The Lds Hymbook's Witness Of The Atonement

CrimsonKairos · August 3, 2007

I recently shared my atonement theory that the sacrifice for sin was on the cross, not in Gethsemane, with timesandseasons.org. One guy pointed out how it's not taught in Church, and that's a reason to question it. I agreed, but then I felt really stupid when last night I read through the sacrament hymns in the current LDS hymnbook.

My theory is there in nearly every hymn, and I never noticed it! Probably because I had been so brainwashed growing up to think that it was in Gethsemane that Christ suffered the punisment for my sins. I had always just glossed over the words of these powerful hymns. What a shame!

Out of 28 sacrament hymns (#169 through #197), the word Gethsemane appears in only one hymn (#190 "In Memory of the Crucified"). That's odd if Gethsemane is the climax of the atonement. One hymn could be interpreted to be referring to Christ sweating blood (#185 "Reverently and Meekly Now"). One hymn refers to Christ shedding a thousand drops of blood (#192 "He Died! The Great Redeemer Died") but the whole hymn is about Calvary, not Gethsemane.

Besides the single reference to Gethsemane in hymn #190, the rest of the hymns--including the other two cited above (#185 and #192)--are unanimous in their emphasis on the cross being the site of Christ's atoning sacrifice. No mention of Gethsemane being connected with the sacrifice for sin!

I just feel so stupid. I've gone 25 years without really reading the hymns. Instead I've merely sung the words that have stared me in the face all along. The words are often profound. Here are a few of my favorite excerpts from various verses (emphasis mine), though I'd recommend sometime reading through all the sacrament hymns. My occasional comments below appear in parentheses:

#172 In Humility Our Savior

Let me not forget, O Savior, Thou didst bleed and die for me

When thy heart was stilled and broken On the cross at Calvary.

#173 While of These Emblems We Partake

For us the blood of Christ was shed; For us on Calvary's cross he bled,

And thus dispelled the awful gloom That else were this creation's doom.

#175 O God, the Eternal Father

If we are pure before thee, This bread and cup of wine,

That we may all remember That offering divine-- (The wine/water does not refer to Gethsemane; more on this below)

#176 'Tis Sweet to Sing the Matchless Love

'Tis good to meet each Sabbath day And, in his own appointed way,

Partake the emblems of his death, And thus renew our love and faith. (The bread and the water refer to the crucifixion; the water doesn't refer to Gethsemane, since Jesus didn't die there)

For Jesus died on Calvary! That all thru him might ransomed be. (The sacrifice on the cross is what ransoms us, not anything in Gethsemane)

#178 O Lord of Hosts

May we forever think of thee And of thy suff'rings sore,

Endured for us on Calvary, And praise thee ever-more.

Prepare our minds that we may see The beauties of thy grace,

Salvation purchased on that tree For all who seek thy face.

#181 Jesus of Nazareth, Savior and King

Leaving thy Father's throne, On earth to live,

Thy work to do alone, Thy life to give.

#182 We'll Sing All Hail to Jesus' Name

We'll sing all hail to Jesus' name, And praise and honor give

To him who bled on Calvary's hill And died that we might live.

The bread and water represent His sacrifice for sin; (Again, emblems of his death, not suffering in Gethsemane)

Ye Saints, partake and testify Ye do remember him.

#183 In Remembrance of Thy Suffering

In remembrance of thy suffering, Lord, these emblems we partake,

When thyself thou gav'st an offering, Dying for the sinner's sake.

#184 Upon the Cross of Calvary

Upon the cross of Calvary They crucified our Lord

And sealed with blood the sacrifice That sanctified his word.

#185 Reverently and Meekly Now

(This is one of three hymns that might be interpreted to refer to Christ bleeding in Gethsemane. However, note that no period separates the references to bleeding like rain and sweating in agony, from the reference to ransoming us on the cross. All three subjects are connected with commas. To me, this is simply referring to his blood and sweat on the cross, nothing more)

Think of me thou ransomed one; Think what I for thee have done.

With my blood that dripped like rain, sweat in agony of pain,

With my body on the tree I have ransomed even thee.

#186 Again We Meet around the Board

With faith in his atoning blood, Our only access unto God. (Several hymns cited above show that Christ ransomed us on the cross--or tree--and thus the blood here referred to is--like the water of the sacrament--about the cross.)

