Atonement

savedbygrace · May 1, 2013

Speaking for myself, I would like to dialogue with you on this thread. But before I'll be able to do so, you'll need to place your thoughts on this subject into more concise, less ponderous language. Perhaps its just me, but I find myself somewhat baffled by much of the above post. You know your own mind on this subject much better than anybody else does; as a consequence, the above post makes perfect sense to you. But with all due respect, your presentation doesn't quite get through to me.
My advise is that you take one concept at a time, and then make a studied effort to distill down the ideas that form that concept into language simple and easy enough for an average 14 year old to understand. It's obvious you're a bright fellow, but it feels as if you're speaking to me, as it were, in the language of advanced calculus, while I'm still trying to understand the basics of algebra one.
This reminds me of the first time I attempted to read Nibley's "The Message of the Joseph Smith Papyri." Brother Nibley seemed to presume anybody bothering to read his arcane study would already have a good grasp of the ever-evolving theologies and mythologies of the ancient Egyptians. I didn't. As a consequence, in order to even begin to understand what I was reading, I had to do research on virtually every sentence in the book! Through this exercise in humiliation, I came to understand a Thoth I am not. Look him up.

I am grateful for your thoughts Ted, if it baffles you, then there is absolutely no hope for me

teddyaware · May 1, 2013

I am grateful for your thoughts Ted, if it baffles you, then there is absolutely no hope for me

Thanks saved,

Somehow I've got this idea in my head that all the great truths should, by very nature, have an innate capacity to be simplified to the point where even a child is able understand. This is especially so if one is able and willing to unfold great truths one baby step at a time.

Edited May 1, 2013 by teddyaware

SamIam · May 1, 2013

Thanks saved,
Somehow I've got this idea in my head that all the great truths should, by very nature, have an innate capacity to be simplified to the point where even a child is able understand. This is especially so if one is able and willing to unfold great truths one baby step at a time.

This is somewhat disheartening, and belies the expectations of the concept of pondering. I'm sure many of us have noted many occasions where principles that make so much sense to an LDS person are greeted with blind eyed stares of incredulous disbelief by individuals of other faiths. At the same time Joseph Smith is often quoted for his lament that if he were to tell all that he knew the rebellion could cost him his life. Thus we have an indication of the same potential within the Gospel realm. It seems possible to understand the scriptures in such a way that fellow saints begin to mimic the deer in the headlight looks of Christians towards LDS theology.

Yet, I have to agree from the perspective that every time the spirit opens my mind to understand things that I have pondered on for years it does seem so simple and I am shocked by the complete clarity of understanding that was completely absent moments before. It is my mistake. I have tried to encourage pondering, and study and the requirements of spiritual learning that do not fit into your expectations, in the least, of simply being able to explain matters of the spirit with better terminology or sentence structure.

However, it is my hope that perhaps you will not give up on it. I have tried to explain line upon line which is why I went to such lengths to illustrate each step of the way in the first post. Nonetheless, I know what I know and this was wondrous information when it was given to me and it is only a small part. Still, this information caused me to grow in gratitude for the atonement because I understood in far better fashion just exactly what his sacrifice bought and how. I understood these things in a way I could never claim before and I guess in which I am poorly equipped to explain in simple terms. My apologies.

teddyaware · May 2, 2013

This is somewhat disheartening, and belies the expectations of the concept of pondering. I'm sure many of us have noted many occasions where principles that make so much sense to an LDS person are greeted with blind eyed stares of incredulous disbelief by individuals of other faiths. At the same time Joseph Smith is often quoted for his lament that if he were to tell all that he knew the rebellion could cost him his life. Thus we have an indication of the same potential within the Gospel realm. It seems possible to understand the scriptures in such a way that fellow saints begin to mimic the deer in the headlight looks of Christians towards LDS theology.
Yet, I have to agree from the perspective that every time the spirit opens my mind to understand things that I have pondered on for years it does seem so simple and I am shocked by the complete clarity of understanding that was completely absent moments before. It is my mistake. I have tried to encourage pondering, and study and the requirements of spiritual learning that do not fit into your expectations, in the least, of simply being able to explain matters of the spirit with better terminology or sentence structure.
However, it is my hope that perhaps you will not give up on it. I have tried to explain line upon line which is why I went to such lengths to illustrate each step of the way in the first post. Nonetheless, I know what I know and this was wondrous information when it was given to me and it is only a small part. Still, this information caused me to grow in gratitude for the atonement because I understood in far better fashion just exactly what his sacrifice bought and how. I understood these things in a way I could never claim before and I guess in which I am poorly equipped to explain in simple terms. My apologies.

You're reading too much into what I said to savedbygrace. You'll likely not find many who are more ready and able to participate in a deep doctrine discussion than I. All I'm saying is that after one exercises faith and does the hard work to gain a deeper knowledge of the mysteries of God, in the end, all the newly gained knowledge seems quite simple and easy understand after all. The mysteries of God only seem obscure and inscrutable until they're revealed. Once a mystery is revealed, one stands back and wonders why things so simple and easy to understand weren't apprehended all along.

As far as the specific points you're trying to make on this thread are concerned, I believe they're probably a lot easier to explain to others than you might now believe. You probably just haven't given the process of how to go about doing so much thought.

Theoretically speaking, let's suppose you or I were offered 100 million dollars tax free, and all we had to do to take the money away was explain our ideas on this thread in such a way that an average 14 year old American boy could understand them. With that kind of incentive, I bet we could do it.

We're all accustomed to formulating and thinking about the gospel in our own unique language and way, The challenge lies in helping others to understand what we understand by describing what we know in a language and in a manner understandable to those whom we wish to reach. Paul puts it this way:

20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;

21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.

22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. (1 cor 9)

Edited May 2, 2013 by teddyaware

SamIam · May 2, 2013

You're reading too much into what I said to savedbygrace. You'll likely not find many who are more ready and able to participate in a deep doctrine discussion than I. All I'm saying is that after one exercises faith and does the hard work to gain a deeper knowledge of the mysteries of God, in the end, all the newly gained knowledge seems quite simple and easy understand after all. The mysteries of God only seem obscure and inscrutable until they're revealed. Once a mystery is revealed, one stands back and wonders why things so simple and easy to understand weren't apprehended all along.

In this we are agreed. Even with the onerous nature of my writing, if you follow what you have stated above in reviewing what I have already written, perhaps in a few hours, days, weeks, you may get through this material and we can pick it up then. This is technically not new material it is simply taking a 30,000 foot view of our more generalized understandings and bringing it to a 10,000 foot view. (As I am sure there is much more for me to learn on these matters)

Edited May 2, 2013 by SamIam

teddyaware · May 2, 2013

This particular verse refers to the resurrection of Christ and the events then but we know that this also applies until his second coming when prior to and up to that time individuals still are subject to these conditions of the first resurrection. The point being that we can distinguish groups that have their sins fully paid for by Christ and all others essentially pay the price of their own sins whether by the spilling of their own blood in the extreme cases or simply in being held in Spirit prison until they repent and acknowledge Jesus as the Christ. Again this seems to have been kind of determined by some in the conversation.

With your assent, I'll start our dialogue with the above paragraph of yours.

If I understand you aright, you seem to be saying those who inherit the the Terrestrial and Telestial Kingdoms of glory will pay for their own sins. By saying this, are you asserting the inhabitants of the lower kingdoms of glory will literally atone for their own sins? If they do pay the price (atone) for their own sins, without any measure of grace extended to them through the atoning sacrifice of Christ, why do you then stipulate further that after satisfying the debt owed the Father's law of justice on their own, these people must then go on to repent and acknowledge Jesus is the Christ? Repent of what specifically? Perhaps they must repent of paying for their own sins?

If you are correct, it would seem to me in large part these folks are their own Saviors. Why do they need to repent further after already having payed the debt for their own sins? Again I ask, what specifically must they repent of if the law of justice has already been satisfied? In light of the fact that the whole purpose of repentance, within the gospel framework, is to seek forgiveness through the atonement of Christ. why then is there a need repent and acknowledge Christ as Savior if they've already atoned for themselves?

If I understand you correctly, your ideas cause me to entertain a very interesting thought: The righteous who fully repent are seemingly weak and utterly dependent upon a sinless Saviour to redeem them from sin and the fall. But the unrighteous seem to have enough virtue inherent within themselves to pay for their own sins, even if they are murderers. I find this astonishing. It leaves me with a feeling of grudging respect and admiration for these wicked who are able to stand on their own two feet, take their punishment like men, and atone for their own wickedness.

But are the righteous taking the easy way out? They do need someone else to do the job for them. If we learn through our mistakes, it would seem the wicked will wind up with some hard-earned wisdom in the end. Perhaps they will know and understand what sufferings Christ had to bear better than will the inheritors of the Celestial Kingdom, and wouldn't this firsthand knowledge of suffering for sin be an advatage?

A final point: If the wicked can satisfy the demands of justice by paying for their own sins, why the need for the following?

"30 But behold, from among the righteous, he organized his forces and appointed messengers, clothed with power and authority, and commissioned them to go forth and carry the light of the gospel to them that were in darkness, even to all the spirits of men; and thus was the gospel preached to the dead.

31 And the chosen messengers went forth to declare the acceptable day of the Lord and proclaim liberty to the captives who were bound, even unto all who would repent of their sins and receive the gospel.

