The Logic Of The Mormon Atonement.

[elguanteloko]

One of the principal reasons for the justifications given for Christs suffering in the Atonement given in Mormonism is that Christ had to pay for the debt of sin we contracted with the Father. It is said, and analogies often go in these lines, that Christ paid for that debt to free us from Father's justice with His (Christ's) mercy and that all he asked from us was repentance and acceptance of his sacrifice and of who he was (what one does after accepting those terms like temple rituals and the like won't matter for this).

Now a few questions:

Why didn't the Father just forgive us from our sins with similar terms stipulated by Jesus Christ after he sacrificed his life? In other words, why didn't the Father just forgive us in the same way Christ forgives us?

It may be argued that this was because justice wouldn't have been served otherwise but I find this as a very unsatisfactory answer because of the following: when you forgive a debt, it isn't unjust to do so. When Christ's forgives our debt of sin it isn't unjust and it isn't unjust for us to forgive other people's debts when we see fit to do so. Why is it, then, said that the Father forgiving something (but not Christ or us) is an offense to justice?

Let's say (just to put a number) that our debt of sin was 500,000 atoms (an atom is a unit of sin... just to put it a number, again). When Christ came he paid the 500,000 atoms of sin but the obvious thing is that we NOW owe 500,000 atoms to Christ. Christ forgave us from what he payed and asked us to do other things than to atone for our own sins (i.e. repentance, baptism, Holy Ghost, follow His commandments and repent when we fail. That is why it is said we will never repay (nor can repay) Christ for what He did for us.

Let me know what you think... but please, PLEASE try to understand what I'm saying here first. I will gladly answer any questions about it.

[Ares]

Bump - held in moderation. Everyone be respectful.

[Arkholt]

One of the principal reasons for the justifications given for Christs suffering in the Atonement given in Mormonism is that Christ had to pay for the debt of sin we contracted with the Father. It is said, and analogies often go in these lines, that Christ paid for that debt to free us from Father's justice with His (Christ's) mercy and that all he asked from us was repentance and acceptance of his sacrifice and of who he was (what one does after accepting those terms like temple rituals and the like won't matter for this).

Now a few questions:

Why didn't the Father just forgive us from our sins with similar terms stipulated by Jesus Christ after he sacrificed his life? In other words, why didn't the Father just forgive us in the same way Christ forgives us?

It may be argued that this was because justice wouldn't have been served otherwise but I find this as a very unsatisfactory answer because of the following: when you forgive a debt, it isn't unjust to do so. When Christ's forgives our debt of sin it isn't unjust and it isn't unjust for us to forgive other people's debts when we see fit to do so. Why is it, then, said that the Father forgiving something (but not Christ or us) is an offense to justice?

Let's say (just to put a number) that our debt of sin was 500,000 atoms (an atom is a unit of sin... just to put it a number, again). When Christ came he paid the 500,000 atoms of sin but the obvious thing is that we NOW owe 500,000 atoms to Christ. Christ forgave us from what he payed and asked us to do other things than to atone for our own sins (i.e. repentance, baptism, Holy Ghost, follow His commandments and repent when we fail. That is why it is said we will never repay (nor can repay) Christ for what He did for us.

Let me know what you think... but please, PLEASE try to understand what I'm saying here first. I will gladly answer any questions about it.

Is your question why do we still have Christ as the "mediator" and not just the Father forgiving our sins Himself, i.e. we have Father as Justice and Son as Mercy?

If it isn't, I apologize for not quite understanding your question. If it is, well... I guess I wonder whether it would matter either way. Wouldn't the result be the same? Why does it matter who ultimately does the forgiving?

[HeatherAnn]

Elguanteloko,

I like how you think deeply about things, because I can relate.

I've wondered similarly. My goal for most of my life - has been to understand & apply the atonement.

The deeper I thought about it, the less it made sense... but you know what? It doesn't matter.

Having faith that a Savior understands & loves us unconditionally & has the power to help & heal us... is powerful just in believing that!

Yet, for logical purposes... (BTW - this is my ever-changing logical perspective at the moment)

What are we being saved from?

Sin... what is sin?

Is it only when we screw up knowingly?

I don't think so. I think sin is thoughts that result in harm for us or others. Sometimes it's healthy to feel shame about sin, & sometimes shame itself is the sin.

Can anybody but us save us from our thoughts or from the consequences of acting on them?

Not really... I mean, faith in a Savior may uplift our thoughts... yet there are still "feelings buried alive that never die" until we soul-search for ourselves.

And besides, Jesus taught (& we know from religion, general spirituality & psychology) that the kingdom of God (or our experience of life) is processed within us. Would an unconditionally loving God kick us when we're down? Would he punish us after we're already suffering from the consequences of sin? I don't think so. And I believe that if not in life, after life, we'll realize more the effects of our thoughts & have reason both to sorrow & rejoice... & will go to the "mansion" where we feel most comfortably, spiritually - where we relate most. And it doesn't end there... we're in this for eternity - eternal progression.

So, is there a God or are we just making it all up or basing it on tradition?

Unconditonal loving God is real... but is much bigger & more expansive than we can ever imagine!

God is that higher energy - of divine will - the best of all possibilities in any given moment.

Yet, how in the world can we relate to something as abstract as that?!

We can't. We can only relate with what we know - which is people, father, mother, Jesus.

That feels more real, so we relate to it more & resonate more spiritually.

Jesus is a wonderful, perfect, ideal example for us to follow & not only that...

I'm discovering that the stories of his life are our spiritual map to achieving our full potential!

Edited July 5, 2011 by HeatherAnn

[cdowis]

One of the principal reasons for the justifications given for Christs suffering in the Atonement given in Mormonism is that Christ had to pay for the debt of sin we contracted with the Father.

This is not quite right, but close.

It is said, and analogies often go in these lines, that Christ paid for that debt to free us from Father's justice

Not sure where you are getting that "Father's justice" thing.

with His (Christ's) mercy and that all he asked from us was repentance and acceptance of his sacrifice and of who he was (what one does after accepting those terms like temple rituals and the like won't matter for this).

Now a few questions:

Why didn't the Father just forgive us from our sins with similar terms stipulated by Jesus Christ after he sacrificed his life? In other words, why didn't the Father just forgive us in the same way Christ forgives us?

I see where you are confused here. The Father administers justice, but so does the Son. It is inherent in their divine nature.

You are creating a false dichotomy -- Father justice, Christ mercy. Christ's atonement was according to the plan of the Father. It was the Father's desire for mercy that He sacrificed His son.

"If it be possible, remove this cup from me, but Thy will be done." The Father is both mercy and justice, and the atonement of the Son made it possible to pay the price of justice.

It may be argued that this was because justice wouldn't have been served otherwise but I find this as a very unsatisfactory answer because of the following: when you forgive a debt, it isn't unjust to do so. When Christ's forgives our debt of sin it isn't unjust and it isn't unjust for us to forgive other people's debts when we see fit to do so. Why is it, then, said that the Father forgiving something (but not Christ or us) is an offense to justice?

Let's say (just to put a number) that our debt of sin was 500,000 atoms (an atom is a unit of sin... just to put it a number, again). When Christ came he paid the 500,000 atoms of sin but the obvious thing is that we NOW owe 500,000 atoms to Christ. Christ forgave us

Again, the false dichotomy. You might find it useful to read Alma 41-42. Christ is restoring to us what we have sought ourselves. We become clean, it is restored to us. We are unclean, filthy, and remain filthy still. We are restored to that state of happiness that we ourselves have chosen.

