[(Dezire2Bwise)
“I can see how the way I phrased my earlier statement is confusing.”
It is refreshing to challenge someone’s statement and get a positive response. Thank you for being so pleasant. Other threads and forums are down right nasty.
In you response you stated “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.”
I have been a member for 43 years, joining at the age of 23. I have held many responsible positions and taught many classes. I am currently on the Stake HC. Everything that I have read and taught agrees with what I think you say the Atonement is, how it was designed, and how it was accomplished. In fact I was assigned to talk on August 19 on the Atonement its grace and its mercies. Because this Sunday was also the “EXIT” talk given by my grandson who is leaving for the Dominican Republic, the entire SP’ency was there. I presented the Atonement exactly the way that I think that you believe. I received many “great talk” acknowledgements from each of the SP.
So I guess that I need clarification on your statement “My point is that the LDS version of the atonement has implications that would undermine His authority to be our Savior.”
I personally believe, and understand from every LDS person whom I have heard talking about the Atonement, that we are probably fanatical about His authority and divinity. And if I am reading your postings correctly we are in complete agreement with you.
I havn't read past your post that I am replying to as of this posting.
Stan
Re The Atonement
-
_sruggio
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:47 pm
[(Dezire2Bwise)
Hello again, I read your post on President Hinckley about the “cross”. He is an awesome person who has devoted his life to the Savior.
I cannot speak for the church or for any other LDS member, I can only speak for myself.
For me the scripture “And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. Matt 10:38” is absolutely true. For me the “cross” that Jesus is talking about is our willingness to die or at least suffer for Christ. I hope that I am never tested to the level of dying, I might not pass the test. As for suffering for Christ I think that I can and do suffer for His cause. I certainly put Christ before my personal needs.
I pray that the things that I do for others is acceptable to Christ and that I am worthy of his Atonement. I studied and prayed about the Atonement and then gave talks as I posted above.
For me, and how I conduct my life, I often think (like when I am tempted to swear) of Jesus’ suffering and how I do not want to add to His burden.
So as I have posted before, I do not look to the physical symbol of the cross. For me the “cross” is my willingness to follow Christ’s commandments and help Him by serving others.
Matthew 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
Stan
Hello again, I read your post on President Hinckley about the “cross”. He is an awesome person who has devoted his life to the Savior.
I cannot speak for the church or for any other LDS member, I can only speak for myself.
For me the scripture “And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. Matt 10:38” is absolutely true. For me the “cross” that Jesus is talking about is our willingness to die or at least suffer for Christ. I hope that I am never tested to the level of dying, I might not pass the test. As for suffering for Christ I think that I can and do suffer for His cause. I certainly put Christ before my personal needs.
I pray that the things that I do for others is acceptable to Christ and that I am worthy of his Atonement. I studied and prayed about the Atonement and then gave talks as I posted above.
For me, and how I conduct my life, I often think (like when I am tempted to swear) of Jesus’ suffering and how I do not want to add to His burden.
So as I have posted before, I do not look to the physical symbol of the cross. For me the “cross” is my willingness to follow Christ’s commandments and help Him by serving others.
Matthew 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
Stan
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
Re: The Atonement
Hi Stan-
I’m glad that you have responded, because you are serious about what you believe, and you know LDS doctrine well. I may not formally hold a teaching position in my church but my family is very active and we love the Lord. Like your grandson, our son is in the evangelism ministry, too. Also at school, he has been asked to lead a lunchtime Bible study. I know that you are very proud of your grandson as we are of our boy. We are both blessed because there’s a lot of bad things young men could be into these days.
While I think we agree in general terms on the importance of the Atonement. I assure you that the things I speak of are not trivial “you say po-tay-to, I say po-tah-to” differences. The Bible is God’s word and it is correctly translated. In another post, I stated that the Bible could be examined as an objective historical reference, so I’d like to lay the spiritual meanings aside for a moment and just look at the who, what ,when, where, and how of the Atonement.