32 Thus was the gospel preached to those who had died in their sins, without a knowledge of the truth, or in transgression, having rejected the prophets.

33 These were taught faith in God, repentance from sin, vicarious baptism for the remission of sins, the gift of the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands,

34 And all other principles of the gospel that were necessary for them to know in order to qualify themselves that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

35 And so it was made known among the dead, both small and great, the unrighteous as well as the faithful, that redemption had been wrought through the sacrifice of the Son of God upon the cross.

36 Thus was it made known that our Redeemer spent his time during his sojourn in the world of spirits, instructing and preparing the faithful spirits of the prophets who had testified of him in the flesh;

37 That they might carry the message of redemption unto all the dead, unto whom he could not go personally, because of their rebellion and transgression, that they through the ministration of his servants might also hear his words." (D&C 138)

Why bother preaching Christ and his gospel of redemption to those rebellious dead who had rejected the gospel in the flesh on earth, if their destiny is to suffer and satisfy the debt for their own sins anyway? Is the purpose of preaching the gospel to these rebellious spirits, who rejected the prophets, only to rub their noses in their own folly so as to let them know what might have been?

Bottom line? Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the unrepentant spirits of the wicked do indeed suffer for their sins, but they cannot at all atone for their sins and satisfy the debt owed to eternal justice -- only Christ has the power do that. Alma the younger's experience in hell is a perfect case study on this point:

12 But I was racked with eternal torment, for my soul was harrowed up to the greatest degree and racked with all my sins.

13 Yea, I did remember all my sins and iniquities, for which I was tormented with the pains of hell; yea, I saw that I had rebelled against my God, and that I had not kept his holy commandments.

14 Yea, and I had murdered many of his children, or rather led them away unto destruction; yea, and in fine so great had been my iniquities, that the very thought of coming into the presence of my God did rack my soul with inexpressible horror.

15 Oh, thought I, that I could be banished and become extinct both soul and body, that I might not be brought to stand in the presence of my God, to be judged of my deeds.

16 And now, for three days and for three nights was I racked, even with the pains of a damned soul.

17 And it came to pass that as I was thus racked with torment, while I was harrowed up by the memory of my many sins, behold, I remembered also to have heard my father prophesy unto the people concerning the coming of one Jesus Christ, a Son of God, to atone for the sins of the world.

18 Now, as my mind caught hold upon this thought, I cried within my heart: O Jesus, thou Son of God, have mercy on me, who am in the gall of bitterness, and am encircled about by the everlasting chains of death.

19 And now, behold, when I thought this, I could remember my painsno more; yea, I was harrowed up by the memory of my sins no more.

20 And oh, what joy, and what marvelous light I did behold; yea, my soul was filled with joy as exceeding as was my pain! (Alma 36)

And so I ask, why would the experiences of the wicked in the spirit world be substantially different from what Alma experienced on the road to his redemption? He indeed suffered for his sins, but forgiveness of his debt to justice only came by means of the salvative work of Jesus Christ

I know my language here is stong, but I genuinely mean no disrespect. I'm sure your answers will be well thought out and thought provoking.

All the best, Ted

Edited May 3, 2013 by teddyaware

savedbygrace · May 2, 2013

Am on holiday now, will not have Internet access for a week hope to catch up when I get back

SamIam · May 2, 2013

With your assent, I'll start our dialogue with the above paragraph of yours.
If I understand you aright, you seem to be saying those who inherit the the Terrestrial and Telestial Kingdoms of glory will pay for their own sins. By saying this, are you asserting the inhabitants of the lower kingdoms of glory will literally atone for their own sins? If they do pay the price (atone) for their own sins, without any measure of grace extended to them through the atoning sacrifice of Christ, why do you then stipulate further that after satisfying the debt owed the Father's law of justice on their own, these people must then go on to repent and acknowledge Jesus is the Christ? Repent of what specifically? Perhaps they must repent of paying for their own sins?

I am going to limit this post to answering only the first paragraph of your inquiry, as you have observed, I seem to take a lot of words to complete a picture and I do not want to lose this point amongst the others that pertain to your post. I'll get to them over the next few hours if possible but over the next day or so otherwise. One of the challenges is that this is a distillation of almost two hundred pages of writing and research and pondering for the past several years. I’m trying to break it into little pieces but each piece is intrinsically dependent on other pieces. So I am doing my best…

This is a fine place to start as it is directly related to the opening of my original post, thus it is in proper order for the foundation of the discussion. Still, I am going to draw a circle of principles that when connected give meaning to your question. The principle that you mention above that is a categorically incorrect take away from my thoughts is this, “without any measure of grace extended to them through the atoning sacrifice of Christ.” We see this conversation often as we discuss grace and works on these forums. First in order to marshal my thoughts let’s reintroduce the two sources for the answer to this question?

“The celestial kingdom is reserved for those who sanctify their souls by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel.
They are the ones whose sins Christ bore.
(Bruce R. McConkie,
A New Witness for the Articles of Faith
1985, 145)
The take away is that Christ does not pay for the sins of every individual that transgresses. The only ones that have their sins paid for are those that repent fully, receive baptism, and the required ordinances for entrance into the Celestial Kingdom. I think that some have somewhat addressed this in this conversation indirectly. This is also referenced in the following verse:
Mosiah 15:11-12
11 Behold I say unto you, that whosoever has heard the words of the prophets, yea, all the holy prophets who have prophesied concerning the coming of the Lord—I say unto you,
that all those who have hearkened unto their words, and believed that the Lord would redeem his people, and have looked forward to that day for a remission of their sins, I say unto you, that these are his seed, or they are the heirs of the kingdom of God.
12
For these are they whose sins he has borne; these are they for whom he has died,
to redeem them from their transgressions
.
And now, are they not his seed?

What we are attempting to do is grasp the essence of what Elder McConkie is stating. I think it is very important to realize I am only one small part of this information as everything I have come to understand originates with individuals both past and present from scriptural sources and quotes. However, I will try to indicate when I am filling in the blanks with reasonable speculation between points as opposed to sharing understandings.

No matter how we slice it up Elder McConkie is saying something here that is not commonly understood or referenced in our typical discussions. In essence there are those whose sins Christ bore and there are those whose sins He did not bear. Elder McConkie qualifies in his quote that those whose sins he bore are exclusively (“reserved for”) those who inherit the Celestial Kingdom.

Whenever, I find a quote from a general authority, I try to find in scripture what it was that they were pondering upon that opened up the insight that they gained. This allows me to ponder upon the same thing and attempt to get the same spirit that revealed it to them.

In this case a strong possibility is the Mosiah 15:11-12 verse quoted above. This expands somewhat on what Elder McConkie states but it does so in the language of scripture. Instead of celestial kingdom inhabitants, Abinidi is referring to the target group as the “seed” of Christ. This seed is defined as those who 1.) Hearken unto his word, 2.) trusted in his redemption, 3.) had faith in receiving a remission of their sins (which includes the principles of repentance and obedience.)

Someday it may be prudent to discuss if there is a difference between remissions of sin versus forgiveness of sin but to stay with your question, we can save it for now. However, we can safely now keep in mind that the seed of Christ is always referring to the Celestial heirs.

If Christ bore only the sins of those that receive the celestial kingdom, then whose sins remain that he did not bear. Bear/bore is the operative principle; I do not believe it to be the same as "paid the price" in the sense of an aggregate total of all of the sins of mankind. In other words, while, Christ did pay the price for all of the sins of mankind the only automatic freebie is the one that gets them back into the presence of God and overcomes the price of the penalty for the law of the Garden of Eden which was God the Father’s law. This is not to say that it rescinds this law but that no one is subject to this first breech of the law because of anyone else’s transgressions. However, for those that qualify after they are returned to God, if they are are found as able to reside under a celestial law then this group of people qualify for a second blessing of Christ having borne their sins and they will not suffer for them as will all others asigned to the lower kingdoms. In a moment we will look at 2 Nephi for the explanation of how this works….

Keep in mind that God the Fathers law was a law of a celestial kingdom with eternal ramifications as eternal as the Kingdom wherein the law was applied. No finite mortal man can play the price of an infinite law. Thus there is no way for any mortal to pay a price adequate to gain him an infinite reward because as a mortal he cannot pay a price greater than his worth which for mortal man is less than the dust of the earth. Since no man can pay the price to come back to the presence of God the Father that price had to be paid by Christ. However once we were back into the presence our Father, we were now eligible to be considered for our own personal actions as they related to our breech of the commandments of men.

I’ll explain in just a moment but let’s introduce another scripture.

2 Nephi 2:21
21 And the days of the children of amen were prolonged, according to the will of God, that they might repent while in the flesh; wherefore,
their state became a state of probation
, and their time was lengthened, according to the commandments which the Lord God gave unto the children of men. For he gave commandment that all men must repent; for he showed unto
all men that they were lost, because of the transgression of their parents.

This wording is very intriguing and is addressing two different conditions. The parts germane to this discussion are that all men were commanded to repent but it is not directly anything to do with specific sins but they are lost because of the transgression of Adam and Eve. Thus they are being held subject to some condition that they were placed in which is the result of what Adam and Eve did. We can freely state that it would be unjust to be held accountable for whatever it is about the condition that Adam and Eve committed man to endure, but because all men receive of the resurrection regardless of their own personal sins and transgressions it is not an issue. This is, as you know, the grace aspect of the Atonement.

