Why and How do we misunderstand the Atonement, like we do?

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

This Sunday last, I taught a class (or directed the "discussion") in Priesthood about the Atonement. As it is new policy, the Elder's Quorum meets in a large circle to discuss, what they would like to be discussed. Each time we do this, a member of the Elder's Quorum Presidency, asks which "Conference Talk", we would like to discuss. On this Fast Sunday meeting, I suggested that we discuss an address (sermon) from April General Conference of 1985. As my friend was writing it down he paused and said, "1985"! Jokingly (and to make a point) he said, "Bill, many in this room were not even alive in 1985." I told him that it was OK, because the Gospel is still the same. 

Since I suggested it, and felt so strongly about it, the Elder's Quorum President asked that I teach the lesson. However, no one uses the term "teach" much anymore, but the word "discussion", due to recent changes. Nothing has changed, all classes have always been a combination of teaching and discussion anyway. The Conference sermon I chose is entitled, "The purifying power of Gethsemane", by Elder Bruce R McConkie. I asked a number of questions to encourage the discussion, for the goal of the class. I first quoted the Scripture by the Apostle Paul, which states "We are saved by Grace, not by works least any man boast" (I hope I quoted it correctly)  Also the Scripture, "I would not have you ignorant of the truth". (Again, I hope I quoted it correctly). I then asked the following questions, I list them to ask of those here for discussion and thread purposes. So, it is my desire that those who post, give their first thought, as I will be explaining my replies to those in my class.

1. "Are we saved by Grace alone"?I asked this question to point out that as often (for those not of our Faith), we try to over explain our views on this topic, leading many to believe that we reject one of the most fundamental doctrines of Christian theology. Since most said or shook their head "no", I moved on to question number two.    

2. "What can I do to be saved from death and hell (the grace) and be resurrected"?  With this question, everyone said, "nothing, Jesus Christ did it already, all will be resurrected". This set the stage for the next question, question number three. 

3. "How did Jesus Christ do this for us all (even that very day, many rose from the grave with him, HE being the first)"? The reply for this question was (with all) in concert. "The Atonement", which was the topic Elder McConkie was speaking on. A sermon that he knew would be his last, as he passed away only days later. He had cancer, and felt like this sermon was the most important thing he could and should proclaim. As he noted in his opening remarks. The answer, "The Atonement" set the stage for question number four. 

4. "Where did the Atonement take place"? Some said nothing, but for those who did so, (to a man) said, "In the Garden of Gethsemane". I then had a number of Priesthood holders read comments concerning where, when and how it took place. The first quote was (or pointed out) that the Atonement is probably the most misunderstood of all doctrines in the Church. In this sermon it pointed out that it took place in the Garden and upon the cross. Some picking up on that said, "well then why not at his mock trail, or his beating, or while carrying his cross"? In short some we almost upset that their answer concerning "The Atonement" was not descriptive enough. But Elder McConkie's sermon went much deeper. So on to question number five. BTW, even our Gospel Essentiala book teaches that the Atonement took place both in the Garden and at the Cross.   

5. " Why and what do the works of righteousness do for us, and what role do they serve, and why are they necessarily"? This came with so many answers that they are too many to list. But the discussion moved quickly back to the Atonement, and where an how, and if what I was saying seemed to suggest that nothing more needed be done. I then noticed that many who are very vocal, and love discussion were sitting with arms folded, and lips pressed. One was a member of the Stake Presidency, who said nothing. 

So, I began quoting others instead f just Elder McConkie, such as President John Taylor, who was wounded almost to death with the Prophet Joseph Smith. Then quoted from a very Jr member of the Quorum, maybe even a Seventy when this sermon happened, who is now the President of the Quorum of the Twelve and a member of the First presidency, President Dallin H Oaks, who said...

"Man unquestionably has impressive powers and can bring to pass great things by tireless efforts and indomitable will. But after all our obedience and good works, we cannot be saved from the effect of our sins without the grace extended by the atonement of Jesus Christ...man cannot earn his own salvation. (Ensign, November 1988, p 67). (Had this on my nightstand, so I know I quoted it correctly)

Elder Bruce R McConkie's final words ever spoken to the Saints in thus life (words I m quoting from memory, because I gave out all my copies) are as follows...

