So people that do good things for an eternal reward are no worse than someone that does it for instant gratification?
I'd say they're better only in that they are more patient. But in the end, your motivation is the sole factor in morality isn't it?
We can all say murder is immoral but I doubt many would say that murdering someone who was about to kill you was immoral.
Or for a more topic related example:
What if you do good deeds, donate millions to children in need, preach love and tolerance, all for the sole purpose of being put into a position of power and trust? Does that makes you a good person or a bad one?
For me, my motivation makes me an egotistical person looking for recognition as well as someone who get's easily frustrated. However, I am unwilling to cause harm for that recognition. (Ie. I won't create a problem so I can solve it)
On the flip side, there is never any guarantee that I will get recognition for helping and I have found myself helping people who I dislike. It's rare for me to refuse to help anyone when I have the ability to help and I seem to want the attention but then play modesty and try to avoid it.
What does that say about me I wonder?