1. LDS teaching starts the Atonement in one place and finishes it in another. This teaching is unbiblical.
“The Savior atoned for our sins by suffering in Gethsemane and by giving his life on the cross. It is impossible for us to fully understand how he suffered for all of our sins. In the Garden of Gethsemane, the weight of our sins caused him to feel such agony and heartbreak that he bled from every pore (see D&C 19:18–19). Later, as he hung upon the cross, Jesus suffered painful death by one of the most cruel methods known to man.” – LDS.org
2. The Bible refutes LDS teaching on this and explains Christ’s work of Atonement in terms of a direct historical reference to the Levitical Day of Atonement in which sacrifices were brought to a single location and killed in that location. The Lamb of God brought Himself to the Cross; the sole location of His work of Atonement.
For [it is] not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and [offering] for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure [therein]; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once [for all]. (Heb 10:4-10)
You see, Mormons use Christian-sounding phrases but to Christians it's like one of the fun-house rooms where all the furniture is nailed to the ceiling. We recognize tables and chairs, but everything is upside down, including the LDS Jesus.
I’m glad that you have responded, because you are serious about what you believe, and you know LDS doctrine well. I may not formally hold a teaching position in my church but my family is very active and we love the Lord. Like your grandson, our son is in the evangelism ministry, too. Also at school, he has been asked to lead a lunchtime Bible study. I know that you are very proud of your grandson as we are of our boy. We are both blessed because there’s a lot of bad things young men could be into these days.
While I think we agree in general terms on the importance of the Atonement. I assure you that the things I speak of are not trivial “you say po-tay-to, I say po-tah-to” differences. The Bible is God’s word and it is correctly translated. In another post, I stated that the Bible could be examined as an objective historical reference, so I’d like to lay the spiritual meanings aside for a moment and just look at the who, what ,when, where, and how of the Atonement.
1. LDS teaching starts the Atonement in one place and finishes it in another. This teaching is unbiblical.
“The Savior atoned for our sins by suffering in Gethsemane and by giving his life on the cross. It is impossible for us to fully understand how he suffered for all of our sins. In the Garden of Gethsemane, the weight of our sins caused him to feel such agony and heartbreak that he bled from every pore (see D&C 19:18–19). Later, as he hung upon the cross, Jesus suffered painful death by one of the most cruel methods known to man.” – LDS.org
2. The Bible refutes LDS teaching on this and explains Christ’s work of Atonement in terms of a direct historical reference to the Levitical Day of Atonement in which sacrifices were brought to a single location and killed in that location. The Lamb of God brought Himself to the Cross; the sole location of His work of Atonement.
For [it is] not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and [offering] for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure [therein]; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once [for all]. (Heb 10:4-10)
You see, Mormons use Christian-sounding phrases but to Christians it's like one of the fun-house rooms where all the furniture is nailed to the ceiling. We recognize tables and chairs, but everything is upside down, including the LDS Jesus.
Last edited by Guest on Thu Aug 23, 2007 12:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
Re: The Atonement
Hello Stan, How are you today? A couple questions if you please, I don’t understand some of your statements.
“I pray that the things that I do for others is acceptable to Christ and that I am worthy of his Atonement.” - What does does “worthy of his Atonement" mean?
“For me, and how I conduct my life, I often think (like when I am tempted to swear) of Jesus’ suffering and how I do not want to add to His burden.” - “How can we add to His burden?
Take Care
“I pray that the things that I do for others is acceptable to Christ and that I am worthy of his Atonement.” - What does does “worthy of his Atonement" mean?
“For me, and how I conduct my life, I often think (like when I am tempted to swear) of Jesus’ suffering and how I do not want to add to His burden.” - “How can we add to His burden?
Take Care
-
_Jason Bourne
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9207
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm
Re: The Atonement
To Jason Bourne (JB) or any takers.
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.
