Pres. Nelson's Atonement quotation

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Maybe there are a couple of teenagers out there that don't know that Christ did the atonement, but it's gotta be rare.  The quote earlier from the teenager doesn't indicate the teenager didn't know that Christ did the atonement.  That was the assumption by the answerer, though.  The teenager clearly, though, thought the word atonement was something he/she did when trying to apply it. 

Obviously all kids who have been raised in the church know, intellectually, that the Savior performed the Atonement, but that's not the point.  The point is whether or not they know, personally, that the Savior and not the Atonement is the most important part of the equation.

I've been in the Youth program in four different states, in multiple wards in two of those states.  It's not rare.  When the kid on the face-to-face video asked how he could access the Atonement, that's a good example of how a lot of them see it.  

(You'd be surprised by what these kids still don't understand, even after having multiple lessons on something.  I know, for example, that the 15 year old girls in my ward have had 7 lessons since they were 12 on how we are saved by grace and yet, when i asked them recently whether or not we are saved by grace, they said "no".)

To use my previous analogy about the Firefighter and the hose, it's not rare at all for teenagers (and even us adults) to focus on the hose more/instead of the Firefighter.   And if we are focusing more on the Atonement (the process that we are saved) than on Jesus (the Savior) our understanding of the Atonement is incomplete.  That's all Pres. Nelson was saying.

 

 

[bluebell]

14 minutes ago, rongo said:

How is this possible? We're in, what, the 4th year of Come Follow Me, where the youth get two hours of the atonement every Sunday every March? 

How can anyone not understand the difference be between the atonement and Jesus? One might not be able to articulate what the atonement is very well, but they should at least be able to distinguish between a person and the thing you can't explain very well . . .  

You'd think, but it seems that a lot of the lessons the kids get, don't penetrate very deeply.  I recently gave a lesson on grace and the 14 and 15 year old girls really struggled.  All active girls who are there pretty much every Sunday and have been active in the youth program since they were 12 and they still were confused about how we are saved by grace.  

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

This is the kind of stuff that is conference, for sure.  "I gotsta tell everyone that the atonement actually involved Christ.  If I don't they're going to be confused and think the atonement is something that doesn't involve Christ." 

I'm not sure there's a purpose to it, but it seems to be what's considered revelation these days--the important stuff we have to hear. 

The importance was to NOT think of the atonement as an event but to place its importance on belief in the Savior as the one who provides the atonement.

I see it again as a move away from dependence on literal history like a literal fall.

Adam and Eve could possibly have lived- I am not discounting that, but their spiritual importance was the fall as an allegory for all of us.

Likewise the person Jesus lived but his spiritual importance was the belief that human beings can overcome the world through believing on him and that HE provides forgiveness

I see this as part of the major move of the church away from the literalism of events toward spiritualizing our beliefs, as not necessarily based on history

The BOM is a revelation- maybe history, yes, but it's spiritual importance is primary.  It came through seerstones and pure revelation to Joseph, if historical or not.

Same with the BOA.  

Now the same with the atonement.   Though possibly historical, the belief in the atonement frees us from the guilt and depression of sin, and is of greater spiritual importance than historical importance as an event which occurred on a date certain, Passover 33 AD or whenever.

All of these examples signal a move away from seeing spirituality as  a series of historical events to placing spirituality exactly where it belongs- as changing our hearts, not revising history.  History becomes less relevant and spirituality more relevant

That is even evident in the new teaching philosophies that place spirituality at the forefront.   The church is finally moving away from the fundamentalism of the past and becoming a modern church

THAT is HUUUUGGGGGE- it is a tectonic shift in what underlies the Mormon point of view.

It is gradual and slow progress, but that is exactly what is needed.   I am very happy with the direction.  

Edited April 3, 2017 by mfbukowski

[rongo]

3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Obviously all kids who have been raised in the church know, intellectually, that the Savior performed the Atonement, but that's not the point.  The point is whether or not they know, personally, that the Savior and not the Atonement is the most important part of the equation.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that someone thinks the atonement is the most important part of the equation. How is their repentance going to be different than someone who thinks Jesus is more important than the atonement?

I don't really see a practical difference as far as applying the atonement, if someone, exercising faith, repents as the Church teaches.

[Ahab]

I am reminded of the babe.

The babe with the power.

The power of the babe.

Jesus saves.

[mfbukowski]

17 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I did! the atonement is about washing your car to make it clean and the enabling power is to keep it clean

If you want to see it that way, that works.