We judge ourselves. Specifically, we would be miserable to live in the Father's presence if we are still filthy. It is in His MERCY that we are not abiding forever in His presence. We get what we desire most, we are among those of like-kind. Those who are filthy still do not want what the Father had to offer.

They scorned and rejected what He had to offer, and they judge themselves. Justice is also known as the law of restoration.

Edited July 5, 2011 by cdowis

[Mike Richards]

One of the principal reasons for the justifications given for Christs suffering in the Atonement given in Mormonism is that Christ had to pay for the debt of sin we contracted with the Father. It is said, and analogies often go in these lines, that Christ paid for that debt to free us from Father's justice with His (Christ's) mercy and that all he asked from us was repentance and acceptance of his sacrifice and of who he was (what one does after accepting those terms like temple rituals and the like won't matter for this).

Now a few questions:

Why didn't the Father just forgive us from our sins with similar terms stipulated by Jesus Christ after he sacrificed his life? In other words, why didn't the Father just forgive us in the same way Christ forgives us?

It may be argued that this was because justice wouldn't have been served otherwise but I find this as a very unsatisfactory answer because of the following: when you forgive a debt, it isn't unjust to do so. When Christ's forgives our debt of sin it isn't unjust and it isn't unjust for us to forgive other people's debts when we see fit to do so. Why is it, then, said that the Father forgiving something (but not Christ or us) is an offense to justice?

Let's say (just to put a number) that our debt of sin was 500,000 atoms (an atom is a unit of sin... just to put it a number, again). When Christ came he paid the 500,000 atoms of sin but the obvious thing is that we NOW owe 500,000 atoms to Christ. Christ forgave us from what he payed and asked us to do other things than to atone for our own sins (i.e. repentance, baptism, Holy Ghost, follow His commandments and repent when we fail. That is why it is said we will never repay (nor can repay) Christ for what He did for us.

Let me know what you think... but please, PLEASE try to understand what I'm saying here first. I will gladly answer any questions about it.

Are you familiar with Skousen's take on this issue? If not, you might find it interesting. I'm not sure if I believe it, but it provides some more options to think about for this topic. The basic idea is, as far as I can remember (and anyone who knows better or has an actual reference for it can feel free to correct me):

The universe is made up of intelligences. They are all progressing and understand that progression occurs by obedience to laws. They, in general, choose to obey God, which is what gives him his power. They trust him. If they were to lose trust in him, they would stop obeying him and he would cease to be God. When we sin, we fail to obey laws, and should also fail to progress. We, as humans, fail to progress because our inability to follow laws demonstrates to the intelligences that they cannot trust us and that they aren't inclined to be loyal to us. God loves us and would like to still see us progress, but if he "promoted" us, he would lose the trust of the intelligences and would cease to be God. From this we see that it isn't God that demands justice, it is the independent intelligences. So, we're stuck here--the intelligences have no loyalty to us because we sin, God can't do anything about it because he would cease to be God.

Enter the atonement--Christ, prior to his entrance into mortal life, had already gained perfect allegiance from the intelligences, and was, in this way, already a god. He came to this earth and lived the life with which we are familiar and, in the process of performing the atonement, suffered to such a great extent that the intelligences (those who demand justice) felt a great deal of compassion for him. (think: to bring about the bowels of mercy) Now, because of this compassion, when we are arraigned before the judgement seat, and God is required to condemn us because of our in order to retain his status as God, Christ will be able to step forward and say, "Father, behold the suffering and death of him who did no sin." This will remind the intelligences of Christ's suffering, arouse compassion in them and they will, essentially, say, "Well, Jesus, since we love you so much, and we know what you went through, if you can vouch for this guy, we'll let him through." At that point, of course, we aren't gods, but we've been given a pass and can rely of Christ's atonement until we are, ourselves, perfected and have gained the trust of the intelligences.

At least, that's how I remember it. It's been a while since I've read his theory, so this might have a lot of stuff incorrect (and might have some of my own thoughts in there). If it sounds interesting, I'm sure someone else knows where to find it...

[Bernard Gui]

They scorned and rejected what He had to offer, and they judge themselves. Justice is also known as the law of restoration.

It is also known as the law of the harvest.

"Plant a radish, get a radish, not a brussels sprout."

One does not sow wheat and expect to get peanuts.

Bernard

[Storm Rider]

One of the principal reasons for the justifications given for Christs suffering in the Atonement given in Mormonism is that Christ had to pay for the debt of sin we contracted with the Father. It is said, and analogies often go in these lines, that Christ paid for that debt to free us from Father's justice with His (Christ's) mercy and that all he asked from us was repentance and acceptance of his sacrifice and of who he was (what one does after accepting those terms like temple rituals and the like won't matter for this).

Now a few questions:

Why didn't the Father just forgive us from our sins with similar terms stipulated by Jesus Christ after he sacrificed his life? In other words, why didn't the Father just forgive us in the same way Christ forgives us?

It may be argued that this was because justice wouldn't have been served otherwise but I find this as a very unsatisfactory answer because of the following: when you forgive a debt, it isn't unjust to do so. When Christ's forgives our debt of sin it isn't unjust and it isn't unjust for us to forgive other people's debts when we see fit to do so. Why is it, then, said that the Father forgiving something (but not Christ or us) is an offense to justice?

Let's say (just to put a number) that our debt of sin was 500,000 atoms (an atom is a unit of sin... just to put it a number, again). When Christ came he paid the 500,000 atoms of sin but the obvious thing is that we NOW owe 500,000 atoms to Christ. Christ forgave us from what he payed and asked us to do other things than to atone for our own sins (i.e. repentance, baptism, Holy Ghost, follow His commandments and repent when we fail. That is why it is said we will never repay (nor can repay) Christ for what He did for us.

Let me know what you think... but please, PLEASE try to understand what I'm saying here first. I will gladly answer any questions about it.

I guess I would first disagree with your assumption about LDS belief of the Atonement. Christ's atonement saved us first from death; his universal gift to all mortals is that the grave will yield up her dead. Adam and Eve introduced death, brought us into a mortal existence. Without the Atonement we would have perpetually stayed in a broken state. The wages of sin is death. The beauty of the atonement is life eternal.

What do you mean that Christ forgave us? He paid for our all our sins, but are you saying that with the atonement all of our sins are forgiven before we even acknowledge him as Savior or ask for forgiveness? I am not aware that his is the doctrine of any Christian church extant today.

We are unprofitable servants because we cannot save ourselves. Nothing that we do, nothing that we say can save us in and of ourselves. It is only through the Grace of God that we can be saved.

I have tried to understand what you say, but what you have said has nothing to do with LDS teaching or doctrine.

[elguanteloko]

Is your question why do we still have Christ as the "mediator" and not just the Father forgiving our sins Himself, i.e. we have Father as Justice and Son as Mercy?

If it isn't, I apologize for not quite understanding your question. If it is, well... I guess I wonder whether it would matter either way. Wouldn't the result be the same? Why does it matter who ultimately does the forgiving?

That is the question.

It does matter since it is said that God loved the world that he sent his son to die and suffer for our sins when no one needed to suffer like that (if my criticisms are correct). The Father could have simply forgiven our sins and ask of us what Christ is asking of us.

It also matters because the principal reason for Christ's atonement is said to have been the need for justice to be served (by 'paying' for our sins) and mercy to be shown (by Christ forgiving us the debt to a great extent).

Edited July 5, 2011 by elguanteloko

[cdowis]

That is the question.

It does matter since it is said that God loved the world that he sent his son to die and suffer for our sins when no one needed to suffer like that. The Father could have simply forgiven our sins and ask of us what Christ is asking of us.

God would then cease to be God.

