Is The Atonement The Plan Of Salvation? Jarom 1:2

[Duncan]

In Jarom 1:2 it reads as follows

"And as these plates are small, and as these things are written for the intent of the benefit of our brethren the Lamanites, wherefore, it must needs be that I write a little; but I shall not write the things of my prophesying, nor of my revelations. For what could I write more than my fathers have written? For have not they revealed the plan of salvation? I say unto you, Yea; and this sufficeth me."

What is missing from 1Nephi to now is any and all mention of the three degrees of glory, premortality, spirit prison/paradise. But what is talked about is the atonement in 2 Nephi 9 and 2 Nephi 2. So, my question is the atonement the plan of salvation? or possibly was Jarom reffering to scriptures he had but we don't have or what do you think?

[Calm]

The Atonement is all one really needs to know about to be encouraged to devote one's life to God. The rest becomes necessary when temple work begins and may not have been written down at the time if seen as a "mystery"

[halconero]

I see two possibilities:

1) It's mentioned in the 116 pages?

2) The spirit world, three degrees etc, all fall flat on their face without the Atonement

With regards to the temple...Elder Nelson told the mission presidents at their seminar last two years ago that we should be teaching "endure to the end" as "endure to the endowment" so I've come to see that as encompassing the temple ordinances.

[Duncan]

I see two possibilities:

1) It's mentioned in the 116 pages?

2) The spirit world, three degrees etc, all fall flat on their face without the Atonement

With regards to the temple...Elder Nelson told the mission presidents at their seminar last two years ago that we should be teaching "endure to the end" as "endure to the endowment" so I've come to see that as encompassing the temple ordinances.

I believe you, do you possibly have that source for the Elder Nelson quotation?

[urroner]

This question kind of reminds me of the differences between "the complete gospel" and the "fulness of the gospel."

The complete gospel, to me, encompasses all spiritual truths which many believe the "fulness of the gospel" is, but it isn't.

From the FAIR site, http://www.fairlds.org/authors/parker-mike/the-book-of-mormon-and-the-fulness-of-the-gospel-the-book-of-mormon-and-the-fulness-of-the-gospel

In this passage, Jesus defines “the gospel” as:

1. Christ came into the world to do the Father’s will.
   
2. The Father sent Christ to be crucified.
   
3. Because of Christ’s atonement, all men will be judged by him according to their works (as opposed to not receiving a judgment at all and being cast out of God’s presence by default, Nephi 9:8-9).
   
4. Those who repent and are baptized shall be filled (with the Holy Ghost, Nephi 12:6), and
   
5. if they continue in faith by enduring to the end they will be justified (declared “not guilty”) by Christ before the Father, but
   
6. if they don’t endure they will be subject to the justice of God and cast out of his presence.
   
7. The Father’s words will all be fulfilled (cf. D&C 1:38).
   
8. Because no unclean thing can enter the Father’s heavenly kingdom, only those who rely in faith on the atonement of Christ, repent, and are faithful to the end can be saved.
   

This is “the gospel.” The Book of Mormon teaches these concepts with a plainness and clarity unequaled by any other book. It has therefore been declared by the Lord to contain “the fulness of the gospel.”

[halconero]

I believe you, do you possibly have that source for the Elder Nelson quotation?

I wish. It was shared during a question and answer session at the mission president's seminar and wasn't officially written down or recorded. I was serving in the office when we switched mission presidents and in our first sit down meeting with the new that was one of the first things he told us.

It actually changed how I viewed my mission, and it spread throughout it. We would try to teach about the temple and the concept of eternal families fairly early on, usually in the second lesson or fairly soon after the investigator(s) had been invited to be baptized.

In the third lesson we also began to focus on the latter half of the 4th principle, "Baptism, our First Covenant." We emphasized and taught thoroughly the importance of and the way we make covenants and the role they play throughout our whole lives.

Retention went up! Heck, even our baptisms went up, and they new converts had a much better idea of what to expect in the coming year after baptism.

Sorry, I don't want to derail the thread...but having an eternal perspective in all our interactions in a gospel capacity really helps one know what steps to take.

[rongo]

Here was my response to this question in the handout for our stake/community fireside "Book of Mormon: Fact or Fiction?"

http://www.fillthenet.com/BoM_fireside_handout.pdf

How can Book of Mormon contain the “fulness of the gospel” if it doesn’t discuss vital doctrines such

as the pre‐existence, three degrees of glory, the priesthood, the temple, etc.?

