Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

This is the place where you can discuss things completely Off Topic.

Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby SpeedRacer » Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:47 am

Was Bro. Skousen officially or unofficially reprimanded for portions of this talk about "little intelligences"?
All you have to do is Obey the Commandments if you want to go to Heaven.
Don’t argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience
SpeedRacer
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1603
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:26 am
Location: Virginia, just outside of D.C.
Been thanked: 509 times

Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Sponsor

Sponsor
 
The Mormon Chronicle

Latter-day Conservative

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby BrianM » Wed Jan 04, 2012 1:41 pm

Reprimanded? Not that I know of, and he continued to talk about it and promote those ideas until the end of his life. He said that Elder John A. Widtsoe taught him most of it.
All my opinions are tentative pending further data...

The Matrix is real...
BrianM
Web Master

User avatar
 
Posts: 3659
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:37 pm
Been thanked: 608 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby SpeedRacer » Wed Jan 04, 2012 1:48 pm

When I was first given that talk in the 90s, I was told to enjoy it, but know that he was reprimanded for its contents that say "little intelligences" are the governing force, not God.
All you have to do is Obey the Commandments if you want to go to Heaven.
Don’t argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience
SpeedRacer
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1603
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:26 am
Location: Virginia, just outside of D.C.
Been thanked: 509 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby davedan » Wed Jan 04, 2012 11:23 pm

1. The suggestion that God had to satisfy the intelligences is not correct.

Bro. Skousen seems to be saying that the Atonement works by getting the intelligences in matter to overlook justice because of their feelings of compassion for Christ. And because of what Christ went through, whatever Christ says and whomever Christ says should be saved will be saved. Bro. Skousen seems to be saying when Christ advocates for us a the final judgement He will be speaking to the intelligences of the Universe. And, Skousen says that if God saved a single soul without first satisfying the sense of justice in every intelligence, that God would loose His honor and cease to be God.

This is not a correct description of how the Atonement works. There are some interesting points in here about intelligence and matter and Quantum Physics with regard to obedience which I like. But applying this to the Atonement is not correct.
davedan
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1916
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:10 pm
Location: Augusta, GA
Been thanked: 222 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby SpeedRacer » Thu Jan 05, 2012 8:10 am

That was the issue, I do not have a source, I was trying to verify something I was told back before the internet. Like davedan said, the talk can be construed in different ways, some that would appear to preach in contradiction to revealed doctrine.
All you have to do is Obey the Commandments if you want to go to Heaven.
Don’t argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience
SpeedRacer
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1603
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:26 am
Location: Virginia, just outside of D.C.
Been thanked: 509 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby ktg » Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:39 pm

davedan wrote:1. The suggestion that God had to satisfy the intelligences is not correct.

This is not a correct description of how the Atonement works. There are some interesting points in here about intelligence and matter and Quantum Physics with regard to obedience which I like. But applying this to the Atonement is not correct.


+1
"As nations cannot be rewarded or punished in the next world, they must be in this. By an inevitable chain of causes and effects, providence punishes national sins by national calamities." George Mason
ktg
captain of 100
 
Posts: 847
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:43 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby Original_Intent » Thu Jan 05, 2012 1:48 pm

I have yet to hear a better explanation of how the Atonement DOES work.

Why does the willing sacrifice of one single perfect being meet the demands of justice against the sins of billions of imperfect beings? How does that satisfy justice?

Of course, somehow it does...but it must be in accordance with some eternal law, it doesn't just work "because God says so".

So my question is...if not as explained by Skousen...give me a nuts and bolts answer that shows how a single perfect being can atone for the sins of all?

Yes He took upon Himself all the sins in Gethsemane, and yet that didn't complete it or the crucifixion would not have been necessary...the suffering in Gethsemane would have satisfied justice, the price was paid - yet it is clear that is not the case, Gethsemane was only part of the equation, Golgotha was also necessary.

