The Perfect Paradox - Chapter 8: In Harmony Divine

Author Edith Hamilton writes: “When love meets no return the result is suffering, and the greater the love the greater the suffering. There can be no greater suffering than to love purely and perfectly one who is bent upon evil and self-destruction. That was what God endured at the hands of men.”[1] Although He was “made like unto his brethren” (see Hebrews 2:17), Christ was neither treated as nor considered a brother, “neither did his brethren believe in him” (John 7:5). Time and again Isaiah’s unique poetry reminds us that the Savior’s sufferings were vicarious and borne for us and yet we hid as it were our faces from him.

With such rejection, we might ask—what was the force that pressed Christ forward to advocate the cause of men? Was it an act of vanity? Was it for personal gain? Such suggestions make reason stare. Love was the force—first, love of His Father and, second, love of His fellowmen, “for scarcely for a righteous man will one die,” declared the apostle Paul, “yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:7-8). Nephi further explained: “And the world, because of their iniquity, shall judge him to be a thing of naught; wherefore they scourge him, and he suffereth it; and they smite him, and he suffereth it. Yea, they spit upon him, and he suffereth it, because of his loving kindness and his long-suffering towards the children of men” (1 Nephi 19:9). Confirming such love as the force that influenced Christ to suffer for us, Moroni likewise wrote:

And again, I remember that thou hast said that thou hast loved the world, even unto the laying down of thy life for the world, that thou mightest take it again to prepare a place for the children of men. 

And now I know that this love which thou hast had for the children of men is charity (Ether 12:33-34).

“True charity has been known only once,” writes Elder Jeffrey R. Holland. “It is shown perfectly and purely in Christ’s unfailing, ultimate, and atoning love for us,” He continues:

It is Christ's love for us that ‘suffereth long, and is kind, and envieth not.’ It is his love for us that is not ‘puffed up . . . , not easily provoked, thinketh no evil.’ It is Christ’s love for us that ‘beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.’ It is as demonstrated in Christ that ‘charity never faileth.’[2]

On May 21, 2004, Lori and I became grandparents. Thirty minutes following the birth of our grand-daughter Kate, we entered the room where our daughter Sarah and her husband, Paul, were admiring their new daughter. Sarah appeared tired yet peaceful, and the new parents were visibly filled with an anxious love for their first child. As we approached our daughter Sarah, we asked, “How are you doing?” Looking to her new baby in her arms and with tears streaming down her face, she replied, “I can do this for as many times as is necessary. It was worth every minute.” This was as gracious a statement as I have ever heard. It calls to mind the Savior’s selfless love demonstrated in His atonement. Christ was willing to experience such indescribable suffering because, in the midst of His offering and in the travail of His soul, He saw His seed. He looked to his children and was satisfied (see Isaiah 53:10-11).[3]

The love of a mother in bringing mortality to her child can be viewed as a type of the perfect love demonstrated by our Savior in bringing immortality and eternal life to His children. As a mother’s pains experienced in the midst of her travail are swallowed up in the joy of her new-born child (see John 16:21), so Christ’s pains and sorrows were “swallowed up” in the pleasure of His seed. His was a supreme joy born of a godly sorrow. He suffered it, because of His loving kindness and His long-suffering towards the children of men and He knew, even in the midst of the terror, of the joy that would result from His divine act and expression of love. Such love has been demonstrated but once. In truth, “how great is his joy in the soul that repenteth!” (D&C 18:13), a joy made possible only because He descended below all things (see D&C 88:6).

Notwithstanding His love, God is also a God of justice and cannot look upon sin with the least degree of allowance. He is the Lion (see Revelation 5:5) that cannot be tamed. He is the Captain who “put on righteousness as a breastplate, [a] . . . helmet of salvation upon his head; . . . the garments of vengeance for clothing, and was clad with zeal as a cloak” (Isaiah 59:17). He carries a sword that is both swift and sharp (see 1 Nephi 22:16) and is able to utterly destroy with the brightness of His coming (see D&C 5:19). He has a voice of thunder (see D&C 88:90), eyes as the flame of fire (see D&C 110:3), lips filled with indignation, a tongue that devours, and breath to reach the midst of the neck (see Isaiah 30:27-28). He creates and He destroys. He gives life and administered death. He can be filled with love and yet filled with anger. Thus, I suggest there was a second impetus, influenced by His love,[4] that pressed Christ forward to undertake the pains of all men—I refer to His wrath, vengeance, anger, and fury.

Some would teach that Christ is only gentle—that anger, fury, and wrath cannot be ingredients of His divine nature. They would even go so far as to have us believe that He loves the one who turned a third of God’s children against Him. Quite to the contrary, God placed enmity—a state of hatred and opposition—between Satan and Christ (see Moses 4:21). Affection for one who is filled with darkness cannot radiate from One in whom there is no darkness. Light cannot cleave to that which light and truth forsake (see D&C 93:37). Light cleaves to light, virtue loveth virtue, and truth embraceth truth (see D&C 88:40). Thus, God’s full love for His children is not without condition. His blood will not cleanse the wicked who hear not His voice (see D&C 29:17) nor will the love of the Father continue with those who keep not His commandments (see D&C 95:12). Indeed, the wicked are rejected from that Tree of Life (see 1 Nephi 15:36) which is the love of God (see 1 Nephi 11:21-22).

Increasing “levels” of God’s love are clearly demonstrated throughout scripture. The Lord declares that He despises the wicked (see 2 Nephi 9:42) and “has no place” in him who “becometh an enemy to all righteousness” (see Mosiah 2:37). Towards such who “repenteth not, and remaineth and dieth an enemy to God, the demands of divine justice do awaken his immortal soul to a lively sense of his own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever. And now I say unto you, that mercy hath no claim on that man; therefore his final doom is to endure a never-ending torment” (Mosiah 2:38-39). The “enemy to God” whose choice and lot it is to “remain filthy still” (see D&C 88:35, 102) shall not experience God’s mercy or love—he shall only know the penalty of His law (see D&C 82:4).

Those who enjoy God’s love in the winding-down scenes will be His servants; they shall experience salvation (see D&C 76:88), but where God and Christ dwell they cannot come worlds without end (see D&C 76:112). They shall experience His love and partake of His mercy, but they must also suffer the penalty of His law (see D&C 76:104-106). Thus, these unique individuals shall taste of His anger and His love—the contrasting experience will undoubtedly remain a memory in the eternities that come and go. Afar from servants, God has friends to whom He extends a greater measure of His love. To His apostles He said:

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. 

Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. 

Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth; but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you” (John 15:13-15).

Friends are those to whom He promises eternal life (see D&C 88:3-4),[5] but they must thereafter prove faithful if they are to become His sons.[6] Thus, the full manifestation of God’s love is reserved only for those who become His sons and daughters—members of His family. The Apostle John wrote:

BEHOLD, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. 

Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is (see 1 John 3:1-2).

The fact that God chooses to call those whom He loves most His sons is not unimportant. Rather, it establishes the basis for understanding God’s love—God has a Beloved Son[7] and to the degree we become like Him we will be beloved of the Father. Some dictionaries suggest that “beloved” means “dearly loved.” But the more refined definitions of “beloved” given in the Oxford English Dictionary include “often-loved, well-loved, best-loved, first-loved, and fairest.” Christ, who sits in the position of first and best, was quite aware of His Father’s immense love for Him and announced it on several occasions (see John 3:35)[8] together with the reason for such love (see John 10:17).