Among the most basic and fundamental doctrines in Mormonism is the 9th Article of Faith: “We believe

all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe He will yet reveal many great and

important things pertaining to the kingdom of God.”

The Book of Mormon itself makes it clear that “greater things than” the Book of Mormon would be known to those who “receive this record and shall not condemn it” (Mormon 8:12)

The lengthy section in 1 Nephi 13 that details both the importance of the Bible (the book that “proceedeth out of the mouth of a Jew”) and the Book of Mormon (“I will manifest myself unto thy seed, that they shall write many things which I shall minister unto them, which shall be plain and precious; and after thy seed shall be destroyed, and dwindle in unbelief, and also the seed of thy brethren, behold, these things shall be hid up, to come forth unto the Gentiles, by the gift and power of the Lamb”) also tells of “other books” which “shall make known the plain and precious things which have been taken away from them” (1 Nephi 13:39‐40). In other words, both Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon clearly point out that many important doctrines would come forth after and outside of the Book of Mormon. And these predictions were dictated to scribes before the dictation of the Book of Mormon was even completed or the Church organized, let alone the Doctrine and Covenants, Book of Abraham, or Inspired Revision of the Bible had even been contemplated!

“First of all, let’s consider what the Lord means by a ‘fulness of the gospel.’ He did not mean to convey

the impression that every truth belonging to exaltation in the kingdom of God had been delivered to the

Nephites and was recorded in the Book of Mormon . . . Neither would this statement imply that every

truth belonging to the celestial kingdom and exaltation therein was to be found within the covers of the

Book of Mormon . . . The fulness of the gospel . . . has reference to the principles of salvation by which we

attain unto this glory. Therefore, the Lord has revealed in the Book of Mormon all that is needful to direct

people who are willing to hearken to its precepts, to a fulness of the blessings of the kingdom of God. It is

beyond dispute . . . that the Book of Mormon teaches that the first principles of the gospel are faith in

God, repentance, baptism for remission of sin, the gift of the Holy Ghost, obedience to divine law, and

that man cannot be saved in ignorance of these divine truths.”

— Joseph Fielding Smith, “Answers to

Gospel Questions,” 3:95‐97.

[Louis Midgley]

We often use language without knowing a thing about their history. Quite often knowing something about our language would, I believe, enrich our understanding of both divine and human things. I will provide an example that will perhaps help sort the question this thread addresses.

It is possible and perhaps even likely that you say goodbye when you or someone else leaves. But we are likely not to realize that this is merely a contraction of the expression "God be with you." What happens is that language that at one point was a vehicle for setting out the sacred (as opposed to the profane–that is, outside the Temple walls) sometimes drops its original setting and its meaning shifts. The word gospel, I believe, started out as Anglo-Saxon god’s+spell, where the word “spell” meant tale or story. We can see this use of spell coming into play when someone indicates that they will spell something out and then tells a story. But a story about what? About how a particular God did something for humans that they could not possibly have done for themselves.

Now with this in mind, try reading 3 Nephi 27. Notice the expressing “this is my gospel” (v13, 21). And notice the use of the word “endure” and the warning that those who do not “endure” will be metaphorically cut down and burned, which is a reference to an unproductive fruit tree–one that does not bear what is called the “fruit of repentance.” The cursed tree gets sent to the fire. This is, of course, just a portion of what is packed into this chapter and placed in the mouth of the resurrected Lord.

So the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ is story of his redeeming love. What is a synopsis of this story? Well, have a look at Mosiah 3. In v5 we are told that the Lord Omnipotent [YHWH], since only God can save us, “shall come down from heaven” and do various things that only God can possibly do. And what are those things? These include the words and deeds of Jesus. For the shortened account of which see vs 5-10. Then we are told that his blood will atone for sin. We must wash, we are told, our filthy clothing in the blood of Jesus, and so forth. The strange word atone–an English word crafted by the first trying to render the Bible into English–tried to find a word to express what went on in the Jewish ritual in which the High Priest went into the Holy of Holies and smeared the blood of an animal on the horns of the altar and begged God to forgive–have mercy–on sinful and rebellious Israel. This day is called Yom Kippur (and in English we know it as the Day of Atonement).

