Individual Worth Of Each Son Or Daughter

[susieSA]

Daily Gems

Individual Worth of Each Son or Daughter

---------------------------------------------------

"Only as we accept the Atonement in our lives and strive to live the

gospel can we meet the challenges of life and find peace, joy, and

happiness. Coming to understand this great gift is an individual pursuit

for each child of God. . . .

"If we could truly understand the

Atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ, we would realize how precious is one

son or daughter of God."

Topic: individual worth

(M. Russell Ballard, "The Atonement and the Value of One Soul," Ensign, May 2004, 86)

[Gabelma]

You always post such beautiful quotes Susie. We had an atonement lesson on Sunday and as I grow in the church its the one thing that never fails to bring tears to my eyes - I love my Saviour for what he did for me, but I have the regret associated with what I do to him everytime I sin or transgress.

Charley

[CrimsonKairos]

I love my Saviour for what he did for me, but I have the regret associated with what I do to him everytime I sin or transgress.

What do you do to Christ when you sin?

[Gabelma]

<div class='quotemain'>

I love my Saviour for what he did for me, but I have the regret associated with what I do to him everytime I sin or transgress.

What do you do to Christ when you sin?

yes - the atonement is eternal, every act I make is part of that, what I do now affects what the Saviour went through then. When I pray or take the sacrament I feel like I was there with him which I probably was not sure if I could watch him go through it, but I can't take away the remorse I feel for what I am responsible for.

Charley

[CrimsonKairos]

So you think that Christ suffered on the cross to a degree equal to the number of sins you commit?

In other words, are you saying you believe that each of your individual sins added to the torment of the cross?

If so, what is the basis for this belief? I'm truly interested in this.

[Palerider]

Daily Gems

Individual Worth of Each Son or Daughter

---------------------------------------------------

"Only as we accept the Atonement in our lives and strive to live the

gospel can we meet the challenges of life and find peace, joy, and

happiness. Coming to understand this great gift is an individual pursuit

for each child of God. . . .

"If we could truly understand the

Atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ, we would realize how precious is one

son or daughter of God."

Topic: individual worth

(M. Russell Ballard, "The Atonement and the Value of One Soul," Ensign, May 2004, 86)

excellent!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Gabelma]

So you think that Christ suffered on the cross to a degree equal to the number of sins you commit?

In other words, are you saying you believe that each of your individual sins added to the torment of the cross?

If so, what is the basis for this belief? I'm truly interested in this.

I assume as you are LDS you are using suffering on the cross as figurative - for me the atonement is as much about the prayer in Gethsemane as the cross. Christ suffered for everyones sins, if I didn't sin he wouldn't be suffering me - as a result everytime I sin Christ suffers because I am a sinner. I am curious do you not believe Christ suffered for YOUR sins? or do you just see it as an impersonal event? For me the atonement is very personal and part of my relationship with the Lord.

This came from a conference talk and incudes scripture and quotes from an apostle

http://lds.org/portal/site/LDSOrg/menuitem..._&hideNav=1

Referring to the Atonement of Jesus Christ, the prophet Alma taught the people in Gideon:

“And he shall go forth, suffering pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind; and this that the word might be fulfilled which saith he will take upon him the pains and the sicknesses of his people.

“And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities.

“Now the Spirit knoweth all things; nevertheless the Son of God suffereth according to the flesh that he might take upon him the sins of his people, that he might blot out their transgressions according to the power of his deliverance; and now behold, this is the testimony which is in me” (Alma 7:11–13).

Also speaking of the Atonement, Jacob, the brother of Nephi, taught: “Wherefore, it must needs be an infinite atonement—save it should be an infinite atonement this corruption could not put on incorruption. Wherefore, the first judgment which came upon man must needs have remained to an endless duration. And if so, this flesh must have laid down to rot and to crumble to its mother earth, to rise no more” (2 Nephi 9:7).

The Atonement of Jesus Christ is available to each of us. His Atonement is infinite. It applies to everyone, even you. It can clean, reclaim, and sanctify even you. That is what infinite means—total, complete, all, forever. President Boyd K. Packer has taught: “There is no habit, no addiction, no rebellion, no transgression, no apostasy, no crime exempted from the promise of complete forgiveness. That is the promise of the atonement of Christ” (“The Brilliant Morning of Forgiveness,” Ensign, Nov. 1995, 20).