Can we ever experience the Father’s love to the degree that His Son does? Can we ever be beloved of the Father? By referring to those who become sons of God as “beloved,” the Apostle John suggests that we can—that the love which He has for His Beloved Son will be “shed forth upon all those who are just and true” (see D&C 76:53). But John also made it clear that such love can only materialize in and through Him who is Just and True (see Revelation 19:11). To describe how the Father’s love is manifest in and through His Son, the Lord said to His apostles: “As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you; continue ye in my love. If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love” (John 15:9-10). Christ’s love for us is inextricably tied to the degree we keep His commandments. And if we keep His commandments, we will abide in His love. If we don’t, we won’t. The Apostle added: “But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected; hereby know we that we are in him” (1 John 2:5).

Keeping Christ’s commandments brings oneness with God and, with it, His love. Jesus confirmed this doctrine to His apostles, “He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him” (John 14:21). The day that we are encircled about in the arms of Christ’s love (see 2 Nephi 1:15) will be the day that we shall know that He is in the Father, and we are in Him, and He is in us (see John 14:20).[9] This pattern is demonstrated perfectly in the Lord’s prayer for His apostles wherein He prayed:

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 send me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me (John 17:22-23).

In short, when we become a son, we will be loved as the Son.

It has long been my experience that efforts to teach that God’s full love is conditional are met with strong resistance—opponents to this view find it impossible to accept that connecting to God’s love is premised upon one’s conduct. They would rather feel safe in their ignorance than apprehensive in the truth. But however ironic it may seem, the myth of unconditional love is most profane and cruel as the one who lives secure in his ignorance may eventually lose all that he thought was certain. The concept of unconditional love is nothing less than the brainchild of him whose primeval design it was to “to save men in their sins”[10]—to guarantee salvation without effort, without excellence, without hard work, and without individual responsibility. It is Lucifer’s ultimate trickery. It is a “secret combination” that validates the sinner no matter how vile he may become; and because it validates the sinner, it decriminalizes his conduct. 

Looking into its origins, one might be surprised to discover that the concept of unconditional love stems largely from Karl Marx and his socialistic and communistic ideals.[11] As far as I can ascertain, the term unconditional love was coined by the social psychologist Erich Fromm.[12] He is thought as one of the founders of socialist humanism who equated Marxism with matriarchal[13] feelings of unconditional love and capitalism with patriarchal[14] dominance and conditional love. He formalized these views in his 1956 book entitled, The Art of Loving, and concluded that one’s childhood relationship with his parents was central in determining which of the two views emerged as predominate. “The love of God,” he wrongly noted, “cannot be separated from the love for one’s parents.”[15]

His protégé, Carl Rogers, equally set forth the idea that one’s personal experience was the foremost authority in developing the idea of God.[16] “Experience is, for me,” Rogers wrote, “the highest authority." He continued:

The touchstone of validity is my own experience. No other person’s ideas, and none of my own ideas, are as authoritative as my experience. It is to experience that I must return again and again, to discover a closer approximation to truth as it is in the process of becoming in me. Neither the Bible nor the prophets—neither Freud nor research—neither the revelations of God nor man—can take precedence over my own direct experience. My experience is not authoritative because it is infallible. It is the basis of authority because it can always be checked in new primary ways. In this way its frequent error or fallibility is always open to correction.[17]

Because individual up-bringing has been largely patriarchal, Fromm suggested that this experience has yielded a societal view that God’s love is patriarchal. “Quite obviously,” he boorishly explained, “the majority of people have, in their personal development, not overcome this infantile stage, and hence the belief in God to most people is the belief in a helping father - a childish illusion.”[18] He concluded that so long as a person retains “this childish dependence on a punishing and rewarding father, or any other authority, he cannot develop a more mature love for God.”[19] Such hodgepodge found fertile soil among the free-loving, morally-bankrupt hippies of Woodstock who wanted little to do with communal constraints and even less to do with God. 

Taking an opposite view and setting forth the doctrine concerning the conditional nature of God’s love, Elder Russell M. Nelson writes: “While divine love can be called perfect, infinite, enduring, and universal, it cannot correctly be characterized as unconditional. The word does not appear in the scriptures. On the other hand, many verses affirm that the higher levels of love the Father and the Son feel for each of us—and certain divine blessings stemming from that love—are conditional.”[20] To those who persist that God’s full love is unconditional, Elder Nelson speaks pointedly:

Understanding that divine love and blessings are not truly ‘unconditional’ can defend us against common fallacies such as these: ‘Since God’s love is unconditional, He will love me regardless . . .’; or ‘Since ‘God is love,’ He will love me unconditionally, regardless . . . .’ These arguments are used by anti-Christs to woo people with deception. Nehor, for example, promoted himself by teaching falsehoods: He ‘testified unto the people that all mankind should be saved at the last day, . . . for the Lord had created all men, . . . and, in the end, all men should have eternal life.’ Sadly, some of the people believed Nehor’s fallacious and unconditional concepts.[21]

The doctrine of unconditional love is antichrist! It is a fabrication of the lowest order. While scriptures declare that “God is love” (see 1 John 4:8), we cannot then conclude that “love is God.” There are those who love darkness and those who love evil. But this love is neither God nor of God. Conversely, although we can appropriately conclude that “Satan is hate,” it does not then follow that “hate is Satan” for “hatred is a proper and holy emotion when channeled properly . . . . Manifestations of perfect hatred are shown forth by Deity himself,”[22] declared Elder McConkie. In scripture we read:

These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 

A heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, 

Feet that be swift in running to mischief,

A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren (Proverbs 6:16-19).

As we work our way through this list of things that God hates, it becomes clear that His hate is not only directed towards sin, but is also directed towards the father of all lies (see 2 Nephi 2:18) who sowed discord among His brethren and “accused them before our God day and night” (see Revelation 12:10).[23] Satan is an abomination to God and for him there is no godly affection.[24] Both love and hatred are godly attributes when properly channeled. When not properly channeled, they are driving forces of the devil’s work. 

It is the focus of one's emotions that determines whether the emotion is good or evil. Thus, while God is a God of love, we cannot ignore that He is also a God of wrath (see Revelation 14:18-20), vengeance (see Romans 12:19), and fury (see D&C 121:5). He stands as a terrible gulf to divide the children of men (see 1 Nephi 12:18) and will not permit the wicked to destroy the righteous without swift retribution. Concerning His wrath and vengeance, the prophet Joseph recorded this vivid description:

And the Lord shall be red in his apparel, and his garments like him that treadeth in the wine-vat. 

And so great shall be the glory of his presence that the sun shall hide his face in shame, and the moon shall withhold its light, and the stars shall be hurled from their places. 

And his voice shall be heard: I have trodden the wine-press alone, and have brought judgment upon all people; and none were with me; 

And I have trampled them in my fury, and I did tread upon them in mine anger, and their blood have I sprinkled upon my garments, and stained all my raiment; for this was the day of vengeance which was in my heart (D&C 133:48-51).[25]

We cannot study such verses without seeing that the justice and vengeance of God is as real and divine as His love and mercy. And if justice, love, and mercy meet in harmony divine in the atonement, shouldn’t we witness something more than His love in this horrific undertaking? Mustn’t we also see the vestiges of His justice? In fact, we do! To Isaiah, the Lord declared concerning His suffering, “and my fury, it upheld me” (Isaiah 63:5). Not only did His love for His Father and His righteous seed sustain Him through His sufferings and sorrows, but His fury, anger, and vengeance upheld Him. Together with love and mercy, I suggest that these were all emotions which he had “in his heart” on that terrible night in Gethsemane.

