Is God all-powerful?

[james12]

The Guide to the Scriptures state the following:

 

"Jesus Christ is the great Redeemer of mankind because he, through his atonement, paid the price for the sins of mankind and made possible the resurrection of all people" (Emphasis added).

 

Price for sins or paid the price for sins is not found in scripture. What is found is:

"12 And forgive us our ^adebts, as we ^bforgive our debtors." Matt. 6:12

And

"4 And ^aforgive us our sins; for we also forgive every one that is ^bindebted to us. ^cAnd lead us not into temptation; but deliver us from evil." Luke 11:4

 

Forgiving debts would seem to imply some sort of transference, would it not?

 

-Finrock

What does it mean to forgive? Does it mean to transfer the payment to another person or is it absolution? In the below parable did the king make another person pay? Would that have shown mercy?

Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which would take account of his servants. And when he had begun to reckon, one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made. The servant therefore fell down, and worshiped him, saying, Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Then the lord of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and forgave him the debt." (Matt 18:23-27)

 

Now as far as forgiving us as we forgive others, this has nothing to do with transference of punishment but rather the hardness of our hearts. The standard we use to judge others is the gauge we should use to judge our own heart. Forgiveness will not be forced upon us and those quickest to find fault with anothers are the least ready to enter the kingdom.

[The Folk Prophet]

So I spent some time writing up a big ol' answer, but determined to try and keep it very simple. The basic understanding of Christ's payment on our behalf can easily be understood in D&C 19:16-17

 

16 For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent;

17 But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I;

 

One can twist the meaning of this all they want, but the plain matter is that Jesus suffered so we don't have to. The obvious implication is that we deserve more suffering that we get if we repent. If we do not repent, we get the full measure of suffering.

 

It is a plain doctrine, very easy to understand. Although the "how" of it is unknowable, that doesn't make the "what" of it incorrect.

[mist5]

Getting back to the issue of whether God is all powerful, I thought I could add a couple thoughts.

Just because God does not use his power does not mean he does not have the power.  That is like a muscular man not using his strength; even if he is sitting at rest, he still has the power to move some pretty heavy things.  Even though God has given us agency, that does not mean he does not have the power to take it away; He just chooses not to.  He could still have all power even though he is not using that power.

Second, I do not believe it matters whether God has all power or not.  Some people have suggested that God may be progressing still (Talmage, Articles of Faith, and other people), or the concept of eternal progression, still learning and gaining more power, and that "perfection is relative" (Talmage, Articles of Faith, pp. 420-421).  Talmage makes sure to point out that his thoughts are in the "absence of direct revelation."  My point is that there is no direct revelation about whether God is all powerful or not, so I am just waiting until I get direct revelation and it does not matter.  All I know is that the atonement is my way to eternal salvation, and that is what is important to me.

[james12]

So I spent some time writing up a big ol' answer, but determined to try and keep it very simple. The basic understanding of Christ's payment on our behalf can easily be understood in D&C 19:16-17

 

16 For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent;

17 But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I;

 

One can twist the meaning of this all they want, but the plain matter is that Jesus suffered so we don't have to. The obvious implication is that we deserve more suffering that we get if we repent. If we do not repent, we get the full measure of suffering.

 

It is a plain doctrine, very easy to understand. Although the "how" of it is unknowable, that doesn't make the "what" of it incorrect.

Actually Folk Prophet I would love to hear the detailed response if you still have it because there are many open questions. Like,  "If it is right that God does not pardon us because another person suffers, why should what Jesus did convince God to pardon us?"

 

However, for now let me review the above scripture you provided. I assure you that this scripture does not fit well with the penal substitution theory, even though you comment that it is easily understood. Here is the question: How is it that if a person doesn't repent they must suffer as Christ suffered? Doesn't their suffering end after a set time regardless of their repentance? How then is it even possible that they would suffer as he suffered?

[The Folk Prophet]

However, for now let me review the above scripture you provided. I assure you that this scripture does not fit well with the penal substitution theory, even though you comment that it is easily understood. Here is the question: How is it that if a person doesn't repent they must suffer as Christ suffered? Doesn't their suffering end after a set time regardless of their repentance? How then is it even possible that they would suffer as he suffered?

