On Christ, succoring and the Atonment

[Goatnapper'96]

If I understand LDS theology correctly, it is taught that before Christ died all the pain of the atonement felt in the Garden returned while He hung on the Cross. When this happened God the Father totally abandoned Christ which resulted in that "Eli Sabachtini" wop sounding line that the Christ uttered. In the Garden of Gethsamne it is written that an angel came to provide Christ some type of support. So I must ask this, was the sacrifice in the Garden sufficient or did Christ have to go through the pain again on the cross to do all things on His very own? Is that the manner in which He purchased mankind's salvation? If so, strikes me as redundant that He atoned in the Garden but it seems invalidated, under the concept that He must do it entirely independent of the Father, because some Angel showed up to give Him a 'lil help.

My other thought was that perhaps there might be succoring for even the Sons of Perdition. If a SOP is totally removed from the Father, it would be neccesary for the Son to be totally removed from the Father so that he would have that perfect empathy that will allow Him to succor even those that are SOPs.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

If I understand LDS theology correctly, it is taught that before Christ died all the pain of the atonement felt in the Garden returned while He hung on the Cross. When this happened God the Father totally abandoned Christ which resulted in that "Eli Sabachtini" wop sounding line that the Christ uttered. In the Garden of Gethsamne it is written that an angel came to provide Christ some type of support. So I must ask this, was the sacrifice in the Garden sufficient or did Christ have to go through the pain again on the cross to do all things on His very own? Is that the manner in which He purchased mankind's salvation? If so, strikes me as redundant that He atoned in the Garden but it seems invalidated, under the concept that He must do it entirely independent of the Father, because some Angel showed up to give Him a 'lil help.

My other thought was that perhaps there might be succoring for even the Sons of Perdition. If a SOP is totally removed from the Father, it would be neccesary for the Son to be totally removed from the Father so that he would have that perfect empathy that will allow Him to succor even those that are SOPs.

I don't know what the official LDS doctrine is. My doctrine is that the atonement was wrought over a period of time beginning in Gethsemanee lasting until his death.

I like the angle you give in your last paragraph, though I think it could apply to much more than just SOP. As non-SOP's, we can seperate ourselves from God in varying degree through sin.

On a like note, I find our obsession with distancing ourselves from Catholic/Christian church's use of the cross symbol pretty silly.

[Quisqueyano]

If you think about it, the ultimate punishment for sin is being separated from the father and holy ghost. Therefore, Christ had to suffer that also to make the atonoement infinite and eternal.
Other than that, I agree that it was a process that started in the garden and ended on the cross.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Quisqueyano

If you think about it, the ultimate punishment for sin is being separated from the father and holy ghost. Therefore, Christ had to suffer that also to make the atonoement infinite and eternal.
Other than that, I agree that it was a process that started in the garden and ended on the cross.

This makes sense to me, though I really don't have any useful ideas to share on the subject.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by jay santos

On a like note, I find our obsession with distancing ourselves from Catholic/Christian church's use of the cross symbol pretty silly.

I always thought we distanced ourselves from the cross symbol because it represented Christ's death and we kind of prefer to celebrate his resurrection.

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

I always thought we distanced ourselves from the cross symbol because it represented Christ's death and we kind of prefer to celebrate his resurrection.

That's correct. But to a large degree I think this has been over-emphasized as part of the "we are a peculiar people" portion of our culture. We try as hard as we possibly can to be different from the "gentiles".

Not sure that's a good thing.

[Surfah]

Originally Posted by Quisqueyano

If you think about it, the ultimate punishment for sin is being separated from the father and holy ghost. Therefore, Christ had to suffer that also to make the atonoement infinite and eternal.
Other than that, I agree that it was a process that started in the garden and ended on the cross.

This is what I believe. Christ in and of himself led a perfect life and was never without the Father or the Spirit. This made the atonement ultimate. The Father had to remove Himself from His Son because Christ never did anything to warrant that distance. And as soon as that occurred Christ recognized it immediately.

I think there is a powerful lesson in that passage for us to learn. How we should tune into the Father and the Spirit with such acuity that the moment we do something to mar that relationship we feel that separation and then do what we can to reclaim it immediately thereafter.

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

I always thought we distanced ourselves from the cross symbol because it represented Christ's death and we kind of prefer to celebrate his resurrection.

That was the explanation given by Joseph Fielding Smith and Bruce R. McConkie, and it's alot like what's in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, but it doesn't wash too well.

Protestants and Evangelicals often wear a cross, and not a crucifix, because the cross is empty and indicates that Jesus completed his work and was resurrected. They wear it to remind themselves of his resurrection. But don't let that get in the way of being wrongheaded and reactionary.

[Indy Coug]

We don't have the cross, because that symbol is associated with other churches. As the restored church, we don't want the symbol of the cross confusing people that we are just another protestant faith.