 

[stemelbow]

8 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Obviously all kids who have been raised in the church know, intellectually, that the Savior performed the Atonement, but that's not the point.  The point is whether or not they know, personally, that the Savior and not the Atonement is the most important part of the equation.

I've been in the Youth program in four different states, in multiple wards in two of those states.  It's not rare.  When the kid on the face-to-face video asked how he could access the Atonement, that's a good example of how a lot of them see it.  

(You'd be surprised by what these kids still don't understand, even after having multiple lessons on something.  I know, for example, that the 15 year old girls in my ward have had 7 lessons since they were 12 on how we are saved by grace and yet, when i asked them recently whether or not we are saved by grace, they said "no".)

To use my previous analogy about the Firefighter and the hose, it's not rare at all for teenagers (and even us adults) to focus on the hose more/instead of the Firefighter.   And if we are focusing more on the Atonement (the process that we are saved) than on Jesus (the Savior) our understanding of the Atonement is incomplete.  That's all Pres. Nelson was saying.

 

 

Well Ok.  I'm not sure I care to get much into this.  I doubt many teenagers focus on the hose, as you say, over the fire fighter.  In my many years experience with teenagers I don't think that's the issue.  But if you think so, if Nelson, thinks so.  So be it. 

[Rain]

19 minutes ago, rongo said:

How is this possible? We're in, what, the 4th year of Come Follow Me, where the youth get two hours of the atonement every Sunday every March? 

How can anyone not understand the difference be between the atonement and Jesus? One might not be able to articulate what the atonement is very well, but they should at least be able to distinguish between a person and the thing you can't explain very well . . .  

There are simple things people miss all the time. Sometimes it amazes me when I miss one of these things and then I start going through scriptures, conference talks, lesson manuals and it has been there all along.  "How did I miss THAT?"

It stands out to me even more when someone leaves the church or is in the process of leaving and they state dimethyl that clearly shows a misunderstanding of simple things.  

While I can't even imagine it in this case,  I've experienced enough in my own life to see that others could miss it. 

[stemelbow]

6 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

The importance was to NOT think of the atonement as an event but to place its importance on belief in the Savior as the one who provides the atonement.

I see it again as a move away from dependence on literal history like a literal fall.

Adam and Eve could possibly have lived- I am not discounting that, but their spiritual importance was the fall as an allegory for all of us.

Likewise the person Jesus lived but his spiritual importance was the belief that human beings can overcome the world through believing on him and that HE provides forgiveness

I see this as part of the major move of the church away from the literalism of events toward spiritualizing our beliefs, as not necessarily based on history

The BOM is a revelation- maybe history, yes, but it's spiritual importance is primary.  It came through seerstones and pure revelation to Joseph, if historical or not.

Same with the BOA.  

Now the same with the atonement.   Though possibly historical, the belief in the atonement frees us from the guilt and depression of sin, and is of greater spiritual importance than historical importance as an event which occurred on a date certain, Passover 33 AD or whenever.

All of these examples signal a move away from seeing spirituality as  a series of historical events to placing spirituality exactly where it belongs- as changing our hearts, not revising history.  History becomes less relevant and spirituality more relevant

That is even evident in the new teaching philosophies that place spirituality at the forefront.   The church is finally moving away from the fundamentalism of the past and becoming a modern church

THAT is HUUUUGGGGGE- it is a tectonic shift in what underlies the Mormon point of view.

It is gradual and slow progress, but that is exactly what is needed.   I am very happy with the direction.  

Excellent explanation.  I enjoyed it and agree. 

[Ahab]

10 minutes ago, bluebell said:

(You'd be surprised by what these kids still don't understand, even after having multiple lessons on something.  I know, for example, that the 15 year old girls in my ward have had 7 lessons since they were 12 on how we are saved by grace and yet, when i asked them recently whether or not we are saved by grace, they said "no".)

Sounds like they were taught well.

Jesus saves.

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, rongo said:

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that someone thinks the atonement is the most important part of the equation. How is their repentance going to be different than someone who thinks Jesus is more important than the atonement?

I don't really see a practical difference as far as applying the atonement, if someone, exercising faith, repents as the Church teaches.

I think it makes a big difference on their personal relationship with Jesus Christ.  It's hard to have a relationship with a hose but it's very possible to have one with a firefighter.  It's hard to feel grace and hope for mercy from a hose, but much easier to feel grace and hope for mercy from a firefighter.  