He left his Father's courts on high, With man to live, for man to die,

#189 O Thou, Before the World Began

Our everlasting Priest thou art, Pleading thy death for sinners now.

Oh, that our faith may never move But stand unshaken as thy love,

Sure evidence of things unseen; Now let it pass the years between,

And view the bleeding on the tree: My Lord, my God, who dies for me.

#190 In Memory of the Crucified

(This is the only mention of Gethsemane in any sacrament hymn. Odd, if Gethsemane was where Christ suffered for sin. Instead, all this hymn shows is that in Gethsemane, the point of no return, Christ overcame his dread of his coming death and went through with the crucifixion)

Our Savior, in Gethsemane, Shrank not to drink the bitter cup,

And then, for us, on Calvary, Upon the cross was lifted up.

The body bruised, the life-blood shed, A sinless ransom for our sake. (Again, the shed blood we remember with the sacrament is the bleeding on the cross)

#191 Behold the Great Redeemer Die

Behold the great Redeemer die, A broken law to satisfy.

He dies a sacrifice for sin, He dies a sacrifice for sin,

That man may live and glory win.

#192 He Died! The Great Redeemer Died

(This is the other hymn that mentions Christ shedding blood for us. As we've seen, the blood that the sacrament refers to is his bleeding on the cross, having his blood shed or his life taken. Notice that verse 1 talks about the darkness and trembling that occurred during the crucifixion. But then we're supposed to believe that verse 2 rewinds to the bleeding in Gethsemane? And then verse 3 fast-forwards back to the cross? I think it's unreasonable to interpret verse 2 to mean Gethsemane...especially since the hymn's title indicates the song is about Christ's death. I reproduce the first 3 verses below so you can see what I mean)

Verse 1

He died! The great Redeemer died, and Israel's daughters wept around.

A solemn darkness veiled the sky; A sudden trembling shook the ground.

Verse 2

Come, Saints, and drop a tear or two For him who groaned beneath your load;

He shed a thousand drops for you, A thousand drops of precious blood.

Verse 3

Here's love and grief beyond degree; The Lord of glory died for men.

But lo! what sudden joys were heard! The Lord, though dead, revived again.

#193 I Stand All Amazed

I tremble to know that for me he was crucified,

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

I think of his hands pierced and bleeding to pay the debt!

Such mercy, such love and devotion can I forget?

And then the chorus:

Oh, it is wonderful that he should care for me Enough to die for me!

Oh, it is wonderful, wonderful to me!

#194 There is a Green Hill Far Away

There is a green hill far away, Without a city wall,

Where the dear Lord was crucified, Who died to save us all.

We may not know, we cannot tell, What pains he had to bear,

But we believe it was for us He hung and suffered there.

#195 How Great the Wisdom and the Love

And sent the Savior from above To suffer, bleed, and die!

His precious blood he freely spilt; His life he freely gave, (It was his life-blood being shed on the cross, not in Gethsemane, that makes up Christ's sacrifice)

A sinless sacrifice for guilt, A dying world to save.

Well, there you have it. Did Christ's sacrifice for sin occur in Gethsemane, or on Calvary? Conclude what you will.

Me? I'm going to believe the 27 hymns and the various scriptures in the Old Testament, New Testament, Book of Mormon, D&C and PoGP that say Christ was slain for the sins of the world. If you would rather cling to the warm-fuzzy that Christ took the punishments for your sins in Gethsemane, you have only a tenuous interpretation of D&C 19, Mosiah 3:7 and ambiguous fragments from three hymns to support your view.

Allow me to conclude with my own hymn (no music yet). I composed these words while pondering Christ's matchless sacrifice. It's untitled at the present.

Upon the cross, the cruel tree,

Christ gave his life, for you and me.

From branch-like beams hung the fruit,

of the atonement: Jesus, resolute.

His blood is shed, his body torn;

For his grief my heart doth mourn.

Yet through this God's unlawful death,

My soul might have eternal breath.

The Lamb dies that my sins might too,

my innocence to restore, renew.

I bend the knee, confess my dark deeds,

Christ for me then fights, and intercedes.

My High Priest sprinkles crimson drops of love,

upon the hidden Mercy Seat that lies above.

"Spare this child who clings to my name;

For my sake, Father, forget his past shame."

Then remitted are my abandoned sins,

My old heart dies, new life begins.

Sanctified, Christ plants me on a throne,

Where I taste joy beyond any man has known.

