Jesus was given the authority by His Father, God, to save all mankind from physical death - all will be resurrected (a reuniting of body and spirit to live forever). However all will not be "saved" in His kingdom - ie. to eventually become heirs to all that They have - and to become Gods as well. Jesus paid for the sins of only those willing to take upon his name and repent. Those who are not accepted into His (and God's) kingdom will go to lesser kingdoms after paying for their own sins. There is a hell below this where those consigned will just weep and wail etc.
No this is not really a good summary of Mormon Doctrine at all. I would suggest a read of the Book of Mormon passages on salvation, and being Born Again, D&C 20:1-39, D&C 76 and D&C 93 to get it better. Also, I would note that not all those who end up in a lesser kingdom if LDS thought pay for their own sins. And I have never heard of a hell below the kingdoms but there is a belief in what LDS call outer darkness for the Sons of Perdition and very few end up there. See D&C 76. Also, LDS do believe in a conditional salvation from Sins and it is based on Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, repentance, baptism and gift of the holy ghost. One can be in the highest heaven in LDS doctrine yet still not be exalted.
Gethsemane was for the sins of mankind, the cross was for the resurrection. How did it work? Heck, I don't know. We can only speculate.
No. In LDS doctrine Gethsemane and the cross and inextricably linked. They are both part of the one atonement.
You got into your car today and drove to work. Does the fact that you know that the torque foot pounds on your rod bearings are 45 or what, where and how it was all assembled? No. Do you know or even care if your car was built in Detroit or Juarez? I imagine that God gave us a perfectly running vehicle to take us to a desireable destination. He gave us instruction on how to operate it. That's the real need to know stuff, right?
If it breaks (which it won't) He's the mechanic.
You lost me at least on how this tied into Mormon Doctrine.
It wouldn't make sense for me to comment on the Book of Mormon, because, to be honest, I haven't studied it. But if someone cited a Book of Mormon reference to me, I'd at least check it out. Regarding the Bible, I'm sorry you feel that way about it. You are entitled to your opinion. It was presumptous of me to think that the Bible could at least be a starting point, common ground,that is, for some good dialog. I'm still willing to address your authority question tommorow, as I said I would, but only if you're interested. You on the other hand haven't addressed the specific questions I posed to you. Why is that? I've found that among those who feel as you tend to know even less about the Bible than I do about the Book of Mormon.
Ciao
Try this for starters from the Book of Mormon:
Mosiah 27:23-31
23 And it came to pass after they had fasted and prayed for the space of two days and two nights, the limbs of Alma received their strength, and he stood up and began to speak unto them, bidding them to be of good comfort: 24 For, said he, I have repented of my sins, and have been redeemed of the Lord; behold I am born of the Spirit. 25 And the Lord said unto me: Marvel not that all mankind, yea, men and women, all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, must be born again; yea, born of God, changed from their carnal and fallen state, to a state of righteousness, being redeemed of God, becoming his sons and daughters; 26 And thus they become new creatures; and unless they do this, they can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God. 27 I say unto you, unless this be the case, they must be cast off; and this I know, because I was like to be cast off. 28 Nevertheless, after wading through much tribulation, repenting nigh unto death, the Lord in mercy hath seen fit to snatch me out of an everlasting burning, and I am born of God. 29 My soul hath been redeemed from the gall of bitterness and bonds of iniquity. I was in the darkest abyss; but now I behold the marvelous light of God. My soul was cracked with eternal torment; but I am snatched, and my soul is pained no more. 30 I rejected my Redeemer, and denied that which had been spoken of by our fathers; but now that they may foresee that he will come, and that he remembereth every creature of his creating, he will make himself manifest unto all. 31 Yea, every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess before him. Yea, even at the last day, when all men shall stand to be judged of him, then shall they confess that he is God; then shall they confess, who live without God in the world, that the judgment of an everlasting punishment is just upon them; and they shall quake, and tremble, and shrink beneath the glance of his all-searching eye.
