Terry,
Well said. The wages of sin is death, and since Jesus paid the price for
our sins, it is his death that paid that price...not the stress He felt in
Gethsemene, as great as it was. If that were so, the billions of animals
that have been sacrificed by the Jews in in ages past for thier sins would
not have been killed...the people could have just transferred their sin to
them and then let them go...but there is no substitutionary atonement in
that. To be substitutionary the sacrificial lamb MUST suffer the penalty
that is due the sinner. Death. On the cross our Lord uttered the word
"tetelestai". "It is finished"
(http://www.bible.org/qa.asp?topic_id=30&qa_id=28). At that moment our debt
was paid. He did not say that in the garden, because he did not pay the debt
in the garden.
The cross is a symbol of His death, yes, but it was His death on that
cross that paid the price we could never pay. The cross is a symbol of the
good news of our forgiven sins. The cross IS used in the Bible as a symbol
by Jesus and the apostles...extensively.
So, the question remains, who would make up such a lie that He atoned for
our sins in the Garden? Maybe the same one that lied to Eve in the Garden?
Perry
From: Terry Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
To: TruthTalk@mail.innglory.org
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] Merry Christmas!
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 08:33:36 -0600
I appreciate your comments, Dave. This helps me to better understand what
you have either been taught or come to believe. If I may, I would like to
take the liberty of pointing out some differences in our views.
I see Jesus sweating out the coming event in the garden much as I sweat out
a trip to the dentist, or the way I felt waiting to have my chest cut open
and my heart stopped while strangers took a vein from my leg and repaired
the hoses feeding my heart. It is the waiting for something you know is
going to hurt while knowing it cannot be avoided. It is apprehension of
what is to come.
There is no doubt that this is a weak comparison. I would rather be killed
than become guilty of being a homosexual or a child molester, but Jesus
became guilty of that and much more when He took the sins of every human on
Himself. The apprehension of a perfectly innocent person becoming
absolutely guilty of every sin possible would be something you or I cannot
possibly comprehend. He suffered mentally there, possibly as much as He
suffered physically later, but that was not what paid the price for our
sin.
He may have shed some bloody sweat there, but the next stage, the flogging,
would have been much bloodier. A whip was used which had multiple thongs,
and to the end of each thong was fastened a bit of stone or iron that hit
the skin like a bullet, tearing out pieces of flesh. Many criminals did
not survive the flogging and died before they could be nailed to the cross.
Death by crucifixion was not due to loss of blood, although that certainly
weakened the victim. When your arms are outstretched and the weight of your
body is supported only by your arms, your rib cage cannot move, and so you
cannot breath. In order to breath, you must push yourself up with your
feet and take the load off your arms. This is hard to do when any pressure
on your feet causes pain because of the spike that nailed them to the
cross. So the victim alternates, first breathing, then suffocating, first
supporting himself with his legs, then hanging from his arms, no relief,
even for a moment. The two thieves were finally suffocated when the
soldiers took a mallet and crushed their legs, ending their ability to
breath.
With Jesus it was different. Prophecy said that not a bone would be broken
and His legs were never hit with the mallet.
At the moment He cried out, *"My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me",
*He paid the price for our sins. Up until that time, the Father had been
with Him, but when Christ took on the sins of the world, God could not bear
to look on sin, and at that point, Jesus was guilty of every evil thing I
have ever done.
When He had done this, He gave up the ghost. No soldier took His life. He
laid it down, for you and for me. When the soldier plunged the spear into
His side, it would have lacerated the liver, and any blood left in His body
would have been almost completely drained from it. Christ paid the
ultimate price for my sins on that cross. His lifeless body was taken down
from it.
Just a final thought: The Bible I use says that every saved person is part
of a royal priesthood. Jesus our Lord is high priests, and every follower
of His is one of His priests. That tells me that the first black priest
was the Etheopean eunuch that Phillip Baptized long before 1978.
I hope you can see this.
Terry
*the Mormon doctrine (official church doctrine) Christ's atonement for
the sins of the world.*
DAVEH: As I understand it, the atonement took place in the Garden of
Gethsemane, and was finalized (sealed, so to speak) by Jesus' death on the
cross.
I'm certainly not an authority on this topic, nor am I probably able
to explain the atonement in the authoritative detail you are requesting.
As I see it, Jesus suffered greatly in the Garden of Gethsemane. Why? I
believe it was because he was bearing the burden of our sins at that
time....in effect, taking upon himself our sins. Such suffering caused
him to bleed from his pores. At the Last Supper, he explained to his
Disciples that his blood would be shed......
/[Mk 14:23] And he took the cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it
to them: and they all drank of it.
