Showing posts with label atonement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label atonement. Show all posts

Saturday, October 16, 2010

Atonement Theory, Part 2: In Christ

If there is one thing to understand about Jesus it is that he was a man, a real human being.  Jesus did not float above the ground as he moved form place to place.  He walked like anyone else and his feet got dirty.  He did not have a halo hovering over his head but looked like everyone else around him.  He got dirty, tired, hungry and thirsty.  Sometimes in our efforts to emphasize Christ’s divinity we gloss over one of his most important attributes—his humanity.  I believe that to understand the Atonement it is crucial to understand that Jesus was a real human person just like us.

The Book of Mormon says: “And he [Jesus] 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.  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.  Now the Spirit knoweth all things; nevertheless the Son of God suffereth according to the flesh that he might take upon him the sins of his people, that he might blot out their transgressions according to the power of his deliverance; and now behold, this is the testimony which is in me.” (Alma 7:11-13)   I believe this passage from the Book of Mormon is the most complete and descriptive explanation of the Atonement anywhere.  Jesus, the man, learned in the experiences of mortality how to succor his people.

Earlier, I reviewed some of the historical theories of Atonement.  They can all work very well as analogies.  But with the exception of Ostler’s Compassion Theory they all seem to be using the Atonement as an answer in search of a problem.  My main critique here is of the Penal Substitution Theory because I think it is the most common and because it is the understanding of Atonement I grew up with.  The critical question is this: why can’t God just forgive sins?  Why are death, blood and suffering required?  Many of the theories construct elaborate conceptual scaffolding around the issue to make the suffering of Christ seem more necessary.  But these explanations are generally extra-scriptural; making the issue more complicated then it needs to be. 

Here I’d like to invoke the insights of William Ockham (1288-1348).  The famous principle of Ockham’s razor states: “Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate” meaning “Plurality must never be posited without necessity”.  The basic idea is that you generally should not add additional layers of complexity to explain something; rather a simple explanation is more likely correct.  Ockham was one of the earliest nominalists, maintaining that universals like “Justice” do not exist as actual entities but rather are descriptions of common traits held by particulars like a just man or a just God.

Something held in common with the Satisfaction Theory, the Governmental Theory, and the Penal Substitution Theory is the use of some universal like Honor, Law, or Justice.  Justice is almost personified as an entity more powerful than God himself.  Since this ethereal entity of Justice is so unbending even to God, he must sacrifice his Son to meet its demands.  This relates strongly to the Problem of Universals.  When Justice is understood as an actual entity it’s as though the conservation of mass and energy apply: all this sin and guilt have to go somewhere, so Christ absorbs it for us.

The way I learned the Penal Substitution Theory was something like this.  We are sinners and have offended God and deserve his punishment.  God cannot deny justice or he would cease to be God (Alma 42:13).  So God sent Jesus to suffer for our sins to fulfill the demands of justice.  Therefore, Jesus suffers the penalty for our sins so we don’t have to.  This allows God to satisfy both Justice and Mercy.  Justice is satisfied because Christ has paid the penalty.  Mercy is satisfied because we are not punished for our sins.

This theory seems to work pretty well with scripture.  But it also begs certain questions.  The first question, again, is why does God have to punish somebody at all?  Why can’t he just forgive?  This gets into the question of what justice actually is.  Another question is this—how is it just to punish someone for a crime they didn’t commit?  Isn’t that the very epitome of injustice?  Then again there is the Problem of Universals.  Is Justice actually something that exists in itself, independent of the particulars it describes?  Does it actually have power over God?  My own experience is that I can simply forgive someone who has offended me.  I don’t have to require punishment.  I would never even think of punishing a person for someone else’s crime.  And I don’t believe that Justice, as a universal, as an entity, actually exists.  Rather, justice is a word used to describe just things and just people.

Of course, all understanding of the Atonement is going to employ analogy and metaphor to some extent.  This is why I don’t want to disparage the classical theories of Atonement, because they have good insights that we can learn from.  The idea of Christ taking the punishment for us is very emotionally compelling.  But I think there are other ways to understand the Atonement that work better with scripture and with our most basic moral sensibilities.

In the Book of Mormon, Amulek explicitly contradicts idea of Penal Substitution: “Now there is not any man that can sacrifice his own blood which will atone for the sins of another.  Now, if a man murdereth, behold will our law, which is just, take the life of his brother?  I say unto, Nay.  But the law requireth the life of him who hath murdered; therefore there can be nothing which is short of an infinite atonement which will suffice for the sins of the world” (Alma 34:11-12).  I believe this verse, if taken at face value, rejects the Theory of Penal Substitution. 

Now, one could object that Christ wasn’t really a man, so this condition doesn’t apply.  The divine and human nature of Christ, the hypostatic union, has been a hot topic in Christian history.  However, I believe there is a wealth of scripture to support the real, actual humanity of Christ. 

