
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
< Criticism of Mormonism | Books | Mormonism 101
m |
m |
||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
*The authors claim that the atonement "took place primarily in the Garden" ought to lead one to conclude that it took place 'secondarily' somewhere else: perhaps the cross? | *The authors claim that the atonement "took place primarily in the Garden" ought to lead one to conclude that it took place 'secondarily' somewhere else: perhaps the cross? | ||
*Despite the ambiguity of these statements the authors rather strangely write that "if Mormons doubt that their church emphasizes the importance of Gethsemane today" they should consider a statement from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, which they then quote. Again, this statement indicates that it took place "primarily" in the Garden. Even though the two passages quoted from Elders Benson and McConkie are unequivocal about the significance of the Garden for the atonement, all the other LDS passages quoted by the authors are just the opposite: they are totally equivocal. And for good reason: the Latter-day Saint leaders, including the two they cite, do not in any way restrict the atoning sacrifice of our Savior to the Garden. But they definitely consider the atonement to have had its beginning there. | *Despite the ambiguity of these statements the authors rather strangely write that "if Mormons doubt that their church emphasizes the importance of Gethsemane today" they should consider a statement from the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, which they then quote. Again, this statement indicates that it took place "primarily" in the Garden. Even though the two passages quoted from Elders Benson and McConkie are unequivocal about the significance of the Garden for the atonement, all the other LDS passages quoted by the authors are just the opposite: they are totally equivocal. And for good reason: the Latter-day Saint leaders, including the two they cite, do not in any way restrict the atoning sacrifice of our Savior to the Garden. But they definitely consider the atonement to have had its beginning there. | ||
− | *The authors write that the Garden of Gethsemane is only mentioned twice in the scriptures, apparently to suggest that anything mentioned so infrequently must not be of much value. They need to realize that the concept that "the Word was made flesh" is mentioned only once; would they therefore reject its significance also?<Ref>The argument is used by Nicholas Lossky, "Theology and Prayer. An Orthodox Perspective," ''Ecumenical Theology in Worship, Doctrine, and Life: Essays Presented to Geoffrey Wainwright on his Sixtieth Birthday'', edited by David S. Cunningham, Ralph Del Colle, and Lucas Lamadrid (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 24–32. On pages 28–29 Lossky uses the argument as a defense for deification against those who state that the singularity of {{b|2|Peter|1|4}} as a scriptural basis for deification is not acceptable.</ref> Is it insignificant that 'Calvary' occurs only at {{b||Luke|23|33}}, and that there is absolutely no warrant for it in the Greek?<ref>'Calvary' is taken from the Latin version and passed into all English translations, until recently. See Alfred Plummer, ''The Gospel According to St. Luke, International Critical Commentary'' (New York: Scribner's, 1902), 530–531. Cf. {{BD|article=Calvary|page=629}}.</ref> It is also significant, as Leon Morris has written, "to find that, apart from the crucifixion narrative [in the Gospels]…Paul is the only New Testament writer to speak about 'the cross.'"<ref>Leon Morris, ''The Cross in the New Testament'' (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1999), 216–217. Leon Morris is referred to by McKeever and Johnson as a "Christian theologian" and is quoted frequently throughout Mormonism 101. Morris is an Australian Anglican.</ref> Furthermore, a recent addition to the literature about the cross in the New Testament points out that even in Paul it is not used frequently. His first two letters, the two to the Thessalonians, make no mention of the cross or the crucifixion. Nor do the last three letters make any reference to the cross (i.e., II Corinthians, Romans, and II Timothy).<ref>Jerome Murphy-O'Connor, "'Even Death On a Cross:' Crucifixion in the Pauline Letters," ''The Cross in Christian Tradition: from Paul to Bonaventure'', edited by Elizabeth A. Dreyer (Mahwah, New Jersey: Paulist Press, 2000), 21–50. Murphy-O'Connor, a Catholic, agrees with what Morris said: "If we leave aside the gospels, 'cross' and 'crucify' are Pauline terms." Page 23 includes a chart of Pauline uses in various letters. In fact he indicates that were it not for Paul, the Gospels probably would not have indicated the manner of Christ's death (page 22).</ref> Murphy-O'Connor refers to nine "fragments of traditional teaching" which appear in Paul's letters. These help to determine "the common doctrinal base that Paul shared with the rest of the early church… Not a single one of these formulae that he inherited from his Christian environment mentions the crucifixion." Our source goes on to indicate that only two of them "formally state that he died." Therefore, in the others it must be inferred by the fact that He was resurrected from the dead.