Read those chapters in Alma. Also 2 Ne chapter 2 about what happened with Adam, and how it intersects with the Atonement.

Edited July 5, 2011 by cdowis

[elguanteloko]

God would then cease to be God.

Why? Why would "just forgiving" our debt of sin like Christ forgives our sins if we repent (and all the other things asked of us) imply God ceasing to be God? That is what Christ does and he doesn't cease to be God because he does it.

Please read the OP again. I'm saying that what Christ is doing (namely, forgiving us of our transgressions if we repent and the other things I say in the OP) could have been done by the Father himself without any sacrifice of anyone. Christ forgives our sins and asks for repentance instead but, why wouldn't the Father do the same thing instead of sending Jesus to suffer?

Read those chapters in Alma. Also 2 Ne chapter 2 about what happened with Adam, and how it intersects with the Atonement.

Could you please be a little bit more specific on what you mean here?

[Ares]

Why? Why would "just forgiving" our debt of sin like Christ forgives our sins if we repent (and all the other things asked of us) imply God ceasing to be God? That is what Christ does and he doesn't cease to be God because he does it.

Please read the OP again. I'm saying that what Christ is doing (namely, forgiving us of our transgressions if we repent and the other things I say in the OP) could have been done by the Father himself without any sacrifice of anyone. Christ forgives our sins and asks for repentance instead but, why wouldn't the Father do the same thing instead of sending Jesus to suffer?

Could you please be a little bit more specific on what you mean here?

You were given a specific reference. Please read it before responding.

[DavidC]

I recommend Blake Ostler's article on atonement. I'm not sure I agree with his theory, but he surveys various other theories, and establishes criteria for an adequate theory.

http://blakeostler.com/docs/AtonementInMormonThought.pdf

[Log]

Food for thought. Note that Satan did not offer a plan of compulsion, but rather offered to redeem us in our sins, rather than from our sins.

http://reperiendi.wordpress.com/2007/06/11/the-atonement-by-cleon-skousen/

THE ATONEMENT

Talk By Cleon Skousen

President Kimball introduced one subject in General Priesthood Meeting that isn’t generally discussed that I want to comment on because it’s the whole foundation of Easter that’s never discussed. We just don’t talk about it, and we’re the only people that know about it. And we’ve almost lost it as a doctrine of the Church. So I was quite thrilled when President Kimball introduced it. He said:

“I want everybody to understand that in this life we only have a very limited amount of priesthood authority to function with. There are many ordinances that as yet must be given to us in the next world. One of them is the ordinance of resurrection. We’re not allowed to perform that ordinance here. It’s an ordinance of the priesthood, we’ll get it over there.

Over in the next life we’ll also have the ordinance of begetting spirit children with spirit bodies and that’s something that we have no power or capacity to do here. Physical bodies, yes, but not spirit.”

Then he got onto a theme that I’m sure may have sounded a little strange to some ears. He said:

“You’ll be able to have access to the intelligences in the universe and organize them and make planets and organize kingdoms.”

Now this is a beautiful doctrine that it’s time we discussed a little bit more because if we understand that principle, it will help us to comprehend why there had to be an atonement. I don’t know whether this bothers you or not, but as I was a little boy sitting in Sunday School and they talked about the terrible suffering of Jesus on the cross, I would say to my Sunday School teacher, “Who wanted that? What was all the suffering for? Everybody talks about all the suffering. What was it for? Who was it to satisfy?” And my teacher said, “Well, it was to satisfy Heavenly Father.” And that didn’t answer my childish questions either. Seems like if Heavenly Father wanted us to come down on this earth, after we’d repented, He’d just say, “Come back on up, you did the best you could.” What did we need all this suffering up there for?

When I (Cleon Skousen) went on my mission I asked James Widtsoe, my mission president, all my childhood questions concerning all the suffering of Jesus. Why all the pain? President Widtsoe said, “This is the most profound question of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and it shouldn’t be answered unless people are first capable of at least wondering about it so they can hear the answer. The answer to this question is what President Kimball was talking about in priesthood meeting. He didn’t associate it with the subject of the Atonement, but it’s the foundation of it.”

The following are passages in the scriptures–the answers to the questions of the pain of the atonement. If you look each one up you will appreciate them much more than if you just say, “Now I know where.” Actually read each passage and you’ll begin to see what a marvelous ocean, an avalanche, a veritable waterfall of truth has poured out upon the saints in the latter days, and some of it we’ve allowed to run off without appreciating what it really represented. Now, first of all, is II Nephi 2:14. This is what you’ll read:

And now, my sons, I speak unto you these things for your profit and learning; for there is a God, and He hath created all things, both the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are, both things to act and things to be acted upon.

Father Lehi says that everything in the universe is made of two things. This is where we get our “building blocks” concept–something to act and something to be acted upon. Now the next reference is D&C 93:29.

The thing which acts is called “eternal intelligences”. In the plural– eternal intelligences! The next one is D&C 93:30.

These intelligences are independent and act voluntarily. They are not compelled. The heavens wait on them until they obey. They don’t do anything until they are ready, just like us! And our Heavenly Father built the whole universe with this element of action, this energy factor in the universe is intelligence and it only operates as fast and in a direction that it is willing to follow. Now Abraham 3:19.

These intelligences are graded from the lowest to the highest and the highest is God’s intelligence Himself. And we’re in between. Some of the intelligences are assigned to the elements, and some were assigned to plant life and some were assigned to animals and those that were his very special, superior, super deluxe intelligences were given bodies in his image. And you are they. You are very, very, very special people. Now Joseph Smith describes this in Documentary History of the Church Vol. 4, p. 519. He says:

“And I explained to the Quorum of the Twelve and their wives the doctrine of the eternal progression of intelligences.”

Then he doesn’t tell us what the explanation was. So you have to go to Brigham Young, Parley P. Pratt and Heber C. Kimball and they tell what was explained to them but they got the doctrine from him. Our next one is D&C 93:33.

That which is acted upon is called “eternal element” (two blocks–act, acted upon)–element, matter. Joseph Smith said that matter exists on two dimensions– the very refined element is called spirit. And the more coarse element is called this temporal matter we’ve got here, physical (D&C 131:7-8 ). It’s all matter but it exists on two planes. Like ice and water. They’re the same thing but they’re on different dimensions. Everything is made up of a combination of intelligence and matter. They are the building blocks of the universe. (Abraham 4:10,12,18; Helaman 12:8-9)

Now if you’re interested in science, this will be very exciting information. Our most advanced research scientists in the pure research area have just proven this to be true. Matter does not function mechanically. It has an element of finite intelligence in it, they say. That’s what Bergsen called it–the French philosopher. It can distinguish, it can choose, it doesn’t always do what the rules say. Some of these little elements are just as ornery as you and me. They go wandering around–and in the aggregate we say that that’s the law of chemistry. In the aggregate, yes, but you look at them individually and they’re fooling around. As a matter of fact, Robert Milligan said that if all the elements were obeying all of the rules of chemistry, you would never die. Through rebellion in the flesh. And they’re called seeds of death–you may have heard of that before. Now at God’s command, element which has received intelligence attached to it, at God’s command it will obey. You want a mountain to move? Talk to it. “MOVE!” “YES, SIR.” And they move when God commands it, or his priesthood does it by his authorization. When God commands, these intelligences obey, in the elements. That’s Jacob 4:6; I Nephi 20:13.

