This is the conversation that reshaped how I viewed God at a time when I wasn’t looking for anything new. It was this conversation where I fell in love with your content. Thank you for what you do
This was probably my favorite episode Faith Matters has produced. Faith Matters should publish a book on Atonement theory. Something to flesh out all these ideas and organize them into something to study and think about. I know I need that. My faith has been faltering due to a lack of substantive answers to this very question. This discussion gave me hope to finding an answer that I can sit with. Thank you! Do a book! 😊
@JediJay4 Terryl Givens has several books, and they are great! One you might find useful is "The Crucible of Doubt", but also "The God Who Weeps" and "All Things New" (written with his wife Fiona) are also amazing.
Incredible!!! Many things that haven’t given my spirit peace as culturally we throw around verbiage and tradition that isn’t actually what Joseph Smith taught about Christ. I especially love that the at one ment is happening now! So important to teach our children all these things! Scrupulousity is a by product of not understanding our gentle, merciful God our Father who is full of devotion and sacrificial love to us His Children who is in the business of healing, educating and empowering! THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THIS!!!!!
I respect very much what you said regarding Eugene England. I actually sought brother England out as a young student at BYU. I have always remembered two things from our conversation: 1) he was a very thoughtful, respectful and thinking man; 2) he was concerned re my testimony. I replied , my testimony was not hurt but bolstered in faith by his thoughtfulness and his support for the First Presidency. By the way of atonement, I am of the opinion one should not work to hard to take out the concept of atonement on the basis it was never truly taught as a concept. The overwhelming precept of atonement as come to derive a meaning between divine laws or forces between justice and mercy This is what I hear missing or at least being lost in the high academics. However in the everyday street level. If one loses their child to a rape and murder. It is natural and common for the parent of the raped and murdered child to seek justice ( not retribution) but there is a underlying desire that justice be served upon the wrong doing. In fact, only the academic would not call it a penal act of justice on the level of a parent whom lost a child to a wrongdoer which raped and murdered a young daughter. The perpetrator of the crime has literally robbed the parents of their child and the child of their life. The divine justice must be executed , but through Christ , the child's executioner can be redeemed from his selfish indulgence in destroying the young life. With all due respect , law and justice, mercy and forgiveness are at the core has the essence of justice and law. Thus, your doctrine is amiss and your analogies are undermining the ideas of divine and universal laws of justice and mercy. However, the ideas of medicine and healing is very poignant because the feeling and sublime love is substantive and truly needed within the complete gospel context. The idea of the metaphor that God the Father represents justice and Christ , the perfect advocate before the father advocates mercy before the judge , which are the universal laws of justice. Anyone who has practiced law in the courts understand at a very sublime analogy between law and justice justaposed to mercy. One principal I have learned from many years of practicing law, one cannot have perfect justice without the consideration of grace and mercy. There can be perfect of justice with the court considering the defendants background by which mercy and grace cannot be truly considered and applied. Divine love is the force of power which holds all these precepts together and perfects these concepts. I can say , I have seen this work in the courts many times to perfect justice, and yet, provide mercy to the defendant designed to improve him working towards the future . Nice discussion, but also the workings of the atonement (!yes I am not afraid to use that phrase because I deeply understand the meaning of redemption. The book of Mormon is a great primer ) Remember, there can not be perfect justice without the consideration of grace and mercy. The book of Mormon in my illustrates these universal laws. Wrong again, the problem your panel is suffering from is your training as in the world view of western mechanistic reductionist theory. The concept of restoration, redemption, resurrection, forgiveness, justice and so on you try to apply western reductionist views in a mechanistic corporate methodology However, many of the eastern sects of Christianity more fully understand the mystery of Christ and the interworkings of Christ redemption. We have beautiful concepts but we Latter Day Saints have managed to cancel much of the power of the Book of Mormon, but for some reason we Saints have turned much of our faith into a corporate , mechanistic reductionist manual driven practice rather than a journey of learning step by step, precept upon precept within the process of discovery and revelation ,to accept the mystery of redemption and restoration. Gestalt rather than mechanical reduction and social engineering.
Atonement “Something is happening to me now…at the hands of Gods love..transforming my experience of life ,not something happened back then. “. love this. Thank you Brother Givens.