-------------

Also these words from I Stand All Amazed

I stand all amazed at the love Jesus offers me,

Confused at the grace that so fully he proffers me.

I tremble to know that for me he was crucified,

That for me, a sinner, he suffered, he bled and died

Charley

[Traveler]

Charley: I am impressed with your concern over the suffering of the Christ and you understanding of both modern and ancient prophets. I believe that as as you grow in such understanding that you will suffer with with Christ, the Father and those that are one with them, over sins committed. Although your suffering is not infinite it is never-the-less real. The first step is to begin to suffer with Christ concerning your sins - not because of the evil of your sins but because of the weight it causes on others and Christ. The more you become free of your own sins the more you will suffer with Christ concerning all sin - until you can no longer make any allowance for sin.

The Traveler

[Gabelma]

Charley: I am impressed with your concern over the suffering of the Christ and you understanding of both modern and ancient prophets. I believe that as as you grow in such understanding that you will suffer with with Christ, the Father and those that are one with them, over sins committed. Although your suffering is not infinite it is never-the-less real. The first step is to begin to suffer with Christ concerning your sins - not because of the evil of your sins but because of the weight it causes on others and Christ. The more you become free of your own sins the more you will suffer with Christ concerning all sin - until you can no longer make any allowance for sin.

The Traveler

[/quote

This is probably a better way of putting it - when I repent I feel a need to confess my sins to God, and to feel remorse for what he went through on my w`` behalf, even those sins that don't hurt another human being like maybe a cup of tea or me not looking after myself as well as I should healhwise, forgetting to pray - do hurt the Lord and God. They contribute to that atonement.

What has impressed me is as I get better and strive for perfection how the goalposts seem to get further away and thats when i really appreciate what the Lord does for me.

Charley

[CrimsonKairos]

I assume as you are LDS you are using suffering on the cross as figurative - for me the atonement is as much about the prayer in Gethsemane as the cross.

One problem with that theory. The phrase "sacrifice for sin" revolves around "sacrifice" and sacrifice involves death. Abraham commanded to sacrifice his son in similitude of Christ. The ancient High Priest commanded to sacrifice a goat in similitude of Christ. Christ sacrificed himself--let himself be killed--to make remission of sins possible.

Christ suffered for everyones sins, if I didn't sin he wouldn't be suffering me - as a result everytime I sin Christ suffers because I am a sinner.

So are you saying that Christ is sad each time you sin? Well of course. I thought you were saying that all your sins were added up and their punishment given to Christ in Gethsemane or on the cross in order for your sins to be remitted. That's what I disagree with.

I am curious do you not believe Christ suffered for YOUR sins?

Christ suffered because of my sins, but he didn't suffer the punishment for my sins so that I wouldn't have to if I repent. In other words, no matter now many times I sin or how few times I sin, Christ's suffering on the cross was the same. The point was for him to die an unjust death.

“And he shall go forth, suffering pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind; and this that the word might be fulfilled which saith he will take upon him the pains and the sicknesses of his people.

“And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities.

So far I see this as talking about Gethsemane (except for the death part), as I do believe in Gethsemane he experienced every piece of suffering and emotion anyone can or will feel. But I do not believe Gethsemane's suffering had anything to do with making remission of my sins possible. I believe it was an extra gift on Christ's part.

“Now the Spirit knoweth all things; nevertheless the Son of God suffereth according to the flesh that he might take upon him the sins of his people, that he might blot out their transgressions according to the power of his deliverance; and now behold, this is the testimony which is in me” (Alma 7:11–13).

Yes, Christ suffered and died on the cross. Thanks to that suffering (not Gethsemane) we can have our sins blotted out.

Also speaking of the Atonement, Jacob, the brother of Nephi, taught: “Wherefore, it must needs be an infinite atonement—save it should be an infinite atonement this corruption could not put on incorruption. Wherefore, the first judgment which came upon man must needs have remained to an endless duration. And if so, this flesh must have laid down to rot and to crumble to its mother earth, to rise no more” (2 Nephi 9:7).

Yes...? I didn't disagree with that.