I'm sorry if I am coming of as a novice who hasn;t studied - I have - but I wonder why Skousen's explanation is so wrong, and if it is wrong, what do you replace it with?
Original_Intent
Level 34 Illuminated

User avatar
 
Posts: 8778
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:35 pm
Been thanked: 1194 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby Oldemandalton » Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:00 pm

Original Intent

I have yet to hear a better explanation of how the Atonement DOES work.

Why does the willing sacrifice of one single perfect being meet the demands of justice against the sins of billions of imperfect beings? How does that satisfy justice?

Of course, somehow it does...but it must be in accordance with some eternal law, it doesn't just work "because God says so".

So my question is...if not as explained by Skousen...give me a nuts and bolts answer that shows how a single perfect being can atone for the sins of all?

Yes He took upon Himself all the sins in Gethsemane, and yet that didn't complete it or the crucifixion would not have been necessary...the suffering in Gethsemane would have satisfied justice, the price was paid - yet it is clear that is not the case, Gethsemane was only part of the equation, Golgotha was also necessary.

I'm sorry if I am coming of as a novice who hasn;t studied - I have - but I wonder why Skousen's explanation is so wrong, and if it is wrong, what do you replace it with?


I agree 100%.

His talk is in the appendix of the "First Two Thousand Years" and has not been changed or edited since the first printing. I believe if Bro. Skousen was told it wasn’t correct doctrine by a GA he would have changed it. It was Elder John A. Widtsoe who taught him this principle. How can it be false?

I think it is just one of those many LDS myths/rumors we see from time to time.
An Ancient Chinese Curse "May you live in interesting times!"
Oldemandalton
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1963
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 4:55 pm
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby BrianM » Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:25 pm

davedan wrote:1. The suggestion that God had to satisfy the intelligences is not correct.

Bro. Skousen seems to be saying that the Atonement works by getting the intelligences in matter to overlook justice because of their feelings of compassion for Christ. And because of what Christ went through, whatever Christ says and whomever Christ says should be saved will be saved. Bro. Skousen seems to be saying when Christ advocates for us a the final judgement He will be speaking to the intelligences of the Universe. And, Skousen says that if God saved a single soul without first satisfying the sense of justice in every intelligence, that God would loose His honor and cease to be God.

This is not a correct description of how the Atonement works. There are some interesting points in here about intelligence and matter and Quantum Physics with regard to obedience which I like. But applying this to the Atonement is not correct.

Care to actually explain specifically why you feel this is not the correct explanation for the Atonement? I love that talk by Skousen, but still exploring some of the details and would like to get your reasoning on this.
All my opinions are tentative pending further data...

The Matrix is real...
BrianM
Web Master

User avatar
 
Posts: 3659
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 2:37 pm
Been thanked: 608 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby SpeedRacer » Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:28 pm

In looking for any reprimand, if it existed, was to see if it was for being doctrinally inaccurate, or for throwing pearls before swine.
All you have to do is Obey the Commandments if you want to go to Heaven.
Don’t argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience
SpeedRacer
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1603
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:26 am
Location: Virginia, just outside of D.C.
Been thanked: 509 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby LukeAir2008 » Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:10 pm

His teachings on the Atonement are just an expansion of the doctrine taught in Alma 34. Cleon understood and taught true doctrine.

The exact opposite of what Speedracer is saying is true. The First Pres assigned Cleon to do church broadcasts and teach doctrine because they had total trust in his doctrinal understanding.
The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.
Benjamin Disraeli
LukeAir2008
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 2332
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:19 pm
Location: Highland
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby LukeAir2008 » Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:17 pm

davedan wrote:1. The suggestion that God had to satisfy the intelligences is not correct.

Bro. Skousen seems to be saying that the Atonement works by getting the intelligences in matter to overlook justice because of their feelings of compassion for Christ. And because of what Christ went through, whatever Christ says and whomever Christ says should be saved will be saved. Bro. Skousen seems to be saying when Christ advocates for us a the final judgement He will be speaking to the intelligences of the Universe. And, Skousen says that if God saved a single soul without first satisfying the sense of justice in every intelligence, that God would loose His honor and cease to be God.

