Lincoln on Practicing Atonement

[Premise Checker]

Your talk on practicing atonement was lovely, Lincoln. I can't say how
original the ideas were with you, but you made the whole business sound
far more whole than what I learned from Creedal Christianity, which is
largely that man is bad. Some of the Creedists maintain that Adam and Eve
"infinitely" offended God, but the God of Genesis and Exodus may get angry
but he sounds much thicker-skinned than that. And so God demands an
infinite sacrifice (namely that of Jesus) to calm him down.

My readings into religion have made me appreciate the role of the Virgin
Mary in Roman Catholicism. I grew up an Episcopalian and, along with being
American (my ancestors came mostly from England starting in 1620) and thus
steeped in English history, too. So I largely absorbed the idea that Mary
was treated as a god by Roman Catholics (hah, hah) and worshiped saints
like the pagans did (hah, hah). I'm sending you a piece that taught me the
beautiful integrative role that Mary played in Christianity before the
Prots demoted her.

Roman Catholics share with Mormons an authoritative hierarchy. There is
something to be said for that, in that I am spared all the difficulties of
drawing my own conclusions from scripture, which will be necessarily
insecure ones. Temperamentally, I'd much rather have it this way,
actually, It fits my 2 3 5 body type, the same one artists through the
ages have painted Jesus as, by the way.

I do have a fundamental problem. Why does Jesus get brought into the
picture. God could have just forgiven on His own, and maybe he might
have overlooked minor transgressions. After all, the key verse in the
entire Bible is Jesus saying, "The sabbath was made for man, not man for
the sabbath." Disobeying the commandments should bring about their own
consequences and rarely stand in need of divine augmentation.

We should indeed praise the Lord for giving us these rules for individual
and social living, as the Psalms enjoin us often. I wonder whether
God explicitly stated that they were for all times. If not, obsolete rules
can no longer be said to have been made for man. You're back into
roll-your-own Protestantism, if everyone can evaluate the continued use of
these rules for himself.

What I haven't seen is how Jesus is necessary, maybe in a way similar to
how praising the Lord is necessary, by which I mean that we are the sort
of creature who will do better by giving praise. In other words, the
commandments to praise are based upon man's ability to understand. And so
maybe Jesus is something that we can grasp.

OR: God is imperfect, as a merely glorified man, constrained by an
underlying reality (closer to the basement reality) to do it things this
way.

I doubt many Mormons would go along with this! We are constrained to speak
to them in what they can understand and not the language of higher set
theory! We had better concentrate on getting their support for
transhumanism and try more mathematical approaches when there are enough
transhumans to handle them.

My thoughts,
Frank

[Lincoln Cannon]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Frank. In my opinion, Jesus' role is that of teacher and example, to the extent that the title "Chirst" or "Messiah" is rightly applicable to him, and that mostly because he teaches us that we, too, should be such teachers and examples, to the extent that "Christ" or "Messiah" applies to us. As Paul in the New Testament put it, the mystery hid from ages is Christ in YOU (http://scriptures.lds.org/en/col/1/23-29#23).

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mormon Transhumanist Association" group.
To post to this group, send email to transf...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to transfiguris...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transfigurism?hl=en.

[Christian Schumann-Curtis]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 3:12 PM, Premise Checker <che...@panix.com> wrote:

Your talk on practicing atonement was lovely, Lincoln. I can't say how original the ideas were with you, but you made the whole business sound far more whole than what I learned from Creedal Christianity, which is largely that man is bad.

I had a high school English teacher once pronounce the following:

Some religions teach that "You are bad and we'll teach you how to be good"
Other religions teach that "You are good and we'll teach you how to be better"
I prefer the latter. 

So do I. 

But that's bumper-sticker-esque over-simplification. 

--
Christian Schumann-Curtis

4300 SE 51st Ave.
Portland, OR  97206

503.774.3568

[Premise Checker]

My original question seems not to have been answered, which is why Jesus
is necessary. Why doesn't God simply forgive those who ask him for
forgiveness (unless there unforgivable things, like blaspheming the Holy
Ghost?

<insert>
Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be
forgiven unto men*: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall
not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the
Son of man, it shall be forgiven unto him: but whosoever speaketh
against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in
this world, neither in the world to come. --Matthew 12:32-3

*unto men who receive me and repent, --added in the Joseph Smith
translation.

Then came some of the Scribes and said unto him, Master, it is
written that, Every sin shall be forgiven; but ye say, Whosoever
speaketh against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven. And they
asked him, How can these things be? And he said unto them, When the
unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places,
seeking rest and findeth none: but when a man speaketh against the
Holy Ghost, then he saith, I will return into my house from whence
I came out; and when he is come, he findeth him empty, swept and
garnished; the the good spirit leaveth him unto himself. --Matthew
12:37-38, Joseph Smith translation.

Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of
men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he
that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness,
but is in danger of eternal damnation. --Mark 3:28-9

But there is a sin which shall not be forgiven. He that shall
blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, hath never forgiveness, but is in
danger of being cut down out of the world. And they shall inherit
eternal damnation. --Mark 3:24, Joseph Smith translation.

And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall
be forgiven unto him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the
Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven. --Luke 12:10

Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of Man, and repenteth,
it shall be forgiven him; but unto him who blasphemeth against the
Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him. --Luke 12:12, Joseph
Smith translation.

+++++++++

Joseph's translation scratched the last phrase of Matthew 12:33,
about "the world to come." Universalists, who claim that all shall be
saved, eventually, take "the world to come" to mean the thousand year
reign of Christ, which will end, after which those who blasphemed
against the Holy Ghost will, eventually, be saved also. This
interpretation is, of course, highly controversial. For a discussion,
see http://www.saviour-of-all.org/SlickMark3_28.html.
</insert>

But this is *New* Testament stuff, and there would be no New Testament
without Jesus. You may recall from the Acts of the Apostles that St.
Stephen iirc upbraided "stiffnecked" Jews for not accepting the Holy
Ghost. Such a being is hard to discern from the Old Testament, so no
wonder stiffnecked Jews rejected it! (I asked an Orthodox Jewish friend
about the Holy Ghost and he said this was something in Christianity, not
in Judaism. So you might ask why the Holy Ghost was necessary as well,
when you answer my question about why Jesus was necessary.

On 2010-02-08, Lincoln Cannon opined [message unchanged below]:

> Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 21:49:30 -0700
> From: Lincoln Cannon <lin...@metacannon.net>
> Reply-To: transf...@googlegroups.com
> To: transf...@googlegroups.com
> Subject: Re: [mta] Lincoln on Practicing Atonement

[Lincoln Cannon]

Christ is necessary (definitionally, not hypothetically). Jesus is
necessary to the extent he is Christ. The same is true of all members
of the body of Christ. Does that answer your question?

> --

[ddaug...@gmail.com]

Sorry for jumping in here out of the blue, but it doesn't answer the question for me. It makes sense, of course, but it doesn't explain why Jesus would have to be a definitional prerequisite for the Plan of Salvation to still work/have structural integrity.

Doe
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

[Lincoln Cannon]

I didn't write that Jesus is definitionally necessary. I wrote that
Christ is definitionally necessary. You'll find this explained at more
length in my paper that Frank referenced, but in short: Christ
(individually and communally) is the volitional aspect of atonement,
which is the overcoming of pain, misery, chaos, death, hell, nihilism,
etc.

On Feb 9, 2010, at 12:38 PM, "ddaug...@gmail.com" <ddaug...@gmail.com

[Christopher Bradford]

I have a few thoughts that I'd like to add to the conversation when I
get a few more minutes. But I'll quickly jot down a couple of suggestions:

Jesus is a necessary part of God's plan from within a particular
community's perspective.

Jesus, qua embodiment of God (God made man, the Word made flesh, the
condescension of God, in whom the Godhead dwells bodily) is a necessary
part of any plan of universal atonement.

Jesus, qua exalted man (Exemplar, the Way, resurrected being) is a
necessary part of any plan of human exaltation.

Jesus, qua the revelation of God to humanity (the Word of God) is a
necessary part of any plan of communication between God and man.

It is possible to be idolatrous in worshipping Jesus.

Chris

On 2/9/2010 12:38 PM, ddaug...@gmail.com wrote:
> Sorry for jumping in here out of the blue, but it doesn't answer the
> question for me. It makes sense, of course, but it doesn't explain
> why Jesus would have to be a definitional prerequisite for the Plan
> of Salvation to still work/have structural integrity.
>
> Doe Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>
> -----Original Message----- From: Lincoln Cannon
> <lin...@metacannon.net> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 12:33:04 To:
> transf...@googlegroups.com<transf...@googlegroups.com>
> Subject: Re: [mta] Lincoln on Practicing Atonement
>
> Christ is necessary (definitionally, not hypothetically). Jesus is
> necessary to the extent he is Christ. The same is true of all
> members of the body of Christ. Does that answer your question?
>
> On Feb 9, 2010, at 9:59 AM, Premise Checker <che...@panix.com>
> wrote:
>
>> My original question seems not to have been answered, which is why
>> Jesus is necessary. Why doesn't God simply forgive those who ask
>> him for forgiveness (unless there unforgivable things, like
>> blaspheming the Holy Ghost?
>>

--
Christopher Bradford

[Dr. Stephen R. White, D. Arts]

please take me off the mailing list, I cannot even begin to keep up with all these emails.

Thanks - Dr Stephen R White - whi...@boone.net

-----Original Message-----
>From: Lincoln Cannon <lin...@metacannon.net>
>Sent: Feb 9, 2010 11:46 AM
>To: "transf...@googlegroups.com" <transf...@googlegroups.com>
>Subject: Re: [mta] Lincoln on Practicing Atonement
>

>I didn't write that Jesus is definitionally necessary. I wrote that
>Christ is definitionally necessary. You'll find this explained at more
>length in my paper that Frank referenced, but in short: Christ
>(individually and communally) is the volitional aspect of atonement,
>which is the overcoming of pain, misery, chaos, death, hell, nihilism,
>etc.
>

>On Feb 9, 2010, at 12:38 PM, "ddaug...@gmail.com" <ddaug...@gmail.com

> > wrote:
>
>> Sorry for jumping in here out of the blue, but it doesn't answer the
>> question for me. It makes sense, of course, but it doesn't explain
>> why Jesus would have to be a definitional prerequisite for the Plan
>> of Salvation to still work/have structural integrity.
>>
>> Doe
>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Lincoln Cannon <lin...@metacannon.net>
>> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 12:33:04
>> To: transf...@googlegroups.com<transf...@googlegroups.com>
>> Subject: Re: [mta] Lincoln on Practicing Atonement
>>
>> Christ is necessary (definitionally, not hypothetically). Jesus is
>> necessary to the extent he is Christ. The same is true of all members
>> of the body of Christ. Does that answer your question?
>>
>> On Feb 9, 2010, at 9:59 AM, Premise Checker <che...@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>>> My original question seems not to have been answered, which is why
>>> Jesus is necessary. Why doesn't God simply forgive those who ask him
>>> for forgiveness (unless there unforgivable things, like blaspheming
>>> the Holy Ghost?
>>>

>>>> To: transf...@googlegroups.com

>>>> Subject: Re: [mta] Lincoln on Practicing Atonement

[Lincoln Cannon]

Hi Stephen. You can control your subscription to the mailing list by visiting this link:

http://groups.google.com/group/transfigurism/subscribe?hl=en

Please note that there are multiple options. You can either unsubscribe entirely or you can choose to get abridged or digest mailings, which result in about one message per day.

[Dr. Stephen R. White, D. Arts]

I have tried several times to log in to the link sent to me- a well as to have my password sent to me.  None of my efforts have been successful.  I'm sure that the account was set up while recoveirng form my head trauma which required me to learn how walk, talk, and type.

 

This is really a problem for me at this time; I'm in corrsepsonde with Nova Science Book Publishers regarding two new chapter publications as well as a book chapter with Oxford University Press in the UK.  Thus I need to keep my emails down and foused as in go through this process with book the publishers.

 

 

Your assitance is most appreciated.

 

Dr. Stephen R. White, B.S., M.A., M.P.A., C.Ed., D.Arts 
Professor

Appalachian State University

Recich College of Education

Graduate Studies - Department of Leadership & Educational Theory

[Lincoln Cannon]

Stephen, I can help you. Would you like me to set you to one summary email per day or to web-only access (no email)? 

[Lincoln Cannon]

Stephen, I've set your account to receive one summary email per day. Please let me know if you want it changed. Thanks.

[Dr. Stephen R. White, D. Arts]

No email is best for me at this point considering the number of messages coming in to me for Nova Science and the UK.

 

Thanks

[Nate]

Chris, I found this to be really profound. I'm very interested in the
other thoughts you said you hoped to add to the conversation.

On Feb 9, 1:54 pm, Christopher Bradford <cbgrasshop...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I have a few thoughts that I'd like to add to the conversation when I
> get a few more minutes. But I'll quickly jot down a couple of suggestions:
>
> Jesus is a necessary part of God's plan from within a particular
> community's perspective.
>
> Jesus, qua embodiment of God (God made man, the Word made flesh, the
> condescension of God, in whom the Godhead dwells bodily) is a necessary
> part of any plan of universal atonement.
>
> Jesus, qua exalted man (Exemplar, the Way, resurrected being) is a
> necessary part of any plan of human exaltation.
>
> Jesus, qua the revelation of God to humanity (the Word of God) is a
> necessary part of any plan of communication between God and man.
>
> It is possible to be idolatrous in worshipping Jesus.
>
> Chris
>

> On 2/9/2010 12:38 PM, ddaught...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Sorry for jumping in here out of the blue, but it doesn't answer the
> > question for me. It makes sense, of course, but it doesn't explain
> > why Jesus would have to be a definitional prerequisite for the Plan
> > of Salvation to still work/have structural integrity.
>
> > Doe Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>
> > -----Original Message----- From: Lincoln Cannon

> > <linc...@metacannon.net> Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 12:33:04 To:

> > transf...@googlegroups.com<transf...@googlegroups.com>
> > Subject: Re: [mta] Lincoln on Practicing Atonement
>
> > Christ is necessary (definitionally, not hypothetically). Jesus is
> > necessary to the extent he is Christ. The same is true of all
> > members of the body of Christ. Does that answer your question?
>

> > On Feb 9, 2010, at 9:59 AM, Premise Checker <chec...@panix.com>

[Lincoln Cannon]

At the MTA meetup last night, Chris publicly committed to blogging
regularly again. I'm looking forward to it. :-)