Another objection could be that punishing one man for the sins of another is normally not allowed, but since the Atonement of Christ is infinite, it is an exception.  In other words, an infinite atonement is super special and will directly contradict the other imperative in this verse—that no person can be punished for the sins of another.  But first, this doesn’t sit well with me simply because of the direct contradiction.  More importantly, there is no evidence in scripture that this is what “infinite” means.  The word “infinite” is never used to mean something capable of making the impossible possible.  Rather, in this verse, the word “infinite” is used in the same way it is always used.  It means without limitation, duration, or bounds.  The Atonement is infinite in its scope—it is “infinite for all mankind” (2 Nephi 25:16).  The Atonement is infinite in love, mercy, and compassion.  It reaches all who have ever lived and all who ever will live.

So what of the man who murdereth?  If the law requireth the life of him who hath murdered and will not allow another to take his place, how can this man be spared?  The answer is forgiveness and mercy.  I come back to the critical question: why can’t God just forgive sins?  Actually, I believe that is precisely what he does.  And that is what the Atonement is.  Atonement is reconciliation, an at-one-ment with God.  Christ came to live on earth as a man to bring us back to God.  The suffering of Christ is not a substitute for our punishment, because God can’t forgive us.  Rather, Christ suffers precisely because he forgives us.  Entering into a close intimate relationship with broken, sinful beings like us causes him tremendous pain.  All the pain and suffering of the world affect Christ just like they do everyone else.  And it is through this shared experience that Christ is able to succor his people and transform them.

But the Book of Mormon does say “the work of justice could not be destroyed; if so, God would cease to be God” (Alma 42:13).  But what exactly is the work of justice?  One interpretation is that every sin that has ever been committed must be punished, even if the offender repents.  At the end of our lives, even if we have repented we will have collected so much sin and guilt that we will be damned unless Christ takes the punishment for us.  But this begs the question—why does this guilt from our past sins follow us around even after repentance?  Are sins like ghosts hovering over us even after we have forsaken them?  I don’t think this is correct.  Alma explained the concept of justice, that for every sin there was a punishment (Alma 42:18-20).  But then he says: “But there is a law given, and a punishment affixed, and a repentance granted; which repentance, mercy claimeth; otherwise, justice claimeth the creature and executeth the law, and the law inflicteth the punishment; if not so, the works of justice would be destroyed, and God would cease to be God” (Alma 42:22, italics added). 

It is important to understand what Alma is actually saying.  There are three operatives: law, punishment, and repentance.  The problem with the Penal Substitution Theory is that it leaves out repentance.  God is just to punish sinners but it would not be just at all to punish people who have repented.  In fact, for the penitent, justice demands that they not be punished.  It is implied that if God were to punish people after they repented he would cease to be God.  Alma says “mercy claimeth the penitent” and all men are brought back to the presence of God “to be judged according to their works, according to the law of justice” (Alma 42:23).  God still acts justly towards the repentant, but now justice works in their favor.  “For behold, justice exercises all his demands, and also mercy claimeth all which is her own; and thus, none but the truly penitent are saved” (Alma 42:24).  God is both just and merciful.  He is justified to punish the sinners, but if they repent and reform he is merciful to them, and justly so.  Again, I understand the personal pronouns here to be figurative descriptions of God’s attributes rather than separate entities of Justice and Mercy.  However, I do like the subtle use of the masculine for Justice and the feminine for Mercy.  A nice little tidbit.

Blake Ostler, in The Problems of Theism and the Love of God, writes: “God could justly punish us now for our sins, but he is merciful in placing us on probation instead and giving us time to repent before judging us.  Because we will be judged at the end of this probationary period, God is both just and merciful.  The entire discourse of atonement focuses on the central truth that the purpose of life is to give us a space in which we can choose to freely enter into relationship with him or reject him.  The atonement is construed as God’s every mode of being in relationship with us in every moment, with Gethsemane and Calvary as the preeminent instances of a supremely loving being sharing our mortality with us.  Such a view avoids the problems of the penal substitutionary view of the atonement, which I believe is a morally reprehensible way of explaining God’s love and reconciliation through atonement” (p. ix-x)

So why does Christ have to suffer?  The short answer is that he suffers because we suffer.  The Atonement is not about substitution; it’s about union.  Christ doesn’t step out in front of our burdens and deflect them, he shares them as an intimate companion.  Jesus said, “take my yoke upon you” (Matthew 11:29).  The yoke is a symbol of union, being joined in our labor and finding rest in his strength.  Jesus called himself the bridegroom (Matthew 25:1-13).  It is helpful to think of union with Christ like a marriage.  Husband and wife share in each other’s burdens and sorrows as well as their happiness and joy.  Christ, as God incarnate, weeps with us, sorrows with us, and if we allow it, rejoices with us.

To be in Christ is to be in it for the good times and the bad.  Paul said, “we are children of God; And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together” (Romans 8:16-17).  To be in Christ means that we suffer with him and that he suffers with us, but we will be glorified to together.  This union, Atonement in Christ, is symbolized in baptism as we symbolically die and are buried in his death but then rise in the likeness of his resurrection.  “Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him” (Romans 6:8).  This union is completely transforming: “Therefore, if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new” (2 Corinthians 5:17).  By the Atonement, we are actually transformed into the likeness of Christ.  We are conformed to his image (Romans 8:29) and receive his image in our countenances (Alma 5:14). 