Are you implying the Christ's suffering did not end?

[Finrock]

Certainly just because saving ordinances are performed on earth it does not mean that one is freed from spirit prison. They must change their ways and accept the ordinances. Of course I do not know all the workings of the spirit world, but ultimately every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is the Christ. Most to receive the glory prepared for them but a very few will be cast into outer darkness.

 

Hi James12,

 

I wasn't very clear in my description because I agree that just because saving ordinances are performed on earth does not mean that the spirit is freed from spirit prison. However, does a spirit have to wait until the saving ordinances have been performed before they can repent? I guess I was assuming that the spirit in spirit prison has repented but simply has not been able to leave spirit prison because the saving ordinances have not been performed on earth for them. That whole assumption, that they can't leave spirit prison until ordinances have been performed, could be false I suppose, but I just wanted to clarify that this is what I was thinking in my mind when I made my post.

 

-Finrock

[Finrock]

james12,

 

Another question: Assuming that what you say is true, how does this knowledge help an individual in their progression? In other words, why is it so important to understand that the atonement is not penal substitution? What practical benefit does this have or is the distinction academic, so to speak?

 

Again, assuming that what you say is true, it would appear that many people have been able to gain access to the atonement by believing in the penal substitution idea of the atonement. How would their experience be any different if they believed as you did?

 

Perhaps my questions can't be answered by you or anyone so I apologize if they are inappropriate in anyway.

 

-Finrock

[james12]

Are you implying the Christ's suffering did not end?

No. I assume you believe that verse 17 means that our suffering will equal Christ's suffering if we don't repent. I'm simply asking how that's possible if ours is of such a limited scope compared to his.

[The Folk Prophet]

No. I assume you believe that verse 17 means that our suffering will equal Christ's suffering if we don't repent. I'm simply asking how that's possible if ours is of such a limited scope compared to his.

 

Well now, wouldn't that obviously be because he suffered for ALL our sins, whereas we will only suffer for our own?

[james12]

Well now, wouldn't that obviously be because he suffered for ALL our sins, whereas we will only suffer for our own?

I believe there is some misunderstanding of the question. Verse 17 says, "But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I". Based on this scripture and your previous comments I believe you would say that this scripture means our suffering will equal Christ's if we don't repent. Is that correct? If so, how can that possibly be, seeing that by your very definition our suffering must be so much less than his?

 

If my understanding is incorrect please explain how you interpret verse 17.

[The Folk Prophet]

I believe there is some misunderstanding of the question. Verse 17 says, "But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I". Based on this scripture and your previous comments I believe you would say that this scripture means our suffering will equal Christ's if we don't repent. Is that correct? If so, how can that possibly be, seeing that by your very definition our suffering must be so much less than his?

 

If my understanding is incorrect please explain how you interpret verse 17.

 

I'm not going to banter word meanings with you. As I've said, this is plain, common LDS doctrine. Wrest with it as you will.

[james12]

james12,

 

Another question: Assuming that what you say is true, how does this knowledge help an individual in their progression? In other words, why is it so important to understand that the atonement is not penal substitution? What practical benefit does this have or is the distinction academic, so to speak?

 

Again, assuming that what you say is true, it would appear that many people have been able to gain access to the atonement by believing in the penal substitution idea of the atonement. How would their experience be any different if they believed as you did?

 

Perhaps my questions can't be answered by you or anyone so I apologize if they are inappropriate in anyway.

 

-Finrock

Of course they're not inappropriate. I guarantee if I can't satisfactory answer them in my own mind I will spend more time considering what you have said, and that's a good thing. 

 

Why is it important to understand that the atonement is not penal substitution and how does that help in progression? When we understand how the atonement works we can better use the atonement in our lives and we can also recognize our relationship with the Father and Son more fully. This is not to say that a more limited understanding cannot still help us, but it is of a more restricted application. 