The point was that Mormons believe one must be Born again, or Born of God as Alma the younger puts it in Mosaih Chapter 27. The point is that he repented and his being born again was based on faith in Jesus Christ and Jesus' work of salvation for us.
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.
Sure, yes, all that the Bible prophesied about Jesus and all that it tells us he did.
2. What were the things that were ordained as you understand them?
Pay the demands of justification that results from all our sins. The wages of sin is death, both physical-we will die, and spiritual, we will be separated from God forever because of our sin. Jesus paid the price for those sins. Asa result we will live again and if we have faith in Jesus and accept His atonement we will be in wit God.
3. How do Mormons understand the origin of the sin that Mosiah confessed?
Adam fell and brought sin into the world. As a result men are born with a carnal and fallen nature and will sin.
4. Does verse 24 mean that Mosiah was saved?
The person in that verse is Alma the younger and yes he was saved. However, LDS do believe one can fall from grace so if Alma turned away from Christ in the future he could lose his salvation.
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.
Nonesense. There are thousands of LDS converts in Utah if not hundreds of thousands and they are not treated less then a life time member at all.
by the way, I think you are hung up on this cross thing and make much out of nothing.
-
_Jason Bourne
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9207
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm
Re: The Atonement
Dezire2BWise wrote:Hi Stan-
I’m glad that you have responded, because you are serious about what you believe, and you know LDS doctrine well. I may not formally hold a teaching position in my church but my family is very active and we love the Lord. Like your grandson, our son is in the evangelism ministry, too. Also at school, he has been asked to lead a lunchtime Bible study. I know that you are very proud of your grandson as we are of our boy. We are both blessed because there’s a lot of bad things young men could be into these days.
While I think we agree in general terms on the importance of the Atonement. I assure you that the things I speak of are not trivial “you say po-tay-to, I say po-tah-to” differences. The Bible is God’s word and it is correctly translated. In another post, I stated that the Bible could be examined as an objective historical reference, so I’d like to lay the spiritual meanings aside for a moment and just look at the who, what ,when, where, and how of the Atonement.
1. LDS teaching starts the Atonement in one place and finishes it in another. This teaching is unbiblical.
“The Savior atoned for our sins by suffering in Gethsemane and by giving his life on the cross. It is impossible for us to fully understand how he suffered for all of our sins. In the Garden of Gethsemane, the weight of our sins caused him to feel such agony and heartbreak that he bled from every pore (see D&C 19:18–19). Later, as he hung upon the cross, Jesus suffered painful death by one of the most cruel methods known to man.” – LDS.org
2. The Bible refutes LDS teaching on this and explains Christ’s work of Atonement in terms of a direct historical reference to the Levitical Day of Atonement in which sacrifices were brought to a single location and killed in that location. The Lamb of God brought Himself to the Cross; the sole location of His work of Atonement.
For [it is] not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and [offering] for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure [therein]; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once [for all]. (Heb 10:4-10)
You see, Mormons use Christian-sounding phrases but to Christians it's like one of the fun-house rooms where all the furniture is nailed to the ceiling. We recognize tables and chairs, but everything is upside down, including the LDS Jesus.
As noted Mormons believe the atonement started in the garden, moved to the cross and culminated in the empty tomb. And this my friend is totally biblical.
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
Re: The Atonement
Hey JB, It's me again. I hope you're not running out of patience.
I understand when you say this is what you believe. I respect that you believe this.
Perhaps you have heard the saying, "the New Testament is hidden in the Old Testament, and the Old Testament is revealed/explained in the New Testament". Internal consistancy is one measure against which the Bible is tested and interpreted. A given doctrine must be consistant with the model presented in the Bible. In other words, there is a biblical model for the Atonement.
If the LDS teaching on the Atonement is biblical as you believe it to be, then please state the precedent/model from Bible that supports this?
Thanks
I understand when you say this is what you believe. I respect that you believe this.