"I am one of his witnesses, and in the coming days I will feel the nail prints in his hands and in his feet, and will wet his feet with my tears. But, I will not know better then than I know now, that salvation comes in and trough his atoning sacrifice, and in no other way. God grant that we walk in the light, as he is in the light. In the name of Jesus Christ, Amen". (Again, I pray I quoted this mighty man of God correctly...if not please forgive me)

 So to all who take the time to read this (including my dear wife, who helps me to get it right, as my eyesight continues to fade) how would you have answered these questions? Are there any who disagree, or think my focus was too narrow, or my methods to direct? 

I would love to foster discussion, or field questions. My world, due to so many health problems is becoming so small, this forum allows me to make it a little larger. Had to see a heart doctor yesterday, been having problems, and she found an abnormality in my EKG, so more tests coming. So even if no replys, prayers would be nice.  

ETA, give yourselves a blessing, look up and read, and watch Elder McConkie's final sermon. You will not be disappointed. It is a powerful message, and a powerful testimony, from a powerful special witness. 

Edited June 22, 2018 by Bill “Papa” Lee

[ksfisher]

9 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

This Sunday last, I taught a class (or directed the "discussion") in Priesthood about the Atonement. As it is new policy, the Elder's Quorum meets in a large circle to discuss, what they would like to be discussed. Each time we do this, a member of the Elder's Quorum Presidency, asks which "Conference Talk", we would like to discuss. On this Fast Sunday meeting, I suggested that we discuss an address (sermon) from April General Conference of 1985. As my friend was writing it down he paused and said, "1985"! Jokingly (and to make a point) he said, "Bill, many in this room were not even alive in 1985." I told him that it was OK, because the Gospel is still the same. 

Not to sidetrack things, but your discussion should be based on a talk from the most recent general conference.

[Guest]

30 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Not to sidetrack things, but your discussion should be based on a talk from the most recent general conference.

It was approved by the Elders Quorum President. Is there another sermon given in this April's General Conference on the topic that teaches something better or different on the Atonement? In this day and age it can be looked up and read and seen, something I would suggest all do. Having said that, even the most current General Conferences quote many of the same leaders who have long passed beyond the veil. Are Elders Quorum Presidents no longer allowed to make decisions on topics to be taught?  

[ksfisher]

12 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

It was approved by the Elders Quorum President. Is there another sermon given in this April's General Conference on the topic that teaches something better or different on the Atonement? In this day and age it can be looked up and read and seen, something I would suggest all do. Having said that, even the most current General Conferences quote many of the same leaders who have long passed beyond the veil. Are Elders Quorum Presidents no longer allowed to make decisions on topics to be taught?  

The most recent conference is the instruction from the First Presidency.

"On the second and third Sundays of each month, elders quorums and Relief Societies will learn from the teachings of Church leaders from the most recent general conference. Emphasis should be given to messages from members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. However, based on local needs and inspiration from the Spirit, any message from the most recent conference may be discussed."

https://www.lds.org/languages/eng/content/manual/come-follow-me-for-elders-quorum-and-relief-society-april-2018/second-and-third-sunday-meetings?lang=eng

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

The most recent conference is the instruction from the First Presidency.

"On the second and third Sundays of each month, elders quorums and Relief Societies will learn from the teachings of Church leaders from the most recent general conference. Emphasis should be given to messages from members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. However, based on local needs and inspiration from the Spirit, any message from the most recent conference may be discussed."

https://www.lds.org/languages/eng/content/manual/come-follow-me-for-elders-quorum-and-relief-society-april-2018/second-and-third-sunday-meetings?lang=eng

Well, I guess it was unfortunate that I suggested the lesson, and that the Elders Quorum President agreed. I was not aware of this policy when I suggested it. I thought that it was, General Conference talks in general, as all are Church leaders, from the Apostle Peter to a President Nelson should be the focus. Little wonder then why so many sat arms folded saying nothing, as I was quoting scripture and past Prophets and Apostles. 