To see how the Atonement of Christ is significant it is important to understand the other part of Jesus’ nature—his Godhood.  The Atonement doesn’t work unless Jesus is everything that we are and feels everything that we feel.  But in Christ we also see God as a man, descending to earth to live among us and to see what it is like to be one of us.  Jesus showed us what God is truly like (John 1:18).  God is not off in an ivory tower looking down from on high.  God is down here with us.  He doesn’t just send us down to live in the gutter and then wish us good luck.  He is here, in it with us for the long haul.  And God is on our side.  “What shall we then say to these things?  If God be for us, who can be against us?” (Romans 8:31).

It is important to state here that the Atonement is absolutely necessary for us.  The Atonement is essentially the union and reconciliation between God and man.  If the Atonement does not happen there is no union or reconciliation and we are cut off from God forever.  Furthermore, it was necessary for Christ to be born, live, and die in the world.  The Atonement is Christ reaching for us and sharing his life with us.  Not only is it essential for us; it is also essential for him.  “For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.  Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.  For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted” (Hebrew 2:18).

My understanding of the Atonement is very similar to the Compassion Theory of Blake Ostler.  This theory takes advantage of additional scripture of the Book of Mormon, which I really like (we should take advantage of it).  I think it is also consistent with the Bible.  I totally recommend checking it out.  You can read more about it in his book, The Problems of Theism and the Love of God, or in a shorter paper I have linked at the bottom.  Any theological doctrine is going to be an approximation and will need further development.  But that shouldn’t prevent anyone from keeping away from the discussion.  The most important thing about Atonement theory is its ability to help us appreciate the Atonement in a way that is meaningful to us.  Ultimately, I don’t know exactly how it happens.  It defies comprehension. But I am grateful that it does happen.

Reference

Atonement in Mormon Thought by Blake Ostler

Thursday, October 7, 2010

Atonement Theory, Part 1: A History


It might be surprising to find out that something as foundational as the doctrine of the Atonement has been interpreted very differently throughout history.  Here I would like to review the history of Atonement theory in Christianity.  It would be interesting to extend this back into the history of Judaism but that is another topic on it’s own.  In Reform Theology and in most LDS discussion the dominant theory of Atonement is that of Penal Substitution.  However, this theory was not developed until the Reformation.  There had been several other theories before this one.   I’ll go through some of these theories here as well as one more modern theory.  Later on, I will discuss my own understanding of the Atonement.

The Ransom Theory

According to the Ransom Theory, Christ’s Atonement was a ransom payment made to the devil to deliver our souls from Hell.  Satan was tricked into thinking that he could keep the soul of Christ captive after this transaction.  But since Christ is divine Satan was unable to hold him captive.  Scriptural basis for the theory comes from a few sources.  In Mark, “For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45).  From Paul, “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time” (1 Timothy 2:5-6).  This theory was promoted by Origen (185-254) as well as Irenaeus (d. 202) and Tertullian (160-220).

The Satisfaction Theory

According to the Satisfaction Theory, Christ suffered to satisfy the demands of God’s honor and merit.  This theory is best understood in terms of the feudal society in which it developed.  This theory was put forward by Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109).  Anselm compared God to a feudal lord who had been wronged by his surfs and needed to maintain his honor.  No mere mortal, or surf, could satisfy the injury to the honor of a lord.  Only a lord, or God, could satisfy God’s honor.  This theory emphasizes God’s justice, which must always be satisfied.  It’s emphasis on justice makes it very similar to the Penal Substitution Theory.

The Governmental Theory

This theory is very similar to the Satisfaction Theory and the Penal Substitution Theory.  The Governmental Theory says that God is the great lawgiver and that he must uphold the law.  Whenever a law is broken there must be a punishment to sustain order in the universe.  Christ thus suffers the penalty for the broken law.  This Theory was developed by Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) who was, incidentally, a jurist.

The Moral Theory

In this theory, Christ’s sacrifice is not so much intended to affect God the Father at is intended to affect us.  The Atonement of Christ demonstrates the supreme love of God for us and thus moves us to repentance and love for God.  This theory was developed by Peter Abelard (1079-1142).  A similar idea was promoted by Faustus (1539-1604) and Laelius Socinius (1525-1562).  They saw the Atonement was the most beautiful demonstration of God’s love.  It also an example of supreme love for God, inspiring us to love God to the same degree.  “To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his footsteps” (1 Peter 2:21).

Penal Substitution Theory

This is the dominant view in the Reform Tradition and probably the most common explanation of Atonement given today.  According to Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology, penal substitution is “the view that Christ in his death bore the just penalty of God for our sins as a substitute for us” (p. 1251).  “This view is sometimes called the theory of vicarious atonement.  A ‘vicar’ is someone who stands in the place of another or who represents another.  Christ’s death was therefore ‘vicarious’ because he stood in our place and represented us.  As our representative, he took the penalty that we deserve” (ibid. 579).  This theory was largely developed by John Calvin (1509-1564).