Perhaps you have heard the saying, "the New Testament is hidden in the Old Testament, and the Old Testament is revealed/explained in the New Testament". Internal consistancy is one measure against which the Bible is tested and interpreted. A given doctrine must be consistant with the model presented in the Bible. In other words, there is a biblical model for the Atonement.
If the LDS teaching on the Atonement is biblical as you believe it to be, then please state the precedent/model from Bible that supports this?
Thanks
-
_Jason Bourne
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 9207
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 8:00 pm
Re: The Atonement
Dezire2BWise wrote:Hey JB, It's me again. I hope you're not running out of patience.
I understand when you say this is what you believe. I respect that you believe this.
Perhaps you have heard the saying, "the New Testament is hidden in the Old Testament, and the Old Testament is revealed/explained in the New Testament". Internal consistancy is one measure against which the Bible is tested and interpreted. A given doctrine must be consistant with the model presented in the Bible. In other words, there is a biblical model for the Atonement.
If the LDS teaching on the Atonement is biblical as you believe it to be, then please state the precedent/model from Bible that supports this?
Thanks
I am not sure what you are looking for. Maybe you could tell me what from the Bible about the atonement you do not think LDS believe. Also the Bible can be understood differing ways. Your way may be wrong.
Last of all LDS believe the Bible but they also believe in an open canon and that God speaks through modern day prophets and apostles. Not all LDS doctrine is Bible based nor do we expect it to be.
-
_sruggio
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 19
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 9:47 pm
Dezire2Bwise wrote:
1. LDS teaching starts the Atonement in one place and finishes it in another. This teaching is unbiblical.
2. The Bible refutes LDS teaching on this and explains Christ’s work of Atonement in terms of a direct historical reference to the Levitical Day of Atonement in which sacrifices were brought to a single location and killed in that location. The Lamb of God brought Himself to the Cross; the sole location of His work of Atonement.
I believe that Sacrifice was given to man as a similitude of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. That is why the sacrifice had to be without blemish. By the time that man had gotten to Moses’ day mankind had been almost wiped out by the flood, had been scattered by the confusion of tongue’s, and the Bible suggests that God was not pleased on how His children were obeying His laws. In the Levitical Day, the children of Israel were a stiff necked people. God had to simplify everything for them, and still they couldn’t follow God’s laws. Remember in Jesus’ day you could only walk so far, you had rules on how and when you had to prepare your meals for the Sabbath, etc.
Therefore your reasoning for the Atonement having to be preformed only on the cross for me doesn’t hold water.
Dezire2Bwise wrote:
For [it is] not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and [offering] for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure [therein]; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once [for all]. (Heb 10:4-10)
Your scripture only proves my point. We as LDS, totally agree that the shedding of blood, in the Mosaic law, was satisfied by Jesus Christ when He died on the cross. I posted somewhere stupidly, that it didn’t matter to me if He died on the cross or He was run over bay a wagon.
I now reject my statement and agree that the cross was an integral part of the Atonement.
Dezire2Bwise:
You see, Mormons use Christian-sounding phrases but to Christians it's like one of the fun-house rooms where all the furniture is nailed to the ceiling. We recognize tables and chairs, but everything is upside down, including the LDS Jesus.
I still think that we are on the same page as to His Atonement with exception to Gethsemane. Here is where I am coming from. If Jesus Christ paid for all of the sins of the world on the cross, then His suffering would be the greatest that only He could do. I submit to you that there have been many people that have died in much more pain than what Jesus might have suffered on the cross. I think I remember an article written about the nazi’s in WW II torturing people just to see how much they could take before they died. That is to say, each level of torture was not enough to kill the person, but that it was the summation of torture what killed them.
Last edited by Dezire2BWise on Thu Aug 23, 2007 6:44 pm; edited 1 time in total
Hello Stan, How are you today? A couple questions if you please, I don’t understand some of your statements.
(Stan)“I pray that the things that I do for others is acceptable to Christ and that I am worthy of his Atonement.” - What does does “worthy of his Atonement" mean?