I think that English word atonement only appears once or twice in the New Testament. Where? Hebrews? Why there? Would its use in the Book of Mormon indicate an effort to cast the expected words and deeds of Jesus in the ritual system of ancient Israel? Be that as it may, the word atone is rather common in the Book of Mormon. And it one finds signs of an understanding of the Messiah in which his blood will cover the sins of those who turn to him (that is, repent). (In Hebrew the word translated into English as repent means to turn to or return and hence to turn to God. In Greek the word translated repent means a profound change of mind.) One cannot do this without remembering him and keeping his commandments. And then one must put one’s trust in him. Faith does not mean assenting to propositions about divine things, but trusting in God, hence the talk about there being only one name–the name of a God–trust in whom can, on certain conditions, get one out of the mess we are all in.

Now, with this in mind, have a look at the last part of 3 Nephi 11, where Jesus is said to have explained exactly what his doctrine is. Please notice that it has points: we must repent, have genuine faith, make a covenant by being baptized in water, receive the anointing of the Holy Spirit. This doctrine is called the rock upon which we must build or we will fall back into the mess from which we should have hoped to be salvaged by the Savior.

The doctrine of Christ (or Messiah), not our vapid speculation about a host of things called doctrines, since in the plural doctrine is always described in the Book of Mormon as false, vain and foolish, fits nicely with his story (or his gospel). And if we make a covenant with him, and remember and keep its terms, he will at the end justify us. We can do this by opening ourselves to the purging, purifying, cleansing, sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit, which is sometimes described as the baptism of fire or baptism of the Holy Spirit, which is the real baptism. This regeneration is known as a new birth. We can choose, with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, grow the seed of faith into the fruit of the tree of life. Think of the fruit of repentance metaphor. So we must become part of the story–that is, his story and our story must cohere in the story. Put another way, we must have Christ in us.

What Jesus did, including both his deeds and words, is described as a victory over death. And death of the body and soul is described as the Light and Life be makes possible, if we follow faithfully his Way.

Though he appeared even to his close disciples to have failed to vindicate Israel, his covenant people, against the demonic powers in Palestine and Rome, his resurrection changed all of that, since the door to life was thereby opened to everyone through his resurrection, and he also forgives the sins (the death of the soul) of those who turn to him, trust him and remember him, thereby following him obediently by enduring to the end during our very difficult mortal probation.

It should not be too hard to find talk in the Book of Mormon about the victory won for us by the Lord through his resurrection from the dead. And also to see that the conditional gifts he offers those who genuinely trust and love him, one crucial one can be said to cover our sins, are also central to God’s Spell.

All of this, and much more, seems to me to be found in our scriptures and also coherent, as well as, at least for me, soul satisfying.

[Duncan]

We often use language without knowing a thing about their history. Quite often knowing something about our language would, I believe, enrich our understanding of both divine and human things. I will provide an example that will perhaps help sort the question this thread addresses.

It is possible and perhaps even likely that you say goodbye when you or someone else leaves. But we are likely not to realize that this is merely a contraction of the expression "God be with you." What happens is that language that at one point was a vehicle for setting out the sacred (as opposed to the profane–that is, outside the Temple walls) sometimes drops its original setting and its meaning shifts. The word gospel, I believe, started out as Anglo-Saxon god’s+spell, where the word “spell” meant tale or story. We can see this use of spell coming into play when someone indicates that they will spell something out and then tells a story. But a story about what? About how a particular God did something for humans that they could not possibly have done for themselves.

Now with this in mind, try reading 3 Nephi 27. Notice the expressing “this is my gospel” (v13, 21). And notice the use of the word “endure” and the warning that those who do not “endure” will be metaphorically cut down and burned, which is a reference to an unproductive fruit tree–one that does not bear what is called the “fruit of repentance.” The cursed tree gets sent to the fire. This is, of course, just a portion of what is packed into this chapter and placed in the mouth of the resurrected Lord.

