The Cross Of Christ

[mfbukowski]

But what rumors I have heard is that while your atonement might be cooler, the place you're headed for is a lot hotter. :diablo:

Just repeating the rumors I've heard from some really, really important people.

Very fitting:

So where are we going and why are we in this handbasket????

Edited October 3, 2012 by mfbukowski

[MiserereNobis]

So where are we going and why are we in this handbasket????

To quote the spiritually enlightened Grateful Dead: I may be going to hell in a bucket, babe, but at least I'm enjoying the ride!

[Tacenda]

williamsmith said,

"As to McConkie, it may be true what he stated, but the scripture is clear that the suffering for the sins of the world part occurred in Gethsemane. I also don't know of any scripture that makes that claim either, so it's simply his opinion.

Other Christians are free to believe what they want, it doesn't change the fact that the Atonement happened, and it's something we ALL believe in."

When Christ was leaving the Garden of Gethsemane we read:

"Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus.

Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?" John 18

So from the foregoing we see the bitter cup of suffering for that Christ embibed from while in the Garden was still filled to a measure with the awful judgements of God against sin and wickedness. The plain meaning of the Saviour's words here indicate there was still more to drink from the "cup of the wrath of God" or "cup of trembling." So when did the Lord fulfiill his Father's commandment to finish drinking bitter cup to the dregs if it wasn't sometime after he left Gethsemane? For according to the record, he never returned there again before his death.

So if it wasn't for sin, why do you think Christ continued to suffer so terribly after he left the precincts of the Garden. A couple more quotes for you to consider:

1. From Isaiah 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." So it seems the Lord also suffered for our sins when he was scourged.

2.Elder James E. Talmage in Jesus the Christ reported: “It seems, that in addition to the fearful suffering incident to crucifixion, the agony of Gethsemane had recurred, intensified beyond human power to endure. In that bitterest hour the dying Christ was alone, alone in most terrible reality. That the supreme sacrifice of the Son might be consummated in all its fulness, the Father seems to have withdrawn the support of His immediate Presence, leaving to the Savior of men the glory of complete victory over the forces of sin and death."

So if Apostle Talmadge is correct when he says that the Gethsemanic sufferings of Christ were intensified beyond what he experienced in the Garden while he hung in additional physical agony upon the cross -- what was he suffering for if it wasn't for sin? Where's the fairness? If the Lord had already finished his work in Gethsemane, for what reasoning requisite with the justice and mercy of God would the Father make the Son continue to suffer as if for sin, if the laws of justice had already been satisfied?

For what it's worth, I'm glad you brought up the atonement of our Saviour because it's a subject everyone can look at and ponder on. Thank you for all the great insights! Edited October 3, 2012 by Tacenda

[teddyaware]

teddyaware, who is saying that all the suffering for the sins of the world happened only in the Garden and not at all on the cross? Who is saying that the suffering on the cross wasn't important or part of the Atonement? Please point out in this thread where anybody has said that and I will berate them.

urroner, I'll take the time to find the "offenders" if instead of berating them, you promise me you'll hunt them down and give them a good excoriation instead (will that get me kicked off the board?).

By the way, I too have been in that depression "hell" as well. Mine was so bad, it felt as if everything and everyone in the universe was unreal and I was the only actual living thing in all of existence. As a result, I believe I tasted in very small part a little of what the Saviour was experiencing when he cried out in utter forsakenness from the cross. Clearly remember thinking to myself that I wouldn't wish what I was going through on the worst person who ever lived. It is a most agonizing and profoundly solemn thing to feel completely and utterly alone. Although I must admit I never actually lost sight of the light of God, even though it seemed very small and remote at times.

Edited October 3, 2012 by teddyaware

[teddyaware]

For what it's worth, I'm glad you brought up the atonement of our Saviour because it's a subject everyone can look at and ponder on. Thank you for all the great insights!

Thanks Tacenda! You're most welcome.

Again I will say it, my prime motivation on this thread is to try to a build bridge of understanding on this contentious issue with our brothers and sisters of other faiths.