 

For example, the theory of penal substitution tends to create a separation between the individual in need and Christ. The individual on the one side suffering for their sin and Christ on the other. The thinking goes that the way to bridge the gap is repentance. If a person repents they get to throw their sins over the boundary to Christ. He then takes them and suffers for them. Do you see how this false boundary makes it appear that the person must do the work alone until a certain point? Further, it gives the false impression that Christ simply takes the burden. This is rarely the case and so when the person's experience does not match their understanding then they think they are doing something wrong. They get confused and don't understand how to progress.

 

But when we understand that Christ is with us every step of the way. That he suffers with us when we sin, that he is not a distant God and there is no specific point at which he finally takes our sin we can turn to him at any and every step in this process. Further, by not expecting him to simply take the sin away we can better recognize when we are forgiven even if we still must be vigilant. 

Edited April 27, 2015 by james12

[james12]

I'm not going to banter word meanings with you. As I've said, this is plain, common LDS doctrine. Wrest with it as you will.

Folk Prophet, Why won't you answer the questions? This is not bantering words. This is the core of the gospel and the most important event in time or eternity. It's worth discussing. If I am indeed wrong then I invite you to tell me how. It does no good to tell me that it is plain and common doctrine and end the conversation. I understand what the majority of members around me believe, and I assure you I have considered it. It is precisely the questions I have asked you that caused me to change my mind. Consider them. Think about them. Ask questions of these scriptures and the spirit will testify of new truths. 

[The Folk Prophet]

Folk Prophet, Why won't you answer the questions?

 

I cannot answer questions based on false premises. For example, you said -- "Based on this scripture and your previous comments I believe you would say that this scripture means our suffering will equal Christ's if we don't repent."

 

I'm not sure how you're drawing either of these conclusions. How is "our suffering will equal His" based on this scripture? Wherein did I make previous comments that said our suffering will equal His? In the post just prior to that I said, "...he suffered for ALL our sins, whereas we will only suffer for our own". So why is your immediate response trying to shove this "our suffering will be equal to His" idea down my throat?

 

So how can I answer a question based on false premises?

 

I find this sort of thing typical of your responses and I, frankly, got tired of the useless back and forth. You need to address what I'm actually saying. We're talking past each other. It's no fun.

 

Am I misunderstanding you somehow? Are you being unclear? Am I? I really don't know. Either way, I can't answer your questions because I don't understand what you're getting at.

[The Folk Prophet]

Consider them. Think about them. Ask questions of these scriptures and the spirit will testify of new truths. 

 

By the way...condescending garbage this ^.

 

What makes you assume that because I disagree with you that I have not considered these matters just as thoroughly?

[james12]

Hi James12,

 

I wasn't very clear in my description because I agree that just because saving ordinances are performed on earth does not mean that the spirit is freed from spirit prison. However, does a spirit have to wait until the saving ordinances have been performed before they can repent? I guess I was assuming that the spirit in spirit prison has repented but simply has not been able to leave spirit prison because the saving ordinances have not been performed on earth for them. That whole assumption, that they can't leave spirit prison until ordinances have been performed, could be false I suppose, but I just wanted to clarify that this is what I was thinking in my mind when I made my post.

 

-Finrock

The spirit world is a place of partial judgement. I take that as meaning that we understand more fully our righteousness or our wickedness and enter a more complete joy or sorrow when we enter the spirit world. But we do not yet understand everything we ultimately will at the resurrection.  

 

Regarding spirit prison we have this from the encyclopedia of Mormonism: 

 

 

In Latter-day Saint doctrine the "spirit prison" is both a condition and a place within the postearthly spirit world. One "imprisons" himself or herself through unbelief or through willful disobedience of God. In such circumstances, one's opportunities in the afterlife will be limited. Those who willfully rebel against the light and truth of the gospel and do not repent remain in this condition of imprisonment and suffer spiritual death, which is a condition of hell (Alma 12:16-18; D&C 76:36-37). Furthermore, since a fulness of joy is not possible without the resurrected body, the waiting in the spirit world for the resurrection is a type of imprisonment (D&C 45:17;93:33-34;138:16, 17, 50). However, through the Atonement of Jesus Christ all have a promise of resurrection, and thus of eventual release from this type of spirit prison, although the unrepentant will still be imprisoned by their unbelief (see Damnation).