Christ paid the price that would return all men to the even ground of only being accountable for their own sins. It would be clearer to say that he paid the entire price that had to be paid for all of our sins but we only receive a credit for the transgression of Adam and Eve which brings us back into God’s presence. However, even though we are back in his presence this is for a period of judgment and remaining in his presence is still at risk upon the conditions of judgment based upon our works after the credit we receive for the price Christ paid. It is kind of like a get out of jail free card in Monopoly. Everyone gets the card and they can use it once. Let’s visit verse 26 of 2 Nephi for clarity:

2 Nephi 2:26 And the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. And because that they are redeemed from the fall they have
become free forever, knowing good from evil; to act for themselves and not to be acted upon, save it be by the punishment of the law at the great and last day, according to the
commandments which God hath given.

This verse states that Christ pays a price and redeems man, in this instance not for their sins specifically but to redeem them from the fall. Since they are redeemed from the fall they are literally free, not constrained in any way by the conditions of the fall at that moment that they are found free. However, that is not to say that they cannot put themselves into bondage of the law by their own transgressions. This is a second issue altogether separate from the conditions that caused the fall and will be addressed after this mortal existence with a day of judgment. This is really touched on pretty well in 2 Nephi 2:5.

2 Nephi 2:5
5 And men are instructed sufficiently that they
a
know
good from evil. And the
b
law
is given unto men. And by the law no flesh is
c
justified
; or, by the law men are
d
cut off
. Yea, by the temporal law they were cut off; and also, by the spiritual law they perish from that which is good, and become miserable forever.

The temporal law is one part and references the, “commandments which the Lord God gave unto the children of men”. These were given after the fall, hence their designation as temporal. However, we also became subject to the spiritual law, which, is the law given to Adam while he lived in an eternal state before he was mortal.

However, and this requires us to grasp and except the conditions of Mosiah 15 and Bruce R. McConkie’s quote: the payment that Christ paid for our redemption is simply what is required that they are not held accountable to a transgression they did not commit. This payment cannot be paid by any finite being. So if for clarity you want to place this under a thought that says Christ pays the price for all mankind to be brought back into the presence of God that’s perfect. However, this price paid, while it can cover it does not automatically cover their own personal sins except upon the principles that Christ and God the Father have implemented. If man follows those conditions and is obedient and repentant – then is when they become the seed of Christ. This is when they get credit for their obedience to the conditions that were stipulated to receive a full blanket of coverage for their own personal sins. This is when they receive of a fullness of the impact of the Atonement and they find that they will suffer no more than this mortal existence exacted of them.

Thus the death inflicted upon mankind is completely remedied by Christ. However, we must keep in mind that this only addresses the condition of Adam and Eve’s transgression. It only removes the permanence of the original decree of death that God the Father inflicted upon all mankind.

If we ourselves commit our first sin we again take upon us the charge that was originally limited to Adam and Eve for their transgression. However, this time it falls under the terms of a probationary period which was described above in these terms “and their time was lengthened, according to the commandments which the Lord God gave unto the children of men.” This probationary period is defined by the secondary commandments that were put into play after the fall. These add some specificity to individual’s sins; however, the potential for a second penalty of a spiritual death is still in force. It is still possible to receive this penalty just as it was in the absence of atonement if the conditions of the fall had prevailed however, our breech of the eternal law for all of mankind occurs in a mortal state and not an eternal state. Thus one can only be held to the standard of a second death if he returns to the knowledge base of an eternal spiritual condition while in this life. This is considered the state of calling and election made sure. Falling from this state only occurs when one is fully aware that his actions are the essential same as crucifying the Savior afresh such as occurs with sons of perdition:

D & C 76:35
35 Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and
having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame.
36 These are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the devil and his angels—
37 And the only ones on whom
the second death shall have any power;

So when we become subject to the spiritual law again, it is only when we are qualified to be measured against that standard. Since in theory everyone who comes to earth has that potential, we could be considered under the burden of the charge of Christ’s innocent blood. So few will follow Joseph Smith’s council of receiving he Second Comforter in this mortal existence, that that penalty will fall on relatively few. I’m not sure how you would describe this condition but because of some of the other material and references which are listed in my first post I have come to use the terminology that all have been charged with a crime that awaits a judgment that measures the degree of complicity in the Saviors death. This charge originated with Adam and Eve but Christ redeems that charge, then when we sin the charge returns for our own actions but it cannot be misconstrued as a declaration of guilt. It is only the initial charge in a court case that is being held over for judgment when we return to God the Fathers presence. Then the evidence will be weighed and judgment rendered.

Thus in 2 Nephi he describes the state of probation wherein man defines his own degree of culpability for the same charge that they become subject to when they transgress the law that Adam and Eve’s exile was predicated upon.

To make this apparent we have to consider the nature of those that are not held accountable for having sinned and that mostly includes little children and any others that physically cannot understand right and wrong. They receive fully of the blessings of the resurrection without any penalty because they never become subject to the law of the Garden of Eden. Once the resurrection was implemented they were fully renewed from the primary law and no secondary law concerning sin and breech of the commandments subsequent to the fall could have claim on them. They never sin in their own right so the first law of the Garden cannot claim them as an act of justice. Justice demands that for these a means be provided to redeem them from the effects of the fall.

Thus by examining the aspects of all parties involved in returning to God’s presence and how judgment affects them, we can see what Elder McConkie and Mosiah 15 are expecting us to grasp. Christ gets them there through the principles of the resurrection which they qualify for upon principles of grace, but now having become subject to the charge by their own actions they become subject to the demands of justice for their own transgression and it must be determined to what degree they are going to be held accountable for their own actions, their own sins in breach of the secondary laws of specific sins. We need to keep this split of primary and secondary accountability in our minds for later. The point I want to put forth here is that where earlier I stated that no mortal can pay the price for an infinite law, that does not preclude that a mortal man can pay the price for finite reward in a kingdom of damnation such as the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms. I won't bring in D & C 132:26-27 at this time but we have already hinted at how that generally confusing set of verses is really quite understandable on these priciples.

If I am to stay only with the core of your question I must stop here. This is the essence of this segment of the circle for which I have four more pages describing tangential portions too. I’ll save that for now to see if this makes sense.

To make it clear, I am not espousing any new doctrine here; I am only addressing some perceptions that exist at a 30,000 foot level that become clearer at a lower level as we accept what Mosiah 15 and Bruce R. McConkie are trying to show. The nature of responsibility for personal sin is the center of this discussion and is the key paradigm shift that is required at this time, though there are a few more if we get beyond this point.

teddyaware · May 3, 2013

Thus by examining the aspects of all parties involved in returning to God’s presence and how judgment affects them, we can see what Elder McConkie and Mosiah 15 are expecting us to grasp. Christ gets them there through the principles of the resurrection which they qualify for upon principles of grace, but now having become subject to the charge by their own actions they become subject to the demands of justice for their own transgression and it must be determined to what degree they are going to be held accountable for their own actions, their own sins in breach of the secondary laws of specific sins. We need to keep this split of primary and secondary accountability in our minds for later. The point I want to put forth here is that where earlier I stated that no mortal can pay the price for an infinite law, that does not preclude that a mortal man can pay the price for finite reward in a kingdom of damnation such as the telestial and terrestrial kingdoms. I won't bring in D & C 132:26-27 at this time but we have already hinted at how that generally confusing set of verses is really quite understandable on these priciples.
If I am to stay only with the core of your question I must stop here. This is the essence of this segment of the circle for which I have four more pages describing tangential portions too. I’ll save that for now to see if this makes sense.
To make it clear, I am not espousing any new doctrine here; I am only addressing some perceptions that exist at a 30,000 foot level that become clearer at a lower level as we accept what Mosiah 15 and Bruce R. McConkie are trying to show. The nature of responsibility for personal sin is the center of this discussion and is the key paradigm shift that is required at this time, though there are a few more if we get beyond this point.

There are several issues throughout your last post with which I might take issue. From my point of view, although the general trajectory of your analysis is on point and in harmony with the Restored Gospel, there are some specific ideas here and there that cause me to doubt and wonder. But I don't want to get sidetracked on these points for now.

There is, I believe, a very simple way to determine if you and I are basically on the same page doctrinally and theologically -- and here's how I propose we find out: If you are willing, I'm going to quote from D&C 138, and after offering my own exegesis on the highlighted portions, I'll ask you to set forth your understanding of the same highlighted portions according to your own atonement paradigm...

"29 And as I wondered, my eyes were opened, and my understanding quickened, and I perceived that the Lord went not in person among the wicked and the disobedient who had rejected the truth, to teach them;

30 But behold, from among the righteous, he organized his forces and appointed messengers, clothed with power and authority, and commissioned them to go forth and carry the light of the gospel to them that were in darkness, even to all the spirits of men; and thus was the gospel preached to the dead...

57 I beheld that the faithful elders of this dispensation, when they depart from mortal life, continue their labors in the preaching of the gospel of repentance and redemption, through the sacrifice of the Only Begotten Son of God, among those who are in darkness and under the bondage of sin in the great world of the spirits of the dead.