The Atonement of Jesus Christ is available to each of us. His Atonement is infinite. It applies to everyone, even you. It can clean, reclaim, and sanctify even you. That is what infinite means—total, complete, all, forever. President Boyd K. Packer has taught: “There is no habit, no addiction, no rebellion, no transgression, no apostasy, no crime exempted from the promise of complete forgiveness. That is the promise of the atonement of Christ” (“The Brilliant Morning of Forgiveness,” Ensign, Nov. 1995, 20).

Again, this doesn't address Gethsemane at all. We both agree that Christ suffered intensely in Gethsemane. Where we disagree is concerning what he suffered and why he suffered it.

I believe the atonement is whatever actions were necessary for Christ to make remission of sins possible so that we can become innocent of sin, perfect in Christ, and worthy of dwelling with God.

I don't believe Jesus had to know what I feel at any given time to be my Advocate. I don't think Jesus needed to know what a murderer or a thief or a cancer patient feels like in order to invoke his unjust death on our behalf.

Also these words from I Stand All Amazed

I stand all amazed at the love Jesus offers me,

Confused at the grace that so fully he proffers me.

I tremble to know that for me he was crucified,

That for me, a sinner, he suffered, he bled and died

Precisely. I've put the important bits in bold. Gethsemane was not about remitting sin. It was about Christ descending below all things out of his love for us and a desire to understand each of us perfectly. He didn't have to do that in order for me to return to live with God. So I'm that much more grateful for it.

The cross was absolutely necessary. The scriptures are replete with passages that talk about Christ being slain for the sins of the world. Not bleeding from every pore. Being slain...having his blood shed...dying on the cross. I just dislike myth being taught as doctrine, and I view the "Christ suffered the punishment for my sins in my place while in Gethsemane" as a myth unsupported by scripture. Period.

It's funny, because I was just discussing this with my brother and his wife and she reacted the exact same way you did, to wit:

"But if he didn't have to suffer the punishments for my sins, then its not personal enough! If the atonement for sin was just about sacrificing his life, it ruins how I like to think of the atonement!"

Sorry to dash your warm fuzzy to bits, but the scriptures don't support it. Seriously, I'm not trying to be a jerk. Consider these scriptures:

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. (1 Cor. 1:18...note the connection between being saved due to the cross.)

And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: (Ephesians 2:16...the cross is the mechanism of reconciliation.)

In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. (Col. 1:14, 20...note that it is by the blood of the cross that we are reconciled, not the blood of Gethsemane.)

For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. (Hebrews 9:26...notice that in the Law of Moses, the people were forgiven due to the slaughter of a spotless animal...not by stoning the animal in place of the adulterer, or by making the animal suffer excruciating pain. Simply killing the sacrifice and using its blood was required.)

Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed. (1 Peter 2:24...again, Christ took our sins upon him, so to speak, on the cross.)

For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: (1 Peter 3:18...Christ suffered for sins by being unjustly put to death, not by bleeding from every pore.)

And I, Nephi, saw that he was lifted up upon the cross and slain for the sins of the world. (1 Nephi 11:33...again, Christ's blood was shed--he was murdered--for our sins.)

Arise and come forth unto me, that ye may thrust your hands into my side, and also that ye may feel the prints of the nails in my hands and in my feet, that ye may know that I am the God of Israel, and the God of the whole earth, and have been slain for the sins of the world. (3 Nephi 11:14...again, Christ himself says he was killed for our sins, but makes no mention of his agony in Gethsemane in connection with suffering for our sins.)

I find it interesting that of all the scriptures that talk about how Christ makes remission of sin possible, they all talk solely about the cross with the exception of D&C 19 which mentions bleeding from every pore. So what does all this mean? Is it some huge conspiracy to cover up the fact that Christ suffered for our sins in Gethsemane? Were the writers of the New Testament, Book of Mormon and the D&C all deceived and that's why they only talk about the cross in connection with our sins being remitted?

I hardly think so.

[Gabelma]

I am not going to use any scriptures with this, the atonement and repentance are an incredibly personal process there are times when scripture use leads to contention, which is very unhealthy with the atonement - and as we are mortal our understanding of them is quite likely to conflict at times, without full knowledge it is entirely possible to have conflicting views both of which are correct or wrong. Not everyone even finds it personal but for me its a crucial part of my relationship with God - I feel like I owe him (probably not the best phrase to describe lol - language can be so frustrating when trying to talk about things of God), my Saviour is my big brother, he takes care of me. I actually don't think scriptures are as important in daily prayer and life experience when it comes to understanding the atonement. I have certainly had plenty of priesthood blessing since I got ill to that effect. I went from just reading about the atonement to starting to empathise more, and no I am not pretending to understand what the Lord went to.

