CrimsonKairos

The atonement isn't about Jesus being one with God. Of course he's always one with God. The atonement was the sacrifice for sin that makes it possible for us to be justified and sanctified. The Old Testament blood sacrifices (particularly Yom Kippur's sprinkling in the Holy of Holies) were symbolic of Christ's ultimate sacrifice. Anciently, Israel wasn't forgiven of their sins because the High Priest was "one with God" throughout the year. They were forgiven because they repented, offered sacrifices themselves, and ultimately because of the once-a-year Day of Atonement sacrifice by the High Priest. The atonement--or suffering and sacrifice of Christ's life--began about the evening of the Passover feast and lasted until the Sunday morning following. That is, if you believe the New Testament account. I do. I don't understand what you're trying to show by saying the atonement happened all the time, everywhere. I don't view the atonement as Jesus being at one with God. He was always at one with God, so his being at one with God while suffering in Gethsemane and on Calvary would be common and no unusual phenomenon. What was uncommon was his bleeding from every pore (which happened only once), and hanging on a cross (which happened only once). I'm not sure what you're getting at with your comments.

Right, Jesus has always been one with the Father. Agreed. However, the sacrifice for sin...what Jesus did that allows us to return to God...happened in a discrete location and during a specific period of time. I'm saying that in the LDS Church, we tend to focus solely on Gethsemane as "the place" where the atonement happened. I think the scriptures say otherwise. Calvary is where Jesus placed his sacrifice at God's feet...placed it there by himself, without heavenly aid.

Gethsemane certainly figures into the atonement, but I disagree that it was there that "it" happened. Several scriptures, Biblical and latter-day, point out that Jesus had to accomplish his sacrifice alone. The Bible also points out that an angel (perhaps Michael) visited and strengthened Jesus in Gethsemane. I believe the real "work" of the atonement occured on the cross. I believe Jesus suffered our pains and infirmities in Gethsemane as an extra "gift" to us...he didn't have to feel what we feel in order to offer a sacrifice for sin. He did that because he loves us and wants to be able to comfort us perfectly by knowing what we all experience. Again, it was on the cross that Jesus utters that awful query, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" I lack time right now to get into how Jesus overpowered justice (though I started an entire thread on this topic not long ago so...). Anyway, just wanted to clarify that it's not solely in Gethsemane that the atoning sacrifice was offered to God on our behalf.

Through personal experience I know that the Lord doesn't always call the qualified to serve; the Lord qualifies the called.

Anyone can call me good buddy that wants to. Guess you just can't win with some people... p.s. Ray, on Gilligan's Island, the Skipper didn't say "Good buddy," to Gilligan...he said "little buddy."

Well first we have to sketch out the question in graphical form, and then we come up with a mathematical equation, but then compare it to philosophical axioms, to be followed by a rigorous hypothesis test...that has to be qualitatively verified before being applied, until finally we have a one-sentence descriptor that accurately defines what over-analyzing is...that is, once we've run multi-lingual word definitions for all the elements in that one-sentence descriptor which--now that I think of it--was formulated incorrectly and needs to be re-written from scratch... *sigh* Am I over-analyzing here? And Ray, I'm sorry if you felt I was denigrating your character. My describing one or more of your posts as "hair-splitting" was meant to evaluate your written words...not the worth of your soul. Go easy, good buddy...no one's tryin' to pick a fight.

Ray, Ray, Ray...all metaphors and analogies break down at some point. Prof. Robinson wasn't creating an analogy to perfectly illustrate the atonement in its infinite breadth and scope. He was interpreting a personal anecdote in light of spirituality and salvation. There doesn't need to be a perfect parallel for the father and daughter becoming "at one." By the way, you are so hung up on the phrase "at one" but I don't get why...it's simply a neologism coined by Tyndale...it's not scriptural or anything. Like Prof. Robinson's analogy, Tyndale's using the word "atonement" is meant to give an idea about the type of thing Jesus wrought in Gethsemane, on Calvary and through the Aramithaean's Tomb. The point of Prof. Robinson's analogy is to point out that only through covenanting with God can we receive salvation. We can't "earn it" with our imperfect obedience and finite service...but we do need to do all that we can do for God to keep His part of the covenant of salvation. It's that simple my friend, Prof. Robinson wasn't trying to say more or less...nor does whether his analogy breaks down or not indicate his "oneness" with God (that line of questioning on your part totally threw me...).