These are the major theories of Atonement throughout the history of Christianity.  However, there is one more theory I would like to mention since it is my favorite and the closest to my own view.  It is called the Compassion Theory, developed by Mormon theologian and philosopher Blake Ostler in the second volume of his series Exploring Mormon Thought: The Problems of Theism and the Love of God.

Ostler defended his theory in another paper titled Atonement in Mormon Thought (see link below).  In this paper he listed five questions he felt that any theory of Atonement should address:

1. How are Christ’s life, death and resurrection either necessary or uniquely beneficial to expiate or eradicate the effects of sin in our lives so that we are reconciled to God here and now?
2. Why can’t we just be forgiven without someone suffering?
3. Why does Christ’s suffering and experience atone for our sins in a way that the Father and the Holy Ghost do not?
4. How could Christ “bear our sins” or “take our sins upon him” that we commit in the here and now in a way that caused him to suffer?
5. How do the ordinances of sacrament and baptism (among others) signify what occurs in atonement?

He also proposes that any theory of Atonement should meet Abelard’s Constraint, that is to say it be “neither unintelligible, arbitrary, illogical, nor immoral.”

Compassion Theory

The Compassion Theory takes advantage of the meaning of the word “com-passion” which etymologically means “feel in union with”.  In The Problems of Theism and the Love of God, Ostler says: “The purpose of Atonement is to overcome our alienation by creating compassion, a life shared in union where we are moved by our love for each other.  ‘The Passion’ also refers to Christ’s suffering—and thus com-passion is to share in Christ’s suffering and he in ours, that we might share also in the unsurpassable joy of each others’ lives… The purpose of the atonement in LDS scripture is to ‘bring about the bowels of mercy’ so that God is moved with compassion for us and we are moved with gratitude to trust him by opening our hearts to him.  The result of the Atonement is that we are free to choose to turn back to God, and he is free to accept us into a relationship of shared life.  Atonement removes, casts out, and releases the guilt that alienates us; and it also brings us together into shared life.  When we let go of our past and release the painful energy of alienation, Christ experiences that release and receives into himself the pain that we have experienced to be transformed by the light of his love.  If we refuse to let go of our past histories and the pain that arises from our sins, we will continue to experience pain.  If we let go of that pain; however, then Christ experiences the very pain that we release, but we no longer have to.  In his Passion we find compassion.  He literally feels our and pains is thereby filled with compassion for us.  In this sense, Christ suffers for our sins and bears our iniquities” (235-236).

So there is a brief review of the major theories of this most important doctrine.  Later, I will talk about my own understanding of the Atonement in response to scripture and in response to personal experience.

Reference:

Blake Ostler’s Atonement in Mormon Thought

Sunday, April 4, 2010

An Easter Message

Today we commemorate the day that the light and life of the world rose from the dead on the first Easter morning. Two thousand years ago, on a Sunday morning in spring Christ rose up and walked from his tomb. What does this mean? Why is it significant or pertinent? Today I want to share my testimony of Christ.

First, a passage of scriptures from the Gospel of John:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men... He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” (John 1:1-14)

I believe that Jesus Christ was the mortal God of Israel, Yahweh, descended to earth to dwell as a man among his people. He was the very image of God the Father, with whom he shared such unity that there was no need to even distinguish between God the Father and God the Son. The Word, Christ, was with God and was God. He was made flesh, the very Son God who gives all who receive him power that they might also become sons of God with him.

That Jesus was the very image of God the Father is no small issue. The fact that God revealed himself in the form of a person is very significant. Jesus has been called our perfect example and he is an example not just of how to live, how to be happy, but how to find God himself. Jesus said: I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.” (John 14:6-7) After this Phillip said that if he would show them the Father they would be content. Jesus responded saying: “Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.” (John 14:9-11) If we want to know who God is and what he is like we need look no further than Jesus Christ. Jesus is the way to salvation and eternal life. Jesus Christ is God’s gift to the world.

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16)

That we should know who God is the very heart of eternal life. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.” (John 17:3) I don’t understand this to mean that the way to eternal life is through knowing God and Jesus Christ. I believe that knowing God and Jesus Christ is eternal life. The verse is a definition. Eternal life is unity with God. To be with God, to be like God, to be one with God is eternal life. Why is it that we must know the only true God and Jesus Christ? Without Jesus Christ we do not know God. “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.” (John 1:18) Even in the few instances when the Father has been seen he has spoken only through his Son. Jesus was one with the Father and it is through him that we may be one with them.

“That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.” (John 17:21-23)

How can we become one with Jesus Christ and the Father? Christ has the power to make us one with him and the Father through his Atonement. The purpose of the Atonement is to make us “at one” with God. Christ was one with the Father and followed him in all things. “The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.” Likewise we must do the things that the Son has done. How can we do that? Must we be crucified and rise again? Actually yes, not literally but symbolically.

Christ as God descended to live as a mortal man, pass through the pains and suffering of mortality and died. His mortal, imperfect body was transformed and he was resurrected into a second life of perfection in body and spirit. The death of the old self and rebirth into a new being is the way to follow Christ. This is represented symbolically in baptism.

