DAVEH: I don't recall the LDS Church making an official
comment about it, but many LDS people have expressed the same
sentiments about it that I have mentioned below.
Lance Muir wrote:
IYO? or, in the opinion of the
Mormon church?
-----
Original Message -----
Sent:
December 27, 2005 03:08
Subject:
Re: [TruthTalk] Merry Christmas!
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.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If deegan is still around, could he give us some material
on the Mormon doctrine (official church doctrine) Christ's
atonement for the sins of the world. Or Blaine or DH? I don't
care who does it, but I would be interested in a full and authoritive
report.
The question DM ask's below -- I would like to see this
answered as well.
Also, have I stumbled onto something of a difficulty
for our Mormon friends?
To recap --------- The Mormon church believes the
"apostate church" and the "first church" are two different things.
Since the scriptures of the NT belong to the First Church and are not a
part of the apostasy AND since the First Church is not the church
repaired by God with "mormon " revelation, why is Mormon
doctrine and church organization so different from what we read and
know of the First Church and its scriptures?
jf
--------------
Original message --------------
From: "David Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> David Miller wrote:
> >> ... a cross, the symbol of the death of
> >> Jesus the Christ.
>
> Dave Hansen wrote:
> > When I suggested similar, it brought a lot of
> > chastisement. Why do you suppose the difference?
>
> Context. I don't think you understand the value of the cross. You
raised
> its issue from skepticism concerning what value the symbol had. I
raised
> the issue from using this symbol to illustrate the victory that
Jesus
> wrought in the cross. I see power in the cross. You see defeat. Is
this
> not true?
>
> Peace be with you.
> David Miller.
>
|