A day is sufficient for God to take vengeance upon the wicked. His sword is swift and He hastens such hostile yet necessary work. Conversely, His work of redemption is patient and long-suffering and, as the allegory of the olive tree expresses, He is ever eager to spare His vineyard a little longer (see Jacob 5). When the victory is won, I think we will see that His mercy and long suffering will reach as far as His justice. Not a single sin will escape His judgments but neither will there be a soul whom He has not showered with His love and whom He has not blessed with His good favor. God’s love is enduring. God’s mercy is infinite. God’s justice is certain. God’s anger is terrible. How wonderful it is to be encircled in the arms of His love (see 2 Nephi 1:15), yet how fearful it is to fall into the hands of the Living God (see Hebrews 10:28-31).

Glory to God on high! Let heav'n and earth reply. Praise ye his name. 

His love and grace adore, Who all our sorrows bore. Sing aloud evermore: Worthy the Lamb! 

Jesus, our Lord and God, Bore sin's tremendous load. Praise ye his name. 

Tell what his arm has done, What spoils from death he won. Sing his great name alone: Worthy the Lamb! 

Let all the hosts above Join in one song of love, Praising his name. 

To him ascribed be Honor and majesty Thru all eternity: Worthy the Lamb![26]

Having looked at the ends of the law and atonement and how both love and fury were divine attributes and emotions demonstrated in the atoning sacrifice, it is appropriate now to consider God’s attributes of justice and mercy. In doing so, I admittedly will be taking a different approach than what is generally taken and I may even suggest different conclusions about the relationship between justice and mercy than those commonly heard. However, I believe that neither my approach nor conclusions are contrary to the revealed word.

From my own studies, I have come to the conclusion that although God’s justice and mercy may seemingly manifest themselves in divergent ways, they most often, if not always, demonstrate themselves in a complimentary fashion. In other words, justice and mercy buttress rather than destabilize each other. At first blush, this may seem like a contradictory philosophy and, in the minds of some, may create ambiguity that needs clarification. Although there are many ways in which justice and mercy are similarly manifest, I will consider only four that are most apparent in order to clear up any ambiguity and illustrate this important conclusion.

First, the resurrection comes to all men because justice demands it. Concerning this, Elder Joseph Fielding Smith said:

Reason teaches us this, and it is a simple matter of justice. Adam alone was responsible for death and therefore the Lord does not lay this to the charge of any other person. Justice demands that no person who was not responsible for death shall be held responsible for it, and therefore, as Paul declared: ‘as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.’[27]

Thus, justice demands that the resurrection be provided freely to all who, because of Adam’s transgression, are subject to the physical bands of death.

In seeming contrast to Elder Smith’s observations, Elder Dallin H. Oaks states:

The universal resurrection from physical death is an unconditional act of mercy made possible by the Atonement. Alma taught Corianton that ‘mercy cometh because of the atonement; and the atonement bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead’ (Alma 42:23).[28]

Thus, like justice, mercy assures that the resurrection will be provided freely to all.

Second, for the same reason that justice demands the resurrection be provided freely to Adam’s posterity, justice likewise demands that all men be redeemed from the “first spiritual death” that comes upon them as a result of Adam’s transgression. Again, Elder Smith declared:

It, therefore, became necessary for the Father to send his Only Begotten Son, who was free from sin, to atone for our sins as well as for Adam's transgression, which justice demanded should be done.[29]

As with physical death, it was by Adam that the first spiritual death came upon men and the Lord will not hold any other man accountable for the choices of this one man. Confirming this, “the Lord said unto Adam: Behold I have forgiven thee thy transgression in the Garden of Eden. Hence came the saying abroad among the people, that the Son of God hath atoned for original guilt, wherein the sins of the parents cannot be answered upon the heads of the children, for they are whole from the foundation of the world” (Moses 6:53-54).

As a confirmation of this verity, Samuel the Lamanite prophesied:

For behold, . . . it behooveth him and becometh expedient that he dieth, to bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, that thereby men may be brought into the presence of the Lord. 

Yea, behold, this death bringeth to pass the resurrection, and redeemeth all mankind from the first death—that spiritual death; for all mankind, by the fall of Adam being cut off from the presence of the Lord, are considered as dead, both as to things temporal and to things spiritual. 

But behold, the resurrection of Christ redeemeth mankind, yea, even all mankind, and bringeth them back into the presence of the Lord (Helaman 14:15-17).[30]

Since, as previously noted, the resurrection comes as a matter of justice, then it is only logical to conclude that the spiritual redemption that comes to all mankind because of the resurrection must also come as a matter of justice.

In seeming contrast, if we use Elder Oak’s previous analysis of mercy and apply it to the verses just quoted, we must also conclude that mercy redeems all men from the first spiritual death. Alma taught that “mercy cometh because of the atonement; and the atonement bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead” (Alma 42:23) and Samuel taught that Christ “dieth, to bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, that thereby men may be brought into the presence of the Lord” (Helaman 14:15). By networking the words of these two prophets, we must conclude that mercy comes because of the atonement which brings about the resurrection of the dead whereby all men are brought back into the presence of God and are thereby redeemed from the first spiritual death. Thus, as with justice, Elder Oaks concludes that one of the manifestations of mercy is that “[w]e are redeemed from the fall of Adam without condition.”[31]

Third, the salvation of all children who die before the age of accountability is unconditionally guaranteed because justice demands it. Concerning this, Elder Smith concluded that “both justice and mercy would be robbed and an unpardonable crime committed in the name of the Lord, if all little children were not redeemed through the atonement of Jesus Christ.”[32] Elder James E. Talmage further commented:

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches as a doctrine founded on reason, justice, and scripture, that all children are innocent in the sight of God, and that . . . they are saved through the atonement of Christ.[33]

In short, justice would self-destruct if enforced against little children.

In seeming contrast, the salvation of all children who die before the age of accountability is also unconditionally provided because of mercy. Elder Smith said:

In declaring that little children are of the kingdom of heaven, our Lord made it clear that they are innocent of sin and require no baptism. This is according to his mercy and justice.[34]

More forcefully, Mormon warned: “Little children cannot repent; wherefore, it is awful wickedness to deny the pure mercies of God unto them, for they are all alive in him because of his mercy” (Moroni 8:19).

Finally, justice accords the opportunity for all men and women who die without law to be taught the gospel in the spirit world so that they can be judged according to men in the flesh. Elder Smith declared:

Therefore, it seems that it was only a matter of justice for the Lord to do what Abinadi said he would do and permit these who innocently died in ‘their ignorance, not having salvation declared unto them’ to have part in this great resurrection. The question naturally arises: Little children who do not understand, should they die, are they redeemed through the blood of Christ? The scriptures inform us also that this is the privilege of all those who are without law: For behold that all little children are alive in Christ, and also all they that are without the law.[35] Elder Boyd K. Packer confirms that “moral law assumes accountability; no accountability, no penalties! Moral law will self-destruct if enforced against those not accountable. It is not moral to do so.”[36]

In seeming contrast, mercy also claims all those who die without law. Supporting this declaration, Elder Jeffrey R. Holland states:

When no moral law applies (as with little children, the mentally impaired, those ignorant of the gospel until they are taught it, and so forth), the power of the Atonement [mercy] ‘satisfieth the demands of . . . justice,’ and such people are ‘restored to that God who gave them breath.’[37]

The prophet Jacob also explained:

Wherefore, he has given a law; and where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation; and where there is no condemnation the mercies of the Holy One of Israel have claim upon them, because of the atonement; for they are delivered by the power of him (2 Nephi 9:25).

Above, I have listed four seemingly contradictory statements from the revealed word as to how justice and mercy are demonstrated in the gospel plan. For example, Elder Smith declared that the resurrection comes to us as “a simple matter of justice” whereas Elder Oaks confirms that it comes to us as “an unconditional act of mercy.”