16:00 The satisfaction of justice taking place is so perfectly described in Adam Miller's discussion on "love is a law, not a reward". Justice and mercy being on the same team or the same side of God's ledger for the Moses 1, 38-39 revelation that His work and glory are simply to bring to pass our immortality and eternal life. Justice and mercy are the parts and particles to what other cultures referred to as the "yin-yang", which are encompassed in the truth of one great whole. We just have this tendency to see them as separated, and even though we profess them as "the Atonement", this almost at times seems to steal away what Christ embodied as both. Sameness. One-ness with the Father. All truth. The real meaning of Atonement. ❤️
Years ago, I read that the original word used in the Bible that has been translated as Just, meant Righteousnesss. It has since caused me to view true justice as a restoration of righteousness, which often in our conflicts and injustices is something only God can give or complete in its wholeness. With this view in mind, I have at times felt in my soul to ask God for justice in my own errors because I crave that restoration and feel how connected it is to the mercy I also stand in need of.
I’ve wondered forever about the an atonement, this is helpful because I now feel great comfort in how I believe, I’m a sinner, I believe God loves me, I repent, the demand for Justice is taken care of between God my Father and me. Jesus my brother pays nothing for anything I’ve done. Jesus being tortured for a all who’ve ever been born just DOES NOT FIT!!! Love the discussion.
“When we’re talking about atonement, in terms of penal substitution, it’s all about me. And it’s about my own sin and righteousness, repentance, and salvation. “And when we zoom out and make it this process of one-ing, I am actually … feeling love toward [my enemies] and sort of coming up with a different way of interacting with them.” - Tim Chaves • 1:09:49 _ I’m grateful for your presence and participation in all of this, Tim (and Aubrey)!
Thank you for this discussion and having Teryl Givens on for it. I have long admired his teaching. Could we say that “grace for grace” and being raised from “grace to grace” is both the horizontal and vertical axis of at-one-ment? That feels right to me when I consider the profound love underlying this majestic work performed by our Redeemer. It seems the essence of receiving the Savior’s gift of reconciliation!
What an inspiring interview - I have more questions now that when I started listening - I love all that we said - I just have to digest it all - Very enlightening - Very thought-provoking -
This might be my favorite also! I had to look up Abelard, because I've been working my way out of this penal interpretation of Christ's suffering and death for a few years and now here's a fairly early theology of love that makes so much sense! Abelard proposed that the example of love elicits love, and Christ continually gives us infinite love so that we are drawn to God. I also love the concept that we belong to whom we love. So simple and amazing!
What if we don't overthink atonement. What if it was simply the process whereby Jesus became fully capable of knowing, understanding and empathizing with all of our pain and suffering, whether it be physical, mental, or spiritual? If so, then atonement was for not just for us, but also for Him, to open a path that leads to a fullness of joy. And if the measure of joy one is able to feel is proportional to the suffering one has felt, then this might explain why Jesus was able to experience a fullness of joy after his resurrection. And this might explain, at least partially, the point of suffering in general. This is what I believe, and of course I could be wrong, but it seems simple and obvious to me, anway.
The process of the Atonement finished Christ's preparations unto the children of men as acknowledged by Him. I think your take hits the nail on the head. It makes such sense and feels so right. Thank you for sharing. Perhaps we are reading too much into it.
I enjoyed this thoroughly. I have felt the oneness of Christ through both the atonement theories spoke about. Maybe instead of its either penal substitution OR experience for perfect empathy and love. Its BOTH/AND. 2 sides of the same coin.
I've read Terryl Givens's biography of Eugene England and the book was heartbreaking for me! Not that the book wasn't well written but the trajectory of Gene's life dream and his experiences teaching at BYU were devastatingly tragic. I've just listened to this podcast on the atonement and I loved Terryl's thoughts on possible interpretations of the meanings of the atonement. After I listened to the podcast I reread 2nd Nephi and I must conclude my perceptions weren't as positive as I had hoped. Woe, woe, woe be unto us was my first reaction to the introductory chapters in 2 Nephi and I felt like I was reading the Old Testament. I'm very puzzled about how Terryl can cite the B of M as a more positive take on the true meaning of the atonement.. Sad, Kleis Clissold
From about 1:01:09 through the question that Aubrey poses about what the theology of a healing Atonement looks like today: I truly feel and see that mainstream evangelical Christianity has a lot to offer members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and that in conjunction with the ongoing restoration is the continual gathering (of Israel) in Christ, and although we as members in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints profess and speak of a much more loving sense of theology we fall short in what Adam Miller explains as love being a commandment. We need that sense of healing. We tend to default towards a Calvinist approach in our actions or by the "genetics" of it all (as Teryl put it), and we tend to process the theology of Atonement much more through the lens of scrupulosity and the 'confusion of calculus' than do the evangelical Christians.