#2) If you expect more than window dressing about the Bible from the average Mormon, you've been sorely misled. The average Mormon probably knows the Book of Mormon pretty well. The Bible, as far as Mormons are concerned, is only appropriate when it's "translated correctly", which leaves a whole lotta window open for interpretation. If you want the official interpretation, go to LDS.org. We're told to read the Book of Mormon, not the Bible.
No we are told to read the Book of Mormon and the Bible as well as other LDS Scripture. Two of every four years is devoted to Bible study in Sunday School and in youth seminary. Of course the Bible is given the LDS twist on things when studying it but that is to be expected.
As for the hang up that seems to be had here about the missionaries emphasizing Gethsemane, I would not worry about it too much. This is based on a section of the D&C, section 19 and in my opinion is carried to far by many LDS in thinking that the suffering in Gethsemane was where all the atonement took place. It is not nor is it LDS doctrine that it is. LDS believe the atonement started there, continued through all the suffering Jesus had between there and the cross, included the cross and culminated at the resurrection. It was all part of the grand and great act of saving us.
Also, LDS are not hung up about crosses nor the cross. Reference to the cross of Christ can be found in many LDS writings. LDS just typically do not wear crossed nor adorn their churches with them. Not because they object to the cross but more perhaps to distinguish what they believe is the restored gospel of Jesus Christ to all other Christian sect.
Many thanks to Inconceivable, Jason Bourne, Sruggio and Ozmec for responding in kind to the things important to me with the things important to you. You all bring a different perspective to the topic. I will attempt to wade through all the material you folks have presented. In the meantime, may I also suggest a resource I use for my personal studies. Google the site "Zola Levitt Ministries" and view/listen to the series on the Passover. I think you'll find it interesting as it is a presentation in terms of historical fact. It helped me understand may things that I misunderstood in the past. Since much of the Bible is about Jews and the Book of Mormon starts out with Jews that resource would be useful for future discussions.
For now, I'll leave you with this verse:
But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and [be] ready always to [give] an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear. 1Peter 3:15
Jason Bourne wrote:No this is not really a good summary of Mormon Doctrine at all...
But it was free.
Mo Doc: Those in the lessor kingdoms do pay for their own sins before admittance. Not sure if it's worth finding. Does it matter if we have trouble believing it anyway.
Hell - Outer Darkness (below the 3 kingdoms)
inc: Gethsemane was for the sins of mankind, the cross was for the resurrection. How did it work? Heck, I don't know. We can only speculate.
Jason: No. In LDS doctrine Gethsemane and the cross and inextricably linked. They are both part of the one atonement.
I agree.
Correction: the cross was fundamental in bringing about the gift of resurrection for all mankind. He had to die on a cross (not the cross) in order to validate prophesy. He had to die in order to resurrect Himself and somehow that made it possible for Him to resurrect all of us.
There are even deeper specifics than this. Suffice to say that we could remain safe in our salvation even if we bundled it all into one large 3 day event. No?
Jason: You lost me at least on how this (the car) tied into Mormon Doctrine.
Not so much Mormon doctrine as the mechanics of the atonement. My point is that if the atonement is real and works, does it really matter where and how if we know by Whom and for what purpose? Maybe God would be more pleased with us if we would just use the gift (in other words shut up and drive).
If the atonement were a vehicle, my assumption is that God has been unwilling to share enough of the technology for us to replicate it. It's a "one off" and I think He wants to keep it that way. It's a miracle because the only important feature we can be sure of is that it works.
Jason Bourne wrote:Also, LDS are not hung up about crosses nor the cross. Reference to the cross of Christ can be found in many LDS writings. LDS just typically do not wear crossed nor adorn their churches with them. Not because they object to the cross but more perhaps to distinguish what they believe is the restored gospel of Jesus Christ to all other Christian sect.
The cross survives still as a symbol in some of our hymns but that is about it. I think we don't use it currently in our architecture or wear it ourselves for two reasons:
1. Separation from most Christian sects.
2. To avoid offense. The Cross has made some enemies. From Constantine conquering under it on it has been used for many unChristian acts. The main group currently offended by it is the Jews and I can't blame them. There are other groups as well.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
I understand where Inconcievable (I-Man) is coming from.