To God alone the glory for this free gift, bought with the blood of Christ;

Thanks be to Jesus forever more, who made the great, last sacrifice.

Palerider · August 4, 2007

Hey Crimson....thats great stuff....thanks for sharing

rosie321 · August 4, 2007

The atonement goes beyond mortal comprehensions and words. Its amazing what our savior did for us.

Since joining the LDS church I've always looked at the atonement as a two part event Much like creation was shown to happen in LDS writings. Spiritually and physically. In the garden he mentally and spiritually was anguished. From there His purpose was clarified. He knew what He had to do. Not his will but His Fathers.

In some ways the garden may have been the worst for him personally because he was coming to understand what he had to do and the weight of the world. No one can even begin to fully imagine what he must have gone through. Think of times when you are coming up against something you know will be very difficult. You don't want to do it and wish there was another way. That it didn't have to be. Then to see the weight of the sins of others and to feel the pain. That is the hardest point in the process. Once your mission is clear and you know what has to do done it becomes a little easier. Then imagine looking at it through the context that Christ had to. It probably was the most horrendous part. For as we know he bled from every pore. It was mental anguish to the maximum.

The Cross was where the act was done. Everything was finalized. This was physically horrendous. The excruciating pain he must have felt. Then to have His Father turn away. That step was equally painful. If the garden was the only part of the atonement then why was he crucified? The crucifixion to me has to be a part of it.

For me both areas were a pivotal point in the atonement.

Only that in the garden it was focused on the spiritual and mental. The crucifixion was focused on the physical.

Then came the resurrection and the hope that it brings.

I stand all amazed....

Gabelma · August 4, 2007

The atonement goes beyond mortal comprehensions and words. Its amazing what our savior did for us.
Since joining the LDS church I've always looked at the atonement as a two part event Much like creation was shown to happen in LDS writings. Spiritually and physically. In the garden he mentally and spiritually was anguished. From there His purpose was clarified. He knew what He had to do. Not his will but His Fathers.
In some ways the garden may have been the worst for him personally because he was coming to understand what he had to do and the weight of the world. No one can even begin to fully imagine what he must have gone through. Think of times when you are coming up against something you know will be very difficult. You don't want to do it and wish there was another way. That it didn't have to be. Then to see the weight of the sins of others and to feel the pain. That is the hardest point in the process. Once your mission is clear and you know what has to do done it becomes a little easier. Then imagine looking at it through the context that Christ had to. It probably was the most horrendous part. For as we know he bled from every pore. It was mental anguish to the maximum.
The Cross was where the act was done. Everything was finalized. This was physically horrendous. The excruciating pain he must have felt. Then to have His Father turn away. That step was equally painful. If the garden was the only part of the atonement then why was he crucified? The crucifixion to me has to be a part of it.
For me both areas were a pivotal point in the atonement.
Only that in the garden it was focused on the spiritual and mental. The crucifixion was focused on the physical.
Then came the resurrection and the hope that it brings.
I stand all amazed....

That was beautiful Rosie do you mind if I print it out and keep it? I agree with everything you say that no one bit of the atonement was more important - except maybe the resurection. However I feel the atonement was all of Christs's life - includes him being without sin, the tempataion by Satan etc

Charley

CrimsonKairos · August 4, 2007

Glad you liked it, Pale.

Rosie, you make some good points.

As I've studied the atonement lately, I've grown to define it very narrowly. Since the word "atonement" was invented by Tyndale to describe the intended result of the animal sacrifices in Judaism, this being "at one" with God, I view the atonement as the minimum that was required to get us back into God's presence eternally.

I do not believe Christ had to know what I feel like or what I go through, in order to offer himself a sacrifice for sin. In that regard--and in a very legalistic way--I do not consider Gethsemane part of the atonement, for by atonement I refer to the sacrifice that remits my sins upon conditions of repentance.

Still, I am in no way arguing for the marginalization of the agony of Gethsemane. In fact, quite the opposite. Since I do not think Christ had to suffer all my pains and afflictions in order to redeem me, I see Gethsemane as Christ practicing what he preached: He said walk the extra mile. In Gethsemane, he did.

He only had to die a sinless death. Yet before he did, he voluntarily sampled all the pains and temptations and agonies that any of us can or will feel.

If anything, by refocusing my view on the cross as the site of the atonement for sin, my gratitude increases for what Christ bore in Gethsemane, since it takes on the character of an extra gift, something beyond what the Father required for redemption.