This is not a correct description of how the Atonement works. There are some interesting points in here about intelligence and matter and Quantum Physics with regard to obedience which I like. But applying this to the Atonement is not correct.


What a shame that you have no understanding of either the Book of Mormon teachings on the atonement or Cleon's expounding of them
The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.
Benjamin Disraeli
LukeAir2008
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 2332
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:19 pm
Location: Highland
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby ktg » Thu Jan 05, 2012 6:54 pm

I have yet to read anything from anyone of church authority that supports Brother Skousen's theory. If anyone has any hard quotes, not hear-say and conjecture, I'd like to read them.

Supposedly what John A Widstoe taught Bro. Skousen?
John A Widstoe wrote on page 38 of his "Rational Theology as Taught by the Church of Jesus Crist of Latter-Day Saints":
"The creation of the earth, the details of which are not known, must have been marvelously and intensely appealing in its interest to the intelligent beings who, because of their exalted knowledge, had the necessary power over the elements and forces of the universe to accomplish the forming of the earth."

There's words directly from Bro. Widstoe stating that power over the elements comes from exalted knowledge.
"As nations cannot be rewarded or punished in the next world, they must be in this. By an inevitable chain of causes and effects, providence punishes national sins by national calamities." George Mason
ktg
captain of 100
 
Posts: 847
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:43 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby davedan » Thu Jan 05, 2012 7:13 pm

LukeAir2008 wrote:
davedan wrote:1. The suggestion that God had to satisfy the intelligences is not correct.

Bro. Skousen seems to be saying that the Atonement works by getting the intelligences in matter to overlook justice because of their feelings of compassion for Christ. And because of what Christ went through, whatever Christ says and whomever Christ says should be saved will be saved. Bro. Skousen seems to be saying when Christ advocates for us a the final judgement He will be speaking to the intelligences of the Universe. And, Skousen says that if God saved a single soul without first satisfying the sense of justice in every intelligence, that God would loose His honor and cease to be God.

This is not a correct description of how the Atonement works. There are some interesting points in here about intelligence and matter and Quantum Physics with regard to obedience which I like. But applying this to the Atonement is not correct.


What a shame that you have no understanding of either the Book of Mormon teachings on the atonement or Cleon's expounding of them




AirLuke,

FYI, The first statement I made, is me telling you exactly what my GA father-in-law told me is what the Apostles have said about this talk. The other part of my post is commentary.

It is incorrect to think that God has to satisfy intelligences, or has to satisfy Justice like Justice is some monster. The Book of Mormon talking about "God ceasing to be God" is their way to say that whatever they are talking about is an impossibility. The Book of Mormon is NOT saying God has some sort of requirements or conditions hanging over His head like the mythic Sword of Damocles.
davedan
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1916
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:10 pm
Location: Augusta, GA
Been thanked: 222 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby davedan » Thu Jan 05, 2012 7:30 pm

God's Justice is God doing exactly as He has said. "If you sin, you will die, and be cut off from the presence of God"
God's Mercy is God doing exactly as He has said. "if you accept Christ, repent and cease to sin you will be forgiving"
davedan
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1916
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:10 pm
Location: Augusta, GA
Been thanked: 222 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby SpeedRacer » Thu Jan 05, 2012 8:27 pm

LukeAir2008 wrote:His teachings on the Atonement are just an expansion of the doctrine taught in Alma 34. Cleon understood and taught true doctrine.

The exact opposite of what Speedracer is saying is true. The First Pres assigned Cleon to do church broadcasts and teach doctrine because they had total trust in his doctrinal understanding.


I cannot trust your posts anymore because you cannot understand mine. Did you even read more than the first word of what I said, or just go on attack.

SpeedRacer: "Does a reprimand exist?"
Lukeair: "The exact opposite of what Speedracer is saying is true"

Observer: "Speedracer did not say anything. He asked a question. Does Lukeair understand sentance structure or make-up of a statement vs. a question? It does not appear so. In fact he brings the spirit of contention."