But in spite of the differences of opinion that might exist between myself and the other Church members who have been sparring with me on this thread, I know we can all agree that the greatest suffering Christ endured when atoning for our sins, regardless of exactly where he suffered it, was the abject spiritual death (descending in spiritual agony, sorrow and forsakenness below all thigs) he vicariously experienced and endured for each of us -- and in that I can truly rejoice...

Edited October 3, 2012 by teddyaware

[williamsmith]

williamsmith said,

"As to McConkie, it may be true what he stated, but the scripture is clear that the suffering for the sins of the world part occurred in Gethsemane. I also don't know of any scripture that makes that claim either, so it's simply his opinion.

Other Christians are free to believe what they want, it doesn't change the fact that the Atonement happened, and it's something we ALL believe in."

When Christ was leaving the Garden of Gethsemane we read:

"Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus.

Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?" John 18

So from the foregoing we see the bitter cup of suffering for that Christ embibed from while in the Garden was still filled to a measure with the awful judgements of God against sin and wickedness. The plain meaning of the Saviour's words here indicate there was still more to drink from the "cup of the wrath of God" or "cup of trembling." So when did the Lord fulfiill his Father's commandment to finish drinking bitter cup to the dregs if it wasn't sometime after he left Gethsemane? For according to the record, he never returned there again before his death.

So if it wasn't for sin, why do you think Christ continued to suffer so terribly after he left the precincts of the Garden. A couple more quotes for you to consider:

1. From Isaiah 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." So it seems the Lord also suffered for our sins when he was scourged.

2.Elder James E. Talmage in Jesus the Christ reported: “It seems, that in addition to the fearful suffering incident to crucifixion, the agony of Gethsemane had recurred, intensified beyond human power to endure. In that bitterest hour the dying Christ was alone, alone in most terrible reality. That the supreme sacrifice of the Son might be consummated in all its fulness, the Father seems to have withdrawn the support of His immediate Presence, leaving to the Savior of men the glory of complete victory over the forces of sin and death."

So if Apostle Talmadge is correct when he says that the Gethsemanic sufferings of Christ were intensified beyond what he experienced in the Garden while he hung in additional physical agony upon the cross -- what was he suffering for if it wasn't for sin? Where's the fairness? If the Lord had already finished his work in Gethsemane, for what reasoning requisite with the justice and mercy of God would the Father make the Son continue to suffer as if for sin, if the laws of justice had already been satisfied?

I really don't know why you keep "adding" to our views and misrepresenting.

No one said the "cup" was finished at the Garden. No one has said the Atonement was finished at the Garden, in fact we've said the opposite.

The Atonement for mankind occurred in three stages. Gethsemane, the Cross, and the Resurrection. Of course Christ having to voluntarily give up his life was a bitter cup that still had to be fulfilled.

And okay, great you've found some LDS that had the view that Gethsemane occurred again on the Cross. Still, that's not official doctrine and it just doesn't matter. There is still no scripture which says we are to use the "cross" as a symbol. And I've already shown you that most mentions of the word "cross" is not even referring to the cross, it's referring to that "cup", Christ's mission itself. He had a "cross to bear" as many of us do, but his being much greater. Our crosses don't refer to an actual physical cross, and neither did his. It's simply language.

[williamsmith]

BTW, just to be clear, whether Christ suffered the same or more on the cross, I don't know. Those particular leaders may be right. To me it's simply a non issue. Christ suffered and died and was resurrected for the sins of the world. I'm just contending against this idea (condemnation) of mormons and mormonism that we teach some great condemnation against Christ being on the cross and the severity of it. Simply haven't seen it on or off line in many a ward.

[zerinus]

According to all the scriptures received, ancient and modern (already cited), the Atonement was carried out on the cross; and the resurrection is not the Atonement.

There were no "stages" to the Atonement. Jesus suffered throughout His life, Gethsene being one of them. If there were "stages," then the first stage was the whole of His life, not just Gethsamane; but strictly the Atonement was carried on the cross, not somewhere else.

Edited October 4, 2012 by zerinus

[teddyaware]

to williamsmith and urroner,

The simple fact of tha matter is that for as long as I've been a member of the Church (42 years), I have frequently heard members minimize, in formal settings, the significance of the crucifixion of Christ when compared to his trials in Gethsemane. Many times I've heard members refer to the Lord's sufferings on Calvary as almost being an afterthought in the atoning process. Perhaps you two fellows don't fall in this category and that's very good. If you understand that Christ's sufferings on the cross (not just the physical agonies of the crucifixion) are as essential to our salvation as is the suffering he endured while in the Garden, I have no quarrel with you. And that's that.