“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.” (Romans 6:3-11)

Being born again is a dramatic process. Symbolically, the old self is actually “crucified” with Christ. We participate in his death with him and die in our old self. Then we rise again. We are born again spiritually and resurrected with Christ in a new life. This transformation is significant enough to be described as a rebirth. We are given a new heritage and identity in Christ.

“Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.” (2 Corinthians 5:17-19)

“Marvel not that all mankind, yea, men and women, all nations, kindreds, tongues and people, must be born again; yea, born of God, changed from their carnal and fallen state, to a state of righteousness, being redeemed of God, becoming his sons and daughters” (Mosiah 27:25)

“And now, because of the covenant which ye have made ye shall be called the children of Christ, his sons, and his daughters; for behold, this day he hath spiritually begotten you; for ye say that your hearts are changed through faith on his name; therefore, ye are born of him and have become his sons and his daughters.” (Mosiah 5:7)

Being born again with Christ, becoming one with Christ is a process of justification, sanctification, transformation and (ultimately) exaltation. Through the redeeming blood of Christ and faith on him we are able to have all that the Father has through his merits. We are given power to become sons and daughters of God.

“The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.” (Romans 8:16-18)

To be joint-heirs with Christ we must be willing to suffer with him as well as be glorified with him. Discipleship can be difficult. Jesus warned his disciples that they would be persecuted. The sorrows and pains of life are difficult to bear. But we do not have to bear them alone. Christ shares are burdens and sorrows and he knows how to comfort us.

“Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows...” (Isaiah 53:4)

“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. 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.” (Alma 7:11-12)

“Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” (Matthew 11:28-30)

Atonement, to be at one with another person is the most intimate kind of relationship there is. Marriage can be an example of atonement. When two people are truly brought into unity and live as “one flesh” sharing both heart and mind they share everything. They share great joy and also great pain. This is the kind of relationship Christ has with us through his Atonement. The Atonement causes him tremendous pain and suffering. He opens his heart to us and makes himself vulnerable to repeated rejection. But he is always willing to receive us again. And in us his joy is full (3 Nephi 17:20). That same fullness of joy is imparted to all who share in atonement with Jesus Christ.

After two thousand years the story of Easter is as relevant as ever. In a world where people are seeking for answers Christ is the perfect revelation of God in the flesh. In a world filled with death we can still look to Christ and live. In the midst of spiritual darkness he is still the light of the world. Christ is still the way, the truth, and the life.

Sunday, February 21, 2010

What Is Our Message?

Has anyone ever asked you point blank “what do you believe”? It can be a very halting question. One reason for this is that it is so personal. When people ask me “what do Mormon’s believe?” there is at least a degree of separation. I find that sometimes people are more comfortable talking about what their church believes and what they were raised to believe. But when you are the center of attention and asked what you believe that can be a little scary. It is important to look within and know how to answer: “be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you” (1 Peter 3:15).

What does it actually mean to believe? A modern definition of the word is “to have confidence in the truth, the existence, or the reliability of something, although without absolute proof that one is right in doing so.” This is an acceptable definition though I don’t find it satisfactory. The reason I don’t find it satisfying is because it doesn’t really describe my personal experience with belief. Is my belief a confidence in truth? Sure, but is that it? No, I feel there is more to it than that. The English verb “believe” was translated in the Bible from the Hebrew “munah” and the Greek “pistuo”. These Hebrew and Greek words mean something more than the modern English definition. But before the sixteenth century the verb “believe” had a slightly different meaning which more closely matched the Hebrew and Greek concepts.

“Modern German usage of ‘belieben’ still means ‘to cherish’, or ‘to hold dear,’ and the modern German term for faith (Glaube) can be traced back to common roots with a family of Old English words ‘leof’, ‘liof’ (dear, beloved) that formed the verb ‘geleofan’, ‘gelafen’, ‘geliefen’, ‘to hold dear, to love, to consider valuable or lovely’; this parallels the Old High German ‘gilouban’, which has the same meanings. This word developed into ‘glauben’ (to have faith).” [1]

The original meaning of our verb “believe” might be better stated “belove”. Your belief is what you value. The Hebrew and Greek concepts of faith and belief were not of confidence in the truth of God’s existence, that was taken as a given. Rather faith or belief in God is a dedication to God. That Latin word “credo” translated “I believe” can be broken down into two components: first, “cor” or “cordia” meaning “heart”; second, “do” meaning “put, place, set” also “give”. So in Latin, saying “I believe...” is another way of saying “I set more heart upon...”

What do I believe? I believe in atonement with God. This is the best way I can express in English the core of my belief. This requires some explanation as well. To “atone” is usually understood to mean “to make amends”, but this is not a satisfactory definition. You can make amends for damage you cause to someone’s car in an accident and never enter into a relationship with that person. You may not even like that person. That is not atonement. To atone is to make “at one”. It is a neologism created by William Tyndale, but it was a brilliant creation. Atonement is a complete reconciliation, unification of heart, mind, and will.