So what is it that brings about the resurrection—justice or mercy? Is one of these brethren wrong or are they both right? Clearly, they are both right and therein lies support for the conclusion made earlier in this chapter that, in the gospel of Jesus Christ, justice and mercy manifest themselves in essentially identical ways in bringing to pass the salvation of men.

If asked the question, “What is the opposite of justice?” many instinctively respond: “Mercy!” This response, however well-intentioned, is incorrect and illustrates a fundamental and widespread misconception concerning the doctrines of justice and mercy and their relationship with each other. To correct this misconception, Elder Packer provides us with this short and simple statement:

When that prodigal classmate of ours is wiser than he has yet shown himself to be, he will have learned that Justice is another name for Mercy, and Mercy is another name for Justice.[38]

Justice is not the opposite of mercy as may be commonly expressed or heard in our Sunday School classes; they are essentially the same. They do not reside at opposing ends of the law; together they rest at its fulcrum intricately and securely woven into the atonement of Jesus Christ working together to ensure that salvation comes only through Christ and that no robber gains it by some other way. Thus, when Alma expressed that “whosoever repenteth . . . shall have claim on mercy through mine Only Begotten Son,” (Alma 12:34) we must appreciate that his expression is in perfect harmony with the justice of God that also demands that the penitent shall have claim on mercy through His Only Begotten Son. Both justice and mercy mutually and concurrently claim the penitent and deliver their souls from hell.

Restated, when a person seeking mercy satisfies the conditions of a broken heart and contrite spirit established by Him who suffered the full penalty of broken law, it would be unjust to impose a second penalty on that person seeking mercy. To do so would be to deny the sufferings of the Son of God and exact a penalty from both Christ and the penitent for the same offense—a violation of the rule of double jeopardy. Therefore, as a matter of justice, mercy must be extended to the penitent as justice would self-destruct if enforced against the repentant transgressor.

As the following illustration portrays, it is the Justice of God that executes the law that imposes the punishment and condemns the wicked. It is also Justice that invokes Mercy to claim the penitent.

ENDNOTES

[1] As cited by Maxwell, “. . . A More Excellent Way,” 43. 

[2] Holland, Christ and the New Covenant, 336. I might add that true charity has been known twice. With this Elder Holland would agree, for it was the Father's love for us that was the driving force behind the love of the Son. The Father's love is love.

[3] Compare Mosiah 14:9-10. 

[4] Joseph Smith taught that love is the one attribute that influences all other excellencies in God’s character such that men and women desire to exercise faith in Him unto salvation: “And lastly, but not less important to the exercise of faith in God, is the idea that he is love; for with all the other excellencies in his character, without this one to influence them, they could not have such powerful dominion over the minds of men; but when the idea is planted in the mind that he is love, who cannot see the just ground that men of every nation, kindred, and tongue, have to exercise faith in God so as to obtain to eternal life” (Smith, Joseph, Lectures on Faith, 3:24). 

[5] Compare D&C 84:63, 77. 

[6] Because of his obedience in all things, Abraham was known as the Friend of God (see James 2:23). 

[7] See JS-H 1:17; compare Matthew 12:18. 

[8] Compare John 5:20. 

[9] “To ‘possess the principles which God possesses’ is to dwell in God!” declared Elder McConkie. “That is, if we possess love, charity, faith, and every godly attribute as he possesses them, then he dwells in us because we have received those attributes which come from him, and we dwell in him because we have become as he is” (see McConkie, Bruce R., Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 3:401). 

[10] Smith, Joseph, Times and Seasons, Volume V, Nauvoo, Illinois, 25 December 1844, 758. 

[11] Marxist notions, in part, flows from Darwin’s theories of organic evolution, which might account for the reason why President Joseph Fielding Smith taught that “organic evolution is Satan’s chief weapon in destroying the divine mission of Jesus Christ. It is a contemptible plot against faith in God and to destroy the effective belief in the divine atonement of our Redeemer through which men may be saved from their sins and find place in the Kingdom of God” (see Smith, Joseph Fielding, His Origin and Destiny, 184 – 185). Much of the nonsense today in education, psychology, and social science ties back to Darwin’s theories which postulate that man is nothing more than a highly-evolved animal. 

[12] Unconditional love,” he wrote, “corresponds to one of the deepest longings, not only of the child, but of every human being; on the other hand, to be loved because of one’s merit, because one deserved it, always leaves doubt; maybe I did not please the person whom I want to love me, maybe this, or that—there is always a fear that love could disappear. Furthermore, ‘deserved’ love easily leaves a bitter feeling that one is not loved for oneself, that one is loved only because one pleases, that one is, in the last analysis, not loved at all but used” (see page 35). 

[13] Fromm summarized the matriarchal view as: “I am loved because I am. This experience of being loved by mother is a passive one. There is nothing I have to do in order to be loved—mother’s love is unconditional. All I have to do is to be—to be her child. Mother’s love is bliss, is peace, it need not be acquired, it need not be deserved. But there is a negative side, too, to the unconditional quality of mother’s love. Not only does it not need to be deserved—it also cannot be acquired, produced, controlled. If it is there, it is like a blessing; if it is not there, it is as if all beauty had gone out of life—and there is nothing I can do to create it” (see page 33). 

[14] “Fatherly love is conditional love,” Fromm wrote. “Its principle is ‘I love you because you fulfill my expectations, because you do your duty, because you are like me.’ In conditional fatherly love we find . . . a negative and a positive aspect. The negative aspect is the very fact that fatherly love has to be deserved, that it can be lost if one does not do what is expected. In the nature of fatherly love lies the fact that obedience becomes the main virtue, that disobedience is the main sin—and its punishment the withdrawal of fatherly love. The positive side is equally important. Since his love is conditioned, I can do something to acquire it, I can work for it; his love is not outside my control as motherly love is” (see page 36). 

[15] See page 64. 

[16] Rogers downgraded the concept of unconditional love to unconditional positive regard; a common term used in psychology today. 

[17] See Rogers, Carl, On Becoming a Person, 23-34. John M. Rector used these philosophies of men to suggest that the “doctrines of our faith may spell out aspects of God’s composition for us, but it is we who fill in nuances of God’s personality and character.” Mr. Rector concluded from this that “since none of us knows very deeply what God is like, we can make a conscious choice to form a concept of divine personality which ‘works’ for us” (see Rector, John, “What is the Character of Your God?” Perspectives, Autumn 2006, 79-80). 

[18] See page 64. 

[19] See page 68-69. 

[20] Nelson, “Divine Love,” Ensign, February 2003, 20. 

[21] Ibid.

[22] McConkie, Bruce R., Mormon Doctrine, 344. 

[23] It is often heard that we are to “hate the sin and love the sinner.” Although I do not question the present appropriateness and political correctness of this rhetoric, the statement itself does not logically hold together. Sin does not exist without a cause. God recognizes this fact and, thus, it is the sinner who is punished, not the sin. Can one hate sin and at the same time love the cause of sin? In the telestial realm in which we presently live, we are commanded to love our enemy and do good to those who despitefully use us. This we do to allow the sinner every opportunity to repent and be reconciled to God. And at times, we are called to endure the cruelty of the wicked that the judgments of the Lord might be just. Failure to do so with patience may itself earn the judgments of God. But, from an eternal perspective, the sin and the sinner are uniquely and inseparably tied together. God can love a people and be patient with them in their days of iniquity, but God’s patience and love can wear thin (see Helaman 15:3-4). 

[24] We are no different than God. We have set limits to our love and have identified those who will receive it. From a lesser to greater degree we love our servants, friends, and sons and daughters, but in no degree should our heart give place for the enemy of our soul (see 2 Nephi 4:28). 

[25] Compare and contrast Isaiah 63:2-4. 

[26] Allen, “Glory to God on High,” Hymns of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 67. 