My effort here was to try to persuade -- through scripture and quotes from modern Apostles -- those others among us who do in fact habitually diminish the importance of Christ's manifold sufferings while on the cross of Calvary. And I started this thread because I know that this imbalanced presentation of the atoning sacrifice of our Lord has been unnecessarily alienating non-LDS Christians for years. And although I do see that there has been a gradual yet discernable change to the more balanced presentation of the atonement in today's Church, there still seems to be a rather large contingent of our people who still tenaciously cling to the old model. This quote from Robert Millet highlights this continued clinging on to the imbalanced understanding of the atonement by some of our people:

"It is probably the case that if one hundred Protestants were asked where the Atonement of Christ took place, those one hundred persons would answer: At Golgotha, on the cross.It is also no doubt true that if one hundred Latter-day Saints were asked the same question, a large percentage would respond: In Gethsemane, in the garden. In fact, the sufferings of Jesus Christ that began in the Garden of Gethsemane were consumated on the cross. Between noon and 3:00 P.M. on that fateful Friday, all of the agonies of Gethsemane returned, as the Spirit of our Heavenly Father was once again withdrawn from the Suffering Servant."

To me, the strangest thing about this whole subject is the fact that the vast majority of our members don't seem to realize -- although the truth of the matter very often stares them right in the face -- that there is no Christian people on earth who better understands how eternally important and absolutely essential the symbolism of crucifixion of Christ is to their salvation. This general blindness to stark reality almost makes me feel like I'm living in an alternate universe at times. The Lord surely spoke the truth when he said that many people will have eyes but see not, and have ears but hear not.

And so again I say, there is no Christian people on the face of the earth who places more eternal importance on the symbolism of the crucifixion of Christ than do the Latter Day Saints. More than any other people, we honor and reverence the symbols of the Lord's agony on Calvary's hill.

Edited October 4, 2012 by teddyaware

[zerinus]

Mormons do not do this at all. Mormons only state that the actual "point" in which Christ took on the sins of the world was in Gethsemane.

And they say it wrong. The “actual point” was the cross, not Gethsemane.

Of course it was "less difficult" in comparison. In Gethsemane he took upon him the sins of the world and bleed as sweat from every pore, and suffered in agony, so of course there would be an emphasis ever so slight between the two. But there is no on going around saying the cross was nothing. He died there.

Wrong again. It was the more difficult part.

I've addressed your points, . . .

You have addressed nothing. You have taught a bunch of false doctrines, that is all.

Really don't see what the issue is? LDS don't go around saying that one was greater than the other. We simply say that the main moment when Christ suffered for the sins of the world was in Gethsemane, which is what the scriptures say to us. . . .

Which is wrong, according to what the scriptures say.

I really don't know why you keep "adding" to our views and misrepresenting.

No one said the "cup" was finished at the Garden. No one has said the Atonement was finished at the Garden, in fact we've said the opposite.

The point of the “cup” is that it was drunk on the cross, not in Gethsemane.

The Atonement for mankind occurred in three stages. Gethsemane, the Cross, and the Resurrection. Of course Christ having to voluntarily give up his life was a bitter cup that still had to be fulfilled.

Way wrong. The Atonement was carried out in one stage, the cross; and the resurrection is not part of the Atonement. Jesus suffered many things throughout His life, including Gethsemane, all of which can be counted as part of his Atonement; but strictly the Atonement was performed on the cross, nowhere else.

BTW, just to be clear, whether Christ suffered the same or more on the cross, I don't know. Those particular leaders may be right. To me it's simply a non issue.

Why are you arguing about it then?

Christ suffered and died and was resurrected for the sins of the world.

Jesus suffered and died for the sins of the world, not resurrected for the sins of the world.

[Flyonthewall]

I don't know if the following will meann anything to anyone, but it does come from LDS.org from the Bible dictionary, and although it is not scripture, it is derived from scripture and teachings of the prophets.