So the fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ is story of his redeeming love. What is a synopsis of this story? Well, have a look at Mosiah 3. In v5 we are told that the Lord Omnipotent [YHWH], since only God can save us, “shall come down from heaven” and do various things that only God can possibly do. And what are those things? These include the words and deeds of Jesus. For the shortened account of which see vs 5-10. Then we are told that his blood will atone for sin. We must wash, we are told, our filthy clothing in the blood of Jesus, and so forth. The strange word atone–an English word crafted by the first trying to render the Bible into English–tried to find a word to express what went on in the Jewish ritual in which the High Priest went into the Holy of Holies and smeared the blood of an animal on the horns of the altar and begged God to forgive–have mercy–on sinful and rebellious Israel. This day is called Yom Kippur (and in English we know it as the Day of Atonement).

I think that English word atonement only appears once or twice in the New Testament. Where? Hebrews? Why there? Would its use in the Book of Mormon indicate an effort to cast the expected words and deeds of Jesus in the ritual system of ancient Israel? Be that as it may, the word atone is rather common in the Book of Mormon. And it one finds signs of an understanding of the Messiah in which his blood will cover the sins of those who turn to him (that is, repent). (In Hebrew the word translated into English as repent means to turn to or return and hence to turn to God. In Greek the word translated repent means a profound change of mind.) One cannot do this without remembering him and keeping his commandments. And then one must put one’s trust in him. Faith does not mean assenting to propositions about divine things, but trusting in God, hence the talk about there being only one name–the name of a God–trust in whom can, on certain conditions, get one out of the mess we are all in.

Now, with this in mind, have a look at the last part of 3 Nephi 11, where Jesus is said to have explained exactly what his doctrine is. Please notice that it has points: we must repent, have genuine faith, make a covenant by being baptized in water, receive the anointing of the Holy Spirit. This doctrine is called the rock upon which we must build or we will fall back into the mess from which we should have hoped to be salvaged by the Savior.

The doctrine of Christ (or Messiah), not our vapid speculation about a host of things called doctrines, since in the plural doctrine is always described in the Book of Mormon as false, vain and foolish, fits nicely with his story (or his gospel). And if we make a covenant with him, and remember and keep its terms, he will at the end justify us. We can do this by opening ourselves to the purging, purifying, cleansing, sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit, which is sometimes described as the baptism of fire or baptism of the Holy Spirit, which is the real baptism. This regeneration is known as a new birth. We can choose, with the assistance of the Holy Spirit, grow the seed of faith into the fruit of the tree of life. Think of the fruit of repentance metaphor. So we must become part of the story–that is, his story and our story must cohere in the story. Put another way, we must have Christ in us.

What Jesus did, including both his deeds and words, is described as a victory over death. And death of the body and soul is described as the Light and Life be makes possible, if we follow faithfully his Way.

Though he appeared even to his close disciples to have failed to vindicate Israel, his covenant people, against the demonic powers in Palestine and Rome, his resurrection changed all of that, since the door to life was thereby opened to everyone through his resurrection, and he also forgives the sins (the death of the soul) of those who turn to him, trust him and remember him, thereby following him obediently by enduring to the end during our very difficult mortal probation.

It should not be too hard to find talk in the Book of Mormon about the victory won for us by the Lord through his resurrection from the dead. And also to see that the conditional gifts he offers those who genuinely trust and love him, one crucial one can be said to cover our sins, are also central to God’s Spell.

All of this, and much more, seems to me to be found in our scriptures and also coherent, as well as, at least for me, soul satisfying.

WOW x 25,000!!!!!!! This is something I will be thinking about for quite some time! Thank you so much!

Edited December 19, 2012 by Duncan

[inquiringmind]

With regards to the temple...Elder Nelson told the mission presidents at their seminar last two years ago that we should be teaching "endure to the end" as "endure to the endowment" so I've come to see that as encompassing the temple ordinances.

Our Bishop's son came back from his mission, and talked a lot about the importance of conversion.

He made it sound like if the proper foundation is laid, and you're really converted to begin with, you'll never fall away.

If what you say Elder Nelson said is true, it sounds like you're safe once you make it thru your endowment.

I would find that very encouraging.

Is that what it means?

[Duncan]

Our Bishop's son came back from his mission, and talked a lot about the importance of conversion.

He made it sound like if the proper foundation is laid, and you're really converted to begin with, you'll never fall away.

If what you say Elder Nelson said is true, it sounds like you're safe once you make it thru your endowment.

I would find that very encouraging.

Is that what it means?

well, no if you just go through the Temple but don't let it go through you. In other words you can fall away after going to the Temple-baptism, marriage are gates that puts you on the path if you continue faithful