I never stated Christ on any level was PUNISHED for my sins - I did assert he SUFFERED for them, I wasn't aware any Christ based religion denied that Christ suffered for humanities sins. Christ suffered so that my greatest punishment for my sins if I repent will be remorse, not everlasting firey hell (whatever form that may take in the eternities - I have my own feelings about that). However if I didn't sin Christ wouldn't have needed to SUFFER for my sins. Nor would I downplay the cross it was part of the atonement but so was Gethsemane - why was Gethsemane downplayed in the scriptures I honestly don't know maybe because it is so personal - but I do know modern prophets and our church leaders refer to it frequently - so its not missing in scripture.I

I could be very wrong but its the stage of my journey of life I am at - I know right now I am at a stage in my life when I feel close to the Lord and that there is nothing wrong with me feeling this way right now. It may well evolve. But I would not at this stage feel comfortable with your view of the atonement, it sits wrong with my spirit and the stage my relationship with the Lord is at.

- Charley

[CrimsonKairos]

I am not going to use any scriptures with this, the atonement and repentance are an incredibly personal process there are times when scripture use leads to contention

True. I'd like to think I'm not posting with a contentious spirit. It's one thing to argue about what a scripture means...all I'm pointing out is that there is only one scripture I'm aware of in the whole canon that talks about Gethsemane in connection with Christ's sacrifice for sin.

...as we are mortal our understanding of them is quite likely to conflict at times, without full knowledge it is entirely possible to have conflicting views both of which are correct or wrong.

I am aware I may be reading the scriptures wrong. I guess I'm not so much trying to make you believe how I believe, I just want to spark thought and have you ask yourself why you believe what you do in light of what the scriptures say about the atonement.

Not everyone even finds it personal but for me its a crucial part of my relationship with God - I feel like I owe him

Now wait a minute Charley. I never said Christ's atonement wasn't personal to me. Christ let himself be murdered for me. No greater love can any man have than to lay down life for his friends. Christ's life was the greatest thing he could give me, despite how horrible Gethsemane's suffering sounds.

While I dislike some aspects of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of The Christ," it does a good job of helping me realize how brutal and awful not just Christ's crucifixion was, but his arrest, trial, scourging, etc...

Christ's suffering and death break my heart, and my gratitude for what he did grows daily.

I am also grateful for what Christ suffered in Gethsemane, but its a different kind of gratitude. I don't believe Christ had to bleed from every pore as part of God's plan. I believe Christ took that extra step out of his infinite love for us all. He didn't need to know what everyone feels or thinks in their lives, but he voluntarily absorbed the entire gamut of pain, emotions and temptations any of us can or will experience. He truly knows us and can empathize with us, not just Advocate for us.

So please don't walk away from this thinking I don't view Christ's suffering in Gethsemane and on Calvary as personal to me. It's very personal, and is what gives me confidence to have faith enough to repent and change because I know who is on my side and what he went through to get there.

I actually don't think scriptures are as important in daily prayer and life experience when it comes to understanding the atonement.

I think I know what you're saying, but how would we even know about Christ's suffering without the scriptural accounts? That's a rhetorical question, I'm not trying to argue with you.

I wasn't aware any Christ based religion denied that Christ suffered for humanities sins.

None of them do deny that, to my knowledge. I'm pretty confident that about 8 out of 10 LDS members believe that Christ "took their whipping for them" in Gethsemane so God could be satisified that someone was punished for their sins even if that wasn't them. I think that's an incorrect view of Gethsemane and how Christ's sacrifice on the cross brings remission of sins. That's all I'm pointing out.

Of course Christ took my sins upon himself on the cross. He wouldn't have had to lay down his life if none of us sinned. The biggest thing I wish I could emphasize to people is that the atonement is about remitting sins, not remitting the punishment for our sins.

We will always pay a price when we sin. There will always be a punishment dispensed, suffering required on our part. Wickedness never was happiness. However, the fact that we sinned...the record of those sins in the Book of Life can be blotted out or remitted and that is why Christ allowed his blood to be shed for us. In my opinion.