Ray, I really think you're splitting hairs on a microscopic level. Of course our beliefs are rooted in the scriptures. Joseph Smith didn't have the divinity of Christ as Savior revealed to him in a vision. He was raised Christian and was taught from the Bible that Jesus is our Savior. In fact the Bible, among other things, prompted his prayer that became the First Vision. I'm also confused about your point. You first say we ask God directly for truth, then in the same sentence you say we listen to the prophets. It seems contradictory (though I know you didn't mean it to be). It sounds as if you're saying our personal prayers to God are answered through the prophets. Anyway, before I become guilty of splitting hairs too, I'll forbear. PC, I have no problems with the way you'd handle inquiries into the LDS Church. I'm actually impressed a tad that you'd connect 1 Corinthians to baptism for the dead...and there is indeed a connection between the two...it's called a Biblical foundation for ordinance. :)

PC didn't say the bike represented the atonement. He said that Robinson seemed to mean that the bike represented salvation (I agree PC). The atonement would be the father's making up the difference in the price of the bike. The bike is personal salvation. My addition to the analogy is that there are different degrees of bikes, and if the girl is really good, she gets a 12-speed bike instead of a 1-speed bike, hahahahaha. j/k

You describe the agony of feeling the darkness. This means you must have felt the light at some point in order to know the difference between the two. Were you doing anything differently in your life when you felt the light than you're doing now? If so, consider ways to alter your lifestyle to regain the feeling you lost and desire. If you're not doing anything differently now than you were then, your inability to feel God's love and influence may have more to do with brain chemistry than God abandoning you (trust me, I know). What do you think? Is this darkness due to a lifestyle change, or perhaps something else altogether?

Extremely gratifying to hear.

You haven't even tried to lick my elbow, how do you know?

The local synagogue's cantor is known to be a pretty poor singer. After the Jewish worship service is over, a man comes up to the cantor and says, "I see we're both in the same profession." The cantor smiles and says, "Oh, you're a singer too?" The other man says flatly, "No, I'm a butcher." Mwahahahahaha.

Yeah, and 1 + 0 = 10.

Exceptions like blasphemy against the Holy Ghost aside, I think there's only one limit on Christ's atonement. That limitation is found in whether we repent or not.

Both do matter. What we "do" compared to what Jesus "did" is like comparing a candle flame to a forest fire the size of Asia. Does that mean our "works" aren't necessary? Of course not. I see salvation as a three-step process (for the purpose of this discussion): First: We are justified by grace -- If we repent, we are declared innocent, or not guilty of sin, through Christ's atoning blood; we could never effect this return to innocence through any effort of our own; the best state we could hope for on our own would be guilty but forgiven; Second: We are judged by works -- In this state of innocence, our actions are reviewed; if we've covenanted with God and done our best to keep our covenants (which includes loving as He loves), we are declared worthy of being made perfect as our Father in Heaven is perfect (I don't mean deification, I mean becoming perfect in our character, desires, behavior, nature...); Third: We are sanctified by grace -- In this condition of having qualified for perfection, Christ's atoning blood sanctifies or perfects us, quickens us until we achieve perfection as defined above, i.e. having our nature and character refined until they mirror God and Christ's character/attributes. So I guess I see repentance leading to justification; but then it is what we have done (and why we have done it) that determines whether we go on to sanctification/perfection. I believe we are justified and sanctified by grace, hands down; we don't and can't do anything to bring about our justification or sanctification. What we can do is qualify for justification (through repentance), and qualify for sanctification (through our best efforts in serving God and mankind). Through this process, our efforts are to Christ's cleansing and quickening grace, what a candle flame is to a continent-sized forest fire. I'd like clarification from everyone on something. Rev. 20:12-13 says we will be judged by our works. What do you all think these "works" are? I'm not asking how they interact with grace, or agency, etc... I'm specifically asking what you think the "works" are that we're judged by?

Due to an ongoing (read: 24/7) family emergency, I've been unable to attend Church for about a year now. Thanks for your post Dancergirl, I enjoyed hearing about the talks at your sacrament meeting. It'll be nice to get back to taking notes myself once I can attend Church again. I think the points about being humble and judging righteously were great.