58 The dead who repent will be redeemed, through obedience to the ordinances of the house of God,

59 And after they have paid the penalty of their transgressions, and are washed clean, shall receive a reward according to their works, for they are heirs of salvation. (D&C 138)

I perceived that the Lord went not in person among the wicked and the disobedient who had rejected the truth, to teach them; But behold, from among the righteous, he organized his forces and appointed messengers ... and commissioned them to go forth and carry the light of the gospel to them that were in darkness, even to all the spirits of men; and thus was the gospel preached to the dead... In his vision, the Prophet Joseph F. Smith learns the faithful elders of this dispensation preach the Gospel message to the disobedient spirits who rejected the gospel message while in the flesh. The Lord himself does not personally visit and teach the gospel to these wicked and disobedient who rejected the truth while on earth. It's obvious these wicked spirits are in the spirit prison -- or in hell, if you like -- because they dwell in darkness. The gospel message is delivered to all the spirits of the dead who are in the spirit prison, not one soul is exempt.

the faithful elders of this dispensation, when they depart from mortal life, continue their labors in the preaching of the gospel of repentance and redemption, through the sacrifice of the Only Begotten Son of God, among those who are in darkness and under the bondage of sin in the great world of the spirits of the dead...Rather than being taught that they must continue to suffer in bondage for their own personal sins until the law of justice is satisfied, the wicked spirits are taught the basic gospel principles of repentance and forgiveness of sin (i.e. redemption, through the sacrifice of the Only Begotten Son of God). It strains all credulity to deny or minimize the fact that these spirits are clearly being taught and offered freedom from the bondage of sin through the atonement of Jesus Christ.

The dead who repent will be redeemed, through obedience to the ordinances of the house of God... It's patently obvious these wicked spirits, who disobeyed or rejected the gospel while in the flesh, have the opportunity to put an end to their suffering for sin and receive forgiveness if they repent and obey the gospel message as delivered by the aforementioned authorized and empowered spirit messengers.

And after they have paid the penalty of their transgressions, and are washed clean, shall receive a reward according to their works, for they are heirs of salvation... Like Alma the Younger, these wicked spirits will continue to pay the penalty for their unforgiven transgressions until they respond in faith to the teachings of the spirit messengers, come unto the Lord Jesus Christ in faith, and allow him to pay the penalty in full for them. The reference to being washed clean is an unmistakable literary allusion to baptism for the remission of sins.

I will end this post by quoting from D&C 76 and making another comment:

73 And also they who are the spirits of men kept in prison, whom the Son visited, and preached the gospel unto them, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh;

74 Whoreceived not the testimony of Jesus in the flesh, but afterwards received it. (D&C 76)

The above two verses clearly relate to the verses I quoted from D&C 138. Taking all the these verses in totality, it's plain to see the gospel of forgiveness of sin through Christ's atoning sacrifice is not just reserved for the inheritors of the Celestial Kingdom.

D&C 138 is to D&C 76, as DC 76 is to 1 Corinthians 15... Elder McConkie's former understanding, based on the verse in D&C 76, has been superceded by the further light and knowledge the Church has been blessed to receive in D&C 138, wherein we learn those who reject or disobey the gospel in in this life may receive it and and obtain a remission of sins through its reception in the world of departed spirits.

Edited May 3, 2013 by teddyaware

SamIam · May 3, 2013

It is always good to get a enough of a discussion going that one can feel like a bigger picture is starting to emerge. It is clear we are not on the same page and perhaps not for the reasons one might think that I am speaking to.

There are several things that I will suggest possibilities on, however, the most important thing that you stated that provides the clearest distinction of where our challenges in communication might lay is this statement here:

Elder McConkie's former understanding, based on the verse in D&C 76, has been superceded by the further light and knowledge the Church has been blessed to receive in D&C 138, wherein we learn those who reject or disobey the gospel in in this life may receive it and and obtain a remission of sins through its reception in the world of departed spirits.

At the least perhaps I am simply misunderstanding your implications. However, what this says to me is that Elder McConkie based some of his conclusions on DC 76 but that conclusion is no longer valid as it is superseded by the further light and knowledge of DC 138.

There are several implications here that are alarming. First, what I hear you saying is that Elder McConkie, in your evaluation, made an observation without knowing the full story and so we can discount his earlier point by “superseding” it with his Grandfather in laws revelation in DC 138. It is as if we can say that Elder McConkie wasn’t aware of DC 138 but if he had been he would have known better. If I have understood the implications, this is my comment on this type of observation.

One of the greatest risks of these online environments is intellectual contamination from those who think that their talents of divining truth enable them to skills of discerning when a general authority is mistaken in his understanding of the Gospel. Then they start tossing out the “was he speaking as a prophet?” rational that is the setup for departure from good sense. There are two reasons this is always wrong. The first is, to a fault each one of these individuals who have served in positions of Apostleship and above know the gospel. Bruce R. McConkie especially can never be accused of not understanding the gospel message nearly as good as any who ever lived on the face of the earth. I assure you that when he made the observation I used in my post, this one:

“The celestial kingdom is reserved for those who sanctify their souls by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel.
They are the ones whose sins Christ bore.
(Bruce R. McConkie,
A New Witness for the Articles of Faith
1985, 145)

I assure that this was every bit comprehended and known to him and he made his observation in full awareness of DC 138. The mistake is thinking otherwise.

The second reason almost seems oppositional to the above but that is only in the difficulty of expressing nuances of proper and improper behavior as it relates to this subject. Few understand this line of reasoning. If by some miraculous chance, I received an open revelation that contradicted something a general authority had stated, the burden shifts from knowing truth to respecting God’s chosen leaders. In such an event, I would shore up my understanding to never state anything derogatory or undermining concerning the General Authority in any public setting. I could never imply that my reasoning and experience was superior to his and that he was mistaken. This is the same principle that Kept Brigham Young true to Joseph Smith when he made a one-time notice of Joseph’s less than capable financial talents and reflects his council to Lorenzo Snow over the “As man is” doctrine to not speak of it until Joseph taught the principles first. There is an order to things.

In my opinion the moment you stepped away from Bruce R. McConkies quote you stepped away from the spirit ever being able to teach you what he meant. I can say unequivocally that Elder McConkies “former understanding” was precisely consistent with the gospel of DC 138 and is true and correct doctrine. Had you of stayed with Elder McConkie and tried to get the spirit of his understanding in the quote you would have been led correctly to understand his perspective properly. It may have taken much longer, perhaps years as so many things have for others, but your confidence in the Lords anointed would have been eventually rewarded.

However, when you stepped away from Elder McConkie you also took Mosiah 15:12 with you. I gave the scripture to you to provide a second witness of its veracity. I never take anything the spirit teaches me on a first witness basis. It is my right and privilege to seek a second witness. However, it is not to be trifled with. A second witness binds one to the truth and is a principle of accountability. Note how Mosiah 15:12 sustains in terminology Bruce R. McConkie’s statements:

Mosiah 15:12
12
For
these are they whose sins he has borne
; these are they for whom he has died
, to redeem them from their transgressions
.
And now, are they not his seed?

Walking away from the concept “these are they whose sins he bore” means it just dangles out there in the periphery of the mind without functioning in its capacity to guide our understandings. Until we take these kinds of things and ponder upon them we do not understand.

Otherwise I will only make two other observations. First, the essence of your material is concerning missionary work. In our discussion, I have been approaching the subject from the perspective of judgment. I assumed, perhaps improperly, that you since we were discussing kingdom assignment that we were far beyond teaching the Gospel and were to the point of discussing the results of individuals response to the Gospel whether to receive or reject it. Still the moment we try to overlay missionary work on what we have discussed so far we immediately establish conflicts from the differing perspectives.

As it pertains to missionary work, you are absolutely correct that all will have the gospel presented to them and have a chance to reject or deny it. If they accept the gospel their sins are forgiven them and they are granted every opportunity that all who accepts the gospel in this life are afforded.

However, as it pertains to judgment, if someone was offered an opportunity and were taught the Gospel in this life there is a threshold that only God can define, where they will have received enough of an understanding of the truth that if they reject it now and accept it in the spirit world later, they will not have the same opportunities for exaltation into the Celestial Kingdom as those that accepted it when they received the witness of its veracity and will to one degree or another suffer for their choices of rejection.

When missionary work is completed for all of his spirit children and when it meets God’s criteria, then is judgment and assignment to the kingdoms we have been discussing. Again where we have been discussing judgment and assignment to kingdoms this is well after the missionary part of the process. It never occurred to me that this foundational principle of our work for the dead would be misconstrued as not considered in our discussion. Had I have realized our different starting points I might have started at the very beginning by stating something to the effect of, “ after every person has had the opportunity to receive the Gospel and accept or reject it then…” and that would have been sufficient to clarify the perspective.

Still, as we are giving some attention to this aspect of missionary work for the dead, as best as I can read into it there is the potential that you are conflating the opportunity of those who have not had the gospel taught to them sufficiently with those that have had a chance in this life and turned away from it only to accept it later. As well it seems there is apparent confusion with concepts of salvation, redemption, exaltation, forgiveness after suffering and forgiveness from suffering.