[ksfisher]

4 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

Little wonder then why so many sat arms folded saying nothing, as I was quoting scripture and past Prophets and Apostles. 

Sometimes people just don't talk much.

[Glenn101]

I believe that most LDS understand the Atonement well enough to take advantage of its full power and purpose. There are nuances that we may quibble over, but basically we get it. Living a life that will ensure that we do take full advantage of all that it offers us is another matter.

A lot of good points though.

Glenn

[Guest]

59 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Sometimes people just don't talk much.

Not in our Quorum, usually it is hard to get a word in edgewise. 

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

I believe that most LDS understand the Atonement well enough to take advantage of its full power and purpose. There are nuances that we may quibble over, but basically we get it. Living a life that will ensure that we do take full advantage of all that it offers us is another matter.

A lot of good points though.

Glenn

All I said were quotes from many GA's about our lack of understanding, and where, when and how. Not a single word I said was my opinion on the matter, not in the class, and not in this post. So no quibbling on my part, and no statements that I understood better than any other. If anyone was offended, it was with the words of our Prophets and Apostles. I approached the topic in all humility. 

[strappinglad]

In looking over the talks from the most recent conference, I saw several that would justify the topic of the Atonement being chosen for discussion. I would hope that we don't just read the talks aloud during a priesthood class. It's called a discussion not a recitation. Excellent questions ,by the way, Bill !

[Guest]

46 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

In looking over the talks from the most recent conference, I saw several that would justify the topic of the Atonement being chosen for discussion. I would hope that we don't just read the talks aloud during a priesthood class. It's called a discussion not a recitation. Excellent questions ,by the way, Bill !

Indeed, it was a discussion. Just the usual players who were down right stoic. I made sure to use quotes from President Oaks, to included a member of the First Presidency, as well as other Prophets from the past. 

[Glenn101]

1 hour ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

All I said were quotes from many GA's about our lack of understanding, and where, when and how. Not a single word I said was my opinion on the matter, not in the class, and not in this post. So no quibbling on my part, and no statements that I understood better than any other. If anyone was offended, it was with the words of our Prophets and Apostles. I approached the topic in all humility. 

I understand that we do not understand very well the Atonement.

6 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

4. "Where did the Atonement take place"? Some said nothing, but for those who did so, (to a man) said, "In the Garden of Gethsemane". I then had a number of Priesthood holders read comments concerning where, when and how it took place. The first quote was (or pointed out) that the Atonement is probably the most misunderstood of all doctrines in the Church. In this sermon it pointed out that it took place in the Garden and upon the cross. Some picking up on that said, "well then why not at his mock trail, or his beating, or while carrying his cross"? In short some we almost upset that their answer concerning "The Atonement" was not descriptive enough. But Elder McConkie's sermon went much deeper. So on to question number five. BTW, even our Gospel Essentiala book teaches that the Atonement took place both in the Garden and at the Cross.

But there can be quibbles about this. What part(s) of the Atonement took place in the Garden of Gethsemane and on the cross? Were they the only places that parts of the Atonement took place?  In the October 2015 General Conference Apostle Dallin H. Oaks suggests that there were parts of the Atonement that happened elsewhere. He quoted Alma 7:11 "And he shall go forth, suffering pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind; and this that the word might be fulfilled which saith he will take upon him the pains and the sicknesses of his people." So where did he suffer those pains and afflictions of every kind. Forty days and nights of fasting. Tempted by Satan. Scourged and mocked, humiliated by the Roman soldiers. Why were those not part of the Atonement? Or are they?

Glenn

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, Glenn101 said:

But there can be quibbles about this. What part(s) of the Atonement took place in the Garden of Gethsemane and on the cross? Were they the only places that parts of the Atonement took place?  In the October 2015 General Conference Apostle Dallin H. Oaks suggests that there were parts of the Atonement that happened elsewhere. He quoted Alma 7:11 "And he shall go forth, suffering pains and afflictions and temptations of every kind; and this that the word might be fulfilled which saith he will take upon him the pains and the sicknesses of his people." So where did he suffer those pains and afflictions of every kind. Forty days and nights of fasting. Tempted by Satan. Scourged and mocked, humiliated by the Roman soldiers. Why were those not part of the Atonement? Or are they?