Note the clarification regarding the two conditions that are involved when we talk about spirit prison. One is, a mental condition based on our unbelief and disobedience, the other is a limitation based on the fact that we do not have a body. Our punishment ends and we are freed from the first condition when we repent of our sins. We do not need to wait for the ordinances to be performed. We are freed from the second condition when we have received all the ordinances and are resurrected. 

[james12]

By the way...condescending garbage this ^.

 

What makes you assume that because I disagree with you that I have not considered these matters just as thoroughly?

Because you don't answer any of my questions. It's not about you disagreeing with me at all, I actually appreciate your different opinion and hope to learn something, but you must present me with some reasoning. 

[james12]

I cannot answer questions based on false premises. For example, you said -- "Based on this scripture and your previous comments I believe you would say that this scripture means our suffering will equal Christ's if we don't repent."

 

I'm not sure how you're drawing either of these conclusions. How is "our suffering will equal His" based on this scripture? Wherein did I make previous comments that said our suffering will equal His? In the post just prior to that I said, "...he suffered for ALL our sins, whereas we will only suffer for our own". So why is your immediate response trying to shove this "our suffering will be equal to His" idea down my throat?

 

So how can I answer a question based on false premises?

 

I find this sort of thing typical of your responses and I, frankly, got tired of the useless back and forth. You need to address what I'm actually saying. We're talking past each other. It's no fun.

 

Am I misunderstanding you somehow? Are you being unclear? Am I? I really don't know. Either way, I can't answer your questions because I don't understand what you're getting at.

Ok, saw this post after my previous comment and I see you have answered one question. I agree Christ's suffering will be greater than ours because he suffered for everyone, but when the scripture says, "they must suffer even as I" I think he is saying that unless we repent we will continue to suffer as he suffers. Or in other words, we will suffer for our own sins along with him. 

 

Actually, D&C 19 also helps explain that suffering does not end until we repent. The penal substitution theory would have us believe that there is an end to suffering even if a person fails to repent. That there is a certain price that must be paid but that it can be paid by either suffering or repenting. However, in verse four the Lord says, "And surely every man must repent or suffer, for I, God, am endless". The Lord also confirms in D&C 29:44, "And they that believe not unto eternal damnation; for they cannot be redeemed from their spiritual fall, because they repent not." There are only two options, repent (change) or suffer. There is no third option of paying for our sins through suffering. Suffering alone never has and never will free of from our sins. It matters not if it is my suffering, Christ's suffering, or my neighbors suffering. Suffering is the consequence of sin (and in that way we pay for our sin) but it does not provide a way out.

Edited April 27, 2015 by james12

[Finrock]

Ok, saw this post after my previous comment and I see you have answered one question. I agree Christ's suffering will be greater than ours because he suffered for everyone, but when the scripture says, "they must suffer even as I" I think he is saying that unless we repent we will continue to suffer as he suffers. Or in other words, we will suffer for our own sins along with him. 

 

Actually, D&C 19 also helps explain that suffering does not end until we repent. The penal substitution theory would have us believe that there is an end to suffering even if a person fails to repent. That there is a certain price that must be paid but that it can be paid by either suffering or repenting. However, in verse four the Lord says, "And surely every man must repent or suffer, for I, God, am endless". The Lord also confirms in D&C 29:44, "And they that believe not unto eternal damnation; for they cannot be redeemed from their spiritual fall, because they repent not." There are only two options, repent (change) or suffer. There is no third option of paying for our sins through suffering. Suffering alone never has and never will free of from our sins. It matters not if it is my suffering, Christ's suffering, or my neighbors suffering. Suffering is the consequence of sin (and in that way we pay for our sin) but it does not provide a way out.

 

Good Morning james12,

 

I appreciate you taking the time to share your ideas and to answer my questions. I have subscribed to the penal substitution idea of the atonement however I have not considered specifically the idea that "penal substitution" line of reasoning leads to the conclusion that "there is an end to suffering even if a person fails to repent" and that this line of reasoning is problematic.