I will take a few of your comments one at a time and illustrate possible alternatives. It is not important that we agree on my interpretation of the gospel and so of course where you feel your observations are more consistent with your gospel understandings I encourage you in them. Still it appears that you are so desperate force a personal expectation on certain statements that I think you are just not able to see what Elder McConkie is trying to get you to see. Either way, following are some of your observations that I cannot bring into my paradigm of gospel understanding, with prophetic or scriptural commentary as to why they do not work for me:

In his vision, the Prophet Joseph F. Smith learns the faithful elders of this dispensation preach the Gospel message
to the disobedient spirits who rejected the gospel message while in the flesh.
It's patently obvious
these wicked spirits, who disobeyed or rejected the gospel while in the flesh,
have the opportunity to put an end to their suffering for sin and receive forgiveness if they repent and obey the gospel message as delivered by the aforementioned authorized and empowered spirit messengers.

This quote speaks to their final best opportunity. The point being made is that those who reject the gospel never have an equal opportunity to be forgiven of their sins which is why they never make it to the Celestial Kingdom. If they had an equal opportunity then the celestial kingdom would not be off limits. This is mostly predicated on DC 76 for your scriptural reference.

The inhabitants of the terrestrial kingdom are described as follows: "1. Accountable persons who die without law (and who, of course, do not accept the gospel in the spirit world under those particular circumstances which would make them heirs of the celestial kingdom); 2. Those who reject the gospel in this life and who reverse their course and accept it in the spirit world; 3. Honorable men of the earth who are blinded by the craftiness of men and who therefore do not accept and live the gospel law; and 4. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who have testimonies of Christ and the divinity of the great latter-day work and who are not valiant, but who are instead lukewarm in their devotion to the Church and to righteousness" (MD, 784; D&C 76:71-80).(Hoyt W. Brewster, Jr., Doctrine and Covenants Encyclopedia [salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1988], 584.)

Here is another from Joseph Fielding Smith. The key point is the statement that rejection of the Gospel message once it has been presented places the burdens of their sin on their own heads:

It is not the fault of innocent children who die that their parents do not come into the Church and refuse to accept the gospel. Through the mercy and justice of our Eternal Father, every soul is entitled to hear the gospel. If they do not have the privilege in this mortal life, then they will have it in the spirit world, where it is preached to the dead and even the dead will be judged according to their works.
Baptism is the door into the celestial kingdom. All who forsake their sins and are baptized and remain true will enter the celestial kingdom
. Therefore parents are offered the gospel, if not in this life, then in the spirit world,
and if they reject it, the sin is on their own heads.
For verily the voice of the Lord is unto all men, and there is none to escape; and there is no eye that shall not see, neither ear that shall not hear, neither heart that shall not be penetrated.
And the rebellious shall be pierced with much sorrow; for their iniquities shall be spoken upon the housetops, and their secret acts shall be revealed.(D. & C. 1:2-3.) (Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 5 vols. [salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1957-1966], 1: 54.)

Here is another one from James E. Talmage which might give you hope at first but then he clearly draws the line:

If it was deemed proper and just that the Gospel be carried to the spirits who were disobedient in the days of Noah, it is reasonable to conclude that like opportunities shall be placed within the reach of others who have rejected the word at different times. For the same spirit of neglect, disobedience, and opposition to divine law that characterized the time of Noah has existed since. fn Further, if, in the plan of God, provision be made for the redemption of the wilfully disobedient, those who actually spurn the truth, can we believe that the still greater multitudes of spirits who have never heard the Gospel are to be left in punishment eternally? No; God has decreed that even the heathen nations, and those that knew no law, shall be redeemed. fn The gifts of God are not confined to this sphere of action, but will be bestowed in justice throughout eternity
.
Upon all who reject the word of God in this life will fall the penalties provided
;

but after the debt has been paid
the prison doors shall be opened, and the spirits once confined in suffering
,
then chastened and clean
, shall come forth to partake of the glory provided for their class.(James E. Talmage, Articles of Faith [salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1981], 133.)

Finally, I think the real issue is manifest from one of your own statements in your response where you have made a good “guess” based on the imagery, but it is simply a mistaken notion.

You state the following:

And after they have paid the penalty of their transgressions, and are washed clean, shall receive a reward according to their works, for they are heirs of salvation...
Like Alma the Younger, these wicked spirits will continue to pay the penalty for their unforgiven transgressions until they respond in faith to the teachings of the spirit messengers, come unto the Lord Jesus Christ in faith, and allow him to pay the penalty in full for them.
The reference to being
washed clean
is an unmistakable literary allusion to baptism for the remission of sins.

The problem I have is that you are conflating two different concepts as if they belong together and to do so I think you are just stepping over the obvious. In the verse says “after they have paid the price of their transgressions”, let’s just stop here and accept what that states. Let’s rewrite it … maybe … they suffer for their sins; I don’t know how to get around the actual words “AFTER…they have PAID the penalty of THEIR transgressions. Isn’t that what you are expecting that Christ is going to do for them? Note that Talmage states “Upon all who reject the word of God in this life will fall the penalties provided; but after the debt has been paid “. Aren’t you stating that when they repent, Christ will bear their burdens, but doesn’t AFTER mean something different? And who is paying the debt according to Talmage? When you stated the following:

the Church has been blessed to receive in D&C 138, wherein we learn those who reject or disobey the gospel in in this life may receive it and obtain a remission of sins through its reception in the world of departed spirits.

Now the conflation comes in when you indicate that they are washed clean means Christ has taken on Him, their sins when it was just stated in the line before that AFTER they paid the penalty of their own transgressions AND are washed clean. Now you have them receiving a remission which , if correct would mean that they do not suffer for their sins. However when you tied that thought to “those who reject or disobey the gospel” remission was no longer an option. If I have not provided enough reference quotes I’ve got at least 20 more to illustrate that to reject the gospel is to forfeit the Celestial Kingdom which means they are no longer on the list of those “whose sins Christ bore”.

It seems correct to me to accept that they pay the price for their own sins and then are washed clean from the process. Thus for me that is the equivalent of what I have said all along; they pay the price of their own sins which in no way removes the fact that Christ earned the position of the Gatekeeper that no one can pass because he shed his blood so that when he accepts their suffering and repentance they need suffer no more except in the fashion that John a Widstoe and Joseph Fielding Smith speak to below.

Since the “washed clean” seems a sticking point let’s look at this commentary from a “Doctrines of the Gospel” Student Manual:

2. The inhabitants of the telestial kingdom will include those who were murderers, liars, sorcerers, adulterers, and whoremongers—in general, the wicked people of the earth (see D&C 76:103; Revelation 22:15). These inhabitants of the telestial kingdom
will have become clean through their suffering
so that they can abide telestial glory. (Chapter 33: Kingdoms of Glory and Perdition, Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual, (2000), 90–9)

This is also in keeping potentially with the Talmage quote above that, “then chastened and clean, shall come forth to partake of the glory provided for their class”

Another:

"This earth will become a celestial kingdom when it is sanctified. Those who enter the terrestrial kingdom will have to go to some other sphere which will be prepared for them. Those who enter the telestial kingdom, likewise will have to go to some earth which is prepared for them, and there will be another place which is hell where the devil and those who are punished to go with him will dwell.
Of course, those who enter the telestial kingdom, and those who enter the terrestrial kingdom will have the eternal punishment which will come to them in knowing that they might, if they had kept the commandments of the Lord, have returned to his presence as his sons and his daughters.
This will be a torment to them, and in that sense it will be hell." (Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, v. 2, p. 210)

"Now, it may be contended that a judgment, with some degree of salvation for all, encourages the sinner to pursue his dark ways. Not so. However generous the judgment, it is measured by
our works. Our punishment will be the heavy regret that we might have received a greater reward, a higher kingdom, had our lives conformed more nearly to truth. Such remorse may yield keener pain than physical torture." (John A. Widstoe, Understandable Religion, p. 89)

This kind of suffering of conscience that Joseph Fielding Smith, and John A. Widstoe refers to is a different take on it but it fits very well for certain perspectives.

God cannot consistently with His attributes, condemn the children of men if they have not heard the truth. It is when men hear the principles which God has revealed for their redemption and
then reject them, that condemnation attaches to them,
and they will be punished
according to their hardness of heart. On the other hand, if they obey the truth when they hear it, they will be rewarded according to their acceptance of it and their repentance.(Brian H. Stuy, ed., Collected Discourses, 5 vols. [George Q. Cannon, Burbank, Calif., and Woodland Hills, Ut.: B.H.S. Publishing, 1987-1992], 5: .)

So to summarize, once rejected the ball game changes and people are held accountable for their transgressions and in the words of George Q. Cannon they will be punished. And as we can all agree after they have been punished, it appears they will be more inclined to repent and then Christ will forgive them and permit them the kingdom which their works merit. This is forgiveness after suffering.

Here just for good measure a several more quotes that speak to aspects of this conversation. One of the key points is the distinction on the words Salvation

Whenever the gospel is offered to any person or group, they then have the obligation to believe and obey its doctrines; other—wise
, they do not become inheritors of its blessings (such as a remission of sins-my note).
The doctrine of salvation for the dead, great and glorious as it is,
does not mean that those who reject the truth, or who disobey their gospel covenants in this life, shall have a second chance to gain salvation by accepting and living the law in the spirit world.
Salvation for the dead is for those who die without a knowledge of the gospel and who would have received it, with all their hearts, had it been presented to them in this mortal life. (Bruce R. McConkie, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 3 vols. [salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1965-1973], 2: 423.)

