DiscussMormonism.com

The following was originally a PM but I'm reposting for general consumption.

My LDS guests presented the same scriptures as you have to explain Gethsemane. Overall, I liked them and they said a lot of good things. however, my impression of what they said sounded scripted; they didn't seem to know much about the Bible except for what was in their presentation. When they did mention the Bible, I felt that the scriptures were only window dressing for other things they said. The topic of Gethsemane stuck out like a sore thumb. Like you, I believe the account of the events that took place in the garden as it is presented in scripture. I also agree that this subject might seem nit-picky, but there really is more to it than meets the eye. How Jesus did what He did in the atonement is not wool-gathering or aimless speculation. There’s a reason why Jesus spent so much time directing his audience back nit-picky details of scripture, what to us is the Old Testament, (Jn 5:39). There were imposters that came before Him who claimed to be the Messiah. His enemies called him an imposter. Therefore, you and I should care about how he saved us; otherwise, we might worship what we don’t know, Jn 4:20-22. The illustrations in the Passover, and Mosaic Law remain even today as signpost to Jesus’ ministry. The Jewish culture and religious practices since the time of Moses and in Jesus’ day are not only in the Bible, but they are historical facts. As a Jew reaching out to other Jews whose daily lives were shaped by the Law, Jesus’ words and deeds were totally in that context. However, Mormon teaching about Gethsemane superimposes an unfounded conjecture that ignores/dismisses these. Why? I was raised Catholic but I left catholicism for that reason. I'm not a theologian, but even on the simple things, Catholic doctrine didn't line up with the Bible. 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.

It is my understanding that the true "saving", if you will, came from his grief and suffering in the garden, not the cross. It's almost as if the cross doesn't count. That's why you don't see crosses on Mormon temples or in jewlery, for example.

Of course, my thoughts are that Jesus always could have backed out, and if He did at some point after Gesthemane, there would have been no atonement or sacrifice for all of mankind.

Therefore, Gesthemane was not something that was needed, per se, but just another part of the overall suffering that the Christ was subject to.

If I have this wrong, as a never-mo, please enlighten me.

Thanks.

(from our original PM)

You perspective is fine with me. My name is still on the records of the Mormon church, but like many that post here, I am gravely disaffected and will never return to activity. Most of us are lost or at least in a limbo stage of belief because of the deep betrayal over misinformation concerning the history and character of many of it's original leaders.

You are right, the missionaries know little of what you speak and much of what they convey is scripted. The church authorized missionary manual "Preach my Gospel" has no reference to what we both may understand as "born again" (forgiven, children of Christ, change of heart etc). But the Mormon scripture (the Book of Mormon) conveys it nearly parallel to how you would believe as a born again Christian. Odd isn't it?

I have born again friends among the good and Christlike that I try to surround myself with. My pastor friend's words seem to hit home best at this time. He no longer calls himself Christian - mostly because of it's loss of meaning. He and a few others now consider themselves "Followers of Christ". This term seems to transcend religious denominations and more describes the path of those that emulate His Peaceable Walk.

Anyway, I would suggest you post your private message on the thread. It is a healthy perspective you bring to the board. I'll gladly post this as well.

inc.

(note: my use of the words "many" and "most" reflect my bias and I have caught myself. What does make this board unique and good for our therapy/benefit is that TBMs, apologists, born agains, disaffected, ex's and others frequent and can equally share perspectives)

Wow, that explains a lot. I always wondered why Mormons talked about the cross when they talk to people yet there are no crosses in their churches. So, are you implying that Mormons are really offended by the cross?

I did a search on “cross” from the Bible. It appears about 28 times in the KJV. I pasted a few verses from the results. How do they compare with what you were taught?

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. 1Cor 1:17-18

And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, [I say], whether [they be] things in earth, or things in heaven. (Col 1:20)
---Note that it doesn’t say that He made peace by the blood of Gethsemane.

But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. (Gal 6:16)
---The most important thing on Paul’s preaching was the cross

Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of [our] faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.(Heb 12:2)
---The location where sinless Jesus endured the “suffering” from the shame of the burden of our sins was not in the garden:

Dezire2BWise wrote:Wow, that explains a lot. I always wondered why Mormons talked about the cross when they talk to people yet there are no crosses in their churches. So, are you implying that Mormons are really offended by the cross?

No, Mormons are not offended by the cross. One reason for the lack of crosses in our chapels is that the rest of the Christian world has co-opted to the point of worshipping it, not the Christ who hung on it. We choose to emphasize the resurrection and Atonement, not the death and humiliation of the Son of God. We know it's there, we know it's role in the story, but we see it as a method of torture, not something to be revered.

As for authority, I'm not sure how you can say that Jesus didn't have the authority to save mankind. Would you please explain that?

harmony wrote:

Dezire2BWise wrote:Wow, that explains a lot. I always wondered why Mormons talked about the cross when they talk to people yet there are no crosses in their churches. So, are you implying that Mormons are really offended by the cross?

