Quid Pro Quo

The arrangement we make with God

By Daryl Neipp

In recent American politics, we have been introduced to the concept of quid pro quo, a Latin phrase which refers to an exchange of goods or services that is offered with a contingency or expectation of receiving something in return.

While this concept may seem new to us in the realm of politics, the reality is we operate under this basic set of assumptions all the time. In fact, I would argue it falls under basic human nature for most of life’s interactions. For example, the car dealer isn’t offering you that “free” cup of coffee merely because he thinks you might be thirsty; rather, he has an agenda in mind—that cup of coffee comes with some strings attached. And this sales mentality runs rampant through all our lives. If we are honest, when we run the thread of actions back to their root motivations, we will discover forms of selfishness: I do x because I will get x in return. If that were not bad enough, we import this line of thinking and this way of life right into our approach to religion as well.

Larry Crabb, in The Pressure’s Off, masterfully describes the quid pro quo arrangement we often make with God. Essentially, there is an A + B = C–type relationship: If you live a certain way, you should get what you want. That’s the bargain: I do A; a good, moral God will respond in kind (B); and I will receive the result I desire (C). For Christians, this could play out in a variety of mentalities:

• If I raise my kids in the church, God will give me good, obedient children who will not go astray.
• If I follow the Biblical model for marriage, God will give me a strong marriage that will not end in divorce.
• If I practice spiritual disciplines, God will keep my faith strong regardless of circumstances I may encounter.
• If I tithe 10 percent, God will grant me financial stability.
• If I am authentic and forgiving, God will give me close, intimate, and forever friends.

The problem with this approach is it depends fully on us and makes God out to be a cosmic vending machine, obligated to reward behavior we feel meets the criteria of our arrangement. By keeping God in our hip pocket, we fool ourselves into thinking we are doing things God’s way when in reality, it leaves you and me in control of how things turn out in our lives.

Problems with the Quid Pro Quo Approach

First, we don’t keep up our end of the arrangement, at least not completely.

We see this perfectly illustrated with the Children of Israel in the Old Testament. In Deuteronomy 11:26–28, we find a quid pro quo offer:

Behold, I set before you today a blessing and a curse: the blessing, if you obey the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you today; and the curse, if you do not obey the commandments of the Lord your God, but turn aside from the way which I command you today, to go after other gods which you have not known. (bold added)

Greater detail is provided in Deuteronomy 28:1–2. Here we see the offer of blessing: “If you diligently obey the voice of the Lord your God, to observe carefully all His commandments which I command you today, that the Lord your God will set you high above all nations of the earth. And all these blessings shall come upon you and overtake you, because you obey the voice of the Lord your God” (bold added).

And beginning in verse 15, we see the result if the children of Israel do not keep up their end of the quid pro quo arrangement:

But it shall come to pass, if you do not obey the voice of the Lord your God, to observe carefully all His commandments and His statutes which I command you today, that all these curses will come upon you and overtake you. (bold added)

The word if is found several times in these passages, which signifies a contingency. God proposed a life of blessing if the Israelites held up their end of the bargain by fully, perfectly, upholding the law. The problem was, they couldn’t do it, and neither can we. Jesus reiterated God’s standard in Matthew 5:48 when He stated, “Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.” The quid pro quo arrangement doesn’t work because we can’t hold up our end of the bargain.

Secondly, we live in a fallen world.

Matthew 5:45 says, “He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.” John 16:33 also makes the point clear: “In this world you will have trouble.” While we like to think our followership of Christ should make us exempt from sin’s consequences, simple observation forces us to recognize that even the godliest men and women will personally encounter the consequences of living in a fallen, sin-stained world. Even the most committed Christians among us contract cancer. Young, godly couples suffer miscarriages. Some children never reach adulthood and step into eternity far sooner than expected. Others live their days confined to a wheelchair and dependent on hospice care. And some live long lives yet are forced to agonize through years of dementia. The reality is that no one is exempt from the consequences of sin. Like rain, suffering falls on both the just and unjust. Simply put, the quid pro quo arrangement we like to make with God can’t exist in a fallen world.

Third, God often has plans we fail to see in the moment.

We love to quote the truth of Romans 8:28: “And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.” The problem is, we can’t always see the good; we can’t always see the end product. This means we could be given circumstances we would define as “bad” only to later realize they were serving a greater purpose that was actually best for us. This was certainly true in Job’s life. From what we can ascertain from Scripture, the blanks were never filled in for him.

On the other hand, the example of Joseph makes the point abundantly clear. After being sold into slavery by his brothers and presumably left for dead, Joseph was used by God to single-handedly preserve His people and His promise. At the family reunion, Joseph observed, “You meant evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is this day, to save many people alive” (Gen. 50:20). God had plans Joseph could not forecast. And if Joseph were looking strictly at his circumstances, he would have to conclude that the arrangement of obedience and blessing was not working out as intended.

A Better Way

The quid pro quo arrangement of the Old Testament did not work, but there is a better way. According to Matthew 5:17–18, Jesus did not do away with the law, but rather He personally fulfilled it: “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.”

Hebrews 7 explains further:

Verse 11: “Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek?” In other words, if Israel had been able to keep up their end of the bargain, another way wouldn’t have been necessary.

Verses 18–19: “For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness [the arrangement wasn’t working], for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope [or a better way], through which we draw near to God.”

The quid pro quo arrangement did not work because we could not hold up our end of the bargain; however, God introduced a better way through the work of Christ. As the holy, perfect, sacrificial lamb, Jesus Christ fully fulfilled the expectations of the law and released us from the contract we could not fulfill. Consequently, we no longer bear the burden of living up to a system of standards we could not possibly meet.

We have been released from the quid pro quo arrangement, which changes the reason for right living! We no longer need to fear the curse that would have previously resulted from our unfulfilled obligation. Furthermore, we no longer live out of a sense of duty merely because it was the only means for attaining blessing. Rather, regardless of how circumstances appear, we place our confidence in the only One Who perfectly fulfilled the law. Consequently, we recognize it isn’t outcomes (blessings) we should be seeking but rather a relationship.

Larry Crabb points out two difficulties that arise with this new arrangement:

One, it requires us to yield control over what happens and to trust God to do whatever He thinks is best. Reading our Bibles and praying often do not guarantee that the cancer won’t come back. We prefer to exercise some sense of control over our circumstances, but the new path requires surrendered trust.

Two, it’s harder to enjoy God than His blessings. Offer a child the choice of having Daddy present Christmas morning with no gifts or having Daddy absent and a stack of gifts piled high beneath the tree, and the child might choose the gifts. Only those with perspective value presence over presents.

These challenges are not insurmountable, but sadly our default preference will often be to choose the perception of control over trust. But as long as we revert to the quid pro quo formula, we will never fully experience intimacy with God. Chasing blessings is an exercise in futility and will only lead us to frustration and “misassigned” blame. Christ has fulfilled the obligations of the quid pro quo arrangement; thus we can fully place our trust in Him.