 

Now that I am thinking of it, in the past I have thought along the lines that if a person does not repent in mortality then they will have to suffer some punishment in order to be forgiven or in order for them to pay the price of the sin and that after they had paid the price they would stop suffering. Of course I have not believed that the person will suffer to the same degree as Christ did but that they will suffer for their own sins until the price is paid.

 

What has caused me to pause and consider your words, however, is that in my life I have experienced the condition that if I do not repent I continue to suffer and my condition doesn't get better until I actually change what I am doing, but more importantly, change what and how I am thinking.

 

But, the scriptures still state that our suffering can end because Jesus Christ suffered. So, clearly Jesus's suffering is tied to our suffering. Surely there is a relationship. If Christ had not suffered, could we repent? Perhaps it is the fact that without Christ suffering the option or possibility of changing or repenting would not even be available. Meaning, we can only repent because Christ has suffered. Am I being clear and making sense?

 

-Finrock

Edited April 27, 2015 by Finrock

[The Folk Prophet]

Ok, saw this post after my previous comment and I see you have answered one question. I agree Christ's suffering will be greater than ours because he suffered for everyone, but when the scripture says, "they must suffer even as I" I think he is saying that unless we repent we will continue to suffer as he suffers. Or in other words, we will suffer for our own sins along with him. 

 

Actually, D&C 19 also helps explain that suffering does not end until we repent. The penal substitution theory would have us believe that there is an end to suffering even if a person fails to repent. That there is a certain price that must be paid but that it can be paid by either suffering or repenting. However, in verse four the Lord says, "And surely every man must repent or suffer, for I, God, am endless". The Lord also confirms in D&C 29:44, "And they that believe not unto eternal damnation; for they cannot be redeemed from their spiritual fall, because they repent not." There are only two options, repent (change) or suffer. There is no third option of paying for our sins through suffering. Suffering alone never has and never will free of from our sins. It matters not if it is my suffering, Christ's suffering, or my neighbors suffering. Suffering is the consequence of sin (and in that way we pay for our sin) but it does not provide a way out.

 

For the most part I agree with you on this, but there are a few things I think aren't quite accurate. First, there is a price to be paid for sin. Period. But that price, as you have described it previously, is not "pain points" or suffering, per se. I agree that suffering is a consequence, and not the payment itself. The payment, although, perhaps impossible to truly understand, likely differs -- but I would say that suffering is a response to the payment rather than the payment itself. Easy analogy -- you speed -- you get a speeding ticket -- you have to pay it. The price is the money. Now it may well hurt you to pay that money. But the hurt isn't the price. The money is.

 

Secondly, as we learn the following from D&C 138 (currently discussed in another thread I started as well):

 

58 The dead who repent will be redeemed, through obedience to the ordinances of the house of God,

 

59 And after they have paid the penalty of their transgressions, and are washed clean, shall receive a reward according to their works, for they are heirs of salvation.

 

Please re-read now carefully.  Clear indication that some who repent must continue to pay the penalty anyway. This puts a serious kink in your, once-repentance-is-accomplished-the-punishment-ends, theory.

 

Here's some other quotes for consideration:

 

M. Russell Ballard:

"...it required the vicarious sacrifice of one who was sinless and who could therefore take upon Himself the sins of all mankind.

 

He knelt among the gnarled olive trees, and in some incredible way that none of us can fully comprehend, the Savior took upon Himself the sins of the world. Even though His life was pure and free of sin, He paid the ultimate penalty for sin—yours, mine, and everyone who has ever lived. His mental, emotional, and spiritual anguish were so great they caused Him to bleed from every pore."

 

Here's more in relation to your calling me ignorant on the matter:

 

Richard G Scott

"I believe that no matter how diligently you try, you cannot with your human mind fully comprehend the eternal significance of the Atonement nor fully understand how it was accomplished."

 

And here's Boyd K. Packer, "We do not know exactly how the Lord accomplished the Atonement."

 

and David A Bednar, "Many things about the Atonement we simply cannot comprehend with our mortal minds."