Now listen to Brigham Young discussing this principle. There is life or intelligence in all matter through the vast extent of all the eternities. It is in the rock, in the sand, in water, air, the gases, and in short, in every description and organization of matter whether it be solid, liquid, or gaseous. Particle operating with particle. Now, all of a sudden, we begin to catch the vision of the miracle of God’s creation. He goes up into the outer darkness of unorganized intelligences and unorganized bits of element and combines them together so that a little tiny bit of element has an intelligence attached to it and now you can command it. They’re combined in certain ways. The Lord has given to all of them a pattern, which becomes the law by which they operate. Some will accept electricity and some will resist it. Some will combine with various things and you get a combination–2 parts Hydrogen and 1 part Oxygen–and we call it water. That’s because they were organized in that way. They’re so marvelously organized that you can take one single little complex organization–it’s called a cell–and it’s fertilized by another cell. And within 9 months because of the DNA organization that is set up there by highly intelligent Heavenly Father, that will grow into trillions of cells, called a human being. All by design. You can almost stand in a worshipful feeling toward our Heavenly Father as you realize what is possible in that organizational structure. (Discourses of Brigham Young, p.368-369)

Now let me show you a miracle. See that hand? That is made of dirt! You want to see a miracle in engineering and Godly power, it’s in that hand. That is made of dirt! And our Heavenly Father can speak to all those little intelligences and He could turn them back into dirt that fast. Or He can say to them–as to the hand of Moses–”My children, halfway, not all the way, just halfway.” Like leprosy, maybe? “Moses, put your hand into your bosom.” So he puts it in and the Lord says, “Now, my children, Moses, take your hand out.” Leprosy! Dripping, incurable, on the way back to dirt. “Moses, put your hand back into your bosom.” Then the Lord says, “Now my children, as you were–everybody back in your places. Take your hand out, Moses.” Ah! Beautiful, clean, strong, pink flesh. That’s the miracle of God. Children are a miracle. Everything around us is a miracle, and for the first time we’re beginning to understand. God speaks and they obey. Things are made of that which acts and that which is acted upon, and they’ve been identified for us by name and President Kimball said that in the next world–that’s where we have access to these intelligences to organize our own great systems. Now, our Heavenly Father says, “Do you know what makes me God?” You might want to put this down. The source of God’s power is D&C 29:36, Moses 4:1,4.

Here he talks about the source of his power–what makes him God. What do you think it turns out to be? What makes a being suddenly or over the process of time a God? MY HONOR is my power. My honor is my power. So that when I speak and say, “water, reorganize into wine–a very high grade of wine, please,” there’s no problem. They reorganize. We called it a miracle. It was nothing in the world but obedient intelligences. That’s the doctrine.

Now keeping that in mind, that’s D&C 29:36, what would happen if the Father violated the confidence of those intelligences? What do you think would happen? No church on the face of the earth has dared to announce the doctrine contained in the Book of Alma, Chapter 42. No church has dared to suggest that God could fall. And our Heavenly Father says, “I want you to know that I walk the razor’s edge of Celestial Law continually in order to maintain the confidence and the honor of all these who trust me because that’s the source of my power.” This gives us a whole new understanding of our Heavenly Father. In Alma 42:13,22,25 he repeats it over and over again. And in Mormon 9:19 it is repeated. If He were unjust, if He were arbitrary, if He were false in any sense, He would what? CEASE TO BE GOD. Who dares to suggest that anything could happen to challenge the power of the almighty Elohim, chief of the Gods? Our Heavenly Father says, “I want you to understand me. I work within very strict rules. I have to function so that I enjoy their confidence and do not violate it.” Now Alma 34:9.

The Father says, “Once I had put you down into the second estate, I lost complete control over the possibility of bringing you back Myself.” God the Father cannot save us. These are doctrines of the church that we seldom put in these dimensions. But this is the Easter story. This is really the Easter story. In fact, it says there that if there had not been some way to get us back to the presence of the Father, and it had been left to the Father and He had been helpless to get us back, we would have ended back in outer darkness with Satan and his hosts. We’d have gone the same route they went. And everything that had been organized by the Father in connection with us, our earth and the other earths on which part of this family is located and all of the creations connected with it, would have disintegrated and gone back to outer darkness, disorganized, That’s the scripture.

Now this takes all the magic out of creation. All of a sudden, we can understand it, in our finite way. All of a sudden, our Heavenly Father becomes much more rational, comprehensive, and our appreciation begins to accelerate as we begin to realize what a remarkable, beautiful, powerful personality He is. II Nephi 9:9 is where it says we would end up with Satan and his angels were there no atonement. That it is absolutely beyond the capacity of our Heavenly Father to lift children who have stumbled while learning the difference between good and evil back into His presence. Because He has to operate according to law and all the other intelligences would say, “Father, now they have sinned and come short of Thy glory. They cannot come back. Remember all the laws that held us back? We didn’t get to be those top people, we were graded down. Remember? Remember laws? You kept talking about laws . . .” These are they who demand justice and will not let us return. And should God try it, as it says in Alma, they would cease to honor Him. And He would cease to be God. That’s the doctrine.

Then how do we do it? How do we do it? Alma 34:11. No person can suffer for the sins of another person, that’s the law. The law says no person can suffer for the sins of another person. That’s what these little intelligences are saying–”that’s the law.” Now, you just stop and think why that is so. If I commit a very serious offense could my brother die for it and satisfy you people? Even though we love each other and my brother says, “No, don’t let him be killed, I’ll die for him.” Do you think everyone would be happy about that? No, it would violate your sense of justice. And it does all these little intelligences. And Alma 34:11 says, “No person can die or be punished for the sins of another person and have it acceptable as justice.” See, there’s demands of justice. That’s what these little intelligences are doing. “There’s an offense there, they cannot come back, Father.” Everybody see the problem?

Now, the genius of the solution. The Gods know that these little intelligences have a capacity for compassion. Compassion–just like you and me. Intelligences have a capacity for compassion. Therefore, the atonement is based not on law, but mercy. That’s Alma 34:15. In other words, we’re going to try and get to these little intelligences in some way so that we can overcome the demands of justice. With what? Sympathy, mercy–so that we’ll actually overcome the demands of justice. That’s Alma 34:15.

Now, once the families of Gods–and they must have worked this out eons and eons ago with other families, so this is a pattern. Remember when they were selecting the Savior? Jesus volunteered, but Satan said, “You know, Father, this is very old fashioned, this just isn’t necessary. We can satisfy the intelligences of the universe. Just put our children in straight jackets and get them through the second estate . . . it’s a great idea, I thought of it. I really would like to get credit for it because I’m offering the whole family, the whole human family, insurance. All I’m asking you to do is to give up the hang-up that the family has always had on this free agency thing. It’s only for this little bit of time. We’ll put them in a straight jacket, get them through the second estate– no body can object to them then. We’ve taken them down, they’ve got bodies, we’ve prevented them from violating any laws . . . bring them back . . . it’s that simple.”

“No!” the father said, “it isn’t that simple.” Apparently implying that if you introduce compulsion into our eternal plan of salvation, or into the cosmic universe, you put coercion there. Anyway, your sowing the seeds of what? . . . Revolution, disintegration. Everything we have out there is moving as it is willing to move. You don’t get revolution that way.

Then Satan says, “I’ll start a revolution.” And he does. I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if the real followers of the Father there, for a while, were a minority. And we had a big uncommitted, in the middle, majority. Jesus said, “Father, I’ll do it your way–I’ll do it the way they’ve always had to do it. We do have casualties, true–but, at least we maintain a voluntary participation that you’ve always done in the past. And I know someone has to suffer in order to have that atonement, and create that sense of compassion, but I’ll do it.” And so we had a big argument, and the revelation says that the war in heaven was a testimony meeting.