A box of cereal furnished an example today of what I've been saying. Funny, I know. The front of the box said, "Free keychain with $5 donation and 2 UPC's." At first I was like, "Ummm, that's not free buddy. Two UPC's from two boxes of cereal plus $5 is about $13! So it's not a free keychain...it's a $13 keychain! But then again, they're not selling the keychain in a store. It's a "gift" for those who donate $5. While I'd never bother getting the "free" keychain (what a joke), I think there is a certain parallel with salvation. After reading Maureen's and PC's posts, I think we all agree more than I'm conveying. Let me sum up my views in a new way. Just as faith without works is dead, works without charity (love, i.e. 1 Cor. 13 definition) is dead. Dead works are worthless eternally. The ironic thing is that the only ones who truly appreciate grace are those who try to obey all the commandments. It can't be done with perfection. We can't do it. There will be eternal debts, debts we cannot pay or make right by ourselves. In my mind, it is only after I try my best to do what God has asked...and after I fail in some respect...that I thank God on my knees for Christ's wondrous gift of grace and love that bears me up. I guess when I step back I see it like this: 1) God wants us to become like Him in attributes and character (I'm not talking about deification here, I'm talking about partaking of the divine nature, becoming better people and having purer love as God does); 2) God commands us to do certain things which--if done--help us grow to be more like Him; 3) By ourselves, we cannot do all the things that God asks us to do; we may obey, but it will ultimately be imperfect obedience 4) Through Christ's grace, we can expand our strength and capacities to the point where we can do what God asks us to do; 5) The only way to do the "works" God commands us to do is by turning to Him and asking with full intent of heart for Him to apply the grace of Christ to our undeserving souls; 6) Once grace is granted, the supplicant finds greater desire and ability to follow God's commandments, and as Maureen pointed out, wants to do them; I don't know if that sheds any new light on my beliefs, or if it's more of the same. One difference I think is that I don't see myself being "saved" until Judgment Day when I am either granted a place at God's right hand, or consigned to dwell outside His presence. It is at that point that I am literally either saved or not saved from sin. I do believe that during this life I can have assurance from God that if I died I would be "saved" or judged worthy through Christ of eternal glory at Judgment Day. I don't see salvation as something that happens "now," in this life. I think that's one main difference between LDS and non-LDS views: non-LDS largely view salvation as a moment or event that someone experiences in this life and that continues into the next life; I think most LDS view salvation as something that can't fully be had until our personal encounter at Judgment Day. Hence, the desire to work and serve and grow as much as possible while we are blessed to live on this earth. Again, the Book of Revelations is explicit that we are judged by our works. BUT...but...I'd add that only through God's grace or quickening spiritual strength can we do the things that will qualify us to dwell with Christ in his throne as he dwells with God in His throne (Rev. 3). No one will be able to say in that day, "I did it by myself...I worked extra hard to earn a place here." Everyone who is blessed to dwell with God eternally will say, "I did my best, Christ did the rest." NOTE: I've really enjoyed and been impressed by Maureen, PC and Rosie's posts thus far. Thanks guys for your thoughtful insights and patience with my various attempts to articulate my beliefs clearly.

Maureen, I have no disagreement with you in your hypothetical situation. Keeping the commandments but not believing or loving God will not qualify one for salvation. There's nothing magical about the commandments, other than that I believe God has asked that I do certain things as a show of my faith and commitment to Him and His Son. The purpose of the commandments to me is not so much about checking off some list of required behaviors. Rather, I believe the commandments (as taught within the LDS Church) are celestial training wheels...guides to help us become more like God...becoming perfect as our Father in Heaven, as Jesus commanded. I don't believe God wants us to keep the commandments as much as He wants us to become the commandments. To love God and our neighbors is surely the most important thing to do in this life. However, I don't see commandments robbing love of its importance...commandments are just guides as to what God would do were He in our situation. The question "What would Jesus do?" can be answered by the commandments he has given us.

Fair enough, you're correct. I suppose for the purposes of this thread I've started viewing salvation through the lense of not just acquiring but retaining it. Sorry for the abrupt turn in discussion. I just can't swallow that, when Jesus says that to enter into eternal life we must keep the commandments (Matt. 19:17). I've heard people minimize or interpret that to mean anything other than the distasteful doctrine of: faith + action = receiving salvation. I take Jesus at face value in that account: would we live with God eternally? Then we must do things He asks of us to qualify for (not earn) salvation. Two things. First, I'd point out that it wasn't just the woman's faith that healed her. She physically got up, approached Jesus and touched his cloak...she did something other than sit by the road side and have faith that he could heal her. Second, I think I give faith enough credit, just not the type of credit that non-LDS religions are used to. Faith is only valuable inasmuch as it prompts us to go and do something about our belief. On this I think we agree. Prisonchaplain: I would say yes, what you said is the crux of the issue. I say that based on the various opinions that have been shared thus far in this and other threads in the past. What say you?