Gethsemane

A garden spoken of in the New Testament as being near the Mount of Olives. In Aramaic, the word gethsemane means “olive press.” Jesus went to the garden on the night that Judas betrayed him. There he prayed and suffered in Gethsemane for the sins of mankind (Matt. 26:36, 39; Mark 14:32; John 18:1; Alma 21:9; D&C 19:15–19).

Cross

The wooden structure upon which Jesus Christ was crucified (Mark 15:20–26). Many in the world now think of it as a symbol of Christ’s crucifixion and atoning sacrifice; however, the Lord has established his own symbols for his crucifixion and sacrifice—the bread and the water of the sacrament (Matt. 26:26–28; D&C 20:40, 75–79). In the scriptures, those who take up their cross are those who love Jesus Christ so much that they deny themselves ungodliness and every worldly lust and keep his commandments (JST, Matt. 16:25–26).

Atonement

His atonement included his suffering for the sins of mankind in the Garden of Gethsemane, the shedding of his blood, and his death and subsequent resurrection from the grave (Isa. 53:3–12; Mosiah 3:5–11; Alma 7:10–13).

Jeffery R. Holland - Standing Together for the Cause of Christ.

http://www.lds.org/l...uery=gethsemane

We bear witness of every sermon He ever gave, every prayer He ever uttered, every miracle He ever called down from heaven, and every redeeming act He ever performed. In this latter regard we testify that in fulfilling the divine plan for our salvation, He took upon Himself all the sins, sorrows, and sicknesses of the world, bleeding at every pore in the anguish of it all, beginning in Gethsemane and dying upon the cross of Calvary as a vicarious offering for those sins and sinners, including each of us.

To me it is plain that the sins of the world were taken upon Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane. Whether it was limited to just the Garden or if it continued afterward, it really doesn't matter, the bulk of it occured in the Garden. Did that mean He was done? No. He still had the prospect of the physical suffering and torment of the events leading up to the cross, and being on the Cross.

As was pointed out before, it was on the cross where Christ was left alone, capping His descent below all things, and His eternal sacrifice complete.

The Garden and the Cross were two stages of the same event. Can we say there were different parts to the atonement? I believe so.

The Atonement was not complete in the Garden, and without the events in the Garden, the Cross would not have been complete.

I have never heard any Latter Day Saint downplay the cross or treat it as nothing. We recognize what happened there as horrific.

I have heard traditional Christians claim that what happened in the Garden was simply that Jesus was scared...had some sort of a nervous breakdown. Perhaps not every Traditional Christian thinks this way but it was shocking to hear from any.

Edited October 4, 2012 by Flyonthewall

[teddyaware]

Zerinus: Please read this,

To my friends on this thread: I think it's likely my work on this particular thread is done. The combined commentary of all my posts here will probably suffice for now, unless I feel an overwhelming need to come back in at some point. I've said much in defence of my position, and probably said too much.

Of all my posts to this thread, the most important paragraph is the last paragraph on my post just previous to this one. The fact is that the Latter Day Saints place more reverential importance and eternal, salvative significance on the symbolism of Chist's crucifixion than do any other Christian people. If you don't know what I'm talking about, it's likely a case of one not being able to see the forest for the proverbial trees. For those with eyes to see and ears to hear. the LDS reverence for the sybolism of Christ's crucifixion is as palpably obvious as anything could possibly be. It's like looking at one of those old 3D images -- when you don't see it it can be very frustrating, but when you do finally see it you wonder why you couldn't see it all along. I've probably said too much...

If he doesn't mind, I'll leave the remaining dicussion into the capable hand of Zerinus, as he and I are on the same page. All the best to each of you. I'll be seeing you on other threads

Edited October 4, 2012 by teddyaware

[volgadon]

To my friends on this thread: I think it's likely my work on this particular thread is done. The combined commentary of all my posts here will probably suffice for now, unless I feel an overwhelming need to come back in at some point. I've said much in defence of my position, and probably said too much.

You haven't really engaged most of what people were saying.

[mfbukowski]

You haven't really engaged most of what people were saying.