As we said one to another, “The Father’s way is the right way. Now you don’t want to introduce compulsion. If you start compulsion, who says where it could end? Lucifer’s trying to steal the throne of our Heavenly Father and he wants the glory for it and there’s nothing in that direction but rebellion and destruction.” We finally got 2/3′s on our side. I won’t be surprised when we see this in the vision if we only had a minority to begin with. But we finally got 2/3′s. And the other 1/3 went for no-risk insurance. They wouldn’t take a chance with us.

All right, now, how does this atonement work? Watch how the principle functions. Now you’re an intelligence. You are capable of being subjected to so much sympathy and compassion, you’ve stopped asking for every pound of flesh that the law permits. Ever notice that in yourself? It works–first the principle. They must have a person who is infinite as it says in Alma 34–one who is infinitely loved. Infinite means completely–everybody recognizes this. So we take a spirit who is so superior He’s first counselor in the first presidency of heaven. He’s so honored that when the Father wants something done He speaks to this person and he tells all the intelligences what to do. And He’s identified as the Word. He’s the one through whom the word passes. He’s loved and respected by all, just like the Father. So we use him. He is infinitely loved. And we have Him come down into the second estate and live a perfect life without offense so that He can return to the Father and incidental thereto while laboring among the human family, we have Him suffer so terribly that the little intelligences of the entire universe are revolted. It’s abhorrent–the suffering that He went through. They loved Him. As it says in the Book of Mormon, even the elements of the earth couldn’t stand it, and churned back and forth until the whole face of the land northward was different than before. The very elements were crying out against this terrible torture of someone that they loved. And all this was by design. That’s the mission of Jesus Christ. You must suffer so much that those little intelligences, when you come and plead on behalf of someone who did the best that he could, which is called repentance–they’ll say, “Well, they really shouldn’t go back, but if you want them, after all you went through for them . . . yes, they can go up.” That’s the atonement.

And so listen to Alma 34 as we hear the prophets who use to understand and preach this doctrine extensively, which we’ve kind of stopped preaching among ourselves. Listen to this statement here. Alma 34:15.

“And thus He shall bring salvation to all those who shall believe on His name. This being the intent of this last sacrifice–to bring about the bowels of mercy.” Whose mercy? The bowels of mercy . . . whose mercy? Our Heavenly Father already has mercy toward us. This is His plan. We don’t have to create that in Him. We have to create it in those that are demanding justice. “Father, they’ve sinned–come short of the glory of God.” There’s where you must arouse the bowels of mercy, which overpower justice, being the demands of justice. “And brings about the means unto men that they may have faith unto repentance. And thus mercy can satisfy the demands of justice. And encircles them in the arms of safety. While he that exerciseth not faith unto repentance is exposed to the whole law of the demands of justice. Therefore, only unto them that hath faith unto repentance is brought about the great and eternal plan of redemption.”

Now let’s turn to D&C 45 and listen to the Savior telling about it. Verse 3–listen to Him who is the advocate with your Father–who is pleading your cause before him saying, “Father, behold the suffering and death of Him who did no sin. In whom thou wast well pleased. Behold the blood of thy Son, which was shed. The blood of Him who thou prayest that Thyself may be glorified, Wherefore, Father, spare these my brethren”–see how He does that? “Spare these my brethren that believe on my name.” He doesn’t plead for those who don’t believe, He can’t–He’s not allowed to–it would rob justice. “Spare these that believe on my name, that they may come to me and have everlasting life.” And the Father can do it without ceasing to be God. Because of what? Mercy! Let me give you an example of how that works. During the Civil War there was a 19 year old soldier who went to sleep on guard duty. A whole section of the Union army was wiped out in that particular sector. He lost many of his very best friends all because he went to sleep and they were able to make a surprise attack on one flank of that particular defense effort. He survived the battle. He was court-martialed and sentenced to be hanged for neglect of duty for going to sleep while servicing as a guard, which was routine military law. The death sentence and order of execution was placed on the desk of President Lincoln and he was prepared to sign it. We lost a lot of valuable men because a 19 year old soldier went to sleep. President Lincoln was communicated with by a little old woman. This mother said to President Lincoln, “When this war started, I had a husband and 6 sons. First I lost my husband, then I lost my sons–5 of them. I just have one son left. And he’s about to be executed for neglect of duty. He feels terrible about what he did. He knows he deserves to die. President Lincoln, I wonder if, maybe, because you have the pardoning power under the constitution, you could find it in your heart to let me have the last of my family–for my sake?” President Lincoln said to the mother, “For your sake, I pardon your son. I pray God he’ll survive the war and be a blessing to you all the days of your life.” See how compassion works? We completely overcame the demands of justice. And nobody criticized President Lincoln for using his pardoning power in that case once they found out what the plea of that little mother had been. And that’s the way all of us are.

I just pause at this moment to ask the question, “What do you think an intelligence is?” What is an intelligence? Well, we don’t know. It’s a wonderful, self-knowing, eternal little entity that says, “I am.” You see me up here, but what you’re really seeing isn’t me–this is mine. And the little “I am” that always existed–I can locate him pretty well. I touch my chin, and that’s outside and below me. Shut your eyes and touch your right ear– is that you? Or is that to the right of you? Notice that? Put your hand on the top of your head. Is that you or is that above you? Isn’t that interesting? Put your fingers out here–is that you or is that way, way, way out from you? You see, “I am” is right in there–that’s the seat of power. Want to know what an intelligence is? That’s it, that’s you! And you’re one of the very advanced intelligences. You’re so advanced that one of our brothers on this level thought that he was as smart as the Father, and tried to take over the Father’s kingdom. Those other little intelligences wouldn’t have thought of that. But the Father’s elevated far beyond us. I tell you, this is an exciting place to be, and it took eons to bring us here and everyone is so precious. Our Heavenly Father says, “If you see one of them trying, then backsliding, then he tries, keeps backsliding, you work with him if you have to forgive him 70 x 7 — as long as he’s trying–keep in there, push him–we might make it eventually–maybe we’ve got an Alma in the making. Who knows?”

Toward the evening they went to the last supper. They partook of the passover lamb. And he looked out over his 12 apostles and He said, “One of you will betray me.” Peter says to John, “You’re closest. You ask Him, who?” And John the Beloved said, “Master, who?” The Savior whispered, “He to whom I give the sop.” And He picked up a piece of bread, dipped it in the gravy, handed it to Judas Iscariot and said, “Judas, whatsoever thou doest, do thou quickly.” Judas got up and went out. I wonder if he suspected that maybe Jesus suspected. We don’t know. We don’t think so. He’d already received the 30 pieces of silver–he’d already approved to betray the Christ. He went out. He went to see the elders of the city. Now it says that Jesus became very depressed. And then rose up and he gave that beautiful high priest prayer found in John, Chapter 17, where he pleads with the Father to, “Bless these, that they may be one as thou, Father, art in me and I in Thee– That they also may be one in us.” And He says, “Bless those who shall believe on their words, who have not seen–that they also may be one, that we all may be one. I pray not for the world, but for those that thou hast given me out of the world. That they may be one.” And in the greatest of anguish and suffering He pleaded with that prayer.