[27] Smith, Joseph Fielding, “The Resurrection,” The Improvement Era, December 1942, 827. 

[28] Oaks, With Full Purpose of Heart, 117. 

[29] Smith, Joseph Fielding, Doctrines of Salvation, 1:126. 

[30] Compare Mormon 9:12-14. 

[31] Oaks, With Full Purpose of Heart, 117. 

[32] Smith, Joseph Fielding, The Way to Perfection, 200. 

[33] Talmage, A Study of the Articles of Faith, 79. 

[34] Smith, Joseph Fielding, The Restoration of All Things, 218. 

[35] Smith, Joseph Fielding, Answers to Gospel Questions, 4:77. 

[36] Packer, Boyd K., as cited in Nyman, The Book of Mormon: Jacob Through Words of Mormon, To Learn With Joy, 9; compare Romans 5:13. 

[37] Holland, Christ and the New Covenant, 68. 

[38] Packer, The Things of the Soul, 59.

Perfect Paradox - Chapter 4: Broken Law and the Punishment Affixed

In the final paragraph of Chapter 3, I note:

Other than Himself, Christ had no savior on whom to rely for salvation. Therefore, He answered the Perfection end of the law for Himself. Having answered this demand, the law could make no further requirements of Him. Notwithstanding, He voluntarily chose to answer the other end of the law—that end which requires uncompromising punishment for broken law. The objective of this chapter is consider the demand that justice exacted of our Savior and the manner in which He satisfied it.

To understand the need for redemption, we must first accept that we are fallen. President Ezra Taft Benson (1988) explained: “Just as man does not really desire food until he is hungry, so he does not desire the salvation of Christ until he knows why he needs Christ. No one adequately and properly knows why he needs Christ until he understands and accepts the doctrine of the fall and its effects upon mankind” (p. 33). Unfortunately, when we look in the mirror, it is almost too easy to conclude that our fallen nature was designed to be an obstacle in our eternal progression. However, although the fall was contrary to God’s character, it was not contrary to His purposes. Rather, it was a divinely orchestrated event[1] that not only paved the highway to hell, but also set before us the pathway to perfection. “The aggregate of scriptures certifies that his transgression in the garden of Eden, although designated as a ‘fall’ was necessary to the advancement and spiritual progress of humanity on this earth, and Adam rightly should be honored, not denigrated” [2] Moroni and Paul therefore taught that God “gave unto men weakness” (see Ether 12:27) that His strength may be “made perfect in weakness” (see 2 Corinthians 12:9). In our “weakness,” salvation is made perfect whereby we experience the rich rewards of God’s grace. 

Paradoxically, it is the fall that brought about the conditions for redemption. It is in the curse of Adam that our eyes are opened and we experience joy in this life. Were it not for his transgression, there would be neither children nor knowledge of good and evil. Importantly, there would be no eternal life which God gives unto all the obedient (see Moses 5:10-11; compare 2 Nephi 2:22-25). Notwithstanding, it remains that, because Adam yielded, man’s nature became evil continually (see Ether 3:2) and subject to the will of the devil (see D&C 29:40). Hence, with one glorious exception, “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). “All are hardened,” Amulek recounted, “yea, all are fallen and lost” (Alma 34:9). As a result, every mortal experiences a two-fold fallen nature—one unconditional and another conditional. First, as a result of Adam’s choice, we unconditionally experience a first spiritual death for, at birth, all mankind are “cut off from the presence of the Lord and are considered as dead, both as to things temporal and to things spiritual” (Helaman 14:16). Second, because of the fall we are conditionally subject to a second spiritual death when we are judged to have knowingly transgressed God’s law and withdrawn from His Spirit that it may have no place in us (see Mosiah 2:36). 

Fundamentally, these first and second spiritual deaths are alike as both result in departure from God to one degree or another. Indeed, the first spiritual death is “that same death which is the last death, which is spiritual” (D&C 29:41). However, the first death is only temporary and incomplete[3] as we receive of the presence of God through the agency that gives life to all things. Further, because we are unconditionally cut off from the presence of God at birth and because this spiritual isolation results from Adam’s choice and not from any choice of our own, justice demands the atonement unconditionally restore us back to our primeval association with God. “Herein is a lawful adjustment between justice and mercy,” noted Elder James E. Talmage (1919). “We are mortal through no personal fault; we shall be made immortal without personal merit” (p. 50). Thus, this restoration back into the presence of God is universal; it comes to all of His children whether or not it is merited. Wrote the prophet Samuel: 

For behold, it . . . becometh expedient that [Christ] dieth, to bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, that thereby men may be brought into the presence of the Lord.

Yea, behold, [Christ’s] death bringeth to pass the resurrection, and redeemeth all mankind from the first [spiritual] death . . . .

. . . yea, even all mankind, and bringeth them back into the presence of the Lord (Helaman 14:15-17). 

Confirming that this universal restoration to God’s presence extends equally to the wicked and the righteous, Moroni wrote:

And because of the redemption of man, which came by Jesus Christ, they are brought back into the presence of the Lord; yea, this is wherein all men are redeemed, because the death of Christ bringeth to pass the resurrection, which bringeth to pass a redemption from an endless sleep, from which sleep all men shall be awakened by the power of God when the trump shall sound; and they shall come forth, both small and great, and all shall stand before his bar, being redeemed and loosed from this eternal band of death, which death is a temporal death (Mormon 9:13).

As redemption from Adam’s transgression will restore us back to the presence of God and that sphere in which we were originally placed, only complete redemption from our personal sins will allow us to remain. Unlike redemption from Adam’s transgression, “Christ’s plan for saving the souls of men contemplates no universal or unconditional remission of sins” (Talmage, Vitality, 1919, p. 51). This redemption is conditional. “And then,” wrote Moroni, “cometh the judgment of the Holy One upon them; and then cometh the time that he that is filthy shall be filthy still; and he that is righteous shall be righteous still; he that is happy shall be happy still; and he that is unhappy shall be unhappy still” (Mormon 9:14).[4] For those declared “filthy still,” then cometh the second death “which is a spiritual death; then is the time that whosoever died in his sins, as to a temporal death, shall also die a spiritual death” (Alma 12:16) for “they cannot be redeemed from the spiritual fall, because they repent not” (D&C 29:44). Therefore, “whosoever repenteth not is hewn down and cast into the fire . . . for they are cut off again as to things pertaining to righteousness” (Helaman 14:18).

Unlike the first spiritual death, the second death is permanent—worlds without end, those who are made full partakers[5] thereof will be cast out never to be brought back into the presence of God (see D&C 76:31-37, 44-49) “for do ye suppose,” wrote Mormon, “that ye can get rid of the justice of an offended God, who hath been trampled under feet of men, that thereby salvation may come” (3 Nephi 28:35)? Such will be condemned to endure a torment that never ends because they persist in their own carnal nature and go on in the ways of sin and rebellion. Over such, the devil has all power and they are as though there was no redemption made (see Mosiah 16:5).[6] These are they who “abideth not by law, but seeketh to become a law unto itself, and willeth to abide in sin, and altogether abideth in sin, [therefore they] cannot be sanctified by law, neither by mercy, justice, nor judgment. Therefore, they must remain filthy still” (D&C 88:35). Neither conformance to gospel law (see D&C 88:21), nor the mercies of Christ (see Moses 7:39), nor suffering the penalty of justice and judgment (see D&C 82:4)[7] will sanctify to the least degree these filthy souls. Wherefore, Christ saves all except them (see D&C 76:44), for all the remainder will be heirs of salvation (see D&C 76:88)[8] and consigned to that kingdom, the conditions of the law of which they are willing to abide (see D&C 88:20-24, 38-39).