I haven't really followed every detail of this thread- just taking occasional pot shots- but I think what he is saying that if one thinks of the final portion of the temple teachings in relation to the crucifixion, suddenly the crucifixion's importance becomes so abundantly clear that to say that we ignore the cross or downplay it in any way is ridiculous.

But of course he didn't go into that in detail and neither will I- I just feel a bit more comfortable saying that than he did. I think.

[CV75]

But of course he didn't go into that in detail and neither will I

...and neither will I, but on many levels those are a far cry from the sign of the cross, a crucifix, or devotional adornments as so-called “religious symbols” as (re)presented in the OP.

[zerinus]

...and neither will I, but on many levels those are a far cry from the sign of the cross, a crucifix, or devotional adornments as so-called “religious symbols” as (re)presented in the OP.

The OP made a small mistake of thiniking that the theology justified, or necessitated, the use of physical symbols, which does not necessarily follow. But he got the theology right, which is the main thing.

[teddyaware]

I haven't really followed every detail of this thread- just taking occasional pot shots- but I think what he is saying that if one thinks of the final portion of the temple teachings in relation to the crucifixion, suddenly the crucifixion's importance becomes so abundantly clear that to say that we ignore the cross or downplay it in any way is ridiculous.

But of course he didn't go into that in detail and neither will I- I just feel a bit more comfortable saying that than he did. I think.

Give that man a cigar!

[mfbukowski]

Give that man a cigar!

Yeah- see how you are? You post about the temple and then tempt me to break the Word of Wisdom so I lose my recommend! Pretty tricky!

[teddyaware]

Yeah- see how you are? You post about the temple and then tempt me to break the Word of Wisdom so I lose my recommend! Pretty tricky!

Maybe I should call myself teddybeware?

[urroner]

Maybe I should call myself teddybeware?

How about teddywerebear.

[williamsmith]

I don't know if the following will meann anything to anyone, but it does come from LDS.org from the Bible dictionary, and although it is not scripture, it is derived from scripture and teachings of the prophets.

Gethsemane

A garden spoken of in the New Testament as being near the Mount of Olives. In Aramaic, the word gethsemane means “olive press.” Jesus went to the garden on the night that Judas betrayed him. There he prayed and suffered in Gethsemane for the sins of mankind (Matt. 26:36, 39; Mark 14:32; John 18:1; Alma 21:9; D&C 19:15–19).

Cross

The wooden structure upon which Jesus Christ was crucified (Mark 15:20–26). Many in the world now think of it as a symbol of Christ’s crucifixion and atoning sacrifice; however, the Lord has established his own symbols for his crucifixion and sacrifice—the bread and the water of the sacrament (Matt. 26:26–28; D&C 20:40, 75–79). In the scriptures, those who take up their cross are those who love Jesus Christ so much that they deny themselves ungodliness and every worldly lust and keep his commandments (JST, Matt. 16:25–26).

Atonement

His atonement included his suffering for the sins of mankind in the Garden of Gethsemane, the shedding of his blood, and his death and subsequent resurrection from the grave (Isa. 53:3–12; Mosiah 3:5–11; Alma 7:10–13).

Jeffery R. Holland - Standing Together for the Cause of Christ.

http://www.lds.org/l...uery=gethsemane

To me it is plain that the sins of the world were taken upon Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane. Whether it was limited to just the Garden or if it continued afterward, it really doesn't matter, the bulk of it occured in the Garden. Did that mean He was done? No. He still had the prospect of the physical suffering and torment of the events leading up to the cross, and being on the Cross.

As was pointed out before, it was on the cross where Christ was left alone, capping His descent below all things, and His eternal sacrifice complete.

The Garden and the Cross were two stages of the same event. Can we say there were different parts to the atonement? I believe so.

The Atonement was not complete in the Garden, and without the events in the Garden, the Cross would not have been complete.

I have never heard any Latter Day Saint downplay the cross or treat it as nothing. We recognize what happened there as horrific.

I have heard traditional Christians claim that what happened in the Garden was simply that Jesus was scared...had some sort of a nervous breakdown. Perhaps not every Traditional Christian thinks this way but it was shocking to hear from any.

