The following, from the Scottish Reformed theologian John Colquhoun, wrote the following wherein he emphasized the necessity of restitution and making amends in true repentance, something that is also part of Latter-day Saint theology. I will note that if a “Mormon” said the following, many Evangelicals would use the following as “proof” that “Mormonism” teaches raw works righteousness:
8. The penitent’s making ample restitution of what he borrowed or fraudulently took from others is a fruit and evidence of true repentance.
According to the ceremonial law, the trespass-offering was to be accompanied by restitution to the party who had been injured (Lev 6:1-5). Zacchaeus, accordingly, proved himself a true penitent by making ample restitution. Every sincere penitent will likewise, with self-loathing, make haste to rid himself of dishonest gain. He will shake his hands from holding of bribes (Is 33:15). He will obey scrupulously the charge of Solomon, “Withhold not good from them to whom it is due, when it is in the power of thine hands to do it” (Prov 3:27). With diligence he will make search for every remainder of that accursed thing. With interest, he will restore it to the injured party if he can; if not, to their relations; and failing them, to the poor. And if he be not able, it will occasion much uneasiness and distress of mind to him. He who has injured his neighbor, and refuses, though he has ability, to make restitution, is an unrighteous man; and “the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Cor 6:9). All appearance of repentance without this are hypocritical. Whatever profession of repentance such a man makes, his religion is vain. He refuses to do to others as he would that they should do to him. To pretend to have turned from iniquity with bitter remorse, and yet to feed sweetly on the fruits of it, is vain. This is so obvious that even Judas in his repentance, counterfeit as it was, was impelled to restore the reward of iniquity.
An ancient philosopher at Athens, having, at a shop there, obtained a pair of shoes with promise to pay for them at a later date, and having afterwards heard that the tradesman was dead, at first was glad to think that the debt was now paid. But recollecting himself, he brought the money and threw it into the shop, saying, “take it; and thou art alive to me, while dead to all the world besides.” What, then, are we to think of many professed Christians who see their creditors struggling with those difficulties into which their extravagance has plunged them, while they themselves are in easy, perhaps in affluent circumstances, and so are well able, if they choose to retrench superfluous expenses, to make them restitution in whole or in part, but will not, because not compelled by law? Such persons shew themselves to be destitute of true repentance, for they prefer wealth, indulgence, and the pride of life, to rendering “to all their duties,” to owing no man any thing, but to love him (Rom 13:7, 8). They who can restore that which they owe their neighbor, but will not, surely do not turn from that sin, for they deliberately continue to enjoy the fruit of it.
9. Another of the fruits and evidences of evangelical repentance is the reparation of injuries in cases in which proper restitution cannot be made; such as injuries done to persons in their reputation, in their influence and usefulness, in their families or connections, in their peace of mind, in their contentment, and in many other instances.
Hence is this exhortation: “Confess your faults one to another” (James 5:16). The evangelical penitent, though he cannot undo what he has done yet will study to counteract the evil arising from the injury, by stooping even to the humblest submissions, and the most ingenuous confessions, how contrary soever to the pride and self-love remaining in his heart. If he was formerly guilty of such scandalous offences as impaired the honour of God before the world, exposed religion to the scorn of profane men, and grieved or stumbled the hearts of the godly he will endeavor diligently to counteract the tendency of his former evil conduct. Or if he is formerly propagated errors respecting either doctrine or duty, he will now retract them, and exert himself to undo that part of his conduct. And as far as his arguments, his persuasions, his influence and example can reach, he will diligently endeavour to stop the further progress of the mischief, In these and various other instances, true repentance, under the almighty agency of the Holy Spirit, disposes a man to employ every proper means of counteracting the tendency of his former bad conduct. Indeed, to repent sincerely of such injuries, and yet willfully to refuse the conduct by which the honour of God and the credit of religion may in some measure be restored, is impossible. A man may as well pretend to repent of his having wounded a person, whilst he sees him bleeding to death, and yet refuses, though he has it in his power, to bind up his wounds. Multitudes, alas! flatter themselves that they have sincerely repented of their sins, who yet will on no account condescend to make the smallest reparation for their injuries they have done. This indeed shows that their penitence is no better than that of Ahab, who humbled himself, but neither restored Naboth’s vineyard, nor turned from any of his other abominations. (John Colquhoun, Evangelical Repentance [Pensacola, Fla.: Mt. Zion Publications, 1993, orig. 1826], 79-81)
