- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Yes that makes sense. Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
bc_pg, it make sense to me too. When you say:
Quote:In my mind making a God hurt because of something we did increases our guilt instead of assuaging it.
I’ve never thought of it this way.
Thanks.
Mike from Milton.
Quote:making a God hurt because of something we did
Fwiw, my take – after saying how much I appreciate DEEPLY your comment:
Quote:“Ye are gods.”
We make gods hurt all the time, every day – especially those we love the most.
For me, it’s NOT just the idea of an Atonement that resonates; it’s the combination of the idea that we really are gods in a very powerful way – and that we suck at it – but that it’s OK – because one of us (another God) showed us that it’s possible to hurt the gods around us less and less each day. He showed us a path to freedom – to become more than our nature – to be godly – to be gods.
I see the Atonement as the power that under-girds our morality and over-rides our natural mortality and teaches us that we really can be and become more than just smart animals as much as I see it in any other way. To me, in a very real way, it says:
“It’s OK if you aren’t the fittest animal in the pack. It’s OK if you suffer for innumerable reasons. It’s OK if life’s not fair and just and equitable. It’s OK. It’s OK. It’s OK. Peace I leave with you, my child.”
I really don’t care about the exact “nature” of this concept. I care DEEPLY about the message I take from it. There are lots of things in this life that suck, including me sometimes, but, in the end . . .
It’s OK.
Ray – that actually makes a lot of sense to me – fairly close to how I think about things in many ways. bc_pg, I find it useful to think of sin and virtue in terms of words, thoughts, and deeds that either injure and alienate or heal and unite.
The garden and the cross weren’t about punishment, although that imagery is specifically used in the scriptures. These acts were both instructive, showing us how to heal the rifts in our relationships, and justifying, allowing the Savior to claim the rights of mercy and advocate based on his perfect virtue for each of us. He alone, the one without sin, can shame our accusers. Since we accuse each other, His willingness to extend mercy to each of us, undeserving though we are, along with His sinlessness, makes Him the intermediary for each and every one of us. He validates our worth, confirms our ability to progress and change, and compWhetherels us to see the value and redemptive possibilities of others.
The scriptures use a punishment metaphor because it appeals to our innate sense of fairness. When we suffer unjustly, we ask “Why me?”. When we are asked to do more than our part, we say “That’s not fair.” When a toddler hits another, the first cries out and typically responds in kind. This is our carnal nature.
God as Whipping Boy satisfies our need for justice until we come to understand that the real power is not freedom from deserved consequences but the grace that changes us as we see our potential through God’s eyes.
Sorry I missed Ray’s response. Takes me FOREVER to type on my phone… Ugh! It goes without saying that the long post before this is how I see things. YMMV.
mercyngrace wrote:I find it useful to think of sin and virtue in terms of words, thoughts, and deeds that either injure and alienate or heal and unite.
I like this thought. Thanks!
:thumbup: I’m afraid I’ve not found these threads very helpful as a marginal believer. Those that have posted, responded, reposted and responded again seem to be speaking from the same intense position of faith and committment. For me and some like me lacking that means there’s not really a place a this table. If I had that sort of testimony I wouldn’t be lurking here trying to figure out how to stay. I’ll back out for awhile and see what everyone has to say about the WoW. GBSmith wrote:I’m afraid I’ve not found these threads very helpful as a marginal believer. Those that have posted, responded, reposted and responded again seem to be speaking from the same intense position of faith and committment. For me and some like me lacking that means there’s not really a place a this table. If I had that sort of testimony I wouldn’t be lurking here trying to figure out how to stay. I’ll back out for awhile and see what everyone has to say about the WoW.
I imagine we each have our different points in these lists of questions requiring us to evaluate our faith.
The first few questions are not the ones I struggle with as much as others.
Perhaps, GB, the thoughts and faith on the Godhead and Atonement hinge more on some of the other points in the interview for you.
I can see how the order of these questions would change a person’s thoughts on the subject.
GBSmith wrote:I’m afraid I’ve not found these threads very helpful as a marginal believer. Those that have posted, responded, reposted and responded again seem to be speaking from the same intense position of faith and committment. For me and some like me lacking that means there’s not really a place a this table. If I had that sort of testimony I wouldn’t be lurking here trying to figure out how to stay. I’ll back out for awhile and see what everyone has to say about the WoW.
Yep. To me the first two questions are givemes. Universal.
It will get much more interesting from here on out.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
I know the atonement, although I have more to learn about it in this life. GBSmith wrote:I’m afraid I’ve not found these threads very helpful as a marginal believer. Those that have posted, responded, reposted and responded again seem to be speaking from the same intense position of faith and committment. For me and some like me lacking that means there’s not really a place a this table. If I had that sort of testimony I wouldn’t be lurking here trying to figure out how to stay. I’ll back out for awhile and see what everyone has to say about the WoW.