I understand the whole of the Gospel of Jesus Christ through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. In the Book of Mormon when Christ came to the Nephites and Lamanites he gave a sort of definition of his gospel: “this is the gospel which I have given unto you—that I came into the world to do the will of my Father, because my Father sent me. And my Father sent me that I might be lifted up upon the cross; and after that I had been lifted up upon the cross, that I might draw all men unto me, that as I have been lifted up by men even so should men be lifted up by the Father, to stand before me, to be judged of their works, whether they be good or whether they be evil—And for this cause have I been lifted up; therefore, according to the power of the Father I will draw all men unto me, that they may be judged according to their works... Now this is the commandment: Repent, all ye ends of the earth, and come unto me and be baptized in my name, that ye may be sanctified by the reception of the Holy Ghost, that ye may stand spotless before me at the last day. Verily, verily, I say unto you, this is my gospel...” (3 Nephi 27:13-21) Notice here how Christ says that he draw all men unto him and invites all to come unto him. There is an effort on both ends to be brought into unity, atonement. “Draw near unto me and I will draw near unto you; seek me diligently and ye shall find me; ask, and ye shall receive; knock, and it shall be opened unto you.” (Doctrine and Covenants 88:63)

When in mortality Jesus taught his disciples that they should “abide” in him. “I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman... Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you.” (John 15:1-7) I love this image and find it to be one of the most moving explanations of unity and atonement in all scripture. Jesus here describes an intimate and organic connection of two living entities actually existing and living as one organism. When we are brought into unity with Christ we are able to bring forth good fruit because we are part of him. Alma described this unity in a way that our very image and appearance is transformed to reflect the image of Christ (Alma 5:14,19).

This transformation must be very powerful because as mortal beings we are much different than divine beings now. We know we are of the same kind as God, even after the same image. But there is still a great difference. After, Moses saw God in the mountain he was left to his own strength and was completely famished. He reflected within himself saying, “Now, for this cause I know that man is nothing, which thing I never had supposed.” (Moses 1:10) Yet, a little while later he was shown a glorious vision of the universe and the history of this world and asked for what purpose they were created. God responded saying “this is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.” (Moses 1:39) Just after learning of the nothingness of man, it was revealed to him that the plan of God was to grant man immortality and eternal life—to transform this mortal man that can hardly withstand the presence of God into a new creature like unto God himself.

The essential question to ask is the same question Enos had: “how is it done?” (Enos 1:7) The answer is the same as it was for him—through faith in Jesus Christ (Enos 1:8). “...Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself...” (2 Corinthians 5:17-19)

This is, according to my understanding, the meat and core of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. God has come after us and sought after us because of his desire to dwell in unity with us. Though we were separate from him by our imperfect nature, sin, weakness, frailty, and death, the Atonement of Jesus Christ brings us together, to be “at one” with God. This is our message: at-one-ment with God through the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

References

[1] Fowler, James. Stages of Faith: The Psychology of Human Development and the Quest for Meaning. Harper Collins. 1981. p. 12

Tuesday, February 2, 2010

The Fall, Part 3: Adam to Michael

This is my final post to complete the three-part series on the Fall of Adam and Eve. In my previous two posts I discussed the history of Original Sin and a metaphorical understanding of the Fall. I want to continue in the metaphorical understanding as I move from the Fall to the Redemption through Christ and his Atonement.

The word “atonement” is something of a neologism. It was created by William Tyndale in the sixteenth century as he was preparing an English translation of the Bible. He wanted to use a word that correctly matched the biblical Hebraic concept and found no word satisfactory. He created the word “atonement” to describe a unification or reconciliation, an “at-onement”. The Atonement of Christ is designed to bring mortal man, Adam, to be made “at-one” with God. This process is not one of physical proximity but of personal development.

In the Garden of Eden man was with God but at the same time far from him. All the perfection and happiness of immortality was given to him but he could not comprehend it. Adam was in the Garden of Eden but he was never qualified to be there. He lacked knowledge and understanding. He was meant not just to be with God but to be like God. It is appropriate that in Mormon doctrine Adam is understood to be the same being as Michael (Doctrine and Covenants 27:11). The name Adam is Hebrew meaning "mankind". The name Michael is also Hebrew and means “who is like God”. If we are to liken this unto ourselves we all have a dual nature: our mortality in “Adam” and our divinity in “Michael”.

So how are we to be transformed from Adam to Michael? It is a giant leap considering the vast differences between mortal man and divine beings. Adam was formed from the ground, the “adamah”. Our mortal man will die and decay. Our bodies and our minds will fail. Our capabilities, though significant, are ultimately limited and terminable. God is immortal and will not die or suffer the afflictions of mortal bodies. He can be understood to exceed all our capacities and has power likely beyond comprehension. How is Adam transformed into Michael “who is like God?” The answer is through the atonement of Jesus Christ. The atonement makes us “at-one” with God, like unto God, “Mi-Cha-El”.

The purpose of our life is to develop as sons and daughters of God. Just as children must leave home to develop, Adam must leave Eden to grow. He has gained knowledge of good and evil. He must now acquire wisdom to choose the good over the evil. He must see that Eden is not the natural condition of things in the universe but that without sustained care, the world around us begins to decay. As children leave the home they come to realize that the gas tank will empty, the bank account depletes and that work is required to sustain order. Just as entropy drives a system to a state of disorder without an input of work, life will fall into disarray without action to put things in order. Eden was creation made by God and more importantly sustained by God. But when God left man alone the earth brought forth noxious weeds and thistles. Plants needed to be cultivated and food had to be earned by the sweat of the brow.

