Forgiveness and Repentance

[Guest]

I'm opening this thread to continue discussion that was made in this thread:

http://www.lds.net/forums/lds-gospel-discussion/59110-anyone-know-where-i-can-find-story.html

I don't understand Wingnut's comment that the story about the criminal hanging on the cross that believed in Christ did not indicate any sins being forgiven...

I understand there's a lot of talk about this criminal making it into Celestial glory. But, when Christ said he will be with him in Paradise indicated to me that his change of heart while he was hanging on that cross caused Christ to forgive him of his sins which qualified him for Paradise.

But that's not really the issue we are talking about here. The issue is whether an elderly woman who committed fornication 50 years ago and has gone through a change of heart over the 50 years have to go through disciplinary action when she confided the sin to her bishop or if the bishop's decision that she has suffered enough for her sins be the proper action.

Edited March 20, 2014 by anatess

[Wingnut]

I don't understand Wingnut's comment that the story about the criminal hanging on the cross that believed in Christ did not indicate any sins being forgiven...

I understand there's a lot of talk about this criminal making it into Celestial glory. But, when Christ said he will be with him in Paradise indicated to me that his change of heart while he was hanging on that cross caused Christ to forgive him of his sins which qualified him for Paradise.

Christ didn't say the thief was forgiven, anymore than he forgave the adulteress. Nowhere in the Gospels (that I know of) is the difference between Paradise and Spirit Prison taught. I take Christ's remark to the thief to mean that the thief will be in heaven with Christ...heaven as a whole, not the "good" side or the "bad" side.

I'd also heard that because the punctuation is a modern interpretation, that Christ might as well be saying, "I say unto you today, you will be with me in Paradise [eventually]."

Edited March 20, 2014 by Wingnut
fix quote

[Windseeker]

This talk might shed some insight.

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1972/10/entrance-into-the-kingdom-of-god?lang=eng&query=thief+cross+paradise

Today there is much controversy and contention among the doctrines and philosophies of men relative to the requirements for entrance into the kingdom of God. Many have been deceived by the teachings of men that works and obedience to God’s commandments are not essential, and some base their contention on scriptures. For example, Paul said, “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” (Eph. 2:8–9.)

The resurrection and immortality are gifts from God, through Jesus Christ, and not from the works and efforts of mortal men.

Many try to justify their claims with the statement of Jesus to the thief on the cross, when the thief said to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom,” and Jesus said unto him, “Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.” (Luke 23:42–43.) Jesus and the thief went to paradise. There are those who teach that paradise and heaven are one and the same place, but this is not according to the teachings of the holy scriptures.

After mortal death the spirit goes to paradise and remains there until the appointed time for its resurrection into immortality and eternal life.

Heaven, which is the kingdom of God, is where those who have been obedient to God’s plan of life and salvation go after judgment and the resurrection.

The spirit of Jesus, after his death, went to paradise and not to the kingdom of heaven. It was not until after his resurrection that he mentioned returning to the kingdom of heaven. You will recall his words to Mary as she stood by the sepulcher weeping: “Touch me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.” (John 20:17.) His spirit had been to paradise, but he had not yet ascended to his Father in heaven.

We also are told the Savior visited the Spirits in Prison.

“By which also he [Jesus Christ] went and preached unto the spirits in prison” (1 Pet. 3:19).

[Suzie]

Smith stated that the Bible verses quoted are a mistranslation and the Lord actually said that the thief would be with him in the Spirit world.

[Suzie]

Spencer W. Kimball:

This connection between effort and the repentance which attracts the Lord's forgiveness is often not understood. In my childhood, Sunday School lessons were given to us on the 8th chapter of John wherein we learned of the woman thrown at the feet of the Redeemer for judgment. My sweet Sunday School teacher lauded the Lord for having forgiven the woman. She did not understand the impossibility of such an act. In my years since then I have repeatedly heard people praise the Lord for his mercy in having forgiven the adulteress. This example has been used numerous times to show how easily one can be forgiven for gross sin.

But did the Lord forgive the woman? Could he forgive her? There seems to be no evidence of forgiveness. His command to her was, "Go, and sin no more." He was directing the sinful woman to go her way, abandon her evil life, commit no more sin, transform her life. He was saying, Go, woman, and start your repentance; and he was indicating to her the beginning step to abandon her transgressions.