It was the same for me. I heard things that didn’t add up. That experience is similar to mine except that I was raised in the Roman Catholic Church. My folks were quasi-Catholic. Many say they are Catholic just for this reason. Among these nominal Catholics there are varying degrees of moral behavior in their lifestyle. Even on this level, expression of faith is works-oriented. One of the tickets a Catholic is supposed to punch is by attending Mass on holy days of obligation. That’s why the church parking lot is so full on Easter, and Christmas. When I was 17, I wanted to start going to church. There were missals in the pews; little booklets to follow the service. Mass was about 45 minutes and each week I liked to see how fast the priest could get through it. Most of the mass was 30 minutes of singing, kneeling, and crossing yourself. There’s one thing, though that I’ll never forget. Here I was at 17, getting myself up early to make the 7:30am mass. I could’ve slept in, but I really wanted to hear the homily. My folks didn’t come, I went alone. The homily lasts about 15 minutes when the priest actually reads a section from the Bible and gives a sermon. He read from First Corinthians and every week I hung on to every word. I even started watching some of those crazy televangelists, praying for Cadillacs.
I joined the Navy, and managed to be stationed overseas for two tours. I lived out of the US for about eight years. Although, I wanted to experience different cultures and experience many things, I remained relatively moral in my worldview, however, still wasn’t any more or less spiritual. In that time, I also quit identifying myself as a Catholic, because of a number of teachings that could not be substantiated from the Bible. The Magisterium is the authoritative body in the church. It also claims:
“Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication, and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith.” -this is a blurb from a Catholic website
As far as I was concerned, there were very simple things stated in scripture that didn’t require any special revelation from God. I even read those things in a Catholic Bible. But, I inquired why it was that what I could read with my own eyes, in a catholic Bible, differed from Catholic teaching; the priest didn’t answer my questions. At first, I was told to go and pray about it. Ultimately, I was told that I had weak faith because I should just trust and accept the church’s teaching because of the AUTHORITY of Church handed down through the centuries from the first pope, St, Peter who has the keys, blah, blah, blah.
In 1989, I had a personal crisis. I was an emotional wreck. I was still in the Navy and professionally, I was a supervisor had to keep myself together. How do you spell S-T-R-E-S-S? The Lord sent three Christians to minister to me; two were co-workers, and one was my babysitter. Each went to a different church, but they never tried to compete over me to go to their church. All three pointed me to God; they all said the same things: (1) Cry out to the Lord (2) Read the Bible. One of them even brought me a one-year devotional Bible that is divided into daily readings.
I began again listening to Christian programming on TV and on the radio as I did when I was 17. I even started looking for a church. However, I knew enough now to avoid the ones praying for Cadillacs. You see, this was my miracle, because not only was I was seriously seeking God , I now realize that when I was 17, He was seeking me. It’s like that analogy of how bank tellers are so used to handling real money that they can instantly recognize counterfeit bills by touch. Well, when I was 17, the Lord placed in my heart the desire to go to church. The particular sermons I heard were un-Catholicized; it was plain scripture. Even in a Catholic church, He placed truth in my heart so that years later I would recognize it once again. All I know is once I was lost but now I'm found. Praise His Holy Name!
Twice I tried to send you a response yesterday. I must've done something wrong, so both attempts were a no-go. Hope it comes through this time.
I can see how the way I phrased my earlier statement is confusing.
[(Dezire2Bwise)
“One word that my LDS guests repeated was “authority”. According to the Bible, the Jesus in the LDS version of Gethsemane is a Jesus who didn’t have the authority to save anybody.”
The missionaries were bringing up the "authority" issue. What I said following that was with respect to historical details in the Bible. Historical facts are common-ground issues whether or not a person is religious. My point is that the LDS version of the atonement has implications that would undermine His authority to be our Savior. I agree that He had the authority from the Father right from the start. Some say it doesn't matter how He saved Us, just that He did. The evidence from historical details say that it does matter because the Father ordained that the atonement had to happen a certain way. Jesus kept the Law perfectly; if he hadn't he would have disqualified Himself from the authority He had to be the Savior. LDS teaching has overlooked this. Jesus maintained His authority of His ministry and work because He observed and kept the details of the Law.