Sin is defined as the transgression[9] or avoidance[10] of law and, in the strictest sense, may be committed inadvertently or in ignorance. President Harold B. Lee (Conference Report, 1973) described sin as “the heaviest burden that one has to bear in this life” (p. 177). Unfortunately, this fact is not always self-evident, especially to those buried in the pleasures of sinful living.[11] More often than not, the price of sin is delayed, thereby, veiling the toll of wickedness for a season (see 3 Nephi 24:13-15). But although the wheels of justice may grind slowly, they grind exceedingly fine and none shall escape.

As reassuring as it is to know that justice will someday avenge the blood of the righteous, infinitely more comforting is the doctrine that justice will not stand as a witness against those ignorant of God’s laws—that “where there is no law given there is no punishment; and where there is no punishment there is no condemnation” (2 Nephi 9:25). Considering the fact that each has come to this earth fully ignorant of God’s laws, this doctrine ought to lend substantial comfort. Elder James E. Talmage (1984) explained:

[I]t is plain from the scriptural doctrine of human responsibility and the unerring justice of God, that in his transgressions . . . man will be judged according to his ability to comprehend and obey law. To him who has never been made acquainted with a higher law the requirements of that law do not apply in their fulness. For sins committed without knowledge—that is, for laws violated in ignorance—a propitiation has been provided in the atonement wrought through the sacrifice of the Savior; and sinners of this class do not stand condemned, but shall be given opportunity yet to learn and to accept or reject the principles of the Gospel (pp. 52-53).

Be this as it may, sins of any sort, whether inadvertently committed or maliciously intended, cannot be ignored in the economy of God’s plan. Every sin exacts a cost and every sin must be counted and paid for. Even little children must rely on the merits of Christ; for by nature, King Benjamin taught, they become carnal (see Alma 42:10): 

And even if it were possible that little children could sin they could not be saved; but I say unto you they are blessed; for behold, as in Adam, or by nature, they fall, even so the blood of Christ atoneth for their sins.

And moreover, I say unto you, that there shall be no other name given nor any other way nor means whereby salvation can come unto the children of men, only in and through the name of Christ, the Lord Omnipotent (Mosiah 3:16-17).

Little children and those who have no law are alive in Christ (see Moroni 8:22) and in Him they are spiritually quickened and sanctified (see D&C 74:7), for as by nature they fall, even so in Christ is the curse of Adam taken from them (see Moroni 8:8). Indeed, the little ones have no need for repentance because Christ will save them (see JST Matthew 18:11). 

On the other hand, when individuals violate their conscience and act contrary to, or fail to act in accord with, the light and knowledge they’ve received, they are under condemnation. Thus, where understanding exists and gospel laws are broken or avoided despite that understanding, no unconditional propitiation exists and other conditional terms must apply. Emphasizing this provisional nature of the atonement, Jesus said to certain Jews: “If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth” (John 9:41). 

Whether salvation comes through a conditional or unconditional propitiation in the atonement, the fact remains that all are guilty until declared innocent through the blood of Christ. That declaration has already been made for certain souls, like little children who die in infancy, whereas, it is pending the outcome of mortality for others who, like us, must place their trust in the Lord, be diligent in keeping His commandments, and continue in faith even until they are, at last, safely dead (see Mosiah 4:6-7). 

Almost from birth, we possess sinful tendencies. As Brigham Young (1854-1886) correctly noted, “there are no persons without evil passions to embitter their life” (pp. 160, Vol. 8). Consequently, we often find ourselves opening the door to temptation (see Moses 5:23), even if only to look upon it. In microscopic, almost imperceptible, ways, each of us at one time or another, and in some degree or another, participates in unholy thoughts or errant behavior, all of which constitute sin. We don’t have to commit the heinous crime of murder to be guilty of the rather transparent sin of anger; we don’t have to overtly commit adultery to be guilty of private immoral thoughts; and we don’t have to curse God to be guilty of prayers that lack real intent (see Moroni 7:9). 

This proclivity to sin has caused me to wonder: “Does my fallen nature mean that I am irrevocably disposed to sin?” Frankly, this seems like a shallow question as perfection seems so far removed. Although the customary response to this question is “nobody’s perfect,” Joseph Smith (1980) pointed out that “although it was foreordained [that man] should fall, and be redeemed, yet after the redemption it was not foreordained that he should again sin” (p. 33).[12]

In other words, Joseph taught that the first spiritual and temporal deaths stemming from Adam’s transgression were the only divinely-intended and orchestrated results of the fall—personal sin was not a part of God’s plan.[13] Rather, personal sin is contrary to His plan even though patience and longsuffering can be shown to the one entrenched in it. Jesus is our Prototype and, as such, has shown that “it is in the power of man to keep the law and remain also without sin.” (1891, pp. 2, Lecture 5). We are therefore commanded to choose God as our Father (see Moses 7:33) and avoid evil of every kind (see Alma 12:32). Indeed, we are commanded to be perfect and are reminded that God cannot wink at iniquity, much less tolerate it (see D&C 1:31).[14]

Concerning sin and the demands of justice, Hyrum Andrus (2003) writes: “The rule of law requires a strict enforcement of justice when it has claim on transgressors . . . . [W]henever a law is broken a payment must be made—somewhere, somehow, sometime—according to the penalty[15] prescribed by the truth and equity of law” (p. 190). This payment is always exacted in the form of a mandatory and unyielding punishment. “Unlike the changeable laws of man, the laws of God are fixed and permanent,” declares Elder Dallin H. Oaks, “‘irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world’ (D&C 130:20).” Continuing, Elder Oaks (2002) explains: “These laws are likewise concerned with justice . . . . According to eternal law, the consequences that follow from the justice of God are severe and permanent. When a commandment is broken, a commensurate punishment is imposed. This happens automatically. Punishment prescribed by the laws of man only follow the judge’s actions, but under the laws of God the consequences and penalties are inherent in the act” (pp. 114-115). 

Acting alone, justice is uncompromising; if law is broken, a punishment must be suffered by the offender. The ultimate penalty for offending gospel law is to suffer a complete spiritual death wherein we become “like unto [the devil], and we become devils, angels to a devil, to be shut out from the presence of our God” (2 Nephi 9:9) worlds without end. Such is our final destiny so long as our personal sins are upon us. 

Is there any possible escape from this awful penalty and judgment? Is there any provision in the Father’s plan that tempers or averts this ultimate penalty for personal sin? In the total arithmetic of justice, there is no escape from the penalty and punishment inflicted for broken law. No sin, however secret or minute, will bypass Him who knows all things, including the heart and mind of man. As Lehi taught, the punishment is affixed and must be suffered. However, although there is no escape from justice, its penalty can be placed on another not guilty of the offense; on one who is willing and qualified to suffer that penalty in the offender’s place. It is by proxy that justice was satisfied and we escape the full punishment of law. 