Christ suffered so that my greatest punishment for my sins if I repent will be remorse, not everlasting firey hell (whatever form that may take in the eternities - I have my own feelings about that).

Even everlasting damnation won't last forever (except for the tenants of outer darkness). Read D&C 19 which explains that when God says "endless punishment" He doesn't mean "punishment without end." Funnily enough, I believe it's this very fact that unlocks the rest of D&C 19's meaning which is--as I said--the main scripture used to support the belief that Christ suffered the punishment for our sins in Gethsemane. I won't get into it here, though. I'm not interested in arguing with you or trying to cram a view down your throat.

why was Gethsemane downplayed in the scriptures I honestly don't know maybe because it is so personal - but I do know modern prophets and our church leaders refer to it frequently

And that bothers me, because I can find no scriptural basis for their explanation of how and where the atonement happened. The important thing which they emphasize is that the atonement works for those of us who repent. Beyond that, I don't agree with all of their opinions about what this or that scripture means, and that's fine. I still know the atonement's power is available.

I would not at this stage feel comfortable with your view of the atonement, it sits wrong with my spirit and the stage my relationship with the Lord is at.

Fair enough. Far be it from me to sour the feelings you have for Christ. I just wanted to let others know I don't buy into the Gethsemane-penal-substitution view, and wish I hadn't been taught it in primary and beyond as I find no basis for it in God's words.

We both agree that Christ can bring us back to God, and for those of us on our way home, I guess that's the only pragmatic concern.

[Traveler]

One problem with that theory. The phrase "sacrifice for sin" revolves around "sacrifice" and sacrifice involves death. Abraham commanded to sacrifice his son in similitude of Christ. The ancient High Priest commanded to sacrifice a goat in similitude of Christ. Christ sacrificed himself--let himself be killed--to make remission of sins possible.

Just one small point - the root of the word sacrifice has more to do with "making sacred" than it has to do with death or destruction.

The Traveler

[CrimsonKairos]

I wasn't so much talking about the Latin root (sacer or "holy") for the English word "sacrifice" as I was talking about the concept of killing that is tied to sacrifice in the Law of Moses and the scriptures.

Zabakh is the Hebrew word translated as "sacrifice" in the following passage:

An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee. (Ex. 20:24)

According to Strong's exhaustive concordance, Zabakh means:

1) To slaughter animals;

2) specially to slay in sacrifice, to sacrifice, to immolate.

My point was merely that in the scriptures, sacrifice for sin always involves killing.

[Gabelma]

True. I'd like to think I'm not posting with a contentious spirit. It's one thing to argue about what a scripture means...all I'm pointing out is that there is only one scripture I'm aware of in the whole canon that talks about Gethsemane in connection with Christ's sacrifice for sin.

This where for each of us personal revelation and experience are important - the scriptures for me are a way to know God but I find them to be relatively unimportant to my faith they are a way to enrich it and grow.

I am aware I may be reading the scriptures wrong. I guess I'm not so much trying to make you believe how I believe, I just want to spark thought and have you ask yourself why you believe what you do in light of what the scriptures say about the atonement.

For me the scriptures just tell me about the atonement they don't allow me to feel it, I love meditating in an old wood, temple etc when I think about the atonement there it feels like every atom cries out quite an experience - I don't come from a standard Christian background so can often approach being LDS a little differently to someone who does. I love the scriptures, read them and have a testimony of them, but I also love General Conference/sacrament etc and listening to revelation the prophet has had for us, or the personal revelation other members have received. The scriptures would be very dry without personal revelation I may as well read the Quran or the Chronicles of Narnia or The Secret Unicorn. I trust Heavenly Father to lead me in the right way for me and my family so we can reach the full potential we have for ourselves.

Now wait a minute Charley. I never said Christ's atonement wasn't personal to me. Christ let himself be murdered for me. No greater love can any man have than to lay down life for his friends. Christ's life was the greatest thing he could give me, despite how horrible Gethsemane's suffering sounds.