I loved this. Thank you. Im 63, active church member, returned missionary still searching truth wherever it takes me. You mentioned another podcast with bro. Givens at the beginning. Which one is that please?
I love Brother Givens. The only thing he says I find myself disagreeing with is that there is inherent shame within the idea of Christs Atonement being a backup plan. It's pretty clear that the Father became what he became by doing the same thing that Christ did. What did Christ do? He obtained a body. He obeyed completely. He suffered. He died. He resurrected. That was the path the Father wanted us to be on. But the Savior was provided because choice would mean that so very few could be saved by the laws of perfection. Not even Michael or Eve were intelligent enough to figure their way around the complexities of perfection and choice in the garden. If they yield, we will provide a Savior.
I think you could continue this line of thought to conclude that Christs suffering educated him in all the ways we would have necessarily needed to have been educated in order to learn the full consequences of our mistakes. Eve’s decision to eat a fruit led to the holocaust eventually. Christ becomes a master teacher who has tasted of hell and death and is also merciful enough to keep that kind of learning from being necessary if you’re willing to listen and learn from him. I still don’t think that answers why the Father needed his Son do to it though
Christ said the Atonement finished His preparations unto the children of men. So I think that process was an experience that informed His empathy and increased His ability to experientially relate to us, which was the purpose of His mortal life in all ways.
Love this! I’ve been praying for a better understanding of the atonement… Is there any way to get a transcript of this? I don’t retain information and it takes me hrs and hrs to take good notes so I can read over, study, and ponder this.
Elder Nelson emphasized that we must include Jesus Christ always, not just the atonement. We should always say the atonement of Jesus Christ not just the atonement. I’m confused about you dismissing the word atonement. I don’t think Elder Nelson meant that at all. Please clarify.
My take on this follows: We often think of "the Atonement" as an event, something we look to in itself for redemption. The way we speak of it makes that apparent. Christ lived and suffered and died and was resurrected to draw us to God, not so we'd look to a one-time event that nobody can explain. Maybe we should think in terms of how Christ is continually atoning and healing and saving us through His infinite love that we can both see in the record of His life and feel every day. Hope this helps.
If the celestial kingdom is a political body of coordinated beings, but the mechanism of co-ordination cannot be easily described, various earthly analogies would be needed to describe being out of alignment with the celestial polity, as well as having that alignment restored. I posit that this is the purpose of substitutionary analogies such as the restoration of debt, legal standing, and honor: they all point to the same core idea - Christ, as heart-transforming exemplar, reconciles us with the Way of the heavenly polity, enabling us to take up full participation in celestial life as heavenly citizens. In a contemporary earthly state, citizens and denizens are coordinated by an economy and a set of laws. Thus, in such a polity, to fall out of alignment with the state often means to be in violation of law (subject to Justice) and/or to have failed to meet one's obligations within the economy (typically, to've defaulted on debt). Consequently, describing one being out of alignment with the celestial polity as being indebted and subject to justice is a meaningful analogy. In Anselm's world, feudal arrangements were a common way of forming a protective fighting force for an area. The debt of honor vassals owed to a lord is what coordinated the force: by pledging military support to a central leader (the lord), the vassals enabled themselves to be coordinated as a fighting force. Thus, the notion of a broken debt of honor is simply another analogy describing the same idea - by falling out of alignment with the ways of the celestial kingdom, we are no longer coordinated members of the political body. Why are analogies needed? Well, let's posit for a moment that the actual coordinating mechanism of the perfect celestial polity defies prescription. It is so agile, adaptive, intuitive, and spontaneous that, irrespective of whether the behavior of celestial citizens in relation to one another can be *described*, sociologically, after the fact, by an observer, there is no list of rules or script one could follow to participate in day-to-day, moment-to-moment celestial life. It must simply be ingrained in oneself, permeating one's whole being; it must define and constitute the entirety of one's character so that one's decisions arise organically in the moment. In my mind, this coordinating mechanism is love - charity, the pure love of Christ (perhaps with a healthy dose of faith and hope). When one is loving, one is ever-attentive to others, adaptable, eager to help and participate (as touching one thing), or drop whatever one is doing, even in sacrifice; to consecrate one's whole self to the collective effort; to bear the burdens of others, mourn and comfort, and so forth. A citizenry of the loving is adaptable and responsive, full of correct principles and governing themselves, filled with the will of God - more agile and efficient and coordinated at small and large scales than any prescriptive body could ever be. Thus, to lack the pure love of Christ - to not be filled with the will of God, to lack perfect faith, hope, and charity-is to be out of alignment with the celestial Way. Because the celestial Way defies easy description (and perhaps because, if laid out fully and directly in a series of *descriptive* laws, the temptation to try to belong and participate by using them as a *prescriptive* recipe would be too great, thus damning us for as long as we held on to that doomed project), analogies were required, to show how the at-one-ment of Christ could realign us with the celestial polity, restoring our citizenship and belonging within the nation. Hence, the ideas of substitutionary debt resolution and legal restoration, as well as Anselm's metaphor of the fulfillment of our debt of honor. They are saying the same thing - Christ, as the exemplar who transforms our hearts, reconciles us to the celestial state, coordinating us with it for good by transforming our whole selves to be filled with the charity of God.