If you want to state that the talk he gave, specifically "the meaning of the atonement" was sanctioned by the brethren, then do so, and back it up. That is all I am aksing for. I enjoy the talk, I have pondered it. Like I said, when I got the talk as a missionary, I was given a verbal warning by more than one of the other elders that the talk was amid controversy, and to take it with a grain of salt. Now that we have the internet, I was attempting to do something like snopes.com and verify the warning. If it was third hand hersay, that is great, if it was true that is fine too. Either way, like many others, a nod in the affirmative or negative from a seated authority from the time of its delivery, or today would be awesome. If it does not exist, then I will continue on under the warning I was given, and continue to follow the spirit.
All you have to do is Obey the Commandments if you want to go to Heaven.
Don’t argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience
SpeedRacer
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1603
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:26 am
Location: Virginia, just outside of D.C.
Been thanked: 509 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby sourcedist » Fri Jan 06, 2012 2:32 pm

i have always have been of the belief that the earth and the elements therein, have always had some sort of built-in sense of justice.

i say this because of wicked cities that have been fully destroyed by nature. i think it is possible that for the cities of soddom that the lord didnt say, 'OK I am going to destroy these cities..' i think the earth has a builtin 'cleanse' mechanism that is triggered if an area has an abundance of wickedness.. and that the earth, still bound by justice, wouldnt cleanse an area if some righteous remained..
sourcedist
captain of 100
 
Posts: 148
Joined: Sun Jan 02, 2011 7:56 pm
Been thanked: 0 time

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby LukeAir2008 » Fri Jan 06, 2012 2:33 pm

SpeedRacer wrote:
LukeAir2008 wrote:His teachings on the Atonement are just an expansion of the doctrine taught in Alma 34. Cleon understood and taught true doctrine.

The exact opposite of what Speedracer is saying is true. The First Pres assigned Cleon to do church broadcasts and teach doctrine because they had total trust in his doctrinal understanding.


I cannot trust your posts anymore because you cannot understand mine. Did you even read more than the first word of what I said, or just go on attack.

SpeedRacer: "Does a reprimand exist?"
Lukeair: "The exact opposite of what Speedracer is saying is true"

Observer: "Speedracer did not say anything. He asked a question. Does Lukeair understand sentance structure or make-up of a statement vs. a question? It does not appear so. In fact he brings the spirit of contention."

If you want to state that the talk he gave, specifically "the meaning of the atonement" was sanctioned by the brethren, then do so, and back it up. That is all I am aksing for. I enjoy the talk, I have pondered it. Like I said, when I got the talk as a missionary, I was given a verbal warning by more than one of the other elders that the talk was amid controversy, and to take it with a grain of salt. Now that we have the internet, I was attempting to do something like snopes.com and verify the warning. If it was third hand hersay, that is great, if it was true that is fine too. Either way, like many others, a nod in the affirmative or negative from a seated authority from the time of its delivery, or today would be awesome. If it does not exist, then I will continue on under the warning I was given, and continue to follow the spirit.


Speedracer, you make an unfounded claim about Cleon Skousen but don't like anyone refuting your nonsense. You remind me of a child. If anyone questions you or tells you that you are incorrect you cry contention.

I could say " I heard that Speedracer is a notorious thread hijacker, can anyone confirm that it is true?" Its called muckraking or stirring.

Do you know the difference between documented evidence and speculative rumor.
The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.
Benjamin Disraeli
LukeAir2008
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 2332
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:19 pm
Location: Highland
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby davedan » Fri Jan 06, 2012 3:24 pm

As far as I know, Cleon Skousen was not Skousen officially or unofficially reprimanded for "Meaning of the Atonement". I read a quote that said that up to the time of his death, Cleon Skousen was proud that this talk had been distributed among the church and was translated in many languages (quoted in forward/front matter to "Cleansing of America")

However, officially, the GA's I have spoken with, have said the part about "satisfying the intelligences" is not correct.
davedan
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1916
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:10 pm
Location: Augusta, GA
Been thanked: 222 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby Original_Intent » Fri Jan 06, 2012 3:34 pm

davedan wrote:As far as I know, Cleon Skousen was not Skousen officially or unofficially reprimanded for "Meaning of the Atonement". I read a quote that said that up to the time of his death, Cleon Skousen was proud that this talk had been distributed among the church and was translated in many languages (quoted in forward/front matter to "Cleansing of America")

However, officially, the GA's I have spoken with, have said the part about "satisfying the intelligences" is not correct.