For me the atonement is everything Christ has done in someways - Gethsemane and the Cross are in a way the pinnacle. Everything He has done from us from the falling out in heaven to the moment of our judgement are part of the atonement. His birth in the stable and his life are also part of it if He hadn't been perfect or had slipped or chose to walkaway during Gethsemane, the atonement would be invalid. I am inclined to believe that Gethesemane is more special and sacred because it is rarely mentioned - as I read the bible and Book of Mormon and my growth increases I do see other parable type mentions to it throughout. And to me descending into hell seems to be more of something special than a horrific trial and death inflicted by the Romans and the corrupt Hebrew offcials - something many people experienced, however horrific Mel Gibson makes it look, in fact Jesus suffered less on the Cross because he died quicker, however I do agree with you the biggest thing on the cross was he didn't have to die he chose that which is different to others as they died when their body gave up..... however this something Australian Aborignes can do - fit healthy young men seem to be able to choose to die and then do. I don't think if I was Heavenly Father I would allow the Gethsemane knowledge to be out there during the apostasy, I would have protected it then. We don't know what was in the New Testament prior to various edits and I personally believe the Old Testament was pretty corrupt by the time of Christ.

I actually don't think scriptures are as important in daily prayer and life experience when it comes to understanding the atonement.

I think I know what you're saying, but how would we even know about Christ's suffering without the scriptural accounts? That's a rhetorical question, I'm not trying to argue with you.

I'll answer it anyway to me knowledge and understanding are two very different things - my patriachal blessing splits them. Scriptures are knowledge the Holy Ghost gives us understanding and wisdom.

Christ suffered so that my greatest punishment for my sins if I repent will be remorse, not everlasting firey hell (whatever form that may take in the eternities - I have my own feelings about that).

Even everlasting damnation won't last forever (except for the tenants of outer darkness). Read D&C 19 which explains that when God says "endless punishment" He doesn't mean "punishment without end." Funnily enough, I believe it's this very fact that unlocks the rest of D&C 19's meaning which is--as I said--the main scripture used to support the belief that Christ suffered the punishment for our sins in Gethsemane. I won't get into it here, though. I'm not interested in arguing with you or trying to cram a view down your throat.

Will read it again and get back to you but it has never been my choice of scripture - I believed about Gethsemane before I was LDS and knew about the D&C - there was so much symbolism in the biblical passages about what passed there.

Fair enough. Far be it from me to sour the feelings you have for Christ. I just wanted to let others know I don't buy into the Gethsemane-penal-substitution view, and wish I hadn't been taught it in primary and beyond as I find no basis for it in God's words.

We both agree that Christ can bring us back to God, and for those of us on our way home, I guess that's the only pragmatic concern.

That is enough but your intial questions were phrased in a manner that my view was wrong, which with something this personal can be difficult to listen to, it may not have been your intention. My view isn't wrong anymore than yours is - its my view.

Charley

[CrimsonKairos]

I love the scriptures, read them and have a testimony of them, but I also love General Conference/sacrament etc and listening to revelation the prophet has had for us,

I guess that's where we differ. I don't consider every talk or address in general conference to be scripture or inspired.

And to me descending into hell seems to be more of something special than a horrific trial and death inflicted by the Romans and the corrupt Hebrew offcials...in fact Jesus suffered less on the Cross because he died quicker

Christ didn't descend into hell. He went to spirit paradise after his death and organized the spirits of past prophets and righteous elders to go and teach to those in spirit prison (D&C 138). Just wanted to point that out.

I don't understand why you think whichever place involved more physical pain--Gethsemane or Calvary--must've been where the bulk of the sacrifice for sin occurred. To say that he died quickly is to me an error. Jesus hung on the cross for nine hours. I don't think Christ was praying in Gethsemane for nine hours, or bleeding from every pore for nine hours. Just my opinion.

The real torture of the cross comes from the fact that it is difficult to breathe with your arms elevated above your head and to the sides...it doesn't allow your lungs to fully expand. The instinct is to "stand up" or push yourself up to get a bigger breathe and to take the weight off of your hands and wrists which--being nailed to the cross--must support your weight.

However, your feet are also nailed to the cross, so if you try to push yourself up to relieve your burning hands and wrists and collapsed lungs, your weight shifts to your feet which causes the nails in your feet to rip through your flesh until it hits toe or ankle bones that prevent further movement.