(Stan)“For me, and how I conduct my life, I often think (like when I am tempted to swear) of Jesus’ suffering and how I do not want to add to His burden.” - “
(Desire2Bwise) How can we add to His burden?
You know Desire2Bwise, that is just the way that my simple mind works. It is obvious that the suffering of the Lord has already taken place. It is kind of, like me standing before the Lord, and having the knowledge that I did not add a lot to His burden.
Now I am curious. You previously posted:
[(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.”
Have I helped you understand that we as LDS people believe without a shadow of doubt that only Jesus has the authority to save?
Your response to that one question is appreciated.
Stan
1. LDS teaching starts the Atonement in one place and finishes it in another. This teaching is unbiblical.
2. The Bible refutes LDS teaching on this and explains Christ’s work of Atonement in terms of a direct historical reference to the Levitical Day of Atonement in which sacrifices were brought to a single location and killed in that location. The Lamb of God brought Himself to the Cross; the sole location of His work of Atonement.
I believe that Sacrifice was given to man as a similitude of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. That is why the sacrifice had to be without blemish. By the time that man had gotten to Moses’ day mankind had been almost wiped out by the flood, had been scattered by the confusion of tongue’s, and the Bible suggests that God was not pleased on how His children were obeying His laws. In the Levitical Day, the children of Israel were a stiff necked people. God had to simplify everything for them, and still they couldn’t follow God’s laws. Remember in Jesus’ day you could only walk so far, you had rules on how and when you had to prepare your meals for the Sabbath, etc.
Therefore your reasoning for the Atonement having to be preformed only on the cross for me doesn’t hold water.
Dezire2Bwise wrote:
For [it is] not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins. Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and [sacrifices] for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and [offering] for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure [therein]; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once [for all]. (Heb 10:4-10)
Your scripture only proves my point. We as LDS, totally agree that the shedding of blood, in the Mosaic law, was satisfied by Jesus Christ when He died on the cross. I posted somewhere stupidly, that it didn’t matter to me if He died on the cross or He was run over bay a wagon.
I now reject my statement and agree that the cross was an integral part of the Atonement.
Dezire2Bwise:
You see, Mormons use Christian-sounding phrases but to Christians it's like one of the fun-house rooms where all the furniture is nailed to the ceiling. We recognize tables and chairs, but everything is upside down, including the LDS Jesus.
I still think that we are on the same page as to His Atonement with exception to Gethsemane. Here is where I am coming from. If Jesus Christ paid for all of the sins of the world on the cross, then His suffering would be the greatest that only He could do. I submit to you that there have been many people that have died in much more pain than what Jesus might have suffered on the cross. I think I remember an article written about the nazi’s in WW II torturing people just to see how much they could take before they died. That is to say, each level of torture was not enough to kill the person, but that it was the summation of torture what killed them.
Last edited by Dezire2BWise on Thu Aug 23, 2007 6:44 pm; edited 1 time in total
Hello Stan, How are you today? A couple questions if you please, I don’t understand some of your statements.
(Stan)“I pray that the things that I do for others is acceptable to Christ and that I am worthy of his Atonement.” - What does does “worthy of his Atonement" mean?
(Stan)“For me, and how I conduct my life, I often think (like when I am tempted to swear) of Jesus’ suffering and how I do not want to add to His burden.” - “
(Desire2Bwise) How can we add to His burden?
You know Desire2Bwise, that is just the way that my simple mind works. It is obvious that the suffering of the Lord has already taken place. It is kind of, like me standing before the Lord, and having the knowledge that I did not add a lot to His burden.
Now I am curious. You previously posted:
[(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.”
Have I helped you understand that we as LDS people believe without a shadow of doubt that only Jesus has the authority to save?
Your response to that one question is appreciated.
Stan
-
_Dezire2BWise
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 6:36 pm
Re: The Atonement
JB –
Now I’m really confused. I went to the LDS.org site for help, and I was surprised to find that….