No, Mormons are not offended by the cross. One reason for the lack of crosses in our chapels is that the rest of the Christian world has co-opted to the point of worshipping it, not the Christ who hung on it. We choose to emphasize the resurrection and Atonement, not the death and humiliation of the Son of God. We know it's there, we know it's role in the story, but we see it as a method of torture, not something to be revered.

As for authority, I'm not sure how you can say that Jesus didn't have the authority to save mankind. Would you please explain that?

Thanks, Harmony.

As I said, this is just based on what I was told; I don't know about any "official" doctrine, or if there is one.

I do find it interesting that so much emphasis is placed on His suffering in the garden, because, the way I look at it, anytime after Gethsemane He could have chosen to NOT take the next step, therefore any suffering He did in the garden would have been moot at that point.

Therefore, I think the emphasis of the rest of the Christian world, as you put it, is rightly on the cross, because without it, none of the rest would matter. It is the cross, and His death, which defines His reason for being here, and is the source of His salvation of the world.

Dezire2BWise wrote: 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.

Here is the Mormon doctrine:

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.

Paradise is the state/place between death and resurrection. There is also spirit prison in this area as well. Evidently, the two thieves had repented before dying otherwise Jesus would not have seen them in Paradise.

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.

I'll put it into context whether it mattered when, where and how:

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.

Now, do I believe all of this? I'm not quite sure anymore.

Hi Harmony,


If there was no cross, there would be no atonement. The atonement had to happen by way of the cross or else the resurrection would be invalid. If there was no resurrection then we’re all wasting our time. Scripture places the cross at the heart of the Gospel.

But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. (Gal 6:14)

But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
---1Cor 1:23

I totally agree with you about how some worship the cross, but I may have misunderstood the rest of what you said. My frame of reference is the Bible so I'm comparing what you explained with scripture. (You know, the Berean thing inActs 17:11?) In light of these verses, your explanation, still sounds like the Mormon response to the cross is to keep it in an intellectual box by just paying lip-service about it. From what I read, Scripture is very in-your-face about the cross; it clearly places the cross at the heart of the gospel. So, I 'm interested to know how is the Mormon understanding/treatment of the cross consistent with the Bible if they keep the cross at a distance with a long-handled spoon?

Regarding your question about Jesus’ authority to be the Savior, I was speaking in terms of comments I made in earlier posts that… with all due respect…according to the Old Testament, Mormon teaching about the atonement in the garden is way off-base. Once in a while LDS missionaries come to my house and they say the same thing. They were nice but starchy so, a few days ago I ventured into the world of chat to try to understand more of the LDS perspective minus the starch from regular folks. I began a personal study on the Passover and one thing led to another. I’ve been studying the Old Testament in-depth on my own for a couple years. I find that it explains the New Testament to a depth that is astounding. Anyone who wants to know can find out on their own that God’s fingerprints are all over the Bible. I’ll probably get back to you tomorrow on the authority issue; I just can't get to it today.

Dezire2BWise wrote:Hi Harmony,


If there was no cross, there would be no atonement. The atonement had to happen by way of the cross or else the resurrection would be invalid. If there was no resurrection then we’re all wasting our time. Scripture places the cross at the heart of the Gospel.

But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world. (Gal 6:14)

But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
---1Cor 1:23

I totally agree with you about how some worship the cross, but I may have misunderstood the rest of what you said. My frame of reference is the Bible so I'm comparing what you explained with scripture. (You know, the Berean thing inActs 17:11?) In light of these verses, your explanation, still sounds like the Mormon response to the cross is to keep it in an intellectual box by just paying lip-service about it. From what I read, Scripture is very in-your-face about the cross; it clearly places the cross at the heart of the gospel. So, I 'm interested to know how is the Mormon understanding/treatment of the cross consistent with the Bible if they keep the cross at a distance with a long-handled spoon?

Regarding your question about Jesus’ authority to be the Savior, I was speaking in terms of comments I made in earlier posts that… with all due respect…according to the Old Testament, Mormon teaching about the atonement in the garden is way off-base. Once in a while LDS missionaries come to my house and they say the same thing. They were nice but starchy so, a few days ago I ventured into the world of chat to try to understand more of the LDS perspective minus the starch from regular folks. I began a personal study on the Passover and one thing led to another. I’ve been studying the Old Testament in-depth on my own for a couple years. I find that it explains the New Testament to a depth that is astounding. Anyone who wants to know can find out on their own that God’s fingerprints are all over the Bible. I’ll probably get back to you tomorrow on the authority issue; I just can't get to it today.

Isn't that interesting? I find man's fingerprints all over the Bible, principally in the Old Testament. I find very little there that is God-breathed. But then, I find very little that is God-breathed in LDS scripture either, so I guess that's fair.

Harmony -

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