I started listening to this because I’ve been reading the Infinite Atonement and thought Br Givens might have some more insight but in the first 5 mins I was shaking my head in disbelief. Joseph Smith never talked about the atonement; he never used the word atonement……???? I went to the Index to the Triple Combination and found the word atonement or atone used 20 times in the Book of Mormon and that’s not counting all the other references like 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. 12 And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities. I found the word atonement in the D&C used 4 times and that’s not counting passages like D&C 19
16 For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; 17 But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I; 18 Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit-and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink- 19 Nevertheless, glory be to the Father, and I partook and finished my preparations unto the children of men. In the Book of Moses there is this; 54 Hence came the saying abroad among the people, that the Son of God hath atoned for original guilt, wherein the sins of the parents cannot be answered upon the heads of the children, for they are whole from the foundation of the world. And our third Article of Faith which Joseph wrote says; 3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel. Our whole concept of punishment for sin comes from 2 Nephi: 10 “….Which punishment that is affixed is in opposition to that of the happiness which is affixed, to answer the ends of the atonement-” I also don’t think he ever read the Hebrews, no early atonement doctrine my foot. I am really surprised and disappointed in how badly he took President Nelson out of context, shame on him; “As Latter-day Saints, we refer to His mission as the Atonement of Jesus Christ, which made resurrection a reality for all and made eternal life possible for those who repent of their sins and receive and keep essential ordinances and covenants. It is doctrinally incomplete to speak of the Lord’s atoning sacrifice by shortcut phrases, such as “the Atonement” or “the enabling power of the Atonement” or “applying the Atonement” or “being strengthened by the Atonement.” These expressions present a real risk of misdirecting faith by treating the event as if it had living existence and capabilities independent of our Heavenly Father and His Son, Jesus Christ. Under the Father’s great eternal plan, it is the Savior who suffered. It is the Savior who broke the bands of death. It is the Savior who paid the price for our sins and transgressions and blots them out on condition of our repentance. It is the Savior who delivers us from physical and spiritual death. There is no amorphous entity called “the Atonement” upon which we may call for succor, healing, forgiveness, or power. Jesus Christ is the source. Sacred terms such as Atonement and Resurrection describe what the Savior did, according to the Father’s plan, so that we may live with hope in this life and gain eternal life in the world to come. The Savior’s atoning sacrifice-the central act of all human history-is best understood and appreciated when we expressly and clearly connect it to Him.” President Nelson was saying we shouldn’t treat the atonement as if it is an entity separate from Christ, I remember that talk and since then I have always tried to say ‘the atonement of Christ’ or we can only be saved through ‘the atoning power of Christ sacrifice’ I’m not even going to bother listening to this to the end.
D&C 19: I hear the exasperated parent of a wayward child saying, "What do I have to do to get it through your thick head!" Try substituting 'command' with 'beg'.
Brother Givens believes that when The Brethren are unanimous on something then it is doctrine, but that can’t be true because blood atonement and black people being denied full participation in the church were unanimous beliefs in the past.
Or there were multiple hominids that awoke having had a far more intelligent spirit breathed into them. It could have been a thing that happened multiple times in multiple places
This is the conversation that reshaped how I viewed God at a time when I wasn’t looking for anything new. It was this conversation where I fell in love with your content. Thank you for what you do
This was probably my favorite episode Faith Matters has produced. Faith Matters should publish a book on Atonement theory. Something to flesh out all these ideas and organize them into something to study and think about. I know I need that. My faith has been faltering due to a lack of substantive answers to this very question. This discussion gave me hope to finding an answer that I can sit with. Thank you! Do a book! 😊
@JediJay4 Terryl Givens has several books, and they are great! One you might find useful is "The Crucible of Doubt", but also "The God Who Weeps" and "All Things New" (written with his wife Fiona) are also amazing.