Well, I'll stop now. I tried to give many quotes to illustrate perspectives. Again feel free to retain yours but for myself there is over whelming evidence that contradicts key facets of some of the expectations you have presented and thus will make it impossible to deal with the other material we have been discussing.

Edited May 4, 2013 by SamIam

teddyaware · May 3, 2013

It is always good to get a enough of a discussion going that one can feel like a bigger picture is starting to emerge. It is clear we are not on the same page and perhaps not for the reasons one might think that I am speaking to.
There are several things that I will suggest possibilities on, however, the most important thing that you stated that provides the clearest distinction of where our challenges in communication might lay is this statement here:
At the least perhaps I am simply misunderstanding your implications. However, what this says to me is that Elder McConkie based some of his conclusions on DC 76 but that conclusion is no longer valid as it is superseded by the further light and knowledge of DC 138.
There are several implications here that are alarming. First, what I hear you saying is that Elder McConkie, in your evaluation, made an observation without knowing the full story and so we can discount his earlier point by “superseding” it with his Grandfather in laws revelation in DC 138. It is as if we can say that Elder McConkie wasn’t aware of DC 138 but if he had been he would have known better. If I have understood the implications, this is my comment on this type of observation.
One of the greatest risks of these online environments is intellectual contamination from those who think that their talents of divining truth enable them to skills of discerning when a general authority is mistaken in his understanding of the Gospel. Then they start tossing out the “was he speaking as a prophet?” rational that is the setup for departure from good sense. There are two reasons this is always wrong. The first is, to a fault each one of these individuals who have served in positions of Apostleship and above know the gospel. Bruce R. McConkie especially can never be accused of not understanding the gospel message nearly as good as any who ever lived on the face of the earth. I assure you that when he made the observation I used in my post, this one:
I assure that this was every bit comprehended and known to him and he made his observation in full awareness of DC 138. The mistake is thinking otherwise.
The second reason almost seems oppositional to the above but that is only in the difficulty of expressing nuances of proper and improper behavior as it relates to this subject. Few understand this line of reasoning. If by some miraculous chance, I received an open revelation that contradicted something a general authority had stated, the burden shifts from knowing truth to respecting God’s chosen leaders. In such an event, I would shore up my understanding to never state anything derogatory or undermining concerning the General Authority in any public setting. I could never imply that my reasoning and experience was superior to his and that he was mistaken. This is the same principle that Kept Brigham Young true to Joseph Smith when he made a one-time notice of Joseph’s less than capable financial talents and reflects his council to Lorenzo Snow over the “As man is” doctrine to not speak of it until Joseph taught the principles first. There is an order to things.
In my opinion the moment you stepped away from Bruce R. McConkies quote you stepped away from the spirit ever being able to teach you what he meant. I can say unequivocally that Elder McConkies “former understanding” was precisely consistent with the gospel of DC 138 and is true and correct doctrine. Had you of stayed with Elder McConkie and tried to get the spirit of his understanding in the quote you would have been led correctly to understand his perspective properly. It may have taken much longer, perhaps years as so many things have for others, but your confidence in the Lords anointed would have been eventually rewarded.
However, when you stepped away from Elder McConkie you also took Mosiah 15:12 with you. I gave the scripture to you to provide a second witness of its veracity. I never take anything the spirit teaches me on a first witness basis. It is my right and privilege to seek a second witness. However, it is not to be trifled with. A second witness binds one to the truth and is a principle of accountability. Note how Mosiah 15:12 sustains in terminology Bruce R. McConkie’s statements:
Walking away from the concept “these are they whose sins he bore” means it just dangles out there in the periphery of the mind without functioning in its capacity to guide our understandings. Until we take these kinds of things and ponder upon them we do not understand.
Otherwise I will only make two other observations. First, the essence of your material is concerning missionary work. In our discussion, I have been approaching the subject from the perspective of judgment. I assumed, perhaps improperly, that you since we were discussing kingdom assignment that we were far beyond teaching the Gospel and were to the point of discussing the results of individuals response to the Gospel whether to receive or reject it. Still the moment we try to overlay missionary work on what we have discussed so far we immediately establish conflicts from the differing perspectives.
As it pertains to missionary work, you are absolutely correct that all will have the gospel presented to them and have a chance to reject or deny it. If they accept the gospel their sins are forgiven them and they are granted every opportunity that all who accepts the gospel in this life are afforded.
However, as it pertains to judgment, if someone was offered an opportunity and were taught the Gospel in this life there is a threshold that only God can define, where they will have received enough of an understanding of the truth that if they reject it now and accept it in the spirit world later, they will not have the same opportunities for exaltation into the Celestial Kingdom as those that accepted it when they received the witness of its veracity and will to one degree or another suffer for their choices of rejection.
When missionary work is completed for all of his spirit children and when it meets God’s criteria, then is judgment and assignment to the kingdoms we have been discussing. Again where we have been discussing judgment and assignment to kingdoms this is well after the missionary part of the process. It never occurred to me that this foundational principle of our work for the dead would be misconstrued as not considered in our discussion. Had I have realized our different starting points I might have started at the very beginning by stating something to the effect of, “ after every person has had the opportunity to receive the Gospel and accept or reject it then…” and that would have been sufficient to clarify the perspective.
Still, as we are giving some attention to this aspect of missionary work for the dead, as best as I can read into it there is the potential that you are conflating the opportunity of those who have not had the gospel taught to them sufficiently with those that have had a chance in this life and turned away from it only to accept it later. As well it seems there is apparent confusion with concepts of salvation, redemption, exaltation, forgiveness after suffering and forgiveness from suffering.
I will take a few of your comments one at a time and illustrate possible alternatives. It is not important that we agree on my interpretation of the gospel and so of course where you feel your observations are more consistent with your gospel understandings I encourage you in them. Still it appears that you are so desperate force a personal expectation on certain statements that I think you are just not able to see what Elder McConkie is trying to get you to see. Either way, following are some of your observations that I cannot bring into my paradigm of gospel understanding, with prophetic or scriptural commentary as to why they do not work for me:
This quote speaks to their final best opportunity. The point being made is that those who reject the gospel never have an equal opportunity to be forgiven of their sins which is why they never make it to the Celestial Kingdom. If they had an equal opportunity then the celestial kingdom would not be off limits. This is mostly predicated on DC 76 for your scriptural reference.
The inhabitants of the terrestrial kingdom are described as follows: "1. Accountable persons who die without law (and who, of course, do not accept the gospel in the spirit world under those particular circumstances which would make them heirs of the celestial kingdom); 2. Those who reject the gospel in this life and who reverse their course and accept it in the spirit world; 3. Honorable men of the earth who are blinded by the craftiness of men and who therefore do not accept and live the gospel law; and 4. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who have testimonies of Christ and the divinity of the great latter-day work and who are not valiant, but who are instead lukewarm in their devotion to the Church and to righteousness" (MD, 784; D&C 76:71-80).(Hoyt W. Brewster, Jr., Doctrine and Covenants Encyclopedia [salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1988], 584.)
Here is another from Joseph Fielding Smith. The key point is the statement that rejection of the Gospel message once it has been presented places the burdens of their sin on their own heads:
Here is another one from James E. Talmage which might give you hope at first but then he clearly draws the line:
Finally, I think the real issue is manifest from one of your own statements in your response where you have made a good “guess” based on the imagery, but it is simply a mistaken notion.
You state the following:
The problem I have is that you are conflating two different concepts as if they belong together and to do so I think you are just stepping over the obvious. In the verse says “after they have paid the price of their transgressions”, let’s just stop here and accept what that states. Let’s rewrite it … maybe … they suffer for their sins; I don’t know how to get around the actual words “AFTER…they have PAID the penalty of THEIR transgressions. Isn’t that what you are expecting that Christ is going to do for them? Note that Talmage states “Upon all who reject the word of God in this life will fall the penalties provided; but after the debt has been paid “. Aren’t you stating that when they repent, Christ will bear their burdens, but doesn’t AFTER mean something different? And who is paying the debt according to Talmage? When you stated the following:
Now the conflation comes in when you indicate that they are washed clean means Christ has taken on Him, their sins when it was just stated in the line before that AFTER they paid the penalty of their own transgressions AND are washed clean. Now you have them receiving a remission which , if correct would mean that they do not suffer for their sins. However when you tied that thought to “those who reject or disobey the gospel” remission was no longer an option. If I have not provided enough reference quotes I’ve got at least 20 more to illustrate that to reject the gospel is to forfeit the Celestial Kingdom which means they are no longer on the list of those “whose sins Christ bore”.
It seems correct to me to accept that they pay the price for their own sins and then are washed clean from the process. Thus for me that is the equivalent of what I have said all along; they pay the price of their own sins which in no way removes the fact that Christ earned the position of the Gatekeeper that no one can pass because he shed his blood so that when he accepts their suffering and repentance they need suffer no more except in the fashion that John a Widstoe and Joseph Fielding Smith speak to below.
Since the “washed clean” seems a sticking point let’s look at this commentary from a “Doctrines of the Gospel” Student Manual:
This is also in keeping potentially with the Talmage quote above that, “then chastened and clean, shall come forth to partake of the glory provided for their class”
Another:
This kind of suffering of conscience that Joseph Fielding Smith, and John A. Widstoe refers to is a different take on it but it fits very well for certain perspectives.
So to summarize, once rejected the ball game changes and people are held accountable for their transgressions and in the words of George Q. Cannon they will be punished. And as we can all agree after they have been punished, it appears they will be more inclined to repent and then Christ will forgive them and permit them the kingdom which their works merit.
Here just for good measure a several more quotes that speak to aspects of this conversation. One of the key points is the distinction on the words Salvation
Well, I'll stop now. I tried to give many quotes to illustrate perspectives. Again feel free to retain yours but for myself there is over whelming evidence that contradicts key facets of some of the expectations you have presented and thus will make it impossible to deal with the other material we have been discussing.