My original topic is still the atonement, but I wanted to address the Pres. Hinkley article.
I have absolutely no problem about whether a church displays a cross or not. I posted my testimony the other day and as an ex-Roman Catholic I don’t go for worshipping statues or crosses. A Catholic will tell you that they aren’t worshipping graven images, rather it helps them to focus in prayer. However, they try to downplay the role of graven images in their worship, it is what it is; idolatry. Anything; any activity, (including Monday Night Football), any person, that we put above God becomes like a graven image and likewise amounts to idolatry. I wear a small cross necklace but I am grieved that in this post-modern age, the cross has become nothing more than a piece of garish costume jewelry.
Pres. Hinckley was asked, “If you do not use the cross, what is the symbol of your religion?”
He responded, “…the lives of our people must become the most meaningful expression of our faith, and in fact, therefore, the symbol of our worship.”
To Christians, the absence of the cross with a group that calls itself “the Church of Jesus Christ is glaring. The reason LDS teaching about the atonement/Gethemane is misguided is that the LDS does not really understand the cross. Pres. Hinckley quotes many Bible verses from the Bible, and I don’t doubt that he is sincere according to what he understands about these verses. From his statements my earlier impression of how Mormons regard the Bible has changed. I see now that they do respect the Bible more that was I thought at first. However, the manner in which Mormons on the one hand verbally acknowledge the necessity of the cross yet downplay the cross is an indication to Christians that Mormons really don’t understand Christ’s work at all. Mormons may respect the Bible, and it may be one of the standard works, but the LDS church attaches the “insofar as it is correctly translated” disclaimer. Correct doctrine is what the LDS church says it is and that sounds very “Catholic” to me. In the Middle Ages the Bible was chained to the pulpit to control the people. If the people managed to read the Bible for themselves then they know the truth that things the clergy perpetrated were not biblical. Stan, I submit to you that the “insofar as it is correctly translated” mantra has chained the Bible to an intellectual pulpit in the LDS. If you really tested that claim about the trustworthiness of translations of the Bible, you would find that: 1. The Bible is correct; 2. LDS doctrine is different from the doctrine Christ taught about the cross and the atonement found in the Bible. 3. LDS doctrine is different overall from Christ’s doctrine as found in the Bible. The differences are not because of Bible translations. While the cross is not to be an object of worship, there is attached to it some other significance that emerges from Bible that is not to be diminished. Furthermore, Jesus didn’t say, “Take up your graven image”, rather He said:
If any [man] will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? Matt 16:24-26
Why did Jesus talk about the cross in this way? Because, the cross is at the heart of the gospel because it reminds us of what we are and who He is. From Adam, we inherit a fallen and depraved nature that is in rebellion to God. (Rom 5:12) Believers receive the spirit of Christ when they acknowledge this state of depravity. Christ’s spirit enables us to struggle against the flesh. The “flesh” is not our physical bodies, rather it is the taint of the knowledge of good and evil. Sometimes evil wins. (Rom 7:14-25)
And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. Matt 10:38
Thank you for the Mosiah Chapter 27 verses. I don't follow how these passages address my original questions about the atonement, but, I went to the LDS.org site and read from verse one through the passage you suggested. In any case let's play the ball where it lies. I have some questions about what I read if you don't mind.
1. Do you agree that Jesus had to live His life and carry out His ministry according to what was ordained.
2. What were the things that were ordained as you understand them?
3. How do Mormons understand the origin of the sin that Mosiah confessed?
4. Does verse 24 mean that Mosiah was saved?
5. Why is it that Mormonism in its structure does not reflect the sense of fairness/equality that is presented in Mosiah 27:2-3 where he decreed that believers are to be treated equally by unbelievers. Don't Mormons believe in different levels of heaven, among Mormon believers, non-Mormons aside?
We knew a Mormon family who moved away a few years ago. They were very active in the church. The wife was a devout Utah Mormon and the husband converted when he was 19 or 20. (He's now probably in his late 30's early 40's) While his wife wouldn't mind going back to Utah, they decided not to settle there because some Mormons are more equal than others. Things are more provincial in Utah and because he's a convert he's not treated the same.