And so Christ's crucifixion became nine hours of having to choose between alleviating the pain in his hands/wrists and lungs by pushing himself up, or alleviating the tearing in his feet by allowing his body to hang by his nailed hands/wrists. Apparently, hanging with semi-collapsed lungs for enough time causes fluid to gather in your lungs and you literally drown or suffocate. In fact when the soldier shoved the spear into Christ's side, blood and water gushed out, likely water that had gathered in his lungs over the nine hour ordeal.

So yeah, nine hours of that wasn't anything to really talk about. I'm sure Christ didn't mind it as much as I say he did. What was I thinking?

The point you're missing, Charley, is that I'm not focused on how horrible his death was in terms of physical pain...though it was horrible. The true tragedy of Christ's death was that it was 100% undeserved. While it is true that little children are innocent when they are born, they have not been perfectly obedient to the Father since premortality. Only Christ has obeyed God perfectly from "day one," only Christ deserved to live with God due to his own merits, and yet this perfectly innocent God is executed as a blasphemer and a rabble-rouser.

The mind-numbing scale of that injustice is the source of Christ's power as our Advocate with God, provided we repent.

...fit healthy young men seem to be able to choose to die and then do.

What in the world does this have to do with Calvary? Christ wasn't "fit" or "healthy" by the time he hung on the cross. He had been scourged, mocked, slapped, hit, and had nails driven through the tender flesh of the hands and feet. Instead of choosing to regenerate his blood supply or dull his nerves as he could have--the same person who regenerated the eyes of the blind and who cured the lepers--instead of healing himself when any one of us would have done so, Christ let his spirit leave his body.

That is supreme willpower, masterful control, the pinnacle of patience. No one in the world had power to do that other than Christ. I'm completely baffled by your reasoning and the Aborigine example.

I don't think if I was Heavenly Father I would allow the Gethsemane knowledge to be out there during the apostasy, I would have protected it then.

The only problem, Charley, is that there is only one scripture in the entire LDS canon--including post-apostasy modern-day revelations like the Book of Mormon and D&C--I say again, there is only one scripture I know of that links Gethsemane with Christ's sacrifice for sin (see D&C 19). Is God still hiding this supposed knowledge from us and His latter-day prophets? I don't follow this line of thought.

We don't know what was in the New Testament prior to various edits and I personally believe the Old Testament was pretty corrupt by the time of Christ.

Again, that doesn't explain the absolute dearth of scriptures in our latter-day canon that link Gethsemane with the sacrifice for sin. While you don't have to interpret the scriptures as I do...I'd at least recommend knowing what the scriptures do or don't say about Gethsemane.

I actually don't think scriptures are as important in daily prayer and life experience when it comes to understanding the atonement.

Apparently. :)

Will read [D&C 19] again and get back to you but it has never been my choice of scripture - I believed about Gethsemane before I was LDS and knew about the D&C - there was so much symbolism in the biblical passages about what passed there.

Wait, now I'm really confused. First you say that the Bible was largely corrupt by the time of Jesus. Then you say the New Testament probably had stuff about Gethsemane taken out of it. Then you add that God probably withheld knowledge of Gethsemane during the apostasy. Then when I point to the only scripture in the whole canon that ties Christ's suffering in Gethsemane with remission of sin (D&C 19), you say that it's not your choice of scripture and that the Bible--which remember you said was largely corrupt and silent about Gethsemane--yes, the Bible has many passages with symbolism about Gethsemane.

You've totally lost me now. That aside, I'd love to read these Biblical passages with Gethsemane-symbolism that you speak of. I'm always open to learning new things, and if there are scriptures I've missed I'd like to correct my misunderstanding. Could you give me a reference or two?

That is enough but your intial questions were phrased in a manner that my view was wrong, which with something this personal can be difficult to listen to

Someone isn't necessarily saying you're wrong about something when they ask you to explain why you believe it. In my case, I just want to know how you get from concept A to concept B in your mind. Nothing less, nothing more. I'm not trying to be contentious.

[Traveler]

I wasn't so much talking about the Latin root (sacer or "holy") for the English word "sacrifice" as I was talking about the concept of killing that is tied to sacrifice in the Law of Moses and the scriptures.

Zabakh is the Hebrew word translated as "sacrifice" in the following passage:

An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee. (Ex. 20:24)

According to Strong's exhaustive concordance, Zabakh means:

1) To slaughter animals;

2) specially to slay in sacrifice, to sacrifice, to immolate.