I have no time at the moment to respond in detail to the above, but will do so as soon as I'm able. But for now, I have some questions for you:

When Alma the Younger suffered for his sins, prior to his receiving forgiveness and relief from his agonies through the atonement of Christ, would you agree that he at least paid in part the penalty for his sins during the three days and nights of his agonizing near death experience? Yes, Alma did suffer for his sins, but he was also forgiven as well; and that forgiveness led to a cessation his suffering for sin. So Alma paid in part the penalty for his sin, but the remainder of the burden of the suffering required at his own hand to satisfy justice came to an end when he turned to Christ for relief. Wouldn't you agree? So why would the experience of departed spirits in this regard be any different from the experience of Alma. Why was Alma not required to pay the full debt of his sin but departed spirits -- many of whom are, no doubt, far less wicked than Alma was in the flesh -- must pay the full debt burden before relief and release? Was Alma a privilaged character, even though we know God is no respecter of persons?

Edited May 3, 2013 by teddyaware

SamIam · May 4, 2013

I have no time at the moment to respond in detail to the above, but will do so as soon as I'm able. But for now, I have some questions for you:
When Alma the Younger suffered for his sins, prior to his receiving forgiveness and relief from his agonies through the atonement of Christ, would you agree that he at least paid in part the penalty for his sins during the three days and nights of his agonizing near death experience? Yes, Alma did suffer for his sins, but he was also forgiven as well; and that forgiveness led to a cessation his suffering for sin. So Alma paid in part the penalty for his sin, but the remainder of the burden of the suffering required at his own hand to satisfy justice came to an end when he turned to Christ for relief. Wouldn't you agree? So why would the experience of departed spirits in this regard be any different from the experience of Alma. Why was Alma not required to pay the full debt of his sin but departed spirits -- many of whom are, no doubt, far less wicked than Alma was in the flesh -- must pay the full debt burden before relief and release? Was Alma a privilaged character, even though we know God is no respecter of persons?

The proper heading for what Alma suffered is called Godly sorrow. I have never seen it equated with suffering as in a payment for ones sins. A good verse to describe it is in Corinthians:

2 Corinthians 7:9-10
9 Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made ^asorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing.
10 For ^agodly ^bsorrow worketh ^crepentance to ^dsalvation not to be repented of: but the ^esorrow of the world worketh death.

IT is exampled in Enos and in Alma the Younger. These examples are diverse and certainly Alma's stands out as seemingly more dramatic but the description of being harrowed up for his sins is the key factor.

Alma 36:17

17 And it came to pass that as I was thus ^aracked with torment, while I was ^bharrowed up by the ^cmemory of my many sins, behold, I ^dremembered also to have heard my father prophesy unto the people concerning the coming of one Jesus Christ, a Son of God, to atone for the sins of the world.

However, it is exactly this experience that is something we all must become familier with if we are to truly repent of our own sins.

First presidency Message – keys to Successful Member-Missionary Work
President Ezra Taft Benson, Ensign, First Presidency Message, September 1990
“How do you obtain the Spirit? 'By the Prayer of faith,' says the Lord. Therefore, you must pray with sincerity and real intent. Pray for increased faith. Pray for the Spirit to accompany your teaching. Ask the Lord for forgiveness. Your prayers must be offered in the same spirit and with the same fervor as were the prayers of Enos in the book of Mormon….I only want to draw your attention to these verses. Enos testified: “I will tell you of the wrestle which I had before God before I received a remission of my sins.” He clarified that wrestle with God for us. Note the fervor in his petition: “My soul hungered…I kneeled down before my maker…I cried unto him in mighty prayer and supplication
for mine own soul
…all day long did I cry unto him.” (Enos 1:4, italics added.)
Then Enos testified: “there came a voice unto me, saying: Enos, thy sins are forgiven thee, and thou shalt be blessed…wherefore, my guilt was swept away.” (Enos 1:5,6) When he inquired of the Lord how this had been accomplished, the Lord answered him: “Because of thy faith in Christ…thy faith hath
made thee whole
.” (Enos 1:8, italics added.) Enos was spiritually healed.
Through his mighty supplication to God, he experienced what
the faithful of any dispensation can, do, and must experience
if they are to see God and be filled with His Spirit.
Become acquainted with Enos and the entire Book of Mormon, the greatest book in the world—a new witness for Christ. It is written for us today. This I know.”

I have never read any other commentary that ever equates godly Sorrow as the equivalent of paying for your sins. Nonetheless, the more one comes to understand the principles of what President Benson is alluding too in "if they are to see God" statement one comes to understand that there is always a process of great trial and affliction that is part of the process. Still I consider the two distinctly differing in intent and nature of the experience. Godly sorrow proceeds generally by many years standing in the presence of the Lord.

One of the key factors is that it is acts of Godly sorrow that are the hallmark of true repentance, which is precisely what Alma is going through. Interesting those who never feel Godly sorrow, who have knowledge( in the context of our discussion) , will suffer for their sins and yet never inherit the celestial Kingdom, while they that do suffer Godly sorrow can never atone for their sins and yet they will gain the celestial kingdom if they experience true repentance and are valiant and endure to the end.

Also, I think it needs to be said that the only payment for sins that has any worth truly in the eternities is that of Jesus Christ. Only his pays the way for eternal life and the exaltation of man. We can never forget this as the overarching act of worth in the scheme of the plan of salvation.

Edited May 4, 2013 by SamIam

Stone holm · May 4, 2013

I don't equate godly sorrow with the type of atonement we are talking about here.

SamIam · May 4, 2013

I don't equate godly sorrow with the type of atonement we are talking about here.

Perhaps then you might explain how you would characterize what Alma the Younger suffered....and what makes you see it differently.

teddyaware · May 4, 2013

The proper heading for what Alma suffered is called Godly sorrow. I have never seen it equated with suffering as in a payment for ones sins. A good verse to describe it is in Corinthians:
IT is exampled in Enos and in Alma the Younger. These examples are diverse and certainly Alma's stands out as seemingly more dramatic but the description of being harrowed up for his sins is the key factor.
Alma 36:17
17 And it came to pass that as I was thus ^aracked with torment, while I was ^bharrowed up by the ^cmemory of my many sins, behold, I ^dremembered also to have heard my father prophesy unto the people concerning the coming of one Jesus Christ, a Son of God, to atone for the sins of the world.
However, it is exactly this experience that is something we all must become familier with if we are to truly repent of our own sins.
I have never read any other commentary that ever equates godly Sorrow as the equivalent of paying for your sins. Nonetheless, the more one comes to understand the principles of what President Benson is alluding too in "if they are to see God" statement one comes to understand that there is always a process of great trial and affliction that is part of the process. Still I consider the two distinctly differing in intent and nature of the experience. Godly sorrow proceeds generally by many years standing in the presence of the Lord.
One of the key factors is that it is acts of Godly sorrow that are the hallmark of true repentance, which is precisely what Alma is going through. Interesting those who never feel Godly sorrow, who have knowledge( in the context of our discussion) , will suffer for their sins and yet never inherit the celestial Kingdom, while they that do suffer Godly sorrow can never atone for their sins and yet they will gain the celestial kingdom if they experience true repentance and are valiant and endure to the end.
Also, I think it needs to be said that the only payment for sins that has any worth truly in the eternities is that of Jesus Christ. Only his pays the way for eternal life and the exaltation of man. We can never forget this as the overarching act of worth in the scheme of the plan of salvation.

Hello Samlam,

I'm enjoying our dialogue. Because I have out of town guests here, for now I can't respond as I would like. Suffice it to say I now believe we're much closer together on this point than I first believed. Our apparent differences are are more a matter of where we're placing emphasis, rather than outright disagreement.

Looking at the plan of salvation through the eyes of love, rather than through a view based on the inflexible mechanics of pure justice, it's obvious to me the suffering of the wicked in the world of spirits is calculated of the Lord to bring hard-hearted, spiritually dead souls to a place of sincere humility. even unto a spiritual sate of mind in which they finally acknowledge their wrongs to God, repent, receive forgiveness, and then move on into the eternities as spirit children of an infinitely charitable God, knowingly and gratefully bowing the knee to their Lord and Savior, who rescues them from "everlasting punishment." In the spirit prison, one will continue to pay the penalty for his transgressions until he humbly comes unto Christ and receives a gracious remission of his sins.