The sum of the matter is this: I believe I can be redeemed through Christ's sacrifice on Calvary alone. I do not believe, however, that I can accurately grasp the depth of Christ's love for me by ignoring what took place in Gethsemane.

In Gethsemane, Christ consumed every soul's pains through his suffering.

On Calvary, Christ redeemed every repentant soul through his suffering.

rosie321 · August 4, 2007

Regardless where or when the atonement happened..... Thank you Jesus for your sacrifice.

Gabelma- Glad you could find something useful in that blurb. You may print it out and keep it.

I agree wholeheartedly with you about the resurrection and its part in the atonement. Without it there would be no hope. I'd put that in with the atonement in the last post but I feared I might be going against popular church opinion as it was. Without the resurrection his death would have been pointless and the sacrifice would have been meaningless. Jesus the only hope against sin would be gone forever. There would be no at one ment with God again.

Gabelma · August 4, 2007

Regardless where or when the atonement happened..... Thank you Jesus for your sacrifice.
Gabelma- Glad you could find something useful in that blurb. You may print it out and keep it.
I agree wholeheartedly with you about the resurrection and its part in the atonement. Without it there would be no hope. I'd put that in with the atonement in the last post but I feared I might be going against popular church opinion as it was. Without the resurrection his death would have been pointless and the atonement would have been meaningless. Jesus the only hope against sin would be gone forever.

Thanks will put it in my journal - I love the atonement for me it doesn't matter how or where to know Jesus loved me enough to do it is amazing and my remorse that he had to do it for me, can at times feel a little overwhelming.

But for me like yourself the resurrection is the part that allows me to hope - I think that is very LDS thinking which is why we don't use a cross in our chapels - it is the symbol of his death.

-Charley

CrimsonKairos · August 4, 2007

The LDS Church teaches that the resurrection was part of the atonement, rosie, so you're on solid ground there. :)

I've been focusing on what remits our sins, and the resurrection has nothing to do with remission of sin.

Of course, without the resurrection, we'd merely be redeemed spirits dwelling with God, and without exalted bodies of flesh and bone, we could not know a fullness of joy (D&C 93:33).

So yes, the resurrection is part of making us at one with God in glorified physical bodies.

I was more trying to differentiate between the ideas that the sacrifice for sin was done in Gethsemane versus Calvary.

p.s. I think we don't use crosses on our chapels because way back when the Church was restored, we wanted to differentiate ourselves from those churches who followed apostate creeds. Unfortunately, the one thing almost all sects back then and today share is the symbol of the cross. I believe that is why the LDS Church has grown to place so much emphasis on Gethsemane...to separate us from the rest of Christianity. I think the idea to set ourselves apart is good, but the execution of the idea is awful. Why reject the symbol of our Lord's sacrifice for sin? I think it's ridiculous to inculcate false paradigms about Gethsemane in order to emphasize the added light and truth God has granted us. In fact, I think it's not just a shame but disrespectful to Christ's death. I'm not saying we should put crosses on all our church buildings, but I wish there wasn't so much contempt for the cross in the LDS Church. Whenever the cross is mentioned, its only ever in connection with the resurrection. Whenever anyone in the church classes I've attended through the world mentions suffering for sin, it's always Gethsemane they point to. This is a tragedy, in my mind, particularly when the scriptures and hymns are so explicit that it was on Calvary, not in Gethsemane, that the sacrifice for sin was offered. Oh well, to each their own.

rosie321 · August 4, 2007

Crimson- Not sure why you are so concerned about where/when the sacrifice happened but that it did.

Sin required the sacrifice of innocent blood which happened on the cross.

Innocent blood was also shed in the garden of gethesmane.

The actions of the cross took the life of christ.

If Christ did not rise up again after his death would his death be any different from the animal sacrifices in the O.T.? Would there be any purpose to it? Would it make us one with God.

I consider as mentioned above all three parts pivotal to gaining at one ment. Perhaps taking it out there a step further (maybe farther then is reasonable) could looking at it as three steps of atonement be linking us back to all aspects of God (God father, Son, H.S. ?). Making us one again to God?

sorry crimson our posts crossed.

You're right the resurrection did not remit the sin.

Not sure what took place where. I'd place more weight on Calvary too. Since that was where the physical act took place and the savior died.