<ref>Murphy, 24. Clearly, the emphasis in the early church was not on the death of Christ, but on His resurrection; not on the cross, but on the empty tomb. The nine passages are: {{b|1|Thessalonians|1|9–10}}; {{b||Galatians|1|3–4}}; {{b|1|Corinthians|15|3–5}}; {{b||Romans|1|3–4}}, {{bv||Romans|4|24–25}}, {{bv||Romans|10 | + | *The authors write that the Garden of Gethsemane is only mentioned twice in the scriptures, apparently to suggest that anything mentioned so infrequently must not be of much value. They need to realize that the concept that "the Word was made flesh" is mentioned only once; would they therefore reject its significance also?<Ref>The argument is used by Nicholas Lossky, "Theology and Prayer. An Orthodox Perspective," ''Ecumenical Theology in Worship, Doctrine, and Life: Essays Presented to Geoffrey Wainwright on his Sixtieth Birthday'', edited by David S. Cunningham, Ralph Del Colle, and Lucas Lamadrid (New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), 24–32. On pages 28–29 Lossky uses the argument as a defense for deification against those who state that the singularity of {{b|2|Peter|1|4}} as a scriptural basis for deification is not acceptable.</ref> Is it insignificant that 'Calvary' occurs only at {{b||Luke|23|33}}, and that there is absolutely no warrant for it in the Greek?<ref>'Calvary' is taken from the Latin version and passed into all English translations, until recently. See Alfred Plummer, ''The Gospel According to St. Luke, International Critical Commentary'' (New York: Scribner's, 1902), 530–531. Cf. {{BD|article=Calvary|page=629}}.</ref> It is also significant, as Leon Morris has written, "to find that, apart from the crucifixion narrative [in the Gospels]…Paul is the only New Testament writer to speak about 'the cross.'"<ref>Leon Morris, ''The Cross in the New Testament'' (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1999), 216–217. Leon Morris is referred to by McKeever and Johnson as a "Christian theologian" and is quoted frequently throughout Mormonism 101. Morris is an Australian Anglican.</ref> Furthermore, a recent addition to the literature about the cross in the New Testament points out that even in Paul it is not used frequently. His first two letters, the two to the Thessalonians, make no mention of the cross or the crucifixion. Nor do the last three letters make any reference to the cross (i.e., II Corinthians, Romans, and II Timothy).<ref>Jerome Murphy-O'Connor, "'Even Death On a Cross:' Crucifixion in the Pauline Letters," ''The Cross in Christian Tradition: from Paul to Bonaventure'', edited by Elizabeth A. Dreyer (Mahwah, New Jersey: Paulist Press, 2000), 21–50. Murphy-O'Connor, a Catholic, agrees with what Morris said: "If we leave aside the gospels, 'cross' and 'crucify' are Pauline terms." Page 23 includes a chart of Pauline uses in various letters. In fact he indicates that were it not for Paul, the Gospels probably would not have indicated the manner of Christ's death (page 22).</ref> Murphy-O'Connor refers to nine "fragments of traditional teaching" which appear in Paul's letters. These help to determine "the common doctrinal base that Paul shared with the rest of the early church… Not a single one of these formulae that he inherited from his Christian environment mentions the crucifixion." Our source goes on to indicate that only two of them "formally state that he died." Therefore, in the others it must be inferred by the fact that He was resurrected from the dead.<ref>Murphy, 24. Clearly, the emphasis in the early church was not on the death of Christ, but on His resurrection; not on the cross, but on the empty tomb. The nine passages are: {{b|1|Thessalonians|1|9–10}}; {{b||Galatians|1|3–4}}; {{b|1|Corinthians|15|3–5}}; {{b||Romans|1|3–4}}, {{bv||Romans|4|24–25}}, {{bv||Romans|10|9}}; also the eucharistic words in {{b|1|Corinthians|11|23–25}}, and two liturgical hymns: {{b||Philemon|2|6–11}} and {{b||Colossians|1|15–20}}. Indeed, with reference to {{b||Philemon|2|6–11}}, a leading study refers to "the noticeable absence of those themes which we associate with Paul's Christology and soteriology, e.g., the doctrine of redemption through the Cross, the Resurrection of Christ and the place of the Church," [Ralph P. Martin, A Hymn of Christ. Philippians 2:5–11 in ''Recent Interpretation and in the Setting of Early Christian Worship'' (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1997), 49.] It will be observed that verse 8 reads "became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." Martin continues the above quotation: "Although it is on the Cross that the Lord of glory brings His life of obedience to a climax, no redemptive significance is attached to that death ''in this verse''. Indeed, as was noted earlier, the Cross may not be mentioned in the original version of the hymn." Martin claims the reference is Pauline, that is, it was inserted by Paul into the original hymn, which did not include the reference to the Cross. Hans Urs von Balthasar agrees with this assessment: that the reference to the Cross was added by Paul to a pre-existing hymn. [Hans Urs von Balthasar, ''Mysterium Paschale'' (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2000), 23.]</ref> |