I've been working on having a better relationship with the Savior for a few months now and Nelson's talk has helped me already, just by changing my perspective and focus.  Having a better, more clear, closer relationship with Jesus Christ is a huge benefit in our every day lives that I would not discount, even if nothing else changed.  

[Ahab]

11 minutes ago, bluebell said:

You'd think, but it seems that a lot of the lessons the kids get, don't penetrate very deeply.  I recently gave a lesson on grace and the 14 and 15 year old girls really struggled.  All active girls who are there pretty much every Sunday and have been active in the youth program since they were 12 and they still were confused about how we are saved by grace.  

Just ask them WHO is their Savior.

I'm sure they'll come up with the right answer.

[rongo]

2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

You'd think, but it seems that a lot of the lessons the kids get, don't penetrate very deeply.  I recently gave a lesson on grace and the 14 and 15 year old girls really struggled.  All active girls who are there pretty much every Sunday and have been active in the youth program since they were 12 and they still were confused about how we are saved by grace.  

Would you like to try something different from Come Follow Me? I was released as a bishop in 2012, called as a youth teacher, called as ward Sunday School president, then stake Sunday School president, and called as bishop of another ward in 2015. So, I've been front-and-center with Come Follow Me since its launch. I find that it's boring for the kids, boring for the teachers, and really isn't instilling the basics that were behind its launch. 

I'm yearning for the flesh pots of the old manuals . . .  

[Rain]

23 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I did! the atonement is about washing your car to make it clean and the enabling power is to keep it clean

While I think there is much more to it than this and I'm a little uncomfortable using it, I'll go with the idea except I need to change it. The redeeming power of the atonement cleans the car and keeps it clean. The enabling power makes the engine run better. 

[mfbukowski]

2 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I am reminded of the babe.

The babe with the power.

The power of the babe.

Jesus saves.

My saintly Catholic mother taught me that well- she even used to use the Polish word for "God" to indicate the baby Jesus, which made me think specifically of the Babe as a different entity almost that the Father.

So she taught me that this little gentle Baby Jesus called "Boga" made the world for all of us.   It was a sweet and for me very touching idea that resonates strongly for me today- the humility of Christ containing all the greatness of God in the humility of a tiny helpless child.

A very powerful image!!  Perhaps it helps not to be raised Mormon to fully understand that idea.

 

[rongo]

4 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I think it makes a big difference on their personal relationship with Jesus Christ.  It's hard to have a relationship with a hose but it's very possible to have one with a firefighter.  It's hard to feel grace and hope for mercy from a hose, but much easier to feel grace and hope for mercy from a firefighter.  

I'm having a hard time envisioning a youth (or anyone) who views the atonement as a stand alone --- like a fire hose --- in complete isolation from Jesus. Like how the little green men saw the claw in Toy Story. I can't see even the worst youth imaginable seeing themselves having a personal relationship with the atonement. 

And where have their parents been in their upbringing? If there are misunderstandings this bad, it looks like the Church is trying to compensate for failure in the home (realizing, of course, that some youth have no gospel foundation at home). 

[Ahab]

4 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

My saintly Catholic mother taught me that well- she even used to use the Polish word for "God" to indicate the baby Jesus, which made me think specifically of the Babe as a different entity almost that the Father.

So she taught me that this little gentle Baby Jesus called "Boga" made the world for all of us.   It was a sweet and for me very touching idea that resonates strongly for me today- the humility of Christ containing all the greatness of God in the humility of a tiny helpless child.

A very powerful image!!  Perhaps it helps not to be raised Mormon to fully understand that idea.

 

Yeah. Even Ricky Bobby understood that.

[Traela]

6 minutes ago, rongo said:

Would you like to try something different from Come Follow Me? I was released as a bishop in 2012, called as a youth teacher, called as ward Sunday School president, then stake Sunday School president, and called as bishop of another ward in 2015. So, I've been front-and-center with Come Follow Me since its launch. I find that it's boring for the kids, boring for the teachers, and really isn't instilling the basics that were behind its launch. 

I'm yearning for the flesh pots of the old manuals . . .  

I was a teacher during the second phase of the trial period, and expressed my concerns.  No one paid attention.  The worst part of the SS lessons IMO is the heavy emphasis on teacher improvement.  So during my weeks (I'm a team teacher), I try really hard to make sure they understand the actual concepts.  The students also have an open invitation to suggest lesson topics.