Incredible!!! Many things that haven’t given my spirit peace as culturally we throw around verbiage and tradition that isn’t actually what Joseph Smith taught about Christ. I especially love that the at one ment is happening now! So important to teach our children all these things! Scrupulousity is a by product of not understanding our gentle, merciful God our Father who is full of devotion and sacrificial love to us His Children who is in the business of healing, educating and empowering! THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THIS!!!!!
I respect very much what you said regarding Eugene England. I actually sought brother England out as a young student at BYU. I have always remembered two things from our conversation: 1) he was a very thoughtful, respectful and thinking man; 2) he was concerned re my testimony. I replied , my testimony was not hurt but bolstered in faith by his thoughtfulness and his support for the First Presidency.
By the way of atonement, I am of the opinion one should not work to hard to take out the concept of atonement on the basis it was never truly taught as a concept. The overwhelming precept of atonement as come to derive a meaning between divine laws or forces between justice and mercy
This is what I hear missing or at least being lost in the high academics. However in the everyday street level. If one loses their child to a rape and murder. It is natural and common for the parent of the raped and murdered child to seek justice ( not retribution) but there is a underlying desire that justice be served upon the wrong doing. In fact, only the academic would not call it a penal act of justice on the level of a parent whom lost a child to a wrongdoer which raped and murdered a young daughter.
The perpetrator of the crime has literally robbed the parents of their child and the child of their life. The divine justice must be executed , but through Christ , the child's executioner can be redeemed from his selfish indulgence in destroying the young life.
With all due respect , law and justice, mercy and forgiveness are at the core has the essence of justice and law. Thus, your doctrine is amiss and your analogies are undermining the ideas of divine and universal laws of justice and mercy.
However, the ideas of medicine and healing is very poignant because the feeling and sublime love is substantive and truly needed within the complete gospel context.
The idea of the metaphor that God the Father represents justice and Christ , the perfect advocate before the father advocates mercy before the judge , which are the universal laws of justice.
Anyone who has practiced law in the courts understand at a very sublime analogy between law and justice justaposed to mercy.
One principal I have learned from many years of practicing law, one cannot have perfect justice without the consideration of grace and mercy. There can be perfect of justice with the court considering the defendants background by which mercy and grace cannot be truly considered and applied.
Divine love is the force of power which holds all these precepts together and perfects these concepts.
I can say , I have seen this work in the courts many times to perfect justice, and yet, provide mercy to the defendant designed to improve him working towards the future .
Nice discussion, but also the workings of the atonement (!yes I am not afraid to use that phrase because I deeply understand the meaning of redemption. The book of Mormon is a great primer ) Remember, there can not be perfect justice without the consideration of grace and mercy.
The book of Mormon in my illustrates these universal laws.
Wrong again, the problem your panel is suffering from is your training as in the world view of western mechanistic reductionist theory. The concept of restoration, redemption, resurrection, forgiveness, justice and so on you try to apply western reductionist views in a mechanistic corporate methodology
However, many of the eastern sects of Christianity more fully understand the mystery of Christ and the interworkings of Christ redemption. We have beautiful concepts but we Latter Day Saints have managed to cancel much of the power of the Book of Mormon, but for some reason we Saints have turned much of our faith into a corporate , mechanistic reductionist manual driven practice rather than a journey of learning step by step, precept upon precept within the process of discovery and revelation ,to accept the mystery of redemption and restoration. Gestalt rather than mechanical reduction and social engineering.
Excellent discussion. Great job!!!
This interview is monumental in terms of the perspective of the sacrifice of Christ and its effects on us.
Atonement
“Something is happening to me now…at the hands of Gods love..transforming my experience of life ,not something happened back then. “. love this. Thank you Brother Givens.
16:00 The satisfaction of justice taking place is so perfectly described in Adam Miller's discussion on "love is a law, not a reward". Justice and mercy being on the same team or the same side of God's ledger for the Moses 1, 38-39 revelation that His work and glory are simply to bring to pass our immortality and eternal life. Justice and mercy are the parts and particles to what other cultures referred to as the "yin-yang", which are encompassed in the truth of one great whole. We just have this tendency to see them as separated, and even though we profess them as "the Atonement", this almost at times seems to steal away what Christ embodied as both. Sameness. One-ness with the Father. All truth. The real meaning of Atonement. ❤️
Years ago, I read that the original word used in the Bible that has been translated as Just, meant Righteousnesss. It has since caused me to view true justice as a restoration of righteousness, which often in our conflicts and injustices is something only God can give or complete in its wholeness.
With this view in mind, I have at times felt in my soul to ask God for justice in my own errors because I crave that restoration and feel how connected it is to the mercy I also stand in need of.