Thank you Flyonthewall for correctly tell the full and true doctrine, and standing as a second witness quoting what the scriptures and the Church actually say officially on the subject, as well as supporting the fact that this "downplay" and "degrading" idea of the cross frankly doesn't happen, at least to the degree claimed.

[teddyaware]

How about teddywerebear.

I guess being likened to a "macho" teddybear ain't all that bad. Just look at that awesome pink dude -- !he perfect balance of justice and mercy!

I was unaware -- even though I'm teddyaware -- of what a Werebear was until your post (do kind of vaguely remember hearing the name Werebear now that I think of it ). Now, thanks to urroner, I've added Werebears to my deep store of of trivial factoids with which to impress my friends and aquaintances!

"The WereBears were a series of teddy bears released in 1983 in the United Kingdom. They were created by a man named George Nicholas, a famous children's author, so that boys could have teddy bears without worrying about being bullied (!!!)." wikipedia

[teddyaware]

williamsmith said "Thank you Flyonthewall for correctly tell the full and true doctrine, and standing as a second witness quoting what the scriptures and the Church actually say officially on the subject, as well as supporting the fact that this "downplay" and "degrading" idea of the cross frankly doesn't happen, at least to the degree claimed."

Is this recent General Conference Address full and true doctrine?

"None Were with Him

Elder Jeffrey R. Holland

Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

Close Video

Close Audio

Trumpeted from the summit of Calvary is the truth that we will never be left alone nor unaided, even if sometimes we may feel that we are.

PD50015887_000_029

Thank you, Sister Thompson, and thanks to the remarkable women of this Church. Brothers and sisters, my Easter-season message today is intended for everyone, but it is directed in a special way to those who are alone or feel alone or, worse yet, feel abandoned. These might include those longing to be married, those who have lost a spouse, and those who have lost—or have never been blessed with—children. Our empathy embraces wives forsaken by their husbands, husbands whose wives have walked away, and children bereft of one or the other of their parents—or both. This group can find within its broad circumference a soldier far from home, a missionary in those first weeks of homesickness, or a father out of work, afraid the fear in his eyes will be visible to his family. In short it can include all of us at various times in our lives.

To all such, I speak of the loneliest journey ever made and the unending blessings it brought to all in the human family. I speak of the Savior’s solitary task of shouldering alone the burden of our salvation. Rightly He would say: “I have trodden the winepress alone; and of the people there was none with me. … I looked, and there was none to help; and I wondered that there was none to uphold [me].”¹

As President Uchtdorf so beautifully noted earlier, we know from scripture that Jesus’s messianic arrival in Jerusalem on the Sunday preceding Passover, a day directly analogous to this very morning, was a great public moment. But eagerness to continue walking with Him would quickly begin to wane.

Soon enough He was arraigned before the Israelite leaders of the day—first Annas, the former high priest, then Caiaphas, the current high priest. In their rush to judgment these men and their councils declared their verdict quickly and angrily. “What further need have we of witnesses?” they cried. “He is [worthy] of death.”²

With that He was brought before the gentile rulers in the land. Herod Antipas, the tetrarch of Galilee, interrogated Him once, and Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor in Judea, did so twice, the second time declaring to the crowd, “I, having examined him before you, have found no fault in this man.”³ Then, in an act as unconscionable as it was illogical, Pilate “scourged Jesus, [and] delivered him to be crucified.”⁴ Pilate’s freshly washed hands could not have been more stained or more unclean.

Such ecclesiastical and political rejection became more personal when the citizenry in the street turned against Jesus as well. It is one of the ironies of history that sitting with Jesus in prison was a real blasphemer, a murderer and revolutionary known as Barabbas, a name or title in Aramaic meaning “son of the father.”⁵ Free to release one prisoner in the spirit of the Passover tradition, Pilate asked the people, “Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you?” They said, “Barabbas.”⁶ So one godless “son of the father” was set free while a truly divine Son of His Heavenly Father moved on to crucifixion.