The Book of Mormon refers to the Law of Moses:
“Behold, I am Jesus Christ the Son of God. I acreated the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are. I was with the Father from the beginning. bI am in the Father, and the Father in me; and in me hath the Father glorified his name. I came unto my own, and my own areceived me not. And the scriptures bconcerning my coming are fulfilled. And as many as have received me, to them have I agiven to become the sons of God; and even so will I to as many as shall believe on my name, for behold, by me bredemption cometh, and cin me is the dlaw of Moses fulfilled. 3Nephi 15-17
Therefore, if ye teach the alaw of Moses, also teach that it is a bshadow of those things which are to come— Mosiah 16:14
Does this Book of Mormon reference refer to some other Law of Moses than what is in the Old Testament? The topical guide cross references Mosiah 16:14 to Hebrews 10:1. The Law is a fixed point of reference that the Book of Mormon agrees is the context of all that Jesus did.
The book of Hebrews was written for a Jewish audience to show them how Jesus established the New Covenant in terms familiar to them. Hebrews places the Levitical system, as it is described in the Old Testament, and Jesus’ work side-by-side. We know that Jesus, a Jew, kept the Law perfectly. Hebrews explains how Jesus did what he did in keeping with the Law. If He failed in the smallest detail then He could not atone for us. Had he failed, Jesus would no longer be qualified to be our Savior. Small details in Hebrews distinguished the true Messiah from a false messiah. It illustrates how the Levitical system of the Mosaic Law looked forward to Jesus’ Atonement; and from the Atonement looks back to the Levitical system. When you consider all this, I don’t understand LDS teaching could say otherwise.
It appears that your understanding comes from this source:
In the Garden of Gethsemane, the weight of our sins caused him to feel such agony and heartbreak that he bled from every pore (see D&C 19:18–19).
Is there something I’ve missed? I understand when you say that Mormon doctrine is an open cannon. What I don't underdstand is how "open canon" can alter history?
Now I’m really confused. I went to the LDS.org site for help, and I was surprised to find that….
The Book of Mormon refers to the Law of Moses:
“Behold, I am Jesus Christ the Son of God. I acreated the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are. I was with the Father from the beginning. bI am in the Father, and the Father in me; and in me hath the Father glorified his name. I came unto my own, and my own areceived me not. And the scriptures bconcerning my coming are fulfilled. And as many as have received me, to them have I agiven to become the sons of God; and even so will I to as many as shall believe on my name, for behold, by me bredemption cometh, and cin me is the dlaw of Moses fulfilled. 3Nephi 15-17
Therefore, if ye teach the alaw of Moses, also teach that it is a bshadow of those things which are to come— Mosiah 16:14
Does this Book of Mormon reference refer to some other Law of Moses than what is in the Old Testament? The topical guide cross references Mosiah 16:14 to Hebrews 10:1. The Law is a fixed point of reference that the Book of Mormon agrees is the context of all that Jesus did.
The book of Hebrews was written for a Jewish audience to show them how Jesus established the New Covenant in terms familiar to them. Hebrews places the Levitical system, as it is described in the Old Testament, and Jesus’ work side-by-side. We know that Jesus, a Jew, kept the Law perfectly. Hebrews explains how Jesus did what he did in keeping with the Law. If He failed in the smallest detail then He could not atone for us. Had he failed, Jesus would no longer be qualified to be our Savior. Small details in Hebrews distinguished the true Messiah from a false messiah. It illustrates how the Levitical system of the Mosaic Law looked forward to Jesus’ Atonement; and from the Atonement looks back to the Levitical system. When you consider all this, I don’t understand LDS teaching could say otherwise.
It appears that your understanding comes from this source:
In the Garden of Gethsemane, the weight of our sins caused him to feel such agony and heartbreak that he bled from every pore (see D&C 19:18–19).
Is there something I’ve missed? I understand when you say that Mormon doctrine is an open cannon. What I don't underdstand is how "open canon" can alter history?