Thankyou for this conversation. What food for thought it has provided and what doors of possibilities it has opened for consideration. Thank you!!!!
“We belong to whomever we love, … [and] if we love God, then we are [God’s].”
- Terryl Givens quoting Peter Abelard • 6:43
I’ve wondered forever about the an atonement, this is helpful because I now feel great comfort in how I believe, I’m a sinner, I believe God loves me, I repent, the demand for Justice is taken care of between God my Father and me. Jesus my brother pays nothing for anything I’ve done. Jesus being tortured for a all who’ve ever been born just DOES NOT FIT!!! Love the discussion.
“When we’re talking about atonement, in terms of penal substitution, it’s all about me. And it’s about my own sin and righteousness, repentance, and salvation.
“And when we zoom out and make it this process of one-ing, I am actually … feeling love toward [my enemies] and sort of coming up with a different way of interacting with them.” - Tim Chaves • 1:09:49
_
I’m grateful for your presence and participation in all of this, Tim (and Aubrey)!
Thank you for this discussion and having Teryl Givens on for it. I have long admired his teaching. Could we say that “grace for grace” and being raised from “grace to grace” is both the horizontal and vertical axis of at-one-ment? That feels right to me when I consider the profound love underlying this majestic work performed by our Redeemer. It seems the essence of receiving the Savior’s gift of reconciliation!
What an inspiring interview - I have more questions now that when I started listening - I love all that we said - I just have to digest it all - Very enlightening - Very thought-provoking -
I always love the conversations with Terryl. Thank you so much Tim for asking about D&C 19. That's been bothering me for awhile!
This might be my favorite also! I had to look up Abelard, because I've been working my way out of this penal interpretation of Christ's suffering and death for a few years and now here's a fairly early theology of love that makes so much sense! Abelard proposed that the example of love elicits love, and Christ continually gives us infinite love so that we are drawn to God. I also love the concept that we belong to whom we love. So simple and amazing!
What if we don't overthink atonement. What if it was simply the process whereby Jesus became fully capable of knowing, understanding and empathizing with all of our pain and suffering, whether it be physical, mental, or spiritual? If so, then atonement was for not just for us, but also for Him, to open a path that leads to a fullness of joy. And if the measure of joy one is able to feel is proportional to the suffering one has felt, then this might explain why Jesus was able to experience a fullness of joy after his resurrection. And this might explain, at least partially, the point of suffering in general. This is what I believe, and of course I could be wrong, but it seems simple and obvious to me, anway.
The process of the Atonement finished Christ's preparations unto the children of men as acknowledged by Him. I think your take hits the nail on the head. It makes such sense and feels so right. Thank you for sharing. Perhaps we are reading too much into it.
I enjoyed this thoroughly. I have felt the oneness of Christ through both the atonement theories spoke about. Maybe instead of its either penal substitution OR experience for perfect empathy and love. Its BOTH/AND.
2 sides of the same coin.
I've read Terryl Givens's biography of Eugene England and the book was heartbreaking for me! Not that the book wasn't well written but the trajectory of Gene's life dream and his experiences teaching at BYU were devastatingly tragic.
I've just listened to this podcast on the atonement and I loved Terryl's thoughts on possible interpretations of the meanings of the atonement. After I listened to the podcast I reread 2nd Nephi and I must conclude my perceptions weren't as positive as I had hoped. Woe, woe, woe be unto us was my first reaction to the introductory chapters in 2 Nephi and I felt like I was reading the Old Testament. I'm very puzzled about how Terryl can cite the B of M as a more positive take on the true meaning of the atonement.. Sad, Kleis Clissold
In the realm of Atonement, Denny Weaver's "The Nonviolent Atonement" made a significant impact on my thinking.
From about 1:01:09 through the question that Aubrey poses about what the theology of a healing Atonement looks like today: I truly feel and see that mainstream evangelical Christianity has a lot to offer members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and that in conjunction with the ongoing restoration is the continual gathering (of Israel) in Christ, and although we as members in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints profess and speak of a much more loving sense of theology we fall short in what Adam Miller explains as love being a commandment. We need that sense of healing. We tend to default towards a Calvinist approach in our actions or by the "genetics" of it all (as Teryl put it), and we tend to process the theology of Atonement much more through the lens of scrupulosity and the 'confusion of calculus' than do the evangelical Christians.
I loved this. Thank you. Im 63, active church member, returned missionary still searching truth wherever it takes me. You mentioned another podcast with bro. Givens at the beginning. Which one is that please?