Loved the hymns you quoted above by the way

CrimsonKairos · August 4, 2007

I'm glad to see you're back, rosie. Long time, no post. B)

This thread I started has sort of been the denouement of a series of threads about my view of the atonement for sin. You might have missed the previous thread which explains alot of what came before and led up to this thread. You can read that previous material by going here, and skipping down to post #73.

I do think it is very important to understand what happened when and where. I confess I don't expect to grasp fully every detail of the atonement in this life. But it seems to me that we can expend some effort to search the scriptures before we teach false doctrines in Church about the very foundation of our religion: the atonement.

If any doctrine should be portrayed or explained clearly, it should be that one. That is why I've been bringing it up so often. It seems almost disrespectful to Christ to adopt an attitude of, "As long as it happened, I don't care where or when it happened." I mean, if we had no scriptures that'd be one thing. But when the truth is right in our standard works, it seems careless to just toss our hands up and say, "We can't know where he offered the sacrifice for sin for sure, why worry about it?"

We can know, and we do know. I have no objection to anyone referring to Gethsemane as evidence that Christ loves us very much due to what he suffered in order to have a fullness of empathy for us. But I think it is destructive doctrine to confuse what happened in the garden with what happened on the cross and in the tomb. Christ bled from his pores in Gethsemane, true, but that is not the "blood, which was shed for us" that we remember in the sacrament prayer. The phrase "bloodshed" and "having your blood shed" refers to murder and death. The sacrament is the emblems of his death. Gethsemane is not symbolized in the sacramental water.

That is one example of why I think accuracy about the atonement is important. If Gethsemane was not where Christ offered the sacrifice for sin, and if thousands of LDS congregations picture Gethsemane when they drink the water each Sunday, then we and they are totally twisting the sacrament. Christ instituted it to be done "in remembrance of his body and blood which was given for us." If we're thinking of the wrong thing when we partake of it, doesn't it seem disrespectful to you?

I'm not talking about it rendering our repentance invalid. I'm talking about having an accurate view of the one act that all others depend upon. I don't think it's too much for Christ to ask that we make sure we are thinking of his sacrifice for sin when we partake of the sacrament, and the sacrifice for sin was on the cross. I'm not saying we have to limit our gratitude to the cross, or that we can't be in awe of what transpired in Gethsemane. What I'm saying is that far too many LDS members don't believe the cross has anything to do with remission of sin, and in that sense they are missing the point of the sacrament if all they think about is Gethsemane while eating and drinking the bread and water.

rosie321 · August 4, 2007

I agree with your last post Crimson.

Yes I did miss all the posts that went before

I've always been taught and felt that the atonement was at the cross prior to joining the LDS church. In the NT Paul references the importance of the cross and christ crucified many times. You never hear of what he went through the Garden.

When I joined the LDS church I started to incorporate the garden into my view of it after recognizing the importantance of what happened there. It is important to me that people understand the atonement. Whether it be one aspect or the critical stage of it.

Do you think the emphasis on the garden is that it is more appealing especially in pictures. LDS are discouraged from references and displays to the Cross or Christ on it? The garden presents a cleaner version of the atonement? Could this be a reason?

On the other hand it seems like the church is going against what Paul promoted and based his faith on -"Christ crucified"

That does seem sinful and disconcerting to say the least. It minimizes the excruciating cost of calvary and makes it easier to trivialize.

rosie321 · August 4, 2007

Importance of Christ crucified

Just a few verses.

I am crucified with Christ– nevertheless I live;

yet not I, but Christ lives in me–

and the life which I now live in the flesh,

I live by faith in the Son of God,

who loved me, and gave himself for me." Galatians 2:20

"God forbid that I should boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ,

by whom the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world."

Galatians 6:14

Don't know of any anywhere that promote the garden of gethsemane

CrimsonKairos · August 4, 2007

Do you think the emphasis on the garden is that it is more appealing especially in pictures. LDS are discouraged from references and displays to the Cross or Christ on it? The garden presents a cleaner version of the atonement? Could this be a reason?

It is possible that the LDS Church wanted a more sanitized image of atonement and that's why we have so many pictures of Christ bent over an olive tree trunk. I personally think the current tradition to marginalize the cross in lessons and paintings is mainly the remnant of a bygone effort to distance the restored Church from apostate Christianity.