*{{Detail|Jesus Christ/Atonement/The garden and the cross|Jesus Christ/Atonement/The garden and the cross/Quotes}} | *{{Detail|Jesus Christ/Atonement/The garden and the cross|Jesus Christ/Atonement/The garden and the cross/Quotes}} | ||
}} | }} | ||
Line 91: | Line 91: | ||
*It is also clear from what the authors write elsewhere that they are unclear about the LDS attitude towards the blood shed by the Savior. In discussing "Christianity's definition of atonement" they quote from Leon Morris that "because Christ's blood was shed, all who believe in him have access into the very holiest of all."<ref>{{CriticalWork:McKeever and Johnson:Mormonism 101|pages=144}} They quote Leon Morris, ''The Atonement'' (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1983), 84.</ref> Later the authors point out "{{b||Hebrews|9|22}} states that there is no remission of sins without the shedding (not sweating) of blood."<ref>{{CriticalWork:McKeever and Johnson:Mormonism 101|pages=145}} This has a clear reference to the Garden of Gethsemane incident as the primary source of LDS doctrine. This has been refuted in the passages already quoted from scripture and LDS leaders.</ref> The parenthetical comment in this last quotation is a referral back to the authors' comment that "the New Testament says nothing about this phenomenon [of 'sweating great drops of blood'] having any role in the atonement."<ref>{{CriticalWork:McKeever and Johnson:Mormonism 101|pages=142}}</ref> Our authors then quote from several New Testament passages which refer to the fact that Christ died, or died on the cross, for us. (See {{B|1|Corinthians|15|3}}; {{B||Colossians|2|13–4}}; {{B||Romans|5|8,10}}; {{B||Galatians|6|14}}; {{B||Hebrews 10|10}}; {{B||Ephesians|2|16}}; {{B||Colossians|1|20}}) | *It is also clear from what the authors write elsewhere that they are unclear about the LDS attitude towards the blood shed by the Savior. In discussing "Christianity's definition of atonement" they quote from Leon Morris that "because Christ's blood was shed, all who believe in him have access into the very holiest of all."<ref>{{CriticalWork:McKeever and Johnson:Mormonism 101|pages=144}} They quote Leon Morris, ''The Atonement'' (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1983), 84.</ref> Later the authors point out "{{b||Hebrews|9|22}} states that there is no remission of sins without the shedding (not sweating) of blood."<ref>{{CriticalWork:McKeever and Johnson:Mormonism 101|pages=145}} This has a clear reference to the Garden of Gethsemane incident as the primary source of LDS doctrine. This has been refuted in the passages already quoted from scripture and LDS leaders.</ref> The parenthetical comment in this last quotation is a referral back to the authors' comment that "the New Testament says nothing about this phenomenon [of 'sweating great drops of blood'] having any role in the atonement."<ref>{{CriticalWork:McKeever and Johnson:Mormonism 101|pages=142}}</ref> Our authors then quote from several New Testament passages which refer to the fact that Christ died, or died on the cross, for us. (See {{B|1|Corinthians|15|3}}; {{B||Colossians|2|13–4}}; {{B||Romans|5|8,10}}; {{B||Galatians|6|14}}; {{B||Hebrews 10|10}}; {{B||Ephesians|2|16}}; {{B||Colossians|1|20}}) | ||
|response= | |response= | ||
− | *It should be clear from the LDS references cited above that these Biblical passages also are all accepted by the Latter-day Saints. They believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross to redeem humankind. He shed His blood for us. Many of those earlier statements refer to the blood that was shed by Him. LDS apologist Michael Hickenbotham has written that "Latter-day Saints emphatically affirm our reliance on the atoning blood of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, as attested to in the Bible," and then refers to Colossians 1:14, 1 Peter 1:18–19, 1 John 1:7, and Revelation 7:14. He then refers to those references found in the Book of Mormon: 1 Nephi 12 | + | *It should be clear from the LDS references cited above that these Biblical passages also are all accepted by the Latter-day Saints. They believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross to redeem humankind. He shed His blood for us. Many of those earlier statements refer to the blood that was shed by Him. LDS apologist Michael Hickenbotham has written that "Latter-day Saints emphatically affirm our reliance on the atoning blood of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, as attested to in the Bible," and then refers to {{b||Colossians 1:14, {{b|1|Peter 1:18–19, {{b|1|John 1:7, and {{b||Revelation 7:14. He then refers to those references found in the Book of Mormon: {{s|1|Nephi|12|10}}; {{s||Mosiah|3|7,11}}; {{sv||Mosiah|4|2}}; {{s||Alma|5|21,27}}, {{sv||Alma|21|9}}, {{sv||Alma|24|13, {{sv||Alma|34|36}}; {{s||Helaman|5|9}}; {{s||Ether|13|10}}; and {{s||Moroni|4|1}}; {{sv||Moroni|5|2}}; {{sv||Moroni|10|33}}; and in modern scripture: {{s||D&C|20|40}}; {{sv||D&C|27|2}}; {{sv||D&C|76|69}}; and {{s||Moses 6|62}}. He then continues: |
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