Christ, chosen and born of an Eternal Being and possessing grace for grace all of His Father’s attributes, was the only One fully sanctioned, willing, and qualified to answer the full penalty for broken law. It required someone unique to suffer such a burden for it exacted suffering even more than man can suffer, except it be unto death, “for behold,” taught King Benjamin, “blood cometh from every pore, so great shall be his anguish for the wickedness and the abominations of his people” (Mosiah 3:7). “The cumulative weight,” confirmed Elder Neal A. Maxwell (1985), “of all mortal sins—past, present, and future—pressed upon that perfect, sinless, and sensitive Soul! All our infirmities and sicknesses were somehow, too, a part of the awful arithmetic of the Atonement (p. 92)” Thus, Amulek concluded that this great and last sacrifice could not be “a sacrifice of man . . . but it must be an infinite and eternal sacrifice” (Alma 34:10). It must be the sacrifice of God.[16]

Christ’s atonement is infinite—infinite in suffering, scope, and time; infinite because it lasts for all time;[17] infinite because it extends to an infinite number of God’s children of every color, race, creed, and nation; infinite because, with few exceptions, it covers sin of every kind and degree; infinite because it was performed by Christ, an Infinite Being! If it were not for His person and character, there would have been no atonement. Describing the nature of the atonement, Elder Russell M. Nelson remarks:

It was . . . infinite in that all humankind would be saved from never-ending death. It was infinite in terms of His immense suffering. It was infinite in time, putting an end to the preceding prototype of animal sacrifice. It was infinite in scope—it was to be done once for all. And the mercy of the Atonement extends not only to an infinite number of people, but also to an infinite number of worlds created by Him. It was infinite beyond any human scale of measurement or mortal comprehension.

Jesus was the only one who could offer such an infinite atonement, since He was born of a mortal mother and an immortal Father. Because of that unique birthright, Jesus was an infinite Being.[18]

Notwithstanding His sinless and perfect life, Christ set His face like flint (see Isaiah 50:7) and suffered the full, uncompromising penalty for broken law. Justice and Judgment passed over His soul, declared Him clean every whit, and then exacted a punishment that only He could bear, “even the wine-press of the fierceness of the wrath of the Almighty God” (see D&C 88:106).[19] Thus, Christ’s ordeal in the Garden and on the Cross was not the proximate result of a contest between good and evil, even though the terrors and temptations of Satan no doubt added to the price paid to appease justice and to carry sicknesses, pains, sorrows, and afflictions of every kind. Rather, this was a holy sacrifice wherein He willingly descended below all things. He suffered the sentence of justice and not the verdict of an evil foe.[20] He accepted and suffered the penalty as predetermined and enforced by His Father. That is what makes this affair all the more difficult to think on.

From the beginning, the shedding of Christ’s blood was in the covenant of the Father (see Moroni 10:33). It was God who gave His Son (see John 3:16)[21] and the Son who gave His life, thereby, concluding the awful accord reached between two Gods in the beginning.[22] And although all created things act and exist by virtue of this pivotal event (see 2 Nephi 2:12-13), it was concluded in solitude and without pomp and circumstance. Even His nearest friends (see John 15:13-16) remained in the outer court (see Matthew 26:38) as the great High Priest “went a little further” (Matthew 26:39) into the holy place[23] to offer Himself without spot to His Father (see Hebrews 9:6-18). It was then that He stood in our place as if we were there and suffered the precise penalty and punishment we would have suffered as if He were guilty. His lips touched the very cup from which the wicked shall drink, even the cup of the wrath of God (see Mosiah 3:26). Truly, He “eateth and drinketh with . . . sinners” (Mark 2:16). Yet, by so doing, the enmity that resulted from the fall was slain and peace with God was made for us (see Ephesians 2:15-17).[24] Surely He has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows. Surely He was wounded for our transgressions and bruised for our iniquities. And surely, the Lord laid on Him the iniquities of us all (see Mosiah 14:4-6).[25]

Keith H. Meservy (Draper, 1990) writes: “Justice is satisfied when the Messiah bears our griefs, carries our sorrows, is wounded for our transgressions, bruised for our iniquities, bears our chastisement, has our iniquities laid on him, is oppressed and taken from prison and judgment, fathoms our travail of soul, and bears our iniquities. Suffering for us, he satisfies justice, which makes the pleasure of the Lord prosper” (p. 168). Why is justice satisfied by the infinite sacrifice? Because Christ is infinite and because His offering was voluntary! A freewill offering was necessary to preserve justice in the eternal sacrifice. The divine offering could not be an instance wherein the wrath of Almighty God was imposed upon an unwilling soul—for this Soul was pure and sin-free. Thus, although Christ was chosen from the beginning (see Moses 4:2), it was requisite that He also declare, “Here am I, Send me,” (see Abraham 3:27) to show forth His willingness. “He was not coerced or required to make this sacrifice,” declared Elder Hugh B. Brown (1962). “His . . . agency was in no way infringed or trammeled. It was a freewill, love-inspired offer, which could have been withdrawn at any time. It was optional until the very time of his crucifixion” (p. 108).[26] Until he spoke the final words, “It is finished (see John 19:30); Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit,” (see Luke 23:46) the offering remained revocable and incomplete. Appropriately and reverently, we sing the sacred tune: 

His precious blood he freely spilt; His life he freely gave, 
A sinless sacrifice for guilt, a dying world to save (Snow E. R., 1985, p. 195). 

Possessing attributes of mortality, Christ suffered all that a mortal can endure. Possessing attributes of immortality, He suffered all that God can endure “which suffering caused . . . [Him], the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit” (D&C 19:18). Of His pains, we have nothing to compare. “The suffering he undertook to endure, and which he did endure,” noted President Marion G. Romney (1969), “equaled the combined suffering of all men” (p. 57). Commensurate with the truth, light, and power He possessed, Christ suffered the “pains of all men, yea, the pains of every living creature, both men, women, and children, who belong to the family of Adam” (2 Nephi 9:21).[27] And more so—He bore the sins of the entire universe that through Him all might be saved whom the Father has put into His power and made by Him (see D&C 76:41-42), even all the worlds that are and were created (see D&C 76:24) “whose inhabitants, too, from the first to the last, are sav’d by the very same Saviour of ours” (Smith J. , Times and Seasons, 1843, p. 83). Of Christ’s agony, Elder James E. Talmage (1982) provides this unique perspective:

It is unfathomable by the finite mind, both as to intensity and cause. The thought that He suffered through fear of death is untenable . . . . He struggled and groaned under a burden such as no other being who has lived on earth might even conceive as possible. It was not physical pain, nor mental anguish alone, that caused Him to suffer such torture as to produce an extrusion of blood from every pore; but a spiritual agony of soul such as only God was capable of experiencing. No other man, however great his powers of physical or mental endurance, could have suffered so; for his human organism would have succumbed, and syncope would have produced unconsciousness and welcome oblivion . . . .

In some manner, actual and terribly real though to man incomprehensible, the Savior took upon Himself the burden of the sins of mankind from Adam to the end of the world . . .. 

From the terrible conflict in Gethsemane, Christ emerged a victor. Though in the dark tribulation of that fearful hour He had pleaded that the bitter cup be removed from His lips, the request, however oft repeated, was always conditional; the accomplishment of the Father's will was never lost sight of as the object of the Son’s supreme desire. The further tragedy of the night, and the cruel inflictions that awaited Him on the morrow, to culminate in the frightful tortures of the cross, could not exceed the bitter anguish through which He had successfully passed (pp. 568-569).

By His suffering, justice was satisfied and the end of the law that required a punishment for sin was answered for those who repent and believe on His name. And when He answered the ends of the law, Lehi taught that He also answered the ends of the atonement (see 2 Nephi 2:10). It is this doctrine which I address in the following chapters. 

WORKS CITED

Andrus, H. L. (2003). Doctrinal Commentary on the Pearl of Great Price (Revised ed.). Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company. 

Benson, E. T. (1988). A Witness and a Warning. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company. 

Brown, H. B. (1962, April 6, 7, and 8). Conference Report, 106-108. 

Draper, R. D. (Ed.). (1990). A Witness of Jesus Christ: The 1989 Sperry Symposium on the Old Testament. Salt Lake City: Deserert Book Company. 

Lee, H. B. (1973, April 8). Conference Report. 

Maxwell, N. A. (1985, April 7). Conference Report. 

Oaks, D. H. (2002). With Full Purpose of Heart. Salt Lake City, UT, United States: Deseret Book Company. 