I love Brother Givens. The only thing he says I find myself disagreeing with is that there is inherent shame within the idea of Christs Atonement being a backup plan. It's pretty clear that the Father became what he became by doing the same thing that Christ did. What did Christ do? He obtained a body. He obeyed completely. He suffered. He died. He resurrected.
That was the path the Father wanted us to be on. But the Savior was provided because choice would mean that so very few could be saved by the laws of perfection. Not even Michael or Eve were intelligent enough to figure their way around the complexities of perfection and choice in the garden.
If they yield, we will provide a Savior.
I think you could continue this line of thought to conclude that Christs suffering educated him in all the ways we would have necessarily needed to have been educated in order to learn the full consequences of our mistakes. Eve’s decision to eat a fruit led to the holocaust eventually.
Christ becomes a master teacher who has tasted of hell and death and is also merciful enough to keep that kind of learning from being necessary if you’re willing to listen and learn from him.
I still don’t think that answers why the Father needed his Son do to it though
Christ said the Atonement finished His preparations unto the children of men. So I think that process was an experience that informed His empathy and increased His ability to experientially relate to us, which was the purpose of His mortal life in all ways.
Love this! I’ve been praying for a better understanding of the atonement… Is there any way to get a transcript of this? I don’t retain information and it takes me hrs and hrs to take good notes so I can read over, study, and ponder this.
The most important event in the world..and yet theres only one place in the new testament where we can find that word.."atonement"
Elder Nelson emphasized that we must include Jesus Christ always, not just the atonement. We should always say the atonement of Jesus Christ not just the atonement. I’m confused about you dismissing the word atonement. I don’t think Elder Nelson meant that at all. Please clarify.
My take on this follows: We often think of "the Atonement" as an event, something we look to in itself for redemption. The way we speak of it makes that apparent. Christ lived and suffered and died and was resurrected to draw us to God, not so we'd look to a one-time event that nobody can explain. Maybe we should think in terms of how Christ is continually atoning and healing and saving us through His infinite love that we can both see in the record of His life and feel every day. Hope this helps.
If the celestial kingdom is a political body of coordinated beings, but the mechanism of co-ordination cannot be easily described, various earthly analogies would be needed to describe being out of alignment with the celestial polity, as well as having that alignment restored.
I posit that this is the purpose of substitutionary analogies such as the restoration of debt, legal standing, and honor: they all point to the same core idea - Christ, as heart-transforming exemplar, reconciles us with the Way of the heavenly polity, enabling us to take up full participation in celestial life as heavenly citizens.
In a contemporary earthly state, citizens and denizens are coordinated by an economy and a set of laws. Thus, in such a polity, to fall out of alignment with the state often means to be in violation of law (subject to Justice) and/or to have failed to meet one's obligations within the economy (typically, to've defaulted on debt).
Consequently, describing one being out of alignment with the celestial polity as being indebted and subject to justice is a meaningful analogy.
In Anselm's world, feudal arrangements were a common way of forming a protective fighting force for an area. The debt of honor vassals owed to a lord is what coordinated the force: by pledging military support to a central leader (the lord), the vassals enabled themselves to be coordinated as a fighting force.
Thus, the notion of a broken debt of honor is simply another analogy describing the same idea - by falling out of alignment with the ways of the celestial kingdom, we are no longer coordinated members of the political body.
Why are analogies needed? Well, let's posit for a moment that the actual coordinating mechanism of the perfect celestial polity defies prescription. It is so agile, adaptive, intuitive, and spontaneous that, irrespective of whether the behavior of celestial citizens in relation to one another can be *described*, sociologically, after the fact, by an observer, there is no list of rules or script one could follow to participate in day-to-day, moment-to-moment celestial life. It must simply be ingrained in oneself, permeating one's whole being; it must define and constitute the entirety of one's character so that one's decisions arise organically in the moment.
In my mind, this coordinating mechanism is love - charity, the pure love of Christ (perhaps with a healthy dose of faith and hope). When one is loving, one is ever-attentive to others, adaptable, eager to help and participate (as touching one thing), or drop whatever one is doing, even in sacrifice; to consecrate one's whole self to the collective effort; to bear the burdens of others, mourn and comfort, and so forth. A citizenry of the loving is adaptable and responsive, full of correct principles and governing themselves, filled with the will of God - more agile and efficient and coordinated at small and large scales than any prescriptive body could ever be.