Even the sacrament prayer for the administration of the water affirms the symbolism of the atoning blood. It states in part: "…bless and sanctify this water to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them."<ref>Michael Hickenbotham, ''Answering Challenging Mormon Questions (Bountiful, Utah: Horizon Publishers'', 1995), 131. This is a volume that should have been noticed by McKeever and Johnson; it puts the lie to much of their work. A book that McKeever and Johnson claim to have read contains much of the same material: Richard R. Hopkins, ''Biblical Mormonism'', 184–188. Both Hickenbotham and Hopkins are dealing primarily with the Eucharist, or sacrament of the Lord's Supper. Elder Marion G. Romney, of the Quorum of Twelve, said in General Conference that "the water is to be drunk in remembrance of his blood which was shed for us." [{{CR|author=Marion G. Romney|date=April 1946|pages=39}}]</ref> | Even the sacrament prayer for the administration of the water affirms the symbolism of the atoning blood. It states in part: "…bless and sanctify this water to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them."<ref>Michael Hickenbotham, ''Answering Challenging Mormon Questions (Bountiful, Utah: Horizon Publishers'', 1995), 131. This is a volume that should have been noticed by McKeever and Johnson; it puts the lie to much of their work. A book that McKeever and Johnson claim to have read contains much of the same material: Richard R. Hopkins, ''Biblical Mormonism'', 184–188. Both Hickenbotham and Hopkins are dealing primarily with the Eucharist, or sacrament of the Lord's Supper. Elder Marion G. Romney, of the Quorum of Twelve, said in General Conference that "the water is to be drunk in remembrance of his blood which was shed for us." [{{CR|author=Marion G. Romney|date=April 1946|pages=39}}]</ref> |
Chapter 9: D&C and Pearl of Gt Price | A FAIR Analysis of: Mormonism 101 A work by author: Bill McKeever and Eric Johnson
|
Chapter 11: Grace and Works |
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. (3 Nephi 27:13–4)
In some way, incomprehensible to us, Gethsemane, the cross, and the empty tomb join into one grand and eternal drama, in the course of which Jesus abolishes death, and out of which comes immortality for all and eternal life for the righteous.[8]
As I understand it, our mission to the world in this day, is to testify of Jesus Christ. Our mission is to bear record that he is the Son of the Living God and that he was crucified for the sins of the world; that salvation was, and is, and is to come, in and through his atoning blood… We believe that he came into the world with the express mission of dying upon the cross for the sins of the world; that he is, actually, literally, and really the Redeemer of the world and the Savior of men; and that by the shedding of his blood he has offered to all men forgiveness of sins conditioned upon their repentance and obedience to the gospel plan.[11]
The time approached that He was to pass through the severest affliction that any mortal ever did pass through. He undoubtedly had seen persons nailed to the cross, because that method of execution was common at that time, and He understood the torture that such persons experienced for hours. He went by Himself in the garden and prayed to His Father, if it were possible, that this cup might pass from Him; and His feelings were such that He sweat great drops of blood, and in His agony there was an angel sent to give Him comfort and strength.[14]
Response
{{IndexClaim |claim=
|response=
Even the sacrament prayer for the administration of the water affirms the symbolism of the atoning blood. It states in part: "…bless and sanctify this water to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them."[19]
wanted Trypho and his friends to understand that the prophetic Spirit could and did speak "as if the passion has already occurred" Sometimes, he explained, the prophetic Spirit "has spoken concerning the things that are going to occur, uttering them as if at that time they were occurring or even had occurred."[20]
Even the sacrament prayer for the administration of the water affirms the symbolism of the atoning blood. It states in part: "…bless and sanctify this water to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them."[19]
wanted Trypho and his friends to understand that the prophetic Spirit could and did speak "as if the passion has already occurred" Sometimes, he explained, the prophetic Spirit "has spoken concerning the things that are going to occur, uttering them as if at that time they were occurring or even had occurred."[20]
Even the sacrament prayer for the administration of the water affirms the symbolism of the atoning blood. It states in part: "…bless and sanctify this water to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them."[19]
wanted Trypho and his friends to understand that the prophetic Spirit could and did speak "as if the passion has already occurred" Sometimes, he explained, the prophetic Spirit "has spoken concerning the things that are going to occur, uttering them as if at that time they were occurring or even had occurred."[20]
==
Notes
We welcome your suggestions for improving the content of this FAIR Wiki article. |
Sites we recommend: |
FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
We are a volunteer organization. We invite you to give back.
Donate Now