Glenn

I understand the point you are making, but the agreed lesson spoke of the "where, when and how", otherwise I would not have even mentioned it. It was such a sacred topic, so I only used the quotes provided. Evidence that many did not like the quotes, was when I posted on Facebook, and apologized if any were offended. Most every post I make on Facebook, those from my Ward and decades old friends always respond. Not a single member, or Quorum member has replied all week. Simply put, I am bewildered at both comments in Priesthood and a lack of any outside on social media. But, so be it, I did as I was asked, and doubt I will be asked again. 

[Robert F. Smith]

7 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

................................. 

2. "What can I do to be saved from death and hell (the grace) and be resurrected"?  With this question, everyone said, "nothing, Jesus Christ did it already, all will be resurrected". ......................................

While it is true that all will be resurrected, being saved from death and hell requires acceptance of the Good News (Gospel) of Jesus Christ, of his Atonement.  It is a matter of free will and choice by everyone indvidually.

7 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

1. "Are we saved by Grace alone"?I asked this question to point out that as often (for those not of our Faith), we try to over explain our views on this topic, leading many to believe that we reject one of the most fundamental doctrines of Christian theology. Since most said or shook their head "no", I moved on to question number two.   

5. " Why and what do the works of righteousness do for us, and what role do they serve, and why are they necessarily"? This came with so many answers that they are too many to list. But the discussion moved quickly back to the Atonement, and where an how, and if what I was saying seemed to suggest that nothing more needed be done. I then noticed that many who are very vocal, and love discussion were sitting with arms folded, and lips pressed. One was a member of the Stake Presidency, who said nothing. 

So, I began quoting others instead f just Elder McConkie, such as President John Taylor, who was wounded almost to death with the Prophet Joseph Smith. Then quoted from a very Jr member of the Quorum, maybe even a Seventy when this sermon happened, who is now the President of the Quorum of the Twelve and a member of the First presidency, President Dallin H Oaks, who said...

"Man unquestionably has impressive powers and can bring to pass great things by tireless efforts and indomitable will. But after all our obedience and good works, we cannot be saved from the effect of our sins without the grace extended by the atonement of Jesus Christ...man cannot earn his own salvation. (Ensign, November 1988, p 67). ............................

Although we are indeed saved by grace (faith) alone, that faith is demonstrated by actions.  That is why both Jesus himself and his brother James both repeatedly insist that all men will be judged based on their works.  As James puts it, faith without works is as dead as a body without a soul.  The two always go together.  By their fruits you shall know them.  Martin Luther hated the Epistle of James and certainly would have removed it from the Canon, if allowed to do so.  He simply did not understand the key place of works of righteousness in God's plan.  Of course you cannot earn your way to salvation, but, at the same time, your faith is always shown forth by your actions.  You cannot have one without the other.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

While it is true that all will be resurrected, being saved from death and hell requires acceptance of the Good News (Gospel) of Jesus Christ, of his Atonement.  It is a matter of free will and choice by everyone indvidually.

Although we are indeed saved by grace (faith) alone, that faith is demonstrated by actions.  That is why both Jesus himself and his brother James both repeatedly insist that all men will be judged based on their works.  As James puts it, faith without works is as dead as a body without a soul.  The two always go together.  By their fruits you shall know them.  Martin Luther hated the Epistle of James and certainly would have removed it from the Canon, if allowed to do so.  He simply did not understand the key place of works of righteousness in God's plan.  Of course you cannot earn your way to salvation, but, at the same time, your faith is always shown forth by your actions.  You cannot have one without the other.

I understand each of your points. But my question to my brothers (or my observation) is when those of other Faiths ask if we believe we are "saved by grace", we do as you just did and try to fit in every discussion into a one or two min encounter. Instead of just saying yes, and then if they ask follow up questions, then answer or try to have them meet with the missionaries. I have a neighbor who asked this, and with a simple "yes", he was taken aback and wanted to know more. Now he is a member of the Church. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

8 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

 So to all who take the time to read this (including my dear wife, who helps me to get it right, as my eyesight continues to fade) how would you have answered these questions? Are there any who disagree, or think my focus was too narrow, or my methods to direct? 