 

Clearly, a demand that someone be able to explain how Christ was able to to take upon Him our sins before we accept the reality of it is invalid.

 

Here's more from Boyd K. Packer:

"If Christ had not made His Atonement, the penalties for mistakes would be added one on the other. Life would be hopeless. But He willingly sacrificed in order that we may be redeemed. And He said, “Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more.” 

 

and here's Dieter F. Uchtdorf:

"It is not repentance per se that saves man. It is the blood of Jesus Christ that saves us. It is not by our sincere and honest change of behavior alone that we are saved, but “by grace that we are saved, after all we can do” (2 Nephi 25:23). True repentance, however, is the condition required so that God’s forgiveness can come into our lives. True repentance makes “a brilliant day [out] of the darkest night” (Spencer W. Kimball, The Miracle of Forgiveness [1969], 362)."

 

and Dallin H. Oaks:

"We can forget that keeping the commandments, which is necessary, is not sufficient...Man unquestionably has impressive powers and can bring to pass great things by tireless efforts and indomitable will. But after all our obedience and good works, we cannot be saved from the effect of our sins without the grace extended by the atonement of Jesus Christ."

 

There is a penalty for sin, and it must be paid whether we repent or not. The only reason we can repent and thereby not pay the penalty is because Christ paid it for us.

[james12]

Good Morning james12,

 

I appreciate you taking the time to share your ideas and to answer my questions. I have subscribed to the penal substitution idea of the atonement however I have not considered specifically the idea that "penal substitution" line of reasoning leads to the conclusion that "there is an end to suffering even if a person fails to repent" and that this line of reasoning is problematic.

 

Now that I am thinking of it, in the past I have thought along the lines that if a person does not repent in mortality then they will have to suffer some punishment in order to be forgiven or in order for them to pay the price of the sin and that after they had paid the price they would stop suffering. Of course I have not believed that the person will suffer to the same degree as Christ did but that they will suffer for their own sins until the price is paid.

 

What has caused me to pause and consider your words, however, is that in my life I have experienced the condition that if I do not repent I continue to suffer and my condition doesn't get better until I actually change what I am doing, but more importantly, change what and how I am thinking.

 

But, the scriptures still state that our suffering can end because Jesus Christ suffered. So, clearly Jesus's suffering is tied to our suffering. Surely there is a relationship. If Christ had not suffered, could we repent? Perhaps it is the fact that without Christ suffering the option or possibility of changing or repenting would not even be available. Meaning, we can only repent because Christ has suffered. Am I being clear and making sense?

 

-Finrock

Your making very good sense from my perspective. I agree that if Christ had not suffered we could not repent or be forgiven. Jacob says our bodies would have crumbled to the dust and our spirits become subject to the father of lies and we would have become angels to a devil (2 Ne 9:8-9). Indeed, because of the fall and because of the atonement we have "entered progressions highway".

[james12]

For the most part I agree with you on this, but there are a few things I think aren't quite accurate. First, there is a price to be paid for sin. Period. But that price, as you have described it previously, is not "pain points" or suffering, per se. I agree that suffering is a consequence, and not the payment itself. The payment, although, perhaps impossible to truly understand, likely differs -- but I would say that suffering is a response to the payment rather than the payment itself. Easy analogy -- you speed -- you get a speeding ticket -- you have to pay it. The price is the money. Now it may well hurt you to pay that money. But the hurt isn't the price. The money is.

 

Secondly, as we learn the following from D&C 138 (currently discussed in another thread I started as well):

 

58 The dead who repent will be redeemed, through obedience to the ordinances of the house of God,

 

59 And after they have paid the penalty of their transgressions, and are washed clean, shall receive a reward according to their works, for they are heirs of salvation.

 

Please re-read now carefully.  Clear indication that some who repent must continue to pay the penalty anyway. This puts a serious kink in your, once-repentance-is-accomplished-the-punishment-ends, theory.

 

...

 

There is a penalty for sin, and it must be paid whether we repent or not. The only reason we can repent and thereby not pay the penalty is because Christ paid it for us.