One has to ask oneself if the GAs that you have spoken with simply disagreed with it or were speaking "with authority". If they were speaking with authority, and there was something circulating from someone who ahd been authorized by the prophet at the time to write the things he did - it seems they should not be stating this among family members, it should be clearly stated that the teaching was not correct, and if possible the correct teaching given. So we are left with either they were expressing personal disagreement OR it was incorrect but for all intents and purposes it was a harmless error and we would have plenty of time in the eternities to get the right information. If it is a serious error then would you not agree it is their responsibility to correct it?
Original_Intent
Level 34 Illuminated

User avatar
 
Posts: 8778
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:35 pm
Been thanked: 1194 times

Re: Cleon Skousen, the Meaning of the Atonement

Postby SpeedRacer » Mon Jan 09, 2012 7:38 am

LukeAir2008 wrote:
SpeedRacer wrote:
LukeAir2008 wrote:His teachings on the Atonement are just an expansion of the doctrine taught in Alma 34. Cleon understood and taught true doctrine.

The exact opposite of what Speedracer is saying is true. The First Pres assigned Cleon to do church broadcasts and teach doctrine because they had total trust in his doctrinal understanding.


I cannot trust your posts anymore because you cannot understand mine. Did you even read more than the first word of what I said, or just go on attack.

SpeedRacer: "Does a reprimand exist?"
Lukeair: "The exact opposite of what Speedracer is saying is true"

Observer: "Speedracer did not say anything. He asked a question. Does Lukeair understand sentance structure or make-up of a statement vs. a question? It does not appear so. In fact he brings the spirit of contention."

If you want to state that the talk he gave, specifically "the meaning of the atonement" was sanctioned by the brethren, then do so, and back it up. That is all I am aksing for. I enjoy the talk, I have pondered it. Like I said, when I got the talk as a missionary, I was given a verbal warning by more than one of the other elders that the talk was amid controversy, and to take it with a grain of salt. Now that we have the internet, I was attempting to do something like snopes.com and verify the warning. If it was third hand hersay, that is great, if it was true that is fine too. Either way, like many others, a nod in the affirmative or negative from a seated authority from the time of its delivery, or today would be awesome. If it does not exist, then I will continue on under the warning I was given, and continue to follow the spirit.


Speedracer, you make an unfounded claim about Cleon Skousen but don't like anyone refuting your nonsense. You remind me of a child. If anyone questions you or tells you that you are incorrect you cry contention.

I could say " I heard that Speedracer is a notorious thread hijacker, can anyone confirm that it is true?" Its called muckraking or stirring.

Do you know the difference between documented evidence and speculative rumor.


SpeedRacer wrote:When I was first given that talk in the 90s, I was told to enjoy it, but know that he was reprimanded for its contents that say "little intelligences" are the governing force, not God.


Clearly I do. Clearly I was trying to either substantiate the speculative rumor in this instance, or debunk it. You on the other hand are so prone to go on attack that you cannot see such thing. Just to reiterate your extreme inability to read and write in English, when you use the word "do" at the beginning of a question, you use a question mark at the end, not a period.

After reading the productive replies on this board, I am inclined to believe that there was no formal reprimand. There might have been an informal one, but nothing that would lead me to believe that the tenants of the talk are promoting concepts in contention with revealed doctrine. This gives me great joy, and may continue to enjoy the talk, but on a more sure footing that I am not out in the weeds with it.
All you have to do is Obey the Commandments if you want to go to Heaven.
Don’t argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience
SpeedRacer
captain of 1,000

User avatar
 
Posts: 1603
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:26 am
Location: Virginia, just outside of D.C.
Been thanked: 509 times


Return to Off Topic / Miscellaneous Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests