Atonement

Knowledge Leads to Salvation  ( Taken from The Infinite Atonement by Tad R. Callister, beginning on page 12).

“It seems paradoxical that the very doctrine that is essential to our salvation is also one of the least understood doctrines in the Christian world.  The misunderstandings, confusion and doctrinal heresies associated with this foundational doctrine and its precursor, the Fall, are rampant.  The following are examples of such misconceptions taught by many in the Christian world today:

1. Adam and Eve would have had children in the Garden of Eden if they had been allowed to remain.

2. Adam and Eve were not in a state of innocence in the Garden, but rather were experiencing unparalleled joy.

3. The Fall was not part of God’s master plan, but rather a tragic step backwards.  It was a stumbling block, not a stepping stone in man’s eternal journey.

4. If Adam had not fallen, all of Adam’s children would have been born in a state of bliss, to live ‘happily ever after’ in Edenic conditions.

5. Because of the Fall, all infants are tainted with original sin.

6. Grace alone can save, (that is, exalt) us, regardless of any works on our part.

7. The physical resurrection of the Savior was merely symbolic; we will be resurrected as spirits without the ‘limitations’ of a physical body.

8. The Atonement does not have the power to transform us into gods; in fact, such a thought is blasphemous.

Each of the foregoing doctrinal assertions is false.  They are not minor issues, but major theological points that strike at the doctrinal core of the Atonement.  Without a correct understanding of them, one will ‘end up’ with many misconceptions of this central Christian teaching.  Fortunately, the truth about each of these doctrinal points is taught in the Book of Mormon, with additional support from modern scriptures…

There are also many key points of the Atonement that are not incorrectly taught by other religions—they simply are not taught at all.  For example, which other religions discuss not only Christ’s taking upon himself all sins, but likewise his assumption of all pains, infirmities and sicknesses inherent in the mortal experience?  Who else preaches of the Atonement’s power to reach those who have no law or of its retroactive effect upon the saints of premeridian times?  Who speaks of its power to transcend the grave and redeem spirits in the premortal realm?  Ironically, the answers to these questions are not to be found in what many call ‘mainstream’ Christianity rather in the restored Church of Jesus Christ.

President Ezra Taft Benson taught:

‘Much of the Christian world today rejects the divinity of the Savior.  They question His miraculous birth, His perfect life and the reality of His glorious resurrection.  The Book of Mormon teaches in plain and unmistakable terms about the truth of all of those.’

…If it were not for the Book of Mormon, we would fall victim to many of the misconceptions about the Fall and the Atonement as discussed above, simply because the Bible, as inspired as it is, has had ‘many parts which are plain and most precious’ deleted from its original contents.

Sometimes it is difficult for us as members of the Church to distinguish between our beliefs in the Atonement and those of the rest of the Christian world.  Many of us grow up thinking that what we know and believe about this central doctrine is also what the world knows and believes, but it is not so.  Without modern scriptures, particularly the Book of Mormon, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to grasp many of the basic tenets of the Atonement.  Almost two thousand years of Bible interpretation and the varied conclusions arrived at by many of the Christian world should be ample evidence of the need for additional scriptural insight.

For many, the beautiful and deep doctrine of the Atonement is summarily dismissed and placed on the back shelf with the (easy) response, ‘Just believe and be saved.’

Hugh Nibley has said, ‘So (casual) has been the reception of the message [of the Atonement] that through the centuries, while heated controversy and debate have raged over evolution, atheism, the sacraments, the Trinity, authority, predestination, faith and works and so on, there has been no argument or discussion at all about the meaning of the Atonement…People either do not care enough or do not know enough even to argue about it…’

Satan has been successful in diverting much of the Christian world’s attention from the one doctrine that can save us, the Atonement of Jesus Christ, to the (secondary) doctrines that have meaning only because they draw their sustenance from this redeeming event.

(However), with increased (knowledge) can come increased motivation.  So it is with the Atonement.  As our vision of the Atonement is enhanced, our motivation to embrace its full effects is proportionately increased.”

The Quest

The Quest For Godhood by Tad R. Callister (taken from the book, The Infinite Atonement, beginning on page 230.  Only a small part of Bro. Callister’s message is included here).

Perhaps no doctrine, no teaching, no philosophy has stirred such controversy as has this—that man may become perfect as God is.  It is a prime focus of anti-Mormon literature…Ironically; godhood for his children is the crowning goal of the Savior’s atoning sacrifice.

We live in a day when this glorious principle advocating man’s quest for godhood is being maligned and ridiculed.  It is viewed by some as blasphemous, by others as absurd.

Such a concept, they challenge, lowers God to the status of man and thus deprives God of both his dignity and divinity.  Others claim this teaching to be devoid of scriptural support. ‘Certainly,’ they say, ‘no God fearing, right thinking, Bible oriented person would subscribe to such a philosophy as this—and the attack goes on and on.  But wherein lies the truth?

The scriptures are replete with references to man’s potential for perfection and thus godhood.  As early as the book of Genesis an angel appeared to Abraham and extended to him this heavenly mandate, ‘Walk before me and be thou perfect.’ (Genesis 17:1)  What type of perfection was the angel alluding to? 
As compared to other men?  Angels?  God?  During the Sermon on the Mount the Savior gave the unequivocal answer:  ‘Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.’ (Matthew 5:48)…

Paul taught that a vital reason for the church was ‘for the perfecting of the saints,…till we all come…unto a perfect man…unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.’ (Ephesians 4:12-13)  Note the measuring rod—not man, not some form of mini-Christ or quasi-God, but rather the fulness of Christ.’  The standard of perfection was not other men, nor angels, but Christ himself.

The scriptures supporting this doctrine continue to roll forth with repeated and powerful testimony.  At one point the Savior was about to be stoned by the Jews for blasphemy.

To this charge he responded, ‘Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?’ (John 10:34)  He was referring to his own Old Testament declaration, with which the Jews should have been familiar.

‘I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High’ (Psalm 82:6) The Savior was merely reaffirming a prophetic teaching that all men are children of God and thus might become like Him…

Paul knew our potential as offspring of God, for while speaking to the Romans he declared, ‘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.’  (Romans 8:16-17)—Not subordinate heirs, not junior, not contingent, but joint, equal heirs with Christ, to share in all that he shall receive.

Joseph Smith understood the significance of this scripture, for he observed, ‘The grand object of our coming to this earth is that we may become like Christ, for if we are not like him, we cannot become the sons of God and be joint heirs with Christ… (Many more scriptures were also cited).

The critic, unable to understand, responds, ‘But such a concept lowers God to the status of man and thus robs God of his divinity.’  ‘To the contrary,’ comes the reply, ‘does it not elevate man in his divine potential?’ 

…After all, who is greater, that being who limits or that being who enhances man’s eternal progress?  Brigham Young addressed this issue.: ‘(Man’s godhood) will not detract anything from the glory and might of our Heavenly Father, for he will still remain our Father and we shall still be subject to Him and as we progress in glory and power, the more it enhances the glory and power of our Heavenly Father.

That is the irony of the critic’s argument—godhood for man does not diminish God’s status; to the contrary, it elevates it by producing more intelligent, more sensitive, more respectful Saints who have enlarged capacities to understand, honor and worship him…

Do not all Christian churches advocate Christlike behavior?  If so, are we better men and women, better Christians, if we desire to be only 90 percent like Christ, rather than 100 percent?  If it is blasphemous to think we can become as God now is, then at what point is it blasphemous to become like him.—90 percent, 50 percent, 20 percent, 1 percent?  Is it more honorable to seek partial godhood than total godhood?  Are we to walk the path of godhood with no hopes of ever reaching the destination?  Yet that seems to be the tragic conclusion of many.

The power of logic teaches us of our divine potential.  Do not the laws of science teach us that like begets like, each after it kind?  Science has discovered that a complex genetic code transferred from parent to child is responsible for the child attaining the physical attributes of his parents.

If this is so, is it illogical to conclude that spiritual offspring receive a spiritual code giving to them the divine potential of their parent—even God himself?...

The difference between man and God is significant, but it is one of degree, not kind.  It is the difference between an acorn and an oak tree, a rosebud and a rose, a son and a father.  In truth, every man is a god in embryo, in fulfillment of that eternal law that like begets like.  To suggest otherwise is to suggest that God created inferior offspring, in direct conflict with every scientific law known to man.  But somehow, most of the world continues to miss the mark…

The more we become like God, the greater our ability to pay him homage.  In that process of lifting men heavenward, God simultaneously multiplies his own honor and thus is honored more, not less…

(Finally), we may not control our temporal setbacks, but we always, always, always control our spiritual destiny.  Every temporal tragedy may be countered with a spiritual victory—and the ultimate victory is godhood.  In the last analysis, through his grace, God has permitted us to define our own divine destiny.