This was also a telling time among those who knew Jesus more personally. The most difficult to understand in this group is Judas Iscariot. We know the divine plan required Jesus to be crucified, but it is wrenching to think that one of His special witnesses who sat at His feet, heard Him pray, watched Him heal, and felt His touch could betray Him and all that He was for 30 pieces of silver. Never in the history of this world has so little money purchased so much infamy. We are not the ones to judge Judas’s fate, but Jesus said of His betrayer, “Good [were it] for that man if he had not been born.”⁷

Of course others among the believers had their difficult moments as well. Following the Last Supper, Jesus left Peter, James, and John to wait while He ventured into the Garden of Gethsemane alone. Falling on His face in prayer, “sorrowful … unto death,”⁸ the record says, His sweat came as great drops of blood⁹ as He pled with the Father to let this crushing, brutal cup pass from Him. But, of course, it could not pass. Returning from such anguished prayer, He found His three chief disciples asleep, prompting Him to ask, “Could ye not watch with me one hour?”¹⁰ So it happens two more times until on His third return He says compassionately, “Sleep on now, and take your rest,”¹¹ though there would be no rest for Him.

Later, after Jesus’s arrest and appearance at trial, Peter, accused of knowing Jesus and being one of His confidants, denies that accusation not once but three times. We don’t know all that was going on here, nor do we know of protective counsel which the Savior may have given to His Apostles privately,¹² but we do know Jesus was aware that even these precious ones would not stand with Him in the end, and He had warned Peter accordingly.¹³ Then, with the crowing of the ****, “the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord. … And [he] went out, and wept bitterly.”¹⁴

Thus, of divine necessity, the supporting circle around Jesus gets smaller and smaller and smaller, giving significance to Matthew’s words: “All the disciples

him, and fled.”

¹⁵ Peter stayed near enough to be recognized and confronted. John stood at the foot of the cross with Jesus’s mother. Especially and always the blessed women in the Savior’s life stayed as close to Him as they could. But essentially His lonely journey back to His Father continued without comfort or companionship.

Now I speak very carefully, even reverently, of what may have been the most difficult moment in all of this solitary journey to Atonement. I speak of those final moments for which Jesus must have been prepared intellectually and physically but which He may not have fully anticipated emotionally and spiritually—that concluding descent into the paralyzing despair of divine withdrawal when He cries in ultimate loneliness, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”¹⁶

The loss of mortal support He had anticipated, but apparently He had not comprehended this. Had He not said to His disciples, “Behold, the hour … is now come, that ye shall be scattered, every man to his own, and shall leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me” and “The Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him”?¹⁷

With all the conviction of my soul I testify that He did please His Father perfectly and that a perfect Father did not forsake His Son in that hour. Indeed, it is my personal belief that in all of Christ’s mortal ministry the Father may never have been closer to His Son than in these agonizing final moments of suffering. Nevertheless, that the supreme sacrifice of His Son might be as complete as it was voluntary and solitary, the Father briefly withdrew from Jesus the comfort of His Spirit, the support of His personal presence. It was required, indeed it was central to the significance of the Atonement, that this perfect Son who had never spoken ill nor done wrong nor touched an unclean thing had to know how the rest of humankind—us, all of us—would feel when we did commit such sins. For His Atonement to be infinite and eternal, He had to feel what it was like to die not only physically but spiritually, to sense what it was like to have the divine Spirit withdraw, leaving one feeling totally, abjectly, hopelessly alone.

But Jesus held on. He pressed on. The goodness in Him allowed faith to triumph even in a state of complete anguish. The trust He lived by told Him in spite of His feelings that divine compassion is never absent, that God is always faithful, that He never flees nor fails us. When the uttermost farthing had then been paid, when Christ’s determination to be faithful was as obvious as it was utterly invincible, finally and mercifully, it was “finished.”¹⁸ Against all odds and with none to help or uphold Him, Jesus of Nazareth, the living Son of the living God, restored physical life where death had held sway and brought joyful, spiritual redemption out of sin, hellish darkness, and despair. With faith in the God He knew was there, He could say in triumph, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.”¹⁹

Brothers and sisters, one of the great consolations of this Easter season is that because Jesus walked such a long, lonely path utterly alone, we do not have to do so. His solitary journey brought great company for our little version of that path—the merciful care of our Father in Heaven, the unfailing companionship of this Beloved Son, the consummate gift of the Holy Ghost, angels in heaven, family members on both sides of the veil, prophets and apostles, teachers, leaders, friends. All of these and more have been given as companions for our mortal journey because of the Atonement of Jesus Christ and the Restoration of His gospel. Trumpeted from the summit of Calvary is the truth that we will never be left alone nor unaided, even if sometimes we may feel that we are. Truly the Redeemer of us all said: “I will not leave you comfortless: [My Father and] I will come to you [and abide with you].”²⁰