Thus, to lack the pure love of Christ - to not be filled with the will of God, to lack perfect faith, hope, and charity-is to be out of alignment with the celestial Way. Because the celestial Way defies easy description (and perhaps because, if laid out fully and directly in a series of *descriptive* laws, the temptation to try to belong and participate by using them as a *prescriptive* recipe would be too great, thus damning us for as long as we held on to that doomed project), analogies were required, to show how the at-one-ment of Christ could realign us with the celestial polity, restoring our citizenship and belonging within the nation.
Hence, the ideas of substitutionary debt resolution and legal restoration, as well as Anselm's metaphor of the fulfillment of our debt of honor. They are saying the same thing - Christ, as the exemplar who transforms our hearts, reconciles us to the celestial state, coordinating us with it for good by transforming our whole selves to be filled with the charity of God.
I started listening to this because I’ve been reading the Infinite Atonement and thought Br Givens might have some more insight but in the first 5 mins I was shaking my head in disbelief.
Joseph Smith never talked about the atonement; he never used the word atonement……????
I went to the Index to the Triple Combination and found the word atonement or atone used 20 times in the Book of Mormon and that’s not counting all the other references like 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.
12 And he will take upon him death, that he may loose the bands of death which bind his people; and he will take upon him their infirmities, that his bowels may be filled with mercy, according to the flesh, that he may know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities.
I found the word atonement in the D&C used 4 times and that’s not counting passages like D&C 19
16 For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent;
17 But if they would not repent they must suffer even as I;
18 Which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit-and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink-
19 Nevertheless, glory be to the Father, and I partook and finished my preparations unto the children of men.
In the Book of Moses there is this;
54 Hence came the saying abroad among the people, that the Son of God hath atoned for original guilt, wherein the sins of the parents cannot be answered upon the heads of the children, for they are whole from the foundation of the world.
And our third Article of Faith which Joseph wrote says;
3 We believe that through the Atonement of Christ, all mankind may be saved, by obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel.
Our whole concept of punishment for sin comes from 2 Nephi: 10
“….Which punishment that is affixed is in opposition to that of the happiness which is affixed, to answer the ends of the atonement-”
I also don’t think he ever read the Hebrews, no early atonement doctrine my foot.
I am really surprised and disappointed in how badly he took President Nelson out of context, shame on him;
“As Latter-day Saints, we refer to His mission as the Atonement of Jesus Christ, which made resurrection a reality for all and made eternal life possible for those who repent of their sins and receive and keep essential ordinances and covenants.
It is doctrinally incomplete to speak of the Lord’s atoning sacrifice by shortcut phrases, such as “the Atonement” or “the enabling power of the Atonement” or “applying the Atonement” or “being strengthened by the Atonement.” These expressions present a real risk of misdirecting faith by treating the event as if it had living existence and capabilities independent of our Heavenly Father and His Son, Jesus Christ.
Under the Father’s great eternal plan, it is the Savior who suffered. It is the Savior who broke the bands of death. It is the Savior who paid the price for our sins and transgressions and blots them out on condition of our repentance. It is the Savior who delivers us from physical and spiritual death.
There is no amorphous entity called “the Atonement” upon which we may call for succor, healing, forgiveness, or power. Jesus Christ is the source. Sacred terms such as Atonement and Resurrection describe what the Savior did, according to the Father’s plan, so that we may live with hope in this life and gain eternal life in the world to come. The Savior’s atoning sacrifice-the central act of all human history-is best understood and appreciated when we expressly and clearly connect it to Him.”
President Nelson was saying we shouldn’t treat the atonement as if it is an entity separate from Christ, I remember that talk and since then I have always tried to say ‘the atonement of Christ’ or we can only be saved through ‘the atoning power of Christ sacrifice’
I’m not even going to bother listening to this to the end.
D&C 19: I hear the exasperated parent of a wayward child saying, "What do I have to do to get it through your thick head!" Try substituting 'command' with 'beg'.
Really well done, intriguing episode. Is there a companion book by Teryl or another that covers these atonement theories from an LDS perspective?
"All Things New" by Terryl and Fiona is probably the closest thing for now!
Brother Givens believes that when The Brethren are unanimous on something then it is doctrine, but that can’t be true because blood atonement and black people being denied full participation in the church were unanimous beliefs in the past.
1:05:50 YES!!!
Perhaps Adam and Eve were real(ish) or at a minimum a metaphor for when hominids first became self-aware (conscience) and hence capable of sinning.
Or there were multiple hominids that awoke having had a far more intelligent spirit breathed into them. It could have been a thing that happened multiple times in multiple places
The same conclusions I have come to. Is it confirmation bias on my part?
I didn't feel enlightened as Givens suggested I should after this. Maybe it's just me...
I agree