It might seem cruel for God to leave Adam and Eve alone to suffer. Corianton thought so and Alma explained the parable to him. The story is fitting because Corianton himself had to pass through his own affliction and fight his own demons as he faced the burden of sin.

Alma said to his son: “Ye do try to suppose that it is injustice that the sinner should be consigned to a state of misery. Now behold, my son, I will explain this thing unto thee. For behold, after the Lord God sent our first parents forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground, from whence they were taken—yea, he drew out the man, and he placed at the east end of the garden of Eden, cherubim, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the tree of life—Now, we see that the man had become as God, knowing good and evil; and lest he should put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live forever, the Lord God placed cherubim and the flaming sword, that he should not partake of the fruit—And thus we see, that there was a time granted unto man to repent, yea, a probationary time, a time to repent and serve God. For behold, if Adam had put forth his hand immediately, and partaken of the tree of life, he would have lived forever, according to the word of God, having no space for repentance; yea, and also the word of God would have been void, and the great plan of salvation would have been frustrated.” (Alma 42:1-5)

Adam and Eve were not ready to be in Eden, they were not yet as God and they were not prepared for immortality. They were still immature. They were given time to prepare. And what was this preparation? They were to “repent and serve God”. There are two words in Hebrew for the verb “repent”. One is “nicham” which literally means to sigh and by implication to feel sorry. The other is “shuv” which literally means to turn. This life is a time to prepare to meet God (Alma 34:32), to serve him, to feel after him and to turn to him. The “Way” to God is Christ.

We are to be perfect like our Father in Heaven (Matthew 5:48). But how are we to know the way, how do we know the Father? Jesus said: “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6). Christ and God the Father are one and we are to be one with them (John 17:11). We are to put away are old life and die with Christ so that we may be resurrected with him into a new life, a life with God (Romans 6:3-8). The Atonement of Christ cleanses us from sin but it also does much, much more. It is through the Atonement that we share an inheritance with Christ. We become “joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together” (Romans 8:17).

Christ’s Atonement has the power to take mortal, finite, temporal creature and transform it into an immortal, infinite, eternal being. It is the infinite Atonement. This body that was formed from the raw materials of the earth can be cast into the likeness of the Father. We are tried and proven through experience of mortality. We come to see how the world works. We see that it is a difficult universe filled with complexity and awesome destructive power. But through an understanding of the operative laws in our universe we can return to Eden. We are always facing eastward toward Eden striving to return once again. But this time we will be prepared to be there. This time we will be permitted to eat of the fruit of the Tree of Life. We will become divine beings, returning not only to be with God but to be like God. We will be transformed from Adam to Michael.

Saturday, January 2, 2010

Where Art Thou?



Rabbi Schneur Zalman, The Rav of Northern White Russia (died 1813), was put in jail in Petersbutf, because the mitnagdim had denounced his principles and his way of living to the government. He was awaiting trial when the chief of the gendarmes entered his cell. The majestic and quiet face of the rav, who was so deep in meditation that he did not at first notice his visitor, suggested to the chief, a thoughtful person, what manner of man he had before him. He began to converse with his prisoner and brought up a number of questions which had occurred to him in reading the Scriptures. Finally, he asked: “How are we to understand that God, the all-knowing, said to Adam: ‘Where art thou?’”

“Do you believe,” answered the rav, “that the Scriptures are eternal and that every era, every generation and every man is included in them?”

“I believe this,” said the other.

“Well then,” said the zaddik, “in every era, God calls to every man: ‘Where are you in your world? So many years and days of those allotted to you have passed, and how far have you gotten in your world?’ God says something like this: ‘You have lived forty-six years. How far along are you?”

When the chief of the gendarmes heard his age mentioned, he pulled himself together, laid his hand on the rav’s shoulder, and cried: “Bravo!” But his heart trembled.

-Martin Buber, The Way of Man (9-10)

As I mentioned in my last post, the seemingly simple can be quite powerful when understood for its underlying symbolism. The name “Adam” is Hebrew, meaning “mankind”. While on one level the Biblical text tells the story of a particular individual, it also tells the story of all mankind, as well as the story of every individual. We are to understand the story as we stand in Adam’s place and imagine God speaking to us. God has given us commandments and the violation of these commandments brings us into opposition with God, for he “cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance” (Doctrine and Covenants 1:31).

I quote again from Buber. God says to Adam: “Where art thou?”


In so asking, God does not expect to learn something he does not know; what he wants is to produce an effect in man which can only be produced by just such a question, provided that it reaches man’s heart—that man allows it to reach his heart.

Adam hides himself to avoid rendering accounts, to escape responsibility for his way of living. Every man hides for this purpose, for every man is Adam and finds himself in Adam’s situation...

