Gethsamane vs. Calvary

[thesometimesaint]

Coolrock:

You are still conflating the Atonement(which the Saints fully endorse), and Theosis(While still a Biblical idea is not directly tied to the Atonement).

[Bernard Gui]

Why do Mormons differ from many Christian sects in where the atonement for our sins took place?

and how did these differences arise?

It's Gethsemane and Calvary and the empty tomb, not Gethsemane

versus Calvary. The importance of the suffering

in the Garden was revealed to Joseph Smith. The

atonement was accomplished at all three events-it would not have

been complete if one were left out.

Bernard

[TAO]

This is an interesting subject bu11fr0g.

I think the best answer as to "why" LDS differ from other Christians on the matter, would be that LDS look within their own separate teachings on the matter.

I think most Christians agree that Christ's Passion began at Gethsemane and ended at Calvary/Golgotha. I think LDS would likely be agreeable to that statement.

The actual difference isn't so much in a stopping and starting place of the Atonement of Christ, rather it has more to do with where the greatest weight of his suffering occurred, plus some additional stuff IIRC.

From most of my discussions with LDS, Gethsemane seems to be given greater weight in regards to the spiritual suffering of Christ.

Yah, I think you nailed it with those statements, that you did. You are correct.

The additional stuff I aforementioned refers to the notion some LDS, perhaps all...I dunno really, seem to think that Christ also suffered for our diseases, physicals pains, and so forth. This is markedly different from my own perspective and is a notable difference.

Yes, let me see if I can find some references to show why we believe this... ok, found some, here they are:

Matthew 8:17 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, ^aHimself took our ^binfirmities, and bare our ^csicknesses.

Alma 7:11 And he shall go forth, suffering pains and ^aafflictions and ^btemptations of every kind; and this that the word might be fulfilled which saith he will ^ctake upon him the pains and the sicknesses of his people.

D&C 84:68 In my name they shall ^aheal the sick;

There is many more verses - but I though they were more iffy on context.

I find the particular difference interesting because it seems to me that it could be asserted that Jesus did not undergo any physical suffering that was equitable to all human suffering. I never really understood the dynamic behind that and haven't felt it worth starting a thread over. But if such is actually the case and I am not misstating LDS beliefs on the matter it would seem there must be some sort of trade of in "spiritual agony" vs. "physical agony" to accommodate.

I think one may be right on this matter - after all, he was taking all the punishment from the law of justice, which is a spiritual law. Thus great spiritual agony - so much that he bled at the pores (although some non-LDS will disagree), is possibly what happened. But I'm not so sure the agony can be portrayed in such a simple way and do it justice... I'm not even sure whether we could even picture the amount of anguish it was...

*Note: I added some because I made an incorrect statement, sorry ppls =).

I tend to pass over a good bit of these differences, since for the most part, we all seem to at least reach agreement on a starting and stopping point.

I think if we looked at a more detailed outline of the actual differences regarding when things occurred and what specifically occurred in regards to Christ's suffering the issue might get a bit more dicey.

Respectfully,

Mudcat

If one would like to start a talk thread about it (not a debate thread hehe, otherwise it gets vicious), I would be willing to participate in helping to underline what these differences are, if one wishes.

Yes, I agree, the dicey is more a realm of speculation, and speculation is rarely needed in the gospel =).

[bu11fr0g]

If one would like to start a talk thread about it (not a debate thread hehe, otherwise it gets vicious), I would be willing to participate in helping to underline what these differences are, if one wishes.

i will try a new thread, but please help reframe for me.

[TAO]

i will try a new thread, but please help reframe for me.

reframe 0.o what do you mean... sorry, TAO just wants to be sure he knows the interpretation of one's words =).

[Mudcat]

Yah, I think you nailed it with those statements, that you did. You are correct.

Thanks for the confirmation on that TAO.

Yes, let me see if I can find some references to show why we believe this... ok, found some, here they are:

There is many more verses - but I though they were more iffy on context.

Thanks for the references.

Matthew 8:17 is a tough verse. In that quite a deal of discussion could be had on plausible interpretations. The timing is a bit off in the chronology of Christs ministry. Matthew's author makes this declaration that refers to Isaiah 53.

Isa 53:3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

Isa 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

Isa 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

Emphasis on the direct citation. The wording of 53:4 is a bit off from the declaration of prophetic fulfillment in Matthew, but as I have understood it this is only an inconsistency in translation and both mean physical ailments.

Still you have the author of Matthew tying in this passage of Isaiah, though it's out of place to some degree. Matthew 8 was early in Christ's ministry yet the passage in Isaiah seems to actually fit better being tied directly to the Crucifixion.

Christian sects that heavily promote faith healing make use of 8:17 but I can't find agreement with them.

Certainly I do believe in physical healing through Christ, but this comes at the resurrection of our bodies as I see it.

I think one may be right on this matter - after all, he was taking all the punishment from the law of justice, which is a spiritual law. Thus great spiritual agony - so much that he bled at the pores (although non-LDS will disagree), is possibly what happened. But I'm not so sure the agony can be portrayed in such a simple way and do it justice... I'm not even sure whether we could even picture the amount of anguish it was...

Most Evangelical I know accept the bleeding of Christ in the Garden. I have seen a few speak at great lengths on it. There is a medical term called hematadrosis that is associated with it.

If one would like to start a talk thread about it (not a debate thread hehe, otherwise it gets vicious), I would be willing to participate in helping to underline what these differences are, if one wishes.

I may take you up on that at a later date TAO. We just closed on a house. We got a really good deal because it was a foreclosure, but because it was a foreclosure it needs quite a bit of work, painting and odd and end things. It will be quite a while before I can likely devote the time to get one kicked off.

Regards,

Mudcat

[Zakuska]

Mudcat,

Most Evangelical I know accept the bleeding of Christ in the Garden. I have seen a few speak at great lengths on it. There is a medical term called hematadrosis that is associated with it.

I wish you would talk to mediator!

[TAO]

Matthew 8:17 is a tough verse. In that quite a deal of discussion could be had on plausible interpretations. The timing is a bit off in the chronology of Christs ministry. Matthew's author makes this declaration that refers to Isaiah 53.

Yah, the interpretation's could alter things slightly, it really depends what one considers sicknesses (I can see people considering problems of the heart sicknesses at time).

Emphasis on the direct citation. The wording of 53:4 is a bit off from the declaration of prophetic fulfillment in Matthew, but as I have understood it this is only an inconsistency in translation and both mean physical ailments.

Still you have the author of Matthew tying in this passage of Isaiah, though it's out of place to some degree. Matthew 8 was early in Christ's ministry yet the passage in Isaiah seems to actually fit better being tied directly to the Crucifixion.

Hmmm... "And now, behold, I say unto you, that ye ought to search these things. Yea, a commandment I give unto you that ye search these things diligently; for great are the words of Isaiah." (3 Nephi 23:1) It seems that Nephi was not the only one who saw marvelous things in Isaiah's words =D. I have not looked all that much into Isaiah recently... I should go take a look at it, that I should.

Christian sects that heavily promote faith healing make use of 8:17 but I can't find agreement with them.

Certainly I do believe in physical healing through Christ, but this comes at the resurrection of our bodies as I see it.

I think faith-healing can work - but not if you mistreat your body completely. I'm pretty sure the Lord expects you to do what you can first, and then come for him for a blessing, and then he will grant it. So yah, I agree, I think Christ would like us to seek medical care when we are sick, that he would.

Most Evangelical I know accept the bleeding of Christ in the Garden. I have seen a few speak at great lengths on it. There is a medical term called hematadrosis that is associated with it.

Sorry XD. I used an implication that meant all, what I meant was some non-LDS disagree with bleeding in the garden - and yah, I've noticed many who believe in the bleeding of Christ. In fact... I'm going to go change that word right now because it gives an improper expression, and that wouldn't be right =).

I may take you up on that at a later date TAO. We just closed on a house. We got a really good deal because it was a foreclosure, but because it was a foreclosure it needs quite a bit of work, painting and odd and end things. It will be quite a while before I can likely devote the time to get one kicked off.

Regards,

Mudcat

Sounds cool, I'll be waiting, that I will.

I do hope your fixing up goes well =D. Which parts of the house are the worst, just curious?

[coolrok7]

Thesometimesaint, the last part of the statement I opened with:

(coolrok7) It is probably an undercurrent of a spiritual dichotomy beteween Mormonism and the traditional Christian tradition/emphasis. The source is not the same.

I made the above comment in regards to the thread op knowing what I know about how Mormons argue the point of the thread in the sense of emphasis as they believe He died on the cross like everyone else does (the actual location of the events are not in question here as far as I know even though they happened in two different places).

You

[Mudcat]

Sounds cool, I'll be waiting, that I will.

I do hope your fixing up goes well =D. Which parts of the house are the worst, just curious?

Well here is an exterior photo.

As far as repairs.. quite a few.

It was a foreclosure. Country home sitting on four acres. Beautiful place... has large man made water fall and goldfish pond. Dunno bout the condition of the pump... that project isn't on the short list. It was a phenomenal deal

God has blessed us, as we needed a larger space. I may give some details on the matter in a SH thread if I ever get the time.

It's been sitting vacant for over a year.

It had some plumbing damage during a pipe freeze last winter. I have four plumbing leaks 3 of 4 repaired at present. I will replace all toilets internal components.

I am laying granite tile for the counter tops. Electric Garage doors are in disrepair due to dirt daubers. Repainting the kitchen, Master Bath and living are. Replacing a hot water heater. Installing all new appliances.

Lots of yard over growth. i.e. It has trees that are supposed to be trimmed to look like big mushrooms, but they look like Captain Caveman at the moment and so forth.

I am forgetting lots of stuff... but you get the idea.

Thanks for the inquiry.

Regards,

Mudcat