Now, He said, “Let us be gone. I need to pray.” And so they went from the part of the city where the poor people lived–we think that’s where it really was–across the temple square, out through the golden gate on the eastern side, down through the brook Cidron, and up unto the top of the Mount of Olives. It was dark now, and as He came in, He told eight of his disciples to stay by the gate. He took Peter, James and John and went into the grove. Then He had them watch, and He went further up the hillside into the grove, and apparently only John stayed awake. And John heard Him fall full-length on the ground and said, “O Father, all things are possible unto thee. Take this cup from me. Nevertheless, not my will, but Thy will be done.” What He’s saying is, “Father, You are God. You’re all powerful–all things are possible unto Thee–don’t make me go through this. We can work it out some other way.” And that angel that came to minister unto Jesus, undoubtedly, explained to Him something He’d forgotten–He’s forgotten His preexistence. He was born to suffer and die. What the angel must have said, and undoubtedly did, though we don’t have the message–but I won’t be surprised if it was something like this, “O Jehovah, Thou Son of God–You do not have to do this, unless you wish. But you should know that unless you fulfill this assignment, the Father will lose not only this family, this whole family, but the entire creation associated with them. The planets, the plants, the animals, everything that you used your hands to create, will be lost to the Father and go back to the chaos of outer darkness from which it came.”

Because when the angel had finished ministering to Him, He said, “Then Thy will be done.” And He sweat drops of blood. The channels of His lifestream couldn’t even contain the fluid of life and it spilled out into the sweat glands and poured out on His skin as it were great drops of blood. The agony of that moment. Now you and I couldn’t have endured that–we don’t have any idea how terrible that was. But Jesus has given us some idea of what it was like in the 19th Section of The Doctrine and Covenants, in which He says, verse 15, “Therefore, I command you to repent. Repent lest I smite you by the rod of my mouth and by my wrath and by my anger, and your sufferings be sore. How sore you know not–how exquisite you know not. How hard to bear you know not. For behold, I, God have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent. But if they would not repent, they must suffer even as I, which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble with pain and to bleed at every pore, and suffer both body and spirit and would that I might not drink the bitter cup and shrink. Nevertheless, glory be to the Father, and I partook and finished my preparation unto the children of men.” “Now will you accept it? Will you let me blot them out? I can, if you’ll be obedient through repentance, the spirit will justify you, and I will sanctify you. I’ve done it for you. Come unto me.” After that, Judas came with the soldiers, and Jesus heard them coming–He came back and here were His apostles sound asleep. We don’t know what else happened– John didn’t stay awake. He was tired. Judas came up to Him. It was night– they had torches–they’d seen Jesus in the temple square but it was night time and they wanted to be sure and get the right one because the others will all flee as soon as they grab somebody. And so Judas came up to Him, Took Jesus in his arms and said, “Hail, Master.” And the Savior looked down at him and said, “Judas, betrayest thou the Son of Man with a kiss?” The soldiers screamed, “Seize him! Seize him!” And everybody fled. Then the Savior was taken up to the house of Ananias and we all remember the terrible night that He spent. We remember the three denials by Peter–he was petrified–Peter will never forgive himself for these three denials. The next morning there was an illegal trial before the Sanhedrin. They can’t kill Jesus without the consent of Pilate, so they take Him into the Antonian, named after Mark Antony and this was a big fortress that’s part of the temple square, and right in the open square they brought in Jesus and turned Him over to Pilate.

Pilate tried to create sympathy in their hearts by flogging Him and putting a crown of thorns on His head and blood running down His face, His robe is just saturated with blood and they bring Him out and say in Latin, “Behold! Behold the man!” And they scream, “Crucify Him! Crucify Him! That’s not enough.” “Bring me water–see ye to it–I wash my hands of this judgment.”

“Crucify Him!” And so they took Him with the cross–carried it as long as His broken body could endure the pain and finally they took Him up to the place of the skull and there they nailed Him to the cross and swung it into position. Two thieves were crucified on either side. The earth trembled and the sky grew black at noon and remained black with the ground trembling occasionally clear up until 3 o’clock.

Over in America, the whole continent was in turmoil as were the islands of the sea. Towards the end, He cried out, “I thirst.” On a sponge they put vinegar up because that was supposed to alleviate the pain a little bit. He looked down in His agony and He said, “John, behold thy mother; mother, behold thy son.” Apparently Joseph had passed away. He’s just saying, “John, take care of my mother, Mary.” And then, after they’d tormented Him and pestered Him, “Why don’t you come down? Why don’t you heal yourself?” All of this is in the 110th Psalm–all of it was seen by David. He knew the very words Jesus would say. And then almost when the agony was beyond bearing, and it was getting toward dusk when they would have to start breaking their legs so they would die fast, suddenly Jesus looked up and said, “Eloi, Eloi, Lama Sabachthani? My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” The Spirit of the Father had withdrawn from this man– left Him absolutely alone, hanging on that cross. But just for a moment–and then the Spirit of God surged back into Him, to say, in effect, “My Son, I’m here–we did it!” He lifted up His face and He said, “It is finished. Father, into Thy hands I commend my spirit.” And he departed.

At that moment Jesus became the Christ. He had done what was necessary to overcome the demands of justice so we could go back. He did it. And by the power of that great force that was in Him, He now had three days and nights and would have that body lifted, resurrected, purified, and glorified, and it’s such a thrilling thing to contemplate Mary Magdalene coming and leaning against the wall of the tomb–she knows that someone stole the body. She thinks maybe it’s the gardener and she sees that person standing through her tears, standing there. She said, “Master, if thou hast born Him hence, tell me where thou hast laid Him and I will bear Him away.” And the person said, “Mary.” She looked up and said, “Master!” He said, “Touch me not. I am not yet ascended to my Father who is in heaven. But go and tell the brethren I ascend unto my God and their God.” And he was gone. That’s the Easter story.

And our Heavenly Father suffered so much that night in Gethsemane when that Son of His lay among the leaves underneath the olive trees and said, “O Father, if it be possible, take this cup from me.” Our Heavenly Father was suffering so much that moment that He wanted at least one of His children of the earth to know what that was like that night for Him. And so He said to our great ancestor, Abraham, “I want you to take your best, beloved son up onto the top of Mount Moriah and I want you to offer him unto me as a sacrifice.” “My son! To whom you promised his seed might be like unto the sands of the seashore. Mine only son and heir. I kill him? And burn him?” And without telling Sarah, he took this young man, probably in his early teens, up to the top of Mount Moriah. And Josephus, who had access to all the books of the temple, says that he said to his son, “My child, I wouldn’t have had you without a special blessing from God to your mother. And He, having sent you to me, now asks that I send you back–not by disease, or war, or old age, but as a sacrament unto Him at the hands of your own Father. I now send you to Him.” And he raised the knife. Oh, the anguish of that father! And in Jacob 4:5 of The Book of Mormon it says that that was done to symbolize the feelings of the Father and the Son. That was specifically done so that at least one human father would know what the pain and anguish was like that night in Gethsemane as Jesus said, “O Father, all things are possible unto Thee–take this cup from me.”

You know as you begin to understand this beautiful doctrine–the intelligences in the universe, the fact that their honor of God is what makes Him God–the fact that if He lost their confidence, He’d cease to be God–these are basic doctrines of the restored gospel as it says in Jacob 2. Why don’t we talk about the atonement more? We don’t talk about the real basis of the atonement–we talk about it as a proven fact, without ever reaching out and saying, “Heavenly Father, I think I understand just a little. I think I understand.” I don’t know what it does for you but it has made me to love my Heavenly Father like I’ve never loved Him before. And I’ve learned to love the Savior Jesus Christ like I’ve never loved Him before. Now that I know what those two wonderful people did for me and you and our children and all the people of this world, the planet on which we live–and all the beautiful things that He’s blessed us with. It would have all been destroyed and lost if those two people hadn’t done what they did. I love them for that.