Everything now depends on whether man faces the question. Of course every man’s heart, like that of the chief in the story, will tremble when he hears it. But his system of hideouts will help him to overcome this emotion. For the voice does not come in a thunderstorm which threatens man’s very existence; it is a “still small voice”, and easy to drown... Adam faces the Voice, perceives his enmeshment, and avows: “I hid myself”; this is the beginning of man’s way. The decisive heart-searching is the beginning of the way in man’s life; it is, again and again, the beginning of a human way. (pages 12-13)


Everyone must take this step and face the Voice. Until Adam takes responsibility for his action he does not progress. Hiding from God provides only a false solace. It is like trying to solve problems by forgetting about them. Forgetting may bring relief but it does not actually change anything—the problems are still there. The reason God calls after Adam is not to find him but to help Adam to find himself. When Adam understands where he is he can decide where he must go.

Adam and Eve are made to face the consequences of their action: pain and death. Because the Lord cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance they are banished from his presence. As Adam, mankind, we face a similar, personal fall from favor with God by sin. We are cut off from the presence of God and suffer sorrow and spiritual death. The objective now is to return to Eden. This is the “teshuvah”, the returning to God. This is what is meant by repentance, to return. The Lord still cannot allow sin, but Adam can return to the presence of God through covenant.

By sinning, Adam has become “natural man” and is in effect “an enemy to God... and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father” (Mosiah 3:19). Adam can become “kadosh”, or holy once again, through the atonement of Christ to be brought back “at-one” with God.

So Adam, where art thou? “Have ye been spiritually born of God? Have ye received his image in your countenances? Have ye experienced this mighty change in your hearts? Do ye exercise faith in the redemption of him who created you? Do you look forward with an eye of faith, and view his mortal body raised in immortality, and this corruption raised in incorruption, to stand before God to be judged according to the deeds which have been done in the mortal body?” (Alma 5:14-15).

“Behold, he sendeth an invitation unto all men, for the arms of mercy are extended towards them, and he saith: Repent, and I will receive you” (Alma 5:33).

Thursday, December 31, 2009

Ring in the Christ


I was thinking that a New Year’s Eve post might be appropriate and with it one of my favorite poems – “Ring Out, Wild Bells” by Alfred, Lord Tennyson. This poem was later made into a hymn set to music by Crawford Gates. The poem was published in 1850 as part of “In Memoriam” which was an elegy to his sister’s fiancĂ© Arthur Henry Hallam. Hallam was a close friend of Tennyson’s at Cambridge before dying of a cerebral hemorrhage in 1833. Tennyson worked on “In Memoriam” for the next seventeen years. The major theme of the elegy is the search for hope after a painful loss. It is one of Tennyson’s greatest works and one of the most famous of nineteenth century literature.

I especially enjoy the poem when sung to the tune composed by Crawford Gates. The song is found in the LDS hymn book as hymn number 215. It is a haunting melody set in a morose minor key. It doesn’t include all the stanzas from the original poem but takes the first two stanzas and ends with the eighth and last stanza.

This is the only hymn in the LDS hymn book I know that is classified as a New Year’s hymn. It is very fitting with the repeated plea to let old things pass away and to bring in the new and good. The New Year has long been a time of beginning again. I mentioned in my last post the Jewish holiday Rosh Hashanah which means “the head of the year”. Rosh Hashanah commemorates the creation of the world and is the first of the Ten Days of Repentance, Aseret Yemei Teshuvah. The Mishnah refers to Rosh Hashanah as “The Day of Judgment”. The ten days set aside for Aseret Yemei Teshuvah are a time for all to practice “teshuvah” which is “repentance” or literally “returning”. The Ten Days of Repentance concludes with Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement.

I find this a very profound way at looking at the New Year. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is all about returning and atonement with God. Tennyson’s poem lists several evils surrounding us in the world but encourages us to let them go and let them die. My favorite part is that the poem ends with the source of redemption, which is The Christ. Appropriately, Crawford Gates’ melody for this poem ends with the ringing in of The Christ on a major chord.

And now the poem:

Ring Out, Wild Bells

Ring out, wild bells, to the wild sky,
The flying cloud, the frosty light;
The year is dying in the night;
Ring out, wild bells, and let him die.

Ring out the old, ring in the new,
Ring, happy bells, across the snow:
The year is going, let him go;
Ring out the false, ring in the true.

Ring out the grief that saps the mind,
For those that here we see no more,
Ring out the feud of rich and poor,
Ring in redress to all mankind.

Ring out a slowly dying cause,
And ancient forms of party strife;
Ring in the nobler modes of life,
With sweeter manners, purer laws.

Ring out the want, the care the sin,
The faithless coldness of the times;
Ring out, ring out my mournful rhymes,
But ring the fuller minstrel in.

Ring out false pride in place and blood,
The civic slander and the spite;
Ring in the love of truth and right,
Ring in the common love of good.

Ring out old shapes of foul disease,
Ring out the narrowing lust of gold;
Ring out the thousand wars of old,
Ring in the thousand years of peace.

Ring in the valiant man and free,
The larger heart, the kindlier hand;
Ring out the darkness of the land,
Ring in the Christ that is to be.

-Alfred, Lord Tennyson