It all sounds good to me, mate! 

I'm with you and the prophets on this one, by the way. We desperately need to understand this central, pivotal doctrine more than we do.

Considering that we're in possession of the Book of Mormon and have so much on this topic from living apostles and other inspired leaders, we should understand the Atonement better than anyone else.

I had a housemate who investigated the Church on and off for about four years. He'd grown up the son of a vicar. Our rooms had a connecting door, which we always left open for airflow, and one night he came bounding into my room with the Book of Mormon in his hand, his thumb in 2 Nephi 9.. 'Do you have any idea what's really in this book?' he asked. 'I feel I've only just begun to understand the Atonement'.

Indeed.

Edited June 23, 2018 by Hamba Tuhan

[Hamba Tuhan]

20 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Although we are indeed saved by grace (faith) alone, that faith is demonstrated by actions.

Not just demonstrated by actions but learnt and developed through actions, in my personal experience.

[Robert F. Smith]

15 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

I understand each of your points. But my question to my brothers (or my observation) is when those of other Faiths ask if we believe we are "saved by grace", we do as you just did and try to fit in every discussion into a one or two min encounter. Instead of just saying yes, and then if they ask follow up questions, then answer or try to have them meet with the missionaries. .......................

I disagree.  In my experience, very few Mormons actually have any inkling of the place of works in the Divine Plan.  It is only within the last few decades that the Brethren and some of the intellectual elite in Mormonism have taken to saying that we are save by grace (faith) alone.  This has been especially true under the influence of Bob Millett. Moreover, when Mormons are accused by the anti-Mormons of believing that they are saved by works, they usually don't know what to say.  Indeed, your initial post did not even hint at the place of works, nor of the need to consciously accept the Gospel.  Instead, you seemed to be saying that the Atonement happened, and that is the end of it.

[strappinglad]

We are saved by grace, after all we can do

we are saved by grace despite all we can do

we are saved by grace only after all we can do

 we are saved by grace because of all we can do

Pick the meaning or provide another

I have always thought that Grace was a gift bestowed by God upon a person because Christ paid for the sins and the person accepted the gift. I need an explanation why grace and faith are the same. We are told that by faith Noah built the ark, and a bunch of other things were brought about. Are you saying that by Grace these things were done ? I'm not getting the connection.

In Cor 13 Paul says that charity is greater than faith ( my interpretation ) hmmm

 

Edited June 23, 2018 by strappinglad

[Glenn101]

3 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

I understand the point you are making, but the agreed lesson spoke of the "where, when and how", otherwise I would not have even mentioned it. It was such a sacred topic, so I only used the quotes provided. Evidence that many did not like the quotes, was when I posted on Facebook, and apologized if any were offended. Most every post I make on Facebook, those from my Ward and decades old friends always respond. Not a single member, or Quorum member has replied all week. Simply put, I am bewildered at both comments in Priesthood and a lack of any outside on social media. But, so be it, I did as I was asked, and doubt I will be asked again. 

I myself am one that has to think things through before I respond. I do not really do well in a class if I have not had the opportunity to review the material ans questions that accompany the lesson. One of the problems with dealing with the talks from the general conferences is that the instructor is usually the only one that knows what material will be presented and the course that he intends to take the lesson. I do not know how or if I would have responded to that series of questions myself.

But, after reviewing your questions, in response to question #1 Are we saved by Grace alone, I would ask can Grace alone save us from our sins? And what do you mean by being saved?

Glenn

 

[clarkgoble]

12 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

1. "Are we saved by Grace alone"?  

2. "What can I do to be saved from death and hell (the grace) and be resurrected"?

3. "How did Jesus Christ do this for us all (even that very day, many rose from the grave with him, HE being the first)"? 