I bear witness that Jesus is the Christ. We have a Father in Heaven who loves us. The atonement is real. The atonement is effective. The atonement works. There is a resurrection. There is forgiveness of sins. Though our sins be as scarlet, if we will truly repent, we can be restored and taken back to our Heavenly Father cleansed like white snow. (Isaiah 1:18) I pray our Heavenly Father that He’ll help us so we won’t let Him down, so we won’t betray the Christ, so we’ll be good missionaries and spread this great message to our neighbors. I pray that we may be worthy of the atonement and gospel of Jesus Christ which has been restored for us, in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

(Read D&C 128:23)

Edited July 5, 2011 by Log

[elguanteloko]

cdowis:

I've read the chapters you mentioned. I've been a member of the Church for my whole life (I became an unbeliever about a year ago) and these things aren't new to me. There is nothing I've read in those chapters that clarifies or answers what I'm asking here.

Please be more specific because I just don't see anything in Alma nor in 2 Nephi 2 that answers what I'm saying.

That "it was written" that Christ should come doesn't answer why it was necessary for Christ to come so as to write it anywhere before it happened, so that reason doesn't work (I mention this reason in particular because I've received it several times here already).

[elguanteloko]

I guess I would first disagree with your assumption about LDS belief of the Atonement.

That's fine!

Christ's atonement saved us first from death; his universal gift to all mortals is that the grave will yield up her dead.

Christ's resurrection saved us from mortal or physical death (when we will resurrect) but the atonement happened through his suffering to save us from spiritual death.

Adam and Eve introduced death, brought us into a mortal existence. Without the Atonement we would have perpetually stayed in a broken state. The wages of sin is death. The beauty of the atonement is life eternal.

"The wages of sin is death" talks about spiritual death, not physical death since Mormons do NOT believe in original sin. If this wasn't the case (that is, if that verse talked about physical death also) then babies either wouldn't be able to die (because they haven't sinned) OR they would be born in sin (thus, the doctrine of original sin). Since it is neither of those then it is consistent with LDS teachings since Mormons believe neither in original sin nor that babies are not able to die because they have not sinned. Then, this quote can ONLY mean spiritual death, NOT physical death (thus speaking ONLY of the atonement, NOT of the resurrection).

What do you mean that Christ forgave us?

I'm NOT saying Christ "forgave us" as in something that happened in the past or at the moment of the atonement but something that happens when we repent and are cleansed.

He paid for our all our sins, but are you saying that with the atonement all of our sins are forgiven before we even acknowledge him as Savior or ask for forgiveness? I am not aware that his is the doctrine of any Christian church extant today.

No, that's not what I meant. See above.

We are unprofitable servants because we cannot save ourselves.

I agree, and that's the point. Someone has to forgive us the debt and we contracted the debt with Christ when he payed for our sins. We can't repay him. Since we can't repay him he changed the conditions of the payment so as us not having to atone for our own sins, but that we must only accept his sacrifice and he will forgive us (he will forgive us our sins which we can't pay for. Then, he forgives sins when we can't pay.. .but the Father could NOT forgive our sins when we couldn't pay. Why?)

Nothing that we do, nothing that we say can save us in and of ourselves. It is only through the Grace of God that we can be saved.

I agree.

I have tried to understand what you say, but what you have said has nothing to do with LDS teaching or doctrine.

...

Edited July 5, 2011 by elguanteloko

[elguanteloko]

I recommend Blake Ostler's article on atonement. I'm not sure I agree with his theory, but he surveys various other theories, and establishes criteria for an adequate theory.

http://blakeostler.c...rmonThought.pdf

Thanks for the article! Certainly very interesting... though I'm not sure if this was meant as a response since Ostler himself admits that,

"I suggest that no theory in the history of Christianity to date has actually met the burden of explaining

how Christ’s suffering somehow eradicates our sin in the here and now. I submit that no theory to date has

adequately answered the questions raised by the claim that because of Christ our sins are forgiven. None has

adequately explained how Christ could possibly bear the pain of sins that haven’t even occurred yet – and might

not occur because sin is necessarily the result of free choices that could be otherwise. Finally, no theory that

I am aware of meets Abelard’s Constraint of providing a non-arbitrary explanation for Christ’s atonement that

is both coherent and morally acceptable."

Other than that, I agree in his criteria (though they are not new); they are very clear.

[elguanteloko]

Food for thought. Note that Satan did not offer a plan of compulsion, but rather offered to redeem us in our sins, rather than from our sins.

I don't get what you mean to imply by this statement. Do you think my objections assume that we could have been forgiven "in our sins"? If that's what you think, that's not what I meant. I'm saying that there is no reason why the Father couldn't have asked of us everything Christ asks for us (except recognize Christ's sacrifice, obviously, since this would have been unnecessary) without the need for Christ's suffering in the normal LDS explanation for the atonement.

About Skousen's view, I've always found it odd in the extreme. To explain why I will quote from the very nice article DavidC was kind enough to recommend me by Ostler about some problems with Skousen:

However, the theory doesn’t account for the scriptural data that must be explained by a theory of

atonement. It doesn’t connect with the scriptural sense in which Christ actually bears our sins. According to

scripture, the pain that Christ suffers arises from taking our sins upon himself and indeed into his own person.

(See 1 Peter 2:21-24) My sins don’t seem to be involved in anything that Christ does because the intelligences

were persuaded to give up their unjust demands 2,000 years ago. What I do in the here and now seems totally

disconnected from this explanation for atonement. Perhaps it could be said that Christ bears the brunt of an

unjust demand for retribution and in this sense bears the sins of the intelligences. However, our sins are not

limited to just making unjust demands for retribution. Moreover, the atonement functions by God giving in to

unjust demands and thus entails that God in fact is complicit in unjustly requiring his son to suffer to appease

these unjust demands. Moreover, the biggest question it raises for me is: why doesn’t the Father himself

undergo the punishment to assuage the unjust demands? This view seems to entail that the Father is both unjust

and a coward. Wouldn’t the intelligences lose faith and trust in the Father for failing to take accountability for

the solution? Perhaps it could be argued that it was tougher for the Father to stand on the sidelines and watch

his son suffer. But that merely underscores that the Father had every reason to undergo the unjust suffering

himself.

Moreover, is God’s status as God really that precarious? If the intelligences simply fail to honor him,

God ceases to be God. If that is so, why would such a god inspire us at all – let alone be in a position to

command our total allegiance as he is wont to do throughout all scriptural texts? Moreover, the scriptural

warrant for this view is obviously questionable. Alma’s discussion of the “demands of justice” in Alma 34 and

42 rather clearly has nothing to do with the demands of intelligences for someone to pay the price of violation

of the law.

(taken from: http://blakeostler.com/docs/AtonementInMormonThought.pdf Special thanks to DavidC for providing it)

[HeatherAnn]

If I understand you correctly, you're wondering why God doesn't just deal with us directly, why does he need a middle man, especially since, we're taught we don't pray to our middleman (Jesus) but directly to Heavenly Father.

And since a relationship is only as good as its' communication, how can we "relate" to Jesus without communicating with him?

And, if we believe in the scriptures, then we believe God makes exceptions, that his word is never really set in stone (except for the 10 commandments lol).

Then, if we believe God is changing, then we can believe in Heavenly Father commanding not to kill, then to kill (as in OT genocides & the human sacrifice of Jesus).

Granted, it was people who fulfilled these killings, but it was part of Heavenly Father's command. (??)

This doesn't make sense, does it?

IMO, Christianity, & the true message of Jesus was distorted, almost from the beginning.

By using Jesus as a scapegoat, it prevents our spiritual progress.

However, if we use Jesus' life story & teachings as the parable he intended ("without a parable spake he not unto them")...

Then we have a beautiful guide & spiritual map!

