Mechanisms Of Atonement

[Cobalt-70]

I guess I view homo sapiens as suitable hosts for Eternal Intelligences who are of the same kind as God, with the same potential and inherent nature. God chose to take on a host, and learned that the material mortal societal existence was the most effective way to progress and more fully obtain (and appreciate) Joy and Family. God is not ontologically different than us, just far more advanced in all respects. His goal is for us to get where he is as quickly and effectively as possible, so that we can cooperatively work to get more and more to where he is.

It's interesting that you use the word "host," which is typically the word you use when an alien life-form takes over your body. Mormonism is so rich with fantastic subject matter for science fiction. Just ask Glen Larson, Orson Scott Card, and Stephenie Meyers.

[wenglund]

I wish to emphasize again that I am not against the "empathy" philosophy of atonement. I think it plays an important role in the atonement process.

It just that I find it quite inadequate in explaining such modern scriptural declarations as D&C 19: 13-20:

13 Wherefore, I command you to repent, and keep the ^acommandments which you have received by the hand of my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., in my name;

14 And it is by my almighty power that you have received them;

15 Therefore I command you to repent—repent, lest I ^asmite you by the rod of my mouth, and by my wrath, and by my anger, and your ^bsufferings be sore—how sore you know not, how exquisite you know not, yea, how hard to bear you know not.

16 For behold, I, God, have ^asuffered these things for all, that they might not ^bsuffer if they would ^crepent;

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

18 Which ^asuffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit—and would that I might ^bnot drink the bitter cup, and shrink—

19 Nevertheless, glory be to the Father, and I partook and ^afinished my preparations unto the children of men.

20 Wherefore, I command you again to repent, lest I ^ahumble you with my almighty power; and that you ^bconfess your sins, lest you suffer these ^cpunishments of which I have spoken, of which in the smallest, yea, even in the least degree you have ^dtasted at the time I withdrew my Spirit.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited October 8, 2011 by wenglund

[Darth_Bill]

I really appreciate all of this, but I want to know HOW that works. Ok, Jesus suffered. We still don't know HOW the atonement works. All the theories of the atonement have some flaws. "empathy" works against the scriptures, as Wade pointed out. Governmental actually works against Justice as an absolute. (if it starts playing a game with Mercy, you enter a realm that I can't understand.) Ultimately, all we have is empathy. We can't experience the other theories, and most go against all our concepts of justice, guilt and mercy (Jesus was not shown Justice nor Mercy, which makes those laws seem arbitrary) The prophets haven't posted a way how this all works, or perhaps they never asked. Instead theologians are the ones to try and figure out if it makes sense, so the most fundamental of doctrines in Christianity has little foundation. We have a God that either can't forgive without slapping someone around, or he is subject to laws that do not extend Justice nor Mercy to all of the inhabitants of the realm.

"Empathy" keeps me here, as I do see practical value. Just don't think about the logic too much of all this. It seems that after 2000 years, a viable theory hasn't been proposed by prophet or theologian. If it has, please inform me.

Edited October 8, 2011 by Darth_Bill

[Cobalt-70]

I really appreciate all of this, but I want to know HOW that works. Ok, Jesus suffered. We still don't know HOW the atonement works. All the theories of the atonement have some flaws. "empathy" works against the scriptures, as Wade pointed out. Governmental actually works against Justice as an absolute. (if it starts playing a game with Mercy, you enter a realm that I can't understand.) Ultimately, all we have is empathy. We can't experience the other theories, and most go against all our concepts of justice, guilt and mercy (Jesus was not shown Justice nor Mercy, which makes those laws seem arbitrary) The prophets haven't posted a way how this all works, or perhaps they never asked. Instead theologians are the ones to try and figure out if it makes sense, so the most fundamental of doctrines in Christianity has little foundation. We have a God that either can't forgive without slapping someone around, or he is subject to laws that do not extend Justice nor Mercy to all of the inhabitants of the realm.

"Empathy" keeps me here, as I do see practical value. Just don't think about the logic too much of all this. It seems that after 2000 years, a viable theory hasn't been proposed by prophet or theologian. If it has, please inform me.

If someone presumes that justice, mercy, or empathy can ever be absolute, then I think it is impossible for them to understand the Atonement. Saying that any of these concept is "absolute" is meaningless. Take justice, for example. Justice means that there is some kind of balance, or ***-for-tat. You add up sins on one side, and see if they balance out the suffering that Jesus did on the other. Okay, but how do you add sins to each other to determine their "weight"? Is one murder plus one fornication greater than or less than one manslaughter and three adulteries? There is no number assigned to each sin--when we perform a sin, there is no council of angel judges that hold up cards ranking the sin on a scale from 1-10, like they do in the Olympics. Same with suffering. How do you attach a number to suffering? And if you assume that the amount of suffering Jesus did was somehow "infinite," whatever that means, then you have just proven that God is unjust, because Jesus will have by definition suffered more than the weight of all our sins.