I think we will simply differ on the idea of payment. I say there is no additional payment that Christ suffers outside the natural consequence of sin that we are exposed to and you would say there is. So be it.

 

I appreciate you pointing to a scripture so we can see how it fits. I would disagree that someone who repents continues to pay a penalty. Once someone has repented and been forgiven the pain is over. This is the teaching of D&C 19:6 which says, "Nevertheless, it is not written that there shall be no end to his torment, but it is written endless torment." What's more verse D&C 138:59 indicates that once a person has paid the penalty of their transgressions and finally accepted the atonement they are washed clean. I believe that will include all the just. Everyone who receives any kingdom will ultimately bow the knee and repent of their sins. Only those in outer darkness will refuse this gift offered them.

 

Now I do understand your comment about a person receiving a reward for their works and I believe there is another aspect that is an outgrowth of the sin/repentance process.

 

We came here to earth with certain inherent weaknesses in our spirit. These weaknesses represent a lack of knowledge and enlightenment. Only here on earth can we gain the understanding we need to further progress. But, even after this life we will still be lacking in some measure. However, this does not represent a punishment for we will receive exactly what we desire, exactly what we worked for, no more, no less. Do you see this is not a punishment? It is as far as we can see, it is the level of our current understanding and we will be satisfied. 

[The Folk Prophet]

James12, you love setting up these false premises and declaring what you believe against the obvious meanings. This makes it pretty useless to discuss things.

 

For example ... what value does it have to specify punishment as "natural" or not? All that is doing is confusing the issue and allowing you to twist meanings again. The description of the penalty being "natural"...who cares?! I don't know if it's natural. Nor does it make any difference. And what does it even mean? Such an ambiguous term that can mean any number of things.

 

Like I said. Who cares? Natural? Whatever.

 

The fact is that Christ paid for our sins, took the penalty (or suffering, or whatever you want to call it) of them upon Himself, so we would not have to if we repent. Beyond that, all your talking in circles around it amounts to so much jibber-jabber.

[james12]

James12, you love setting up these false premises and declaring what you believe against the obvious meanings. This makes it pretty useless to discuss things.

 

For example ... what value does it have to specify punishment as "natural" or not? All that is doing is confusing the issue and allowing you to twist meanings again. The description of the penalty being "natural"...who cares?! I don't know if it's natural. Nor does it make any difference. And what does it even mean? Such an ambiguous term that can mean any number of things.

 

Like I said. Who cares? Natural? Whatever.

 

The fact is that Christ paid for our sins, took the penalty (or suffering, or whatever you want to call it) of them upon Himself, so we would not have to if we repent. Beyond that, all your talking in circles around it amounts to so much jibber-jabber.

By natural I mean the consequences of sin we can feel here and now. Pain, sorrow, regret caused by the discord between spirit and body. Our spirit would do one thing yet through the influence of bodily appetites we do another. Of course the feelings are masked by the adversary at times while on earth, and we will recognize the effect more fully in the spirit world, but there is not some hidden payment outside of these things. 

 

What of the second half of my comment. What are your impressions? 

[The Folk Prophet]

By natural I mean the consequences of sin we can feel here and now. Pain, sorrow, regret caused by the discord between spirit and body. Our spirit would do one thing yet through the influence of bodily appetites we do another. Of course the feelings are masked by the adversary at times while on earth, and we will recognize the effect more fully in the spirit world, but there is not some hidden payment outside of these things. 

 

See...here's another meaningless word. "Hidden". Hidden is a relative term and adding it into your argument is merely argumentative. Hidden is something that cannot be seen. You say in the same paragraph that feelings may be masked and we may recognize more fully in the spirit world...but they're not hidden...??? What?! It makes no sense.  All things are known to God -- not all things are known to man (some things are, indeed "hidden").  So?  What's your point? It really has no use or meaning.

 

I reiterate. There is a price to sin that Christ paid so we will not have to if we repent. Hidden? Natural? Just garbage to confuse the issue.

 

What of the second half of my comment. What are your impressions? 

 

I have no impressions. Not do I find it relevant.