If we must teach by topic, I wish they would figure out a way to do that while still going systematically through the scriptures and church history.

 

[Ahab]

18 minutes ago, rongo said:

I'm having a hard time envisioning a youth (or anyone) who views the atonement as a stand alone --- like a fire hose --- in complete isolation from Jesus. Like how the little green men saw the claw in Toy Story. I can't see even the worst youth imaginable seeing themselves having a personal relationship with the atonement. 

And where have their parents been in their upbringing? If there are misunderstandings this bad, it looks like the Church is trying to compensate for failure in the home (realizing, of course, that some youth have no gospel foundation at home). 

I think the point was that we all should think of and talk about WHO is our Savior more than we talk about HOW he saves us or to what extent we can be saved.

Jesus saves.

[rongo]

11 minutes ago, Traela said:

If we must teach by topic, I wish they would figure out a way to do that while still going systematically through the scriptures and church history.

Amen! My wife teaches the oldest primary class (turning 12 this year), and I wish the youth were getting their lessons (Book of Mormon translation, founding of the Church, etc.). Lots of good stuff that many youth have never heard of before (my wife was thrilled with things like the David Whitmer angel stories --- plowing his field, etc.). I try to expose youth to good Church history stuff when I can, but our curriculum is a thin gruel now compared to before. I know that teachers are supposed to plan and teach by the Spirit, but when you essentially do the same 12 topics every year, it gets really old for both students and teachers. And, a lot of essential stuff will never be covered in an effort to "teach the basics."

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

I'm having a hard time envisioning a youth (or anyone) who views the atonement as a stand alone --- like a fire hose --- in complete isolation from Jesus. Like how the little green men saw the claw in Toy Story. I can't see even the worst youth imaginable seeing themselves having a personal relationship with the atonement. 

And where have their parents been in their upbringing? If there are misunderstandings this bad, it looks like the Church is trying to compensate for failure in the home (realizing, of course, that some youth have no gospel foundation at home). 

From my perspective, it's much easier to believe that Pres. Nelson, with his huge sphere of influence and all the information that he has access to, has a much better handle on the weaknesses of the members than we could ever hope to have.  Especially knowing how hard each apostles prays to know what they should speak on.

In the end, our tiny bit of anecdotal evidence is probably not a very valuable way to determine the needs of the church as a whole.   I know his talked helped me a lot, and so there's no valid way for me to accept your argument that it 'wasn't necessary'. 

I get that you see it differently.  

[Calm]

5 hours ago, bluebell said:

Obviously all kids who have been raised in the church know, intellectually, that the Savior performed the Atonement, but that's not the point.  The point is whether or not they know, personally, that the Savior and not the Atonement is the most important part of the equation.

I've been in the Youth program in four different states, in multiple wards in two of those states.  It's not rare.  When the kid on the face-to-face video asked how he could access the Atonement, that's a good example of how a lot of them see it.  

(You'd be surprised by what these kids still don't understand, even after having multiple lessons on something.  I know, for example, that the 15 year old girls in my ward have had 7 lessons since they were 12 on how we are saved by grace and yet, when i asked them recently whether or not we are saved by grace, they said "no".)

To use my previous analogy about the Firefighter and the hose, it's not rare at all for teenagers (and even us adults) to focus on the hose more/instead of the Firefighter.   And if we are focusing more on the Atonement (the process that we are saved) than on Jesus (the Savior) our understanding of the Atonement is incomplete.  That's all Pres. Nelson was saying.

 

 

Teenagers' brains are not fully functional yet and .I am not confident that the current schooling system is that great for encouraging students to analyze and think about alternative ways to see something.  Instead they assume what is actually a superficial knowledge is sufficient for understanding and don't feel a need to dissect it to be sure it works on multiple levels.

Rongo, you teach German right?  Students who are learning another language at that age and doing it by choice as would be for German students would tend to have greater comprehension and likely enjoy looking at things less superficially.  It must be fun to work with them.

Edited April 3, 2017 by Calm

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Teenagers' brains are not fully functional yet and .I am not confident that the current schooling system is that great for encouraging students to analyze and think about alternative ways to see something.  Instead they assume what is actually a superficial knowledge is sufficient for understanding and don't feel a need to dissect it to be sure it works on multiple levels.

Rongo, you teach German right?  Students who are learning another language at that age and doing it by choice as would be for German students would tend to have greater comprehension and likely enjoy looking at things less superficially.  It must be fun to work with them.