I tend to think these sorts of things are more semantic issues rather than usually real misunderstanding of the atonement. Take saved by grace alone. That can be interpreted in many ways ranging from the heretical notion of cheap grace to Calvinist predestination through the idea that on God's side the saving part is all him. Yet even Evangelicals less work oriented than Mormons would agree something has to happen to the person whether it's just believing in Christ to more expansive kinds of openness towards God. You can then quibble over when those are works and why we wouldn't call them that. Further we can then ask whether the individual is free in that regard which is why Calvinists take the approach to determinism they do.

Likewise for salvation from death and hell things get tricky. Some might say sons of perdition aren't saved there. Others might say they are saved and then destroyed. Others yet might deny there are sons of perdition in the robust sense Mormons usually take it. Further one can still always ask, can an individual reject grace. If so, does that apply to death?

Anyway I think things are more tricky than you suggest. Things are made even more complex because revelation on the atonement is pretty darn vague with different figures like Paul pushing different metaphors - which sometimes contradict and certainly shouldn't be pushed too far. (But of course everyone does push their favorite metaphor too far)

Honestly in a Sunday School class I'd shut up and not say anything. Were I not in Sunday School I'd probably get very Socratic and ask people to define their questions much more clearly. Usually by the time the question is defined the hard work is over. But of course by then the question may not relate to the text that raised the question very well.

Edited June 23, 2018 by clarkgoble

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Glenn101 said:

I myself am one that has to think things through before I respond. I do not really do well in a class if I have not had the opportunity to review the material ans questions that accompany the lesson. One of the problems with dealing with the talks from the general conferences is that the instructor is usually the only one that knows what material will be presented and the course that he intends to take the lesson. I do not know how or if I would have responded to that series of questions myself.

But, after reviewing your questions, in response to question #1 Are we saved by Grace alone, I would ask can Grace alone save us from our sins? And what do you mean by being saved?

Glenn

 

In our Ward all know ahead of time, and for the older brothers copies are provided. Often we even use media to show parts of the sermon given in General Conference. 

[Guest]

10 hours ago, strappinglad said:

We are saved by grace, after all we can do

we are saved by grace despite all we can do

we are saved by grace only after all we can do

 we are saved by grace because of all we can do

Pick the meaning or provide another

I have always thought that Grace was a gift bestowed by God upon a person because Christ paid for the sins and the person accepted the gift. I need an explanation why grace and faith are the same. We are told that by faith Noah built the ark, and a bunch of other things were brought about. Are you saying that by Grace these things were done ? I'm not getting the connection.

In Cor 13 Paul says that charity is greater than faith ( my interpretation ) hmmm

 

The point of the class was not only to understand the atonement, but the roll of how Jesus Christ "brings to pass the immortality and eternal life of man". One being already done for all, the other requiring our efforts, on behalf of ourselves and others. 

[Guest]

11 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I disagree.  In my experience, very few Mormons actually have any inkling of the place of works in the Divine Plan.  It is only within the last few decades that the Brethren and some of the intellectual elite in Mormonism have taken to saying that we are save by grace (faith) alone.  This has been especially true under the influence of Bob Millett. Moreover, when Mormons are accused by the anti-Mormons of believing that they are saved by works, they usually don't know what to say.  Indeed, your initial post did not even hint at the place of works, nor of the need to consciously accept the Gospel.  Instead, you seemed to be saying that the Atonement happened, and that is the end of it.

My OP was based solely on the sermon by Elder McConkie, and not an exhaustive approach to all nuances of the Gospel of Grace.  

[Guest]

11 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

It all sounds good to me, mate! 

I'm with you and the prophets on this one, by the way. We desperately need to understand this central, pivotal doctrine more than we do.

Considering that we're in possession of the Book of Mormon and have so much on this topic from living apostles and other inspired leaders, we should understand the Atonement better than anyone else.

I had a housemate who investigated the Church on and off for about four years. He'd grown up the son of a vicar. Our rooms had a connecting door, which we always left open for airflow, and one night he came bounding into my room with the Book of Mormon in his hand, his thumb in 2 Nephi 9.. 'Do you have any idea what's really in this book?' he asked. 'I feel I've only just begun to understand the Atonement'.

Indeed.

I understand, 2 Nephi 9-10 is the most powerful sermon on the atonement anywhere. I have read it hundreds of times, and still can scarce take it in. Thank you for reminding me.