My other plea at Easter time is that these scenes of Christ’s lonely sacrifice, laced with moments of denial and abandonment and, at least once, outright betrayal, must never be reenacted by us. He has walked alone once. Now, may I ask that never again will He have to confront sin without our aid and assistance, that never again will He find only unresponsive onlookers when He sees you and me along His Via Dolorosa in our present day. As we approach this holy week—Passover Thursday with its Paschal Lamb, atoning Friday with its cross, Resurrection Sunday with its empty tomb—may we declare ourselves to be more fully disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ, not in word only and not only in the flush of comfortable times but in deed and in courage and in faith, including when the path is lonely and when our cross is difficult to bear. This Easter week and always, may we stand by Jesus Christ “at all times and in all things, and in all places that [we] may be in, even until death,”²¹ for surely that is how He stood by us when it was unto death and when He had to stand entirely and utterly alone. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Edited October 5, 2012 by teddyaware

[zerinus]

Double post

Edited October 5, 2012 by zerinus

[zerinus]

I don't know if the following will meann anything to anyone, but it does come from LDS.org from the Bible dictionary, and although it is not scripture, it is derived from scripture and teachings of the prophets.

Gethsemane

A garden spoken of in the New Testament as being near the Mount of Olives. In Aramaic, the word gethsemane means “olive press.” Jesus went to the garden on the night that Judas betrayed him. There he prayed and suffered in Gethsemane for the sins of mankind (Matt. 26:36, 39; Mark 14:32; John 18:1; Alma 21:9; D&C 19:15–19).

Cross

The wooden structure upon which Jesus Christ was crucified (Mark 15:20–26). Many in the world now think of it as a symbol of Christ’s crucifixion and atoning sacrifice; however, the Lord has established his own symbols for his crucifixion and sacrifice—the bread and the water of the sacrament (Matt. 26:26–28; D&C 20:40, 75–79). In the scriptures, those who take up their cross are those who love Jesus Christ so much that they deny themselves ungodliness and every worldly lust and keep his commandments (JST, Matt. 16:25–26).

Atonement

His atonement included his suffering for the sins of mankind in the Garden of Gethsemane, the shedding of his blood, and his death and subsequent resurrection from the grave (Isa. 53:3–12; Mosiah 3:5–11; Alma 7:10–13).

Did you read the references I gave in post #137? Teddy also gave some good ones. What do you think of them? Which do you think has more authority, the Bible, or the Bible dictionary?

To me it is plain that the sins of the world were taken upon Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane. Whether it was limited to just the Garden or if it continued afterward, it really doesn't matter, the bulk of it occured in the Garden. Did that mean He was done? No. He still had the prospect of the physical suffering and torment of the events leading up to the cross, and being on the Cross.

Not so plain to me. That is Mormon tradition. What if that tradition is wrong? What if the scriptures teach differently? Which is more authoritative, scripture, or Mormon tradition?

I have never heard any Latter Day Saint downplay the cross or treat it as nothing. We recognize what happened there as horrific.

In post #184 Teddy quoted something from David Millet as follows:

"It is probably the case that if one hundred Protestants were asked where the Atonement of Christ took place, those one hundred persons would answer: At Golgotha, on the cross. It is also no doubt true that if one hundred Latter-day Saints were asked the same question, a large percentage would respond: In Gethsemane, in the garden."

What do you think of that? What if the Protestants are actually right?

I have heard traditional Christians claim that what happened in the Garden was simply that Jesus was scared...had some sort of a nervous breakdown. Perhaps not every Traditional Christian thinks this way but it was shocking to hear from any.

That is right, they do say that. They don't understand the nature of Jesus' suffering in Gethsemane. But that does not prove that we have correctly understood the entire process either. Just because they have go their end of the stick wrong, it doesn't prove that we have got ours right.

Edited October 5, 2012 by zerinus