Romney, M. G. (1969, October 4). Conference Report. 

Smith, J. (1843, February 1). Times and Seasons. 

Smith, J. (1891). The Doctrine and Covenants. Salt Lake City: George Q. Cannon & Sons, Co., Printers and Publishers. 

Smith, J. (1980). The Words of Joseph Smith: The contemporary accounts of the Nauvoo discourses of the Prophet Joseph. (A. F. Ehat, & L. W. Cook, Eds.) Provo: BYU Religious Studies Center. 

Snow, E. R. (1985). How Great the Wisdom and the Love. Hymns of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 

Talmage, J. E. (1919). The Vitality of Mormonism. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company. 

Talmage, J. E. (1982). Jesus the Christ: A Study of the Messiah and His Mission according to Holy Scriptures both Ancient and Modern. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company. 

Talmage, J. E. (1984). A Study of the Articles of Faith. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company. 

Young, B. (1854-1886). Journal of Discourses (Vol. 21). Liverpool, London, England: Latter-day Saints' Book Depot. 

ENDNOTES

[1] It is instrumental to recall that the tree of knowledge of good and evil was planted by God (see Moses 3:9). 

[2] See LDS Bible Dictionary under the heading “Adam,” 604. 

[3] But for the atonement, this “first judgment [of a spiritual and temporal death] which came upon man must needs have remained to an endless duration” (2 Nephi 9:7). 

[4] In this verse, I believe all the revealed kingdoms are illustrated. I suggest that they who are righteous are those of a celestial nature, whereas, those who are happy appear to be those of a terrestrial nature. I further suggest that they who are unhappy are those of a telestial nature, whereas, they who are filthy still are clearly those sons of perdition who inherit a kingdom of no glory (compare D&C 88:96-102). 

[5] There are those who will have “their part” in the second death. These are they of the telestial glory. For them, this second death will not be permanent (see D&C 63:17-18). 

[6] In the final sense, this second death will be pronounced only upon the wicked following their resurrection and judgment. 

[7] Compare D&C 63:17 and D&C 138:59. 

[8] Compare D&C 138:59. 

[9] Such as sins of commission (see 1 John 3:4). 

[10] Such as sins of omission (see James 4:17). 

[11] Even to the righteous, the pleasures of sinful living may seem a little unfair. Malachi wrote: “And now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are set up; yea, they that tempt God are even delivered” (Malachi 3:15). 

[12] Compare Moses 6:53-54.

[13] Nevertheless, according to the foreknowledge of God, provision was made to redeem us from personal sin on conditions of repentance (see D&C 138:19). 

[14] Compare Alma 45:16. 

[15] The imposition of a penalty is necessary to encourage compliance to law. In an article entitled, Morality and Marriage in the Book of Mormon, Rodney Turner states: “An unenforced law has no practical existence; it is only a façade of justice. Worse, not enforcing a law tends to cloud the legitimacy of all laws” (Nyman & Tate, The Book of Mormon: Jacob Through Words of Mormon, To Learn With Joy, 1990, p. 273). In connection, Elder Orson Pratt (1854-1886) posed the following question: “could He not give a commandment, without affixing a penalty?” In response, Elder Pratt continued: “He could not: it would be folly, even worse than folly, for God to give a law to an intelligent being, without affixing a penalty . . . . Why? Because all intelligent beings would discard the very idea of a law being given, which might be broken at pleasure, without the individuals breaking it being punished for their transgression” (pp. 283, Vol. 1). 

[16] “Now there is not any man that can sacrifice his own blood which will atone for the sins of another,” stated Amulek. “Therefore, there can be nothing short of an infinite atonement which will suffice for the sins of the world” (Alma 34:11-12). 

[17] Just because the atonement is infinite does not mean Christ’s must suffer forever. Contrary, such suffering seems to have been reserved for the sons of perdition, not the Son of God. I don’t know where or how these rumors get started, but lately I have heard it taught that Christ suffers every time someone sins as if the vicarious work of Christ’s atonement will never end. No doubt the Lord may “groan within himself” and be “troubled because of the wickedness of the people of the house of Israel” (see 3 Nephi 17:14). Notwithstanding, the pains that Christ faced in Gethsemane and on Golgotha were “once suffered” (see 1 Peter 3:18). It was there and then that He “partook and finished” His preparations unto the children of men (see D&C 19:19). The apostle Paul wrote: “Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world; but now once in the meridian of time hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. And as it is appointed unto men once to die . . . ; So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many . . .” (Hebrews 9:25-28). 

[18] Nelson, “The Atonement,” Ensign, November 1996, 35.
[19] Compare 3 Nephi 11:11.

[20] Apparently, Satan interjected himself into the events of that night to exact all his awful terrors whilst Christ undertook to gain the victory. Concerning this ‘supreme contest with the powers of evil,’ Elder James E. Talmage wrote: “In that hour of anguish Christ met and overcame all the horrors that Satan, the ‘prince of this world’ could inflict. The frightful struggle incident to the temptations immediately following the Lord’s baptism was surpassed and overshadowed by this supreme contest with the powers of evil” (see Talmage, Jesus the Christ, 613). Elder Boyd K. Packer likewise notes: “He, by choice accepted the penalty for all mankind for the sum total of all wickedness and depravity . . . . In choosing, He faced the awesome power of the evil one who was not confined to flesh nor subject to mortal pain. That was Gethsemane” (see Packer, Ensign, May 1988, 69). 

[21] Compare D&C 45:4 and D&C 20:21.

[22] If, as expressed by Jacob, the offering of Isaac by his father Abraham was a “similitude of God and his Only Begotten Son,” (see Jacob 4:5) then we may suppose that the atonement wrought out by Jesus Christ was as much a trial for the Father as it was for His Son. Recalling the words of the Apostle Paul, “By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac,” gives us a glimpse that more than one God was tried by the awfulness of the atonement. How difficult it must have been for the Father to allow His Most-Beloved’s triple pleading, “If it be possible, let this cup pass from me,” (see Matthew 26:39, 42, 44) to go unanswered. Such apparent forsaking for our sakes makes us love Him all the more and Jesus no less. Elder Melvin J. Ballard provided this interesting sentiment concerning the Father’s response to His Son’s sacrifice: “In that hour I think I can see our dear Father behind the veil looking upon these dying struggles until even he could not endure it any longer; and, like the mother who bids farewell to her dying child, has to be taken out of the room, so as not to look upon the last struggles, so he bowed his head, and hid in some part of his universe, his great heart almost breaking for the love that he had for his Son. Oh, in that moment when he might have saved his Son. I thank him and praise him that he did not fail us, for he had not only the love of his Son in mind, but he also had love for us. I rejoice that he did not interfere, and that his love for us made it possible for him to endure to look upon the sufferings of his Son and give him finally to us, our Savior and our Redeemer. Without him, without his sacrifice, we would have remained, and we would never have come glorified into his presence. And so this is what it cost, in part, for our Father in Heaven to give the gift of his Son unto men” (Hinckley B. S., p. 155). 

[23] “This sacred spot,” said Elder McConkie (1985), “like Eden where Adam dwelt, like Sinai from where Jehovah gave his laws, like Calvary where the Son of God gave his life a ransom for many, this holy ground is where the sinless Son of the Everlasting Father took upon himself the sins of all men on condition of repentance” (p. 9). 

[24] Compare Colossians 1:20.
[25] Compare Isaiah 53:4-6 and D&C 18:11.

[26] Notwithstanding the voluntary nature of His offering, the Savior declared that He was commanded of His Father to lay His life down that He might take it again: “Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father” (John 10:17-18). 

[27] Compare D&C 18:11 and 1 John 2:2.