[24] And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, which
is shed for many./
..........and this was fulfilled in the Garden of Gethsemane shortly after
the Last Supper.
The crucification itself brought him much pain and suffering as well,
but interestingly the Bible makes no mention of him shedding blood on the
cross until after his death, when his body was lanced with a spear. I
believe the pain he suffered on the cross was caused by the physical
torture to which he was subjected by being nailed to that cross, and then
hung there in a manner designed to bring great suffering and pain, in
contrast to the pain he suffered in the Garden of Gethsemane which was
caused by what I believe was the effect of taking our sins upon himself.
What do you believe brought enough pain to Jesus that it caused him to
bleed from every pore in the Garden, John?
In order for the atonement to be functional......yikes, that is
probably not the best word to describe it, but I cannot think of a more
appropriate term at the moment...... for each of us, Jesus had to provide
a way for us to be resurrected. Without the resurrection, no atoning
sacrifice would benefit those who are bound by (physical) death. Jesus
was the only person who could accomplish the resurrection, and for that to
happen, he had to die. The pain he suffered in the Garden of Gethsemane
was not sufficient to bring death, but that which he experienced on the
cross was more than adequate. Nobody could kill Jesus had he not been
willing to die. Jesus had the power to call angels to his side to prevent
his death there, but in lieu of that......the cross provided the means to
bring about his physical death.
So, the cross was the tool used by Jesus' enemies to kill him. He
rose from the tomb on the 3rd day, which then made it possible for all to
be resurrected. This gift of grace was freely given to all mortals, who
had inherited physical death from Adam. Just as all who are born on this
earth have no control (or option) as to whether or not they will die,
Jesus overcame that obstacle for us.
Had we /not/ been able to overcome physical death, the need for the
atonement would have been a non-issue. Since by virtue of the Lord's
resurrection all will be resurrected, it then became possible for the
atonement to be available for those who desire it. And as I've mentioned
before, those who desire to overcome spiritual death need only to accept
and love the Lord by keeping his commandments.
Now the question becomes why do we need the atonement at all? If all
are to be resurrected, what advantage is there for an atonement? That is
where we need to consider the effect spiritual death has upon us. As I've
defined it before, spiritual death happens when we are separated from God.
Effectively, the further we are from the love of the Lord, the deeper
in hell we reside, so to speak. In order to overcome that form of hell
(and there are several), those who love the Lord seek to become one with
him. To do that, we need to become perfect as God is perfect. Since God
is without sin, and we are sinners....that seems like an impossibility.
However, by virtue of the atonement of our Redeemer, those who accept
Jesus as their Savior can have their sins remitted, and hence become
perfect (complete) as God is perfect.....and become closer to and one with
our Heavenly Father and Jesus.
As I suggested before, without the possibility of a resurrection, the
atonement would be of little effect, as physical death would confine us to
hell.
This explanation may be a bit brief, if not a little awkward......but
I hope it answers your question, John.
*have I stumbled onto something of a difficulty for our Mormon
friends? *
DAVEH: I don't see why you would think such, John. Evidence of the
apostasy was already showing itself at the time the NT was being written,
as Acts 20 suggested....
/
[29] For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter
in among you, not sparing the flock/
..........and Paul affirmed in his epistle to the Galatians.....
/[1:6] I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into
the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
[7] Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would
pervert the gospel of Christ./
...........and to the Corinthians.....
/[1:11] For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them
which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you./
.........So as I see it, the apostasy had already started in the NT times.
*why is Mormon doctrine and church organization so different from what we
read and know of the First Church and its scriptures? *
DAVEH: It could be for several reasons. First, your perspective of the
Primitive Church may have changed as religion/theology evolved over the
centuries. For instance, the early Christians eschewed the cross, yet
most religions readily embrace it today.
From our (LDS) perspective, having a living prophet allows the Lord
to guide his Church in the direction he wishes it to go depending on the
needs of the time. I don't know if that makes sense to you, but to LDS
folks it is very logical. IOW....We believe that the Lord reveals such
things as the 1978 revelation allowing black males to be allowed the
priesthood because it was appropriate for that to happen at that time.
Without a prophet, such events could not occur. The same thing happens
with specific programs and organizations in the LDS Church. Though such
may not have existed in the Primitive Church, that does not mean that it
should not occur in the latter-day Church, depending on what the Lord
determines our needs to be.
----------
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you
ought to answer every man." (Colossians 4:6) http://www.InnGlory.org
If you do not want to receive posts from this list, send an email to [EMAIL
PROTECTED] and you will be unsubscribed. If you have a friend who wants to
join, tell him to send an e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and he will be subscribed.