This whole discussion always comes down to the same thing. I'm not mad at you Maureen or anything, so please don't take this as a critique of you personally. In the end, grace and "works" (i.e. obedience/service) are both elements of salvation. Whether people obey because it's a natural result of being saved, or whether people obey because it's necessary in accessing Christ's grace, the fact is the obedience is necessary, in any way you slice it. If someone is truly saved and changed by Christ's grace, they will "be better" people because of it, they will love more, be more patient, serve more, be more selfless...all the things Christ was. The LDS view has nothing to do with proving ourselves worthy. We'll never be worthy; we are eternally indebted to God; profitless servants who nonetheless serve. Of course it's Christ's atonement and grace that save us. Of course we don't save ourselves. But Christ can't save us against our will, and we accept his grace by doing things...things he and his followers taught. Baptism; receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost; loving others; partaking of ordinances like the Lord's Supper; striving to build up the kingdom of God with whatever talents and abilities He has endowed us with, and so on... Do I think doing these things save me? No. It gives me access to salvation, just like flipping the light switch, but it's not me saving myself by doing these things, anymore than flipping a light switch creates electricity (instead of activating it). The ultimate question is: Must saved souls do certain things to remain saved? It doesn't matter why, or what, or when, or where...the question is simply do saved souls need to do anything? Conversely, can they forfeit salvation by doing or not doing certain things? If so, then the fact is that salvation involves us doing, acting, not just passively believing or being an armchair Christian. Of course belief is important...faith is the motivating element that leads to obedience and service...but faith is not sufficient by itself.

I'm not sure which scripture you're saying does not say that. There are of course scriptures in the Book of Mormon that do say that. In fact, the whole New Testament taken together (not verse by verse) teaches clearly that people do certain things after their conversion to Christianity. Consider one example in Acts 2:38, 40 as here: 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. 40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. I won't beat this to death, but I will note several key things. On Pentecost, an audience of pilgrims (and perhaps some residents of Jerusalem) heard the apostles preach, notably Peter. Three thousand were "pricked in their hearts" or had a spiritual witness of the truth of his testimony of Christ's divinity. They ask Peter what to do with this new belief in Jesus. Peter's answer is clear and unmistakable: repent, be baptized, receive the Holy Ghost...why? To "save themselves," as he says in verse 40. He says be baptized for the remission of sins. This would indicate that repentance alone isn't enough (though it is a necessary step); without baptism, sins aren't forgiven; without being forgiven, we can't be saved since salvation is being saved from spiritual death or the result of sin. What say you? Was this a one-time, Day of Pentecost blue-light special that only applied for those three thousand? Or do all of us need to do as Peter directed in order to be saved, namely, be baptized and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost? I'm not looking to convince you I'm right. I am looking to draw your attention to a few things that contradict the "saved by belief only" line of thought. There are lots of other things of course that I believe must be done to receive a fulness of salvation from sin. This is merely meant to serve as one example that we must do things in order to be saved. We access Christ's saving grace through "works" or obedience. Christ saves us; we either accept or reject that grace by what we do or don't do. It's quite semantical and frustrating, isn't it? Prisonchaplain indicates how ridiculous it gets--in my opinion--with the Calvinist view about predestination. Their reasoning is absurd to me...hmmm, mankind isn't saved by anything we do, hence we must not choose to accept Christ because that would be doing something, hence we are predestined to be saved or damned since that doesn't involve mankind choosing or doing something. What theological rubbish.

Dr. T, the scripture you quoted demonstrates why I said it's stupid to reduce what saves us to a one-word answer. There are many factors involved. We are not saved by belief, unless that belief leads to conversion which leads to doing things in the service of God, serving others, etc... People always have a scripture ready to prove that we need only believe in Jesus to be saved. The problem with all of these scriptures (yours included) is that they don't say, "For whoso believeth in him--and doeth no other thing--shall be saved." There's never a claim that it is belief alone that "saves" us. It's not what those scriptures say, but what they don't say, that's important. Find me one scripture that says, "Those who have faith in Jesus and faith alone, will be saved; they need not do anything else for the rest of their lives but believe in Jesus; they can sin and disobey God and abuse their fellowmen, but as long as they do one thing--believe in Jesus--they will be saved." Do those who believe in Jesus receive salvation? Sure, if they then bring forth fruits meet for repentance and show forth their love for God and mankind in how they live their lives. Even the Book of Mormon has verses which--if read by themselves--might appear to support the "faith is sufficient to save us" theory, as here in 2 Nephi 2:9 Wherefore, [Jesus] is the firstfruits unto God, inasmuch as he shall make intercession for all the children of men; and they that believe in him shall be saved. At Judgment Day, it's not what we believe that will be used to evaluate our worthiness to dwell with God. It is our works, our actions, what we did or didn't do (see Rev. 20:12-13).

In the Bible, prophets weren't just men who prophesied of future events. They were, like Moses, men called of God to lead His people and deliver His commandments to them, calling them to repentance when necessary. That's my view anyway. I think the Bible bears that view out (LDS beliefs aside).

That's pretty much what I said Ray.