My point was merely that in the scriptures, sacrifice for sin always involves killing.

Interesting view - you mix scripture well with the expert teachings of men: Is a broken heart and a contrite spirit a sacrifice?

The Traveler

[CrimsonKairos]

Interesting view - you mix scripture well with the expert teachings of men:

Huh?

Is a broken heart and a contrite spirit a sacrifice?

You can call them that, sure. Again Traveler, my point was that within the framework of the Law of Moses, sacrifice for sin involved killing a live offering. Since the Law of Moses typified Christ and foreshadowed his mighty atonement, I was drawing the connection between killing the spotless lamb for sacrifice, and killing the Son of God for sacrifice.

I was not saying sacrifice can only mean killing a live offering. I was saying the Hebrew word the KJV translates as "sacrifice" meant killing.

It's really not that complicated.

[Maureen]

The cross was absolutely necessary. The scriptures are replete with passages that talk about Christ being slain for the sins of the world. Not bleeding from every pore. Being slain...having his blood shed...dying on the cross. I just dislike myth being taught as doctrine, and I view the "Christ suffered the punishment for my sins in my place while in Gethsemane" as a myth unsupported by scripture. Period.

Hey CK, maybe you're the Martin Luther of the 21st century!

M.

[CrimsonKairos]

If only our LDS Chapels had wooden doors...then I could nail my atonement thesis to it like my good buddy Luther did at Wittenberg. B)

[Elphaba]

I saw this at Times and Seasons, and remembered your conversation here. I thought it might be something you'd be interested in.

Elphaba

[CrimsonKairos]

Thanks. I posted a link on their site to the thread on this site where I shared my thoughts. There were some interesting comments in that other thread, but I felt they were missing the point that the atonement isn't penal-substitution. We'll see if anyone reads the thread on this site.

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>

Interesting view - you mix scripture well with the expert teachings of men:

Huh?

Is a broken heart and a contrite spirit a sacrifice?

You can call them that, sure. Again Traveler, my point was that within the framework of the Law of Moses, sacrifice for sin involved killing a live offering. Since the Law of Moses typified Christ and foreshadowed his mighty atonement, I was drawing the connection between killing the spotless lamb for sacrifice, and killing the Son of God for sacrifice.

I was not saying sacrifice can only mean killing a live offering. I was saying the Hebrew word the KJV translates as "sacrifice" meant killing.

It's really not that complicated.

It is not that complicated - and I submit to you my friend of important points that a broken heart and a contrite spirit is a more complete offering and a better type and shadow of the mighty atonement and sacrifice of Christ.

Sometimes ancient terms become to represent more what we think than what was first intended. For example the term "Cheater" was first used as a title of an official at a sporting event.

The Traveler

[CrimsonKairos]

...I submit to you...that a broken heart and a contrite spirit is a more complete offering and a better type and shadow of the mighty atonement and sacrifice of Christ.

Why? Christ's sacrifice for sin wasn't about having a broken heart and contrite spirit. It was about him losing his life unjustly. A type is: A person or thing exemplifying or symbolizing the ideal or defining characteristics of something. The defining characteristic of Christ's sacrifice for sin was that he--a God--was murdered.

I'm not saying there aren't other factors and elements at work in the atonement, just that the slaughter of a spotless lamb is an excellent way to typify Christ's coming sacrifice for sin.

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>

...I submit to you...that a broken heart and a contrite spirit is a more complete offering and a better type and shadow of the mighty atonement and sacrifice of Christ.

Why? Christ's sacrifice for sin wasn't about having a broken heart and contrite spirit. It was about him losing his life unjustly. A type is: A person or thing exemplifying or symbolizing the ideal or defining characteristics of something. The defining characteristic of Christ's sacrifice for sin was that he--a God--was murdered.

I'm not saying there aren't other factors and elements at work in the atonement, just that the slaughter of a spotless lamb is an excellent way to typify Christ's coming sacrifice for sin.

Perhaps I should ask this question in another way: What did Jesus die of? Was his life taken from him? Was he slaughtered or murdered? or did he give his life freely by his choice?

In case you are wondering - I believe there was great injustice, there was cruelty and brutality - all of which Jesus suffered - but death? He had power over death - his life was not taken it was given.

The Traveler