The Lord's prophet Amulek had said emphatically: "... Ye cannot be saved in your sins." (Al. 11:37. Italics added.) It was this same Lord Jesus Christ who made the laws, and he must observe them. Accordingly, how could he have forgiven the woman in her deep sin? When she had had time to repent; when she had abandoned her evil ways and evil associates; when she had made restitution so far as she could; and when she had proved by her works and the living of the commandments that she was "born again" and was a new creature--when she had done these things the forgiveness of the Savior could overshadow her and claim her and give her peace.

Another mistaken idea is that the thief on the cross was forgiven of his sins when the dying Christ answered: "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise." (Luke 23:43.) These men on the cross were thieves. How could the Lord forgive a malefactor? They had broken laws. There was no doubt of the guilt of the two men, for the one voluntarily confessed their guilt.

The Lord cannot save men in their sins but only from their sins, and that only when they have shown true repentance. The one thief did show some compassion, whether selfishly with hope we are not sure. He was confessing, but how could he abandon his evil practices when dungeon walls made evil deeds impossible? How could he restore the stolen goods when hanging on the cross? How could he, as John the Baptist required, "bring forth fruits meet for repentance"? How could he live the Lord's commands attend his meetings, pay his tithing, serve his fellowmen? All these take time. Time was the one thing he was running out of very rapidly. "No unclean thing can enter the kingdom of heaven." This thought has been repeated throughout the scriptures numerous times and is a basic truth. We may be sure that the Savior's instructions to the thief on the cross were comparable to his instructions to the woman caught in adultery: "Go your way and transform yourself and repent." (Miracle of Forgiveness, Spencer W. Kimball, p. 165-166.)

[Traveler]

The Gospel of Christ verses Doctrine.

I believe that often we get doctrine confused with the gospel of Christ. The gospel of Christ teaches that all man kind can and should be saved by faith, repentance, baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost through the atonement of Christ. The gospel of Christ teaches us that Jesus did all that was necessary and possible for him to have done - he did not leave anything undone for his part. Therefore we know that if anyone is not saved it is not because G-d and Christ lacked in providing a way. The reason that someone fails is because they did not do as G-d has directed. The only reason I can think of that someone would not do as G-d has directed is because they do not have faith in G-d nor do they believe in him to do as G-d has directed. I believe G-d has made it possible for all to exercise faith and belief in him - thus the temples of the saints the the fulfillment of the prophesy "How beautiful upon the mountain (temple) are the fee of them that bring good tidings."

Perhaps an excuse to not do as G-d has directed and to verbalize their lack of faith and belief is to claim to it is not necessary to earn your salvation by having enough faith and belief to do what G-d asks. And this is where doctrine takes over and understanding of the Gospel of Christ is lost in a pointless discussion.

The Traveler

[Lakumi]

Perhaps an excuse to not do as G-d has directed and to verbalize their lack of faith and belief is to claim to it is not necessary to earn your salvation by having enough faith and belief to do what G-d asks. And this is where doctrine takes over and understanding of the Gospel of Christ is lost in a pointless discussion.

The Traveler

Or they believe in another religion entirely...

Then its more what, say Shiva wants.

Can't force faith on yourself, or change one's beliefs to accept dogma. Changing ones self for something they are on the fence about or don't believe in, is good for no one, I think.

[MarginOfError]

But that's not really the issue we are talking about here. The issue is whether an elderly woman who committed fornication 50 years ago and has gone through a change of heart over the 50 years have to go through disciplinary action when she confided the sin to her bishop or if the bishop's decision that she has suffered enough for her sins be the proper action.

It's actually written in the handbooks (in the chapter about Church discipline) that disciplinary measures don't need to be taken if enough time has passed that the person has demonstrated sincere repentance and the only piece missing from their repentance is confession to a priesthood authority.

By every measure of repentance, it appeared to that bishop that the woman had repented of her sin. In some spins, you could argue that the sin she really carried all those years was pride, not fornication. I don't see why should should have to undergo a disciplinary council over a little battle with pride.