Reminded me of a sign I saw posted on a peg board in a local restaurant:

             Hiring teenagers!

(while you still know everything)

[SamIam]

On 4/2/2017 at 9:36 AM, Duncan said:

Yestarday Pres. Nelson said that "Don't be confused, it is not the Atonement which saves us, it is Jesus Christ" How does that make sense in light of the 3rd AOF which says,  "'We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel." How are we saved?

Observing where this thread has gone, in some cases I don't think you are getting a fair shake on your question.  Clearly President Nelson is trying to clarify or correct, if you will, some aspect that the brethren are seeing that is not properly reflective of a wholesome understanding of the atonement.  Concerning your comparison "Through" the atonement is precisely one aspect of what I perceive that clarification to be.  "Through the atonement of Christ" is wording that permits the reader to see the atonement as an accomplishment of Christ's efforts, and by those efforts (of Christ) all mankind may be saved ... 

Often when I hear people speak or bear testimony they speak in a fashion that reflects a sense of personification of the atonement.  For instance Ideologies of "we can resist sin if we let the atonement work in our lives", or "the atonement heals the afflicted soul" or "the atonement enables me to be less judgmental by increasing the pure love of Christ in my heart ..... these types of statements can be understood as implied references to Christ's accomplishment of his atoning sacrifice if that is what you feel in your heart but what I am observing is that most people do not understand the mechanisms of how the atonement works and they are just parroting popular usage in snippets of common phrases as if repeating oft referenced sentiments is equal to a testimony of how Christ works in our lives by virtue of the efficacy that the atonement lends to the processes of salvation.  They are attributing to the atonement capacities that are more accurately characterized as functions of the Holy Ghost, perhaps the light of Christ, or even the Savior himself.  

I observe that it has become so common to say that "in some way which we cannot know" or "in a manner beyond our comprehension" the atonement accomplished this or that.  Not really having any idea or true testimony many are parroting something they heard someone else say.  However, it may be, again my observations, that people are not grasping what can be known, they are not studying the concepts well enough to recognize how the atonement fits into Christ's role as Savior and their misappropriation of  emphasis is indicative of inadequate understanding and not representative of a fundamentally sound comprehension of Jesus Christ and or the atonement that he wrought.

Edited April 4, 2017 by SamIam

[mfbukowski]

15 minutes ago, SamIam said:

Observing where this thread has gone, in some cases I don't think you are getting a fair shake on your question.  Clearly President Nelson is trying to clarify or correct, if you will, some aspect that the brethren are seeing that is not properly reflective of a wholesome understanding of the atonement.  Concerning your comparison "Through" the atonement is precisely one aspect of what I perceive that clarification to be.  "Through the atonement of Christ" is wording that permits the reader to see the atonement as an accomplishment of Christ's efforts, and by those efforts (of Christ) all mankind may be saved ... 

Often when I hear people speak or bear testimony they speak in a fashion that reflects a sense of personification of the atonement.  For instance Ideologies of "we can resist sin if we let the atonement work in our lives", or "the atonement heals the afflicted soul" or "the atonement enables me to be less judgmental by increasing the pure love of Christ in my heart ..... these types of statements can be understood as implied references to Christ's accomplishment of his atoning sacrifice if that is what you feel in your heart but what I am observing is that most people do not understand the mechanisms of how the atonement works and they are just parroting popular usage in snippets of common phrases as if repeating oft referenced sentiments is equal to a testimony of how Christ works in our lives by virtue of the efficacy that the atonement lends to the processes of salvation.  They are attributing to the atonement capacities that are more accurately characterized as functions of the Holy Ghost, perhaps the light of Christ, or even the Savior himself.  

I observe that it has become so common to say that "in some way which we cannot know" or "in a manner beyond our comprehension" the atonement accomplished this or that.  Not really having any idea or true testimony many are parroting something they heard someone else say.  However, it may be, again my observations, that people are not grasping what can be known, they are not studying the concepts well enough to recognize how the atonement fits into Christ's role as Savior and their misappropriation of  emphasis is indicative of inadequate understanding and not representative of a fundamentally sound comprehension of Jesus Christ and or the atonement that he wrought.

Agree strongly.

Hebrews 10:

Quote

 

¹⁶ This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;

¹⁷ And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.

¹⁸ Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.

¹⁹ Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,

²⁰ By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;

²¹ And having an high priest over the house of God;

²² Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water.

 

Let's always remember this when we visit the temple.