There is not enough virtue within a fallen man to fully pay the debt owed to God that pardon might be obtained. Only an infinite and eternal sacrifice by an infinite and eternal Being can the debt fully be paid. A man may suffer for his sins forever -- as do the sons of perdition-- but that suffering will never end until the time he humbles himself before the throne of God the Father, and with broken heart and contrite spirit bows the knee and confesses that Jesus is his Christ. The sons of perdition are anti-Christ and seek to dethrone the Saviour; all the others will be redeemed through the blood of the Lamb, even if it must needs be that they suffer within the confines of winepress of the fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God, and this in order to bring them in genuine remorse and repentance unto Christ the Lord. And so we read:

32 They are they who are the sons of perdition, of whom I say that it had been better for them never to have been born;

33 For they are vessels of wrath, doomed to suffer the wrath of God, with the devil and his angels in eternity;

34 Concerning whom I have said there is no forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come—

35 Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open shame.

36 These are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the devil and his angels—

37 And the only ones on whom the second death shall have any power;

38 Yea, verily, the only ones who shall not be redeemed in the due time of the Lord, after the sufferings of his wrath.

39 For all the rest shall be brought forth by the resurrection of the dead, through the triumph and the glory of the Lamb, who was slain, who was in the bosom of the Father before the worlds were made.

The suffering for sin of the wicked in the spirit prison is not just intended to partially balance the scales of divine justice, for that suffering is designed by a loving God to stir up the hearts of these wicked unto humility, contrition, remorse and repentance in the presence of their personal Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ.

All the best, your brother

Edited May 4, 2013 by teddyaware

SamIam · May 4, 2013

Hello Samlam,
I'm enjoying our dialogue. Because I have out of town guests here, for now I can't respond as I would like. Suffice it to say I now believe we're much closer together on this point than I first believed. Our apparent differences are are more a matter of where we're placing emphasis, rather than outright disagreement.
Looking at the plan of salvation through the eyes of love, rather than through a view based on the inflexible mechanics of pure justice,

You've nailed this bolded part on the head. This is the foundation of my initial efforts in understanding the Gospel. I call it the nuts and bolts of the various processes that comprise the nebulous concepts we try to discuss. People are always saying that we can never really understand the atonement and why the sacrifice accomplishes what it does. Then they stop there and leave it at that. I disagree to a point. Our capacity is much more capable with the spirit teaching us that we tend to realize. The nuts and bolts of understanding are perfectly necessary as when one grasps the nuts and bolts he can determine more accurately the points of understanding that fill in the scaffolding we have built and recognize when others are building on weak understandings. In my first post I was building on my scaffolding but now we really are just working on the nuts and bolts which lead to the great things.

... it's obvious to me the suffering of the wicked in the world of spirits is calculated of the Lord to bring hard-hearted, spiritually dead souls to a place of sincere humility. even into a spiritual that they finally acknowledge their wrongs to God, repent, receive forgiveness, and then move on into the eternities as spirit children of an infinitely charitable God, knowingly and gratefully bow the knee to their Lord and Savior who rescues them from "everlasting punishment." In the spirit prison, one will continue to pay the penalty for his transgressions until he humbly comes unto Christ and receives a gracious remission of his sins.
There is not enough virtue within a fallen man to fully pay the debt owed to God that pardon might be obtained. Only and infinite and eternal sacrifice by an infinite and eternal Being can fully pay the debt. A man may suffer for his sins forever -- as do the sons of perdition-- but that suffering will never end until the time he humbles himself before the throne of God the Father, and with broken heart and contrite spirit bows the knee and confesses that Jesus is his Christ. The sons of perdition are anti-Christ and seek to dethrone the Savior all the others will be redeemed through the blood of the Lamb, even if it must be that they need to suffer within the confines of wine press of the fierceness of the wrath of Almighty God to bring them in genuine remorse and repentance unto Christ the Lord.

We are definitely more consistent in our understandings on this point than I think we might have been before. I would accept what you have said above with no reservations. I bolded one thought above. It is correct but one would initiate a pathway that leads the end points of what we have been discussing by answering the question, "Why is this the case?". There are some more nuts and bolts that we need to add but at the end of it is, for me, one of my greatest current understandings for the awe I feel for what God the Father and his Son has accomplished.

And so we read:
32 They are they who are the sons of perdition, of whom I say that it had been better for them never to have been born;
33 For they are vessels of wrath, doomed to suffer the wrath of God, with the devil and his angels in eternity;
34 Concerning whom I have said there is no forgiveness in this world nor in the world to come—
35 Having denied the Holy Spirit after having received it, and having denied the Only Begotten Son of the Father, having crucified him unto themselves and put him to an open
shame.
36 These are they who shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the devil and his angels—
37 And the only ones on whom the second death shall have any power;
38 Yea, verily, the only ones who shall not be redeemed in the due time of the Lord, after the sufferings of his wrath.
39 For all the rest shall be brought forth by the resurrection of the dead, through the triumph and the glory of the Lamb, who was slain, who was in the bosom of the Father before the worlds were made.
The suffering for sin of the wicked in the spirit prison is not just intended to partially balance the scales of divine justice, for that suffering is designed by a loving God to stir up the hearts of these wicked unto humility, contrition, remorse and repentance in the presence of their personal Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ.

This is well stated and understood. Look forward to the rest of your comments when you get the time.

teddyaware · May 4, 2013

You've nailed this bolded part on the head. This is the foundation of my initial efforts in understanding the Gospel. I call it the nuts and bolts of the various processes that comprise the nebulous concepts we try to discuss. People are always saying that we can never really understand the atonement and why the sacrifice accomplishes what it does. Then they stop there and leave it at that. I disagree to a point. Our capacity is much more capable with the spirit teaching us that we tend to realize. The nuts and bolts of understanding are perfectly necessary as when one grasps the nuts and bolts he can determine more accurately the points of understanding that fill in the scaffolding we have built and recognize when others are building on weak understandings. In my first post I was building on my scaffolding but now we really are just working on the nuts and bolts which lead to the great things.
We are definitely more consistent in our understandings on this point than I think we might have been before. I would accept what you have said above with no reservations. I bolded one thought above. It is correct but one would initiate a pathway that leads the end points of what we have been discussing by answering the question, "Why is this the case?". There are some more nuts and bolts that we need to add but at the end of it is, for me, one of my greatest current understandings for the awe I feel for what God the Father and his Son has accomplished.
This is well stated and understood. Look forward to the rest of your comments when you get the time.

Samlam.

Enjoyed that! Going out for a while, but will return here sooner or later. Just edited my previous; it was written in haste and not proof read. You may want to check it out. I hate imprecision, and when one is only semi-literate, as I, it can make for many moments of discomfiture. Will check in later, Ted

Edited May 4, 2013 by teddyaware

SamIam · May 4, 2013

The suffering for sin of the wicked in the spirit prison is not just intended to partially balance the scales of divine justice, for that suffering is designed by a loving God to stir up the hearts of these wicked unto humility, contrition, remorse and repentance in the presence of their personal Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ.

I really did not give this part of your response enough attention. You have captured one of the most critical aspects of understanding how God thinks and I consider the focus so refreshing I just wanted to add more support. You are right that typically when we think of punishment we think of quid pro quo suffering an equal amount of suffering to match a quota equal to the amount of sin. Kind of a each lie is 1 day, fornication will cost you a century, murder is 2 millennia concept. We think this way because we see punishment for it's punishing objective. However, what you have pointed out is that God has no priority of punishing anyone for the sake of punishment. There is no quid pro quo, no terms or conditions of time-frames it is simply predicted upon how long it will take to bump the rough edges down to the point an individual will be humble, contrite and turn their heart towards God. God's love will opportune the release from punishment as soon as the conditions and character of the individual is suitable to abide the laws of a telestial or terrestrial glory. Thus I can see that those of a terrestrial state of mind might suffer so very little as to be not much at all. Others will of course in their stubborn refusal take until the end of the millennium before they will accept Gods love. Then some will never allow his love to change them and they are lost. That is a brilliant observation on your part and if we understood it better would make us better parents, spouses ... people.

teddyaware · May 4, 2013

I really did not give this part of your response enough attention. You have captured one of the most critical aspects of understanding how God thinks and I consider the focus so refreshing I just wanted to add more support. You are right that typically when we think of punishment we think of quid pro quo suffering an equal amount of suffering to match a quota equal to the amount of sin. Kind of a each lie is 1 day, fornication will cost you a century, murder is 2 millennia concept. We think this way because we see punishment for it's punishing objective. However, what you have pointed out is that God has no priority of punishing anyone for the sake of punishment. There is no quid pro quo, no terms or conditions of time-frames it is simply predicted upon how long it will take to bump the rough edges down to the point an individual will be humble, contrite and turn their heart towards God. God's love will opportune the release from punishment as soon as the conditions and character of the individual is suitable to abide the laws of a telestial or terrestrial glory. Thus I can see that those of a terrestrial state of mind might suffer so very little as to be not much at all. Others will of course in their stubborn refusal take until the end of the millennium before they will accept Gods love. Then some will never allow his love to change them and they are lost. That is a brilliant observation on your part and if we understood it better would make us better parents, spouses ... people.

Checked in one final time before leaving, and all I can say is I couldn't hope to say the above better myself... Bullseye!!!

Sign In

Atonement

Recommended Posts

savedbygrace

teddyaware

SamIam

teddyaware

SamIam

teddyaware

savedbygrace

SamIam

teddyaware

SamIam

teddyaware

SamIam

Stone holm

SamIam

teddyaware

SamIam

teddyaware

SamIam

teddyaware

Recently Browsing 0 members

Activity

Browse