It angers me. I don't necessarily think that the Church leadership is conspiring to promote a false view of the cross. But I think many prominent members have interpreted and propagated this Gethsemane-is-where-it-happened-view and that, to me, is regrettable to say the least.

On the other hand it seems like the church is going against what Paul promoted and based his faith on -"Christ crucified"
That does seem sinful and disconcerting to say the least. It minimizes the excruciating cost of calvary and makes it easier to trivialize.

Thank you. That's all I was trying to say. Did I say it was great having you back posting again?

rosie321 · August 4, 2007

Did I say it was great having you back posting again?

Aww -Gee thanks

CrimsonKairos · August 5, 2007

Don't know of any anywhere that promote the garden of gethsemane

There are only two clear supports for the interpretation that Christ suffered for sin in Gethsemane. One is D&C 19 which I discuss here. The other is Mosiah 3:7 which says:

And lo, he shall suffer temptations, and pain of body, hunger, thirst, and fatigue, even more than man can suffer, except it be unto death; for behold, blood cometh from every pore, so great shall be his anguish for the wickedness and the abominations of his people.

So many people have interpreted that to mean that when it says that Christ was feeling anguish for our wickedness and so forth, he was really suffering the punishment for our sins in our place and in that way, atoning for our sins. That is what I was taught growing up, and what is still taught today. In fact, that very theory was taught in Sunday School about two weeks ago.

I find that interpretation laughable at best, when held side-by-side in context with the host of other scriptures and hymns that talk about Calvary being where the sacrifice for sin was offered. Many will say, "But Christ did sweat blood in Gethsemane, and the scriptures say that by the blood of Christ we are redeemed, and the sacrament prayer says we drink the water in memory of the blood of Christ which was shed...so that has to mean Gethsemane!"

What such people fail to realize is that the phrase "shed blood" or "have your blood shed" is a scriptural term for murder or killing. A few examples will suffice to establish this:

Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. (Gen. 9:6)

And thou hast shed the blood of a righteous man, yea, a man who has done much good among this people; and were we to spare thee his blood would come upon us for vengeance. (Alma 1:13)

Therefore, it is expedient that there should be a great and last sacrifice, and then shall there be, or it is expedient there should be, a stop to the shedding of blood; then shall the law of Moses be fulfilled; yea, it shall be all fulfilled, every jot and tittle, and none shall have passed away. (Alma 34:13)

That last scripture is very clear. It says the atonement will fulfill the Mosaic law of animal sacrifice, and in the law of Moses, animal sacrifices only had efficacy when their blood was shed...when they were killed. The term "blood which was shed" is a specific phrase that refers to being killed or murdered.

Christ's unjust death was the sacrifice for sin. Yet I'm confident eight--maybe nine--out of ten LDS members would tell you the sacrament water represents the blood that came from Christ's pores in Gethsemane. This to me is a tragedy, that such an important thing as the atonement should be so misunderstood. This is one of my favorite explanations of what blood it is that redeems us:

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. To this give all the hymns and scriptures witness.

rosie321 · August 5, 2007

Thanks for your two references.

While both implicate the garden of gethsemane in the sacrificial process (ie the garden being one part) it does not emphatically state as it does for the cross its importance in the atonement.

I think of it as in the case of a criminal who is preparing for sentencing(in this case Christ was not but he was taking on the sins of the world). The criminal knows his time is drawing near and is filled with guilt , remorse and sadness. Christ did not suffer guilt as we know it because he was innocent but he still suffered the agony of bearing that sin. The weight was part of the sin process. For actual criminals this can be the worst stage recognizing and seeing the sin. In Christs case he hadn't experienced sin like this before. It was part of paying the price of sin and the atonement. To fully understand and atone for all sins.

The actual atonement or releasing of sin didn't happen until after the sentencing. Where Christ was sentenced to die. The actual paying for the sins and atonement happened after when he was crucified. So there was where the actual penalty was paid. The verse in D&C indicates that the Garden was part of the atonement process and it is part that we will be subject to if we don't repent and turn to Him. That is how I take the D&C verses. Once again Mosiah would also indicate the garden was a part of the atonement process too. Calvary was where the actually spilling of Christs blood and the actual atonement as we know it took place finished by the resurrection. The resurrection was the culmination. Changing it from just another sacrifice that must be repeated to the final one that is needed (if we choose)

<div class='quotemain'>
Don't know of any anywhere that promote the garden of gethsemane