Perhaps I haven’t been clear. I’m not sure that each of us have expressed intense faith, but rather, how we feel about this specific question. Many intensely feel something with respect to these things, but I hardly think it could be categorized as “faith” in the standard LDS definitions of things.In my original post, I rejected the standard definition of atonement including the concept that god was so hung up on our sins he needed to kill his son. I also rejected the idea of fallen man. I then defined what atonement is to me, and a personal experience with it.
Likewise, in my answer to the question of God, I rejected the standard definition, and posited what ‘god’ is to me. These are not your standard testimonies.
I think Ray, Brian and others have defined their way of answering the question — most of which don’t fit the standard testimony model — I find this fascinating.
I’m interested in what you have to say, because until this very post, I thought you were more-or-less a traditional believer. Maybe I have read your posts incorrectly — I think you have valuable input to share, and I for one would like read it. However, participation in the thread is up to you.
I appreciate you being here. We’re all just muddling through, in my humble opinion.
I think the problem many Latter-day Saints have is that they dumb down the atonement and Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross. I’m sure this is true of others also, but I don’t hang out on their disaffected websites. 
Because of the legalism that infects our culture the atonement is largely something that applies to somebody else. I had the home teachers over last week and one of my home teachers is a former member of the temple presidency and is incredibly smug. They brought lesson 12 from the GASmith manual about sharing the gospel and he kept talking about how “they” need the gospel. Later on in the conversation he talked about his inactive children and about the example of righteousness he and his wife set. Most Latter-day Saints believe, I think, that if you can pass a temple recommend interview, do OK in your calling, and are not guilty of major moral sins that they are justified by their personal righteousness, merely because they follow the obvious rules that the church articulates. Receiving a leadership calling is all the evidence you need that you are favored by God, and the higher the calling the better you are.
This is one reason I think that general conference talks in general often lack the power of a testimony like the one Wayfarer shared early in this thread. With the exception of Dieter Uchtdorf’s Sunday AM talk they would never think of sharing the idea that they were sinners in need of a savior. The atonement is for people who have committed adultery, fornicated, are gay, are drug addicted, or in some way committed a “hot sin”, being defined as a sin committed by somebody else, as opposed to the sins like gossip, lack of gratitude, lack of concern for the poor, etc., that we ourselves commit that are of course small things we convince ourselves that God doesn’t care about.
Sin matters because it hurts other people and spits in Heavenly Father’s face, like our own children spit in our face when we lack gratitude for everything we have been given. “Be Ye Therefore Perfect” indicts us all. Every one. No one lives up to Jesus’ example of worship, dedication to sharing the gospel, or concern for others. Nor are we capable of this level of perfection on our own.
Somebody earlier referred to the atonement as a metaphor and was turned off by the idea of a God torturing his son in order to pay for the mistakes of others. I know this is a concern for a lot of people, but I think when you scrub the dirt and the blood and the nail marks off of the crucifixion you rob it of its power. It is incredibly gruesome and offensive, but it’s supposed to be, because otherwise we would not understand either the depth of God’s love for us or the seriousness of sin or the width of the gulf between a perfect God and our imperfect selves. We wouldn’t really understand just how deeply we need a Savior. We would think that it’s enough to be a nice person and be kind to animals and maybe contribute to Friends of Scouting or to give five bucks at Christmas to the Salvation Army, and then surely God loves you.
To the extent that some consider Latter-day Saints not Christian, I think this is largely the reason. If you go back to Wayfarer’s original post, you see a man (I think . . ) who knows he cannot save himself. If you looked at my story you would see a man (this I know!
I don’t think most LDS see it that way. They believe their mere cultural conversion to the LDS church and having sat through some ordinances is what justifies them before God.
There is no such thing as a saving ordinance. What saves is the core knowledge that you need a savior because of your intractable imperfections, that Savior is Jesus, and the atonement is what makes eternal life possible.
I feel like this is pretty clearly articulated in the Bible and BoM, but often lost in just keeping the programs going in the LDS church. It’s also there in the words of the general authorities, but again often lost in the “keep the commandments” “pay your tithing” “follow the standards” drumbeat. I had to go outside the church to really understand the atonement and to actually be able to find it inside the church, because before I didn’t really know what to look for.
Wow, Bob, I really appreciate your response — It’s quite distinct from my point of view, but I’ve gained a lot from your insight. Just to be clear, is that a “yes” or a “no” on the question of “atonement”? Well said BobDixon. Outstanding stuff.
Mike from Milton.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.