[zerinus]

One of the principal reasons for the justifications given for Christs suffering in the Atonement given in Mormonism is that Christ had to pay for the debt of sin we contracted with the Father. It is said, and analogies often go in these lines, that Christ paid for that debt to free us from Father's justice with His (Christ's) mercy and that all he asked from us was repentance and acceptance of his sacrifice and of who he was (what one does after accepting those terms like temple rituals and the like won't matter for this).

Now a few questions:

Why didn't the Father just forgive us from our sins with similar terms stipulated by Jesus Christ after he sacrificed his life? In other words, why didn't the Father just forgive us in the same way Christ forgives us?

It may be argued that this was because justice wouldn't have been served otherwise but I find this as a very unsatisfactory answer because of the following: when you forgive a debt, it isn't unjust to do so. When Christ's forgives our debt of sin it isn't unjust and it isn't unjust for us to forgive other people's debts when we see fit to do so. Why is it, then, said that the Father forgiving something (but not Christ or us) is an offense to justice?

Let's say (just to put a number) that our debt of sin was 500,000 atoms (an atom is a unit of sin... just to put it a number, again). When Christ came he paid the 500,000 atoms of sin but the obvious thing is that we NOW owe 500,000 atoms to Christ. Christ forgave us from what he payed and asked us to do other things than to atone for our own sins (i.e. repentance, baptism, Holy Ghost, follow His commandments and repent when we fail. That is why it is said we will never repay (nor can repay) Christ for what He did for us.

Let me know what you think... but please, PLEASE try to understand what I'm saying here first. I will gladly answer any questions about it.

The parable of the debtor may not be the best analogy to compare it with. It is more instructive to think of it in terms of a court of law. If you committed a serious crime, and were brought before a court of law, and you were convicted and were found guilty, the judge has to execute the law and impose the penalty. If for example you were convicted of theft, and it carries a mandatory sentence of minimum three months in jail, then the judge has to carry out the sentence and impose the penalty. He can't say, "Okay now, tell me that you have repented, and I will forgive you, and you can go home." The sentence has to be carried out. Jesus by virtue of the Atonement was able to override that sentence on the condition of our faith and repentance. It is not revealed how he was able to do this, because in human law it doesn't work that way; but with divine law apparently it does.

Perhaps you will now say, It is God who made the law, therefore why can't He override His own law? The answer is that He can't. He is bound by His own law. If He expects us to be bound by it, then it is requisite that He must be bound by it too. The only way that it can be overridden is by means of an atonement: "this being the intent of this last sacrifice, to bring about the bowels of mercy, which overpowereth justice, and bringeth about means unto men that they may have faith unto repentance" (Alma 34:15).

[Log]

About Skousen's view, I've always found it odd in the extreme. To explain why I will quote from the very nice article DavidC was kind enough to recommend me by Ostler about some problems with Skousen:

I don't see that Ostler's objection has any hold over Skousen's scriptural explanation. Maybe you can explain it better, but I'm guessing not, since I've asked Ostler himself and he declined to. Calling something unjust doesn't make it so, and that's the end of that.

[elguanteloko]

The parable of the debtor may not be the best analogy to compare it with. It is more instructive to think of it in terms of a court of law. If you committed a serious crime, and were brought before a court of law, and you were convicted and were found guilty, the judge has to execute the law and impose the penalty. If for example you were convicted of theft, and it carries a mandatory sentence of minimum three months in jail, then the judge has to carry out the sentence and impose the penalty. He can't say, "Okay now, tell me that you have repented, and I will forgive you, and you can go home."

Not "you are forgiven, go home", that's not what I'm saying happened at any time. What I'm saying is that Christ only pushed the "forgiving" one more step from the Father to Him. Christ doesn't just tell people "you are forgiven, go home" but instead of us atoning for our own sins (to pay to Christ, NOT to the Father since the Father is payed by Christ already) He tells us to repent, be baptized, etc... something the Father could have asked in the first place.

The sentence has to be carried out. Jesus by virtue of the Atonement was able to override that sentence on the condition of our faith and repentance. It is not revealed how he was able to do this, because in human law it doesn't work that way; but with divine law apparently it does.

Well, we were sentenced but he payed our sentence. There was a price (or a sentence) and he payed it. Your analogy (of which I also speak in the OP, by the way) is not really different from the "debt" analogy. Though if you say that's not how it really works and that we don't know how its done, well that is admitting we can't make sense out of it. Which is fine, though.

Perhaps you will now say, It is God who made the law, therefore why can't He override His own law? The answer is that He can't. He is bound by His own law. If He expects us to be bound by it, then it is requisite that He must be bound by it too. The only way that it can be overridden is by means of an atonement: "this being the intent of this last sacrifice, to bring about the bowels of mercy, which overpowereth justice, and bringeth about means unto men that they may have faith unto repentance" (Alma 34:15).

Again, I say in the OP why Christ is forgiving us ANYWAYS! How is his not a breach of justice? We never end up paying to either Father or Christ anyways.

[CV75]

Why didn't the Father just forgive us from our sins with similar terms stipulated by Jesus Christ after he sacrificed his life? In other words, why didn't the Father just forgive us in the same way Christ forgives us?

God is in perfect alignment with eternal laws and so does not short-circuit the laws governing human perfection. Our agency and its consequences are governed by these laws. At some point along our trajectory to perfection, we choose to fall out of alignment and suffer the consequences. Using our own resources to get back on track results in a net shortfall of total wherewithal required to reach perfection.

God does not ignore, waive or forgive that shortfall because that would get Him out of alignment with the laws that govern eternal progress. By covenant with the Father, Christ does not ignore, waive or forgive that shortfall and provides the resources necessary to get us back on track. He does this in perfect alignment with those eternal laws that govern the actions of a pre-mortal God who enters mortality. Because the Son does on earth what He sees the Father do in eternity (John 5), it could be said that it is as difficult for the Father to give the world His Only Begotten Son as it is for the Son to perform the atonement, or that it is a mutual undertaking, not one instead of the other.

Because we haven’t the resources and wherewithal to return to the path and finish the course, the atonement had to be accomplished by Christ, a mortal god on earth (more intelligent than us all, Abraham 3) under the direction of the Father, an exalted god in eternity (who is more intelligent than they all) in order to bring heaven and earth together. The reason the atonement has to be accomplished by a mortal god is because mortality is time, place, condition, etc. in which the laws were broken.

It could be said that the Fall was did not occur in the mortal world,. The atonement covers this as well in that Christ had the power make Himself immortal through the choice of obedience in answer or opposition to Adam having the power to make himself mortal through the choice of disobedience.

Edited July 5, 2011 by CV75

[Darth_Bill]

I've had my intellectual doubts on the atonement for many years. I still have them. Ostler help give me the words to express it. I like his take on the mercy and justice angle as it would have to apply to Christ as well, but it doesn't. The one most innocent is dealt with unjustly, ie, paying for crimes and sins not his own. I still haven't come to terms with much of that.

My conversion to christianity came during a time when I was in the process of messing up my life and I needed to stop. Perhaps it came from a need to forgive myself which I seemed unable to do. More recently, I've received forgivness for some bad behavior on my part towards another party. I didn't need anyone to die because of it. I don't understand what kind of justice or sense of justice is present where a god is needed to die to forgive us. Even if God didn't make the rules, what kind of universe is it where gods need to die in order for Him to do what we do every day? I just don't know if I can understand the premises any longer.

[altersteve]

Christ's resurrection saved us from mortal or physical death (when we will resurrect) but the atonement happened through his suffering to save us from spiritual death.

Christ's resurrection was part of the Atonement.