As a Latter-day Saint, I believe that the Lord has revealed some wonderful things in the last two centuries. Through Joseph Smith and follow through by other prophets, the Lord has given the world the Book of Mormon, the Word of Wisdom, temples, eternal families, knowledge of how to preserve those families, and a gamut of other doctrines that not only enrich my life but are the basis of everything that matters to me.
With all of these wonderful doctrines at our disposal, we might fall into the trap of forgetting what Joseph Smith taught gave life to them all. He famously said:
“The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it” (Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, 49).
Just as Christ taught that He is the Vine and the disciples the branches (see John 15:1-7), so are all doctrines of the Gospel branches or appendages of the Vine that is Jesus Christ. If we try to understand or live any principle of the Gospel without seeing it in the context of Christ and His Atonement then "there will be no life nor substance nor redemption in them” (Boyd K. Packer, “The Mediator”).
Jamie and I have noted this principle in action frequently of late. We’ve sat in lessons where, for some reason, the Spirit just didn’t reach that peak you want when you give three hours of your Sunday to marching kids off to church. But then, just recently, we’ve participated in fantastic lessons where the Spirit was so strong and we’ve commented that what those lessons had in common was being centered on Christ and His Atonement.
For example, earlier this month, there was a Gospel Doctrine lesson on Joseph Smith’s time in Liberty Jail. The teacher and the class members testified of how Jesus Christ understood Joseph’s trials and all of our trials because He has been through them and thus has the moral authority to advise us in them. The Spirit was so strong as we testified and learned about Christ and connected all principles back to Him. The “look what I know” or “look how right I am” sort of comments that sometimes usurp Gospel Doctrine class were gone as we all unified in meekness before the Son of God.
Then, just last Sunday, while visiting family in Idaho, a sacrament meeting speaker gave a talk on the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel. As she talked about faith, repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, she connected each one back to Christ, both His example of the principle and how the principle gives us access to His Atonement. The Spirit was so strong as she spoke and I wondered to myself how more of us could do a better job of connecting whatever principle we’re assigned to teach to the Atonement of the Savior.
And then, revelation hit me like lightning. I wrote it down as quickly and accurately as I could. The revelation consisted of questions I can ask myself as I prepare a lesson or sermon:
- How does Christ’s Atonement make this principle possible?
- How does this principle help us use Christ’s Atonement?
- How is this principle symbolic of Christ’s Atonement?
- How did/does Christ exemplify this principle?
For example, I will be teaching an upcoming Elders quorum lesson called “Continue in the Great Process of Learning”. I need to ask myself questions like “How does Christ’s Atonement make learning possible?”, “How does learning help us use Christ’s Atonement?”, or “How did/does Christ exemplify learning”. I can find answers to those questions in scriptures such as Doctrine & Covenants 88:5-11, Matthew 11:29, Luke 2:52, and the words of President Hinckley in the lesson itself.
As I begin my lesson with a testimony of how learning is connected to the Atonement of Jesus Christ and the answers to the questions above throughout the lesson (which should be easy to do with any true principle) then the Spirit will come in abundance and we elders will understand the principles taught in their proper and Living context.
All of this goes back to the sacrament prayers. Every sacrament meeting, Latter-day Saints consume the emblems of the Savior’s Atonement and promise twice to “always remember him [the Son of God]” and, as a result, are promised in return that “they may always have his Spirit to be with them” (Doctrine and Covenants 20:77, 79). One important way to keep that covenant is to ensure that every lesson, talk, and testimony we give ties back to the atoning sacrifice of the Savior and, as we do so, the Lord will keep His side of the covenant and the Spirit will abound in our meetings.
Yes- excellent point!!! Now I want to listen to talks/lessons with this in mind! I am sad sometimes when Jesus isn't even mentioned in Sacrament meeting talks, because He should always be the crux, like you said. (Interestingly enough, the definition for crux: the decisive or most important issue; heart; essence; core; nucleus; bottom line. In Latin, the root "crux" means "cross.")
ReplyDeleteI have been thinking about this idea ever since I read this blog post, and I'm sure it will be on my mind at church! Thanks for sharing!
I recently read Doctrine and Covenants 88 (what a section!) and it stood out to me that this principle is totally applied by the Lord there. That section jumps from topic to topic but the theme that holds it all together is that Jesus walked among men, atoned, died, and resurrected ("the Gospel" as defined in 3 Nephi 27). I kept noticing that as the Lord transitioned to different topics, He would present the new topic in the context of Christ's advent.
DeleteI really love this. I remember after teaching a lesson about the priesthood to the Young Women how another leader came up to me and said how much she realized that the spirit was strong in the lesson because we talked so much about the Savior. It really is easier than may seem obvious to tie all of our talks and lessons back to Jesus Christ. If our ultimate goal is to become like Him, everything we learn should point to Him.
ReplyDeleteI think this post is also a good reminder that we as class participants can help lead a lesson back toward the Savior too in our comments. Jesus did not respond to questions to make himself look good, but use questions as an opportunity to teach true doctrine and point those listening toward God and His commandments.
Thank you for this comment, Jamie! I love your personal experience and your point that we as class participants can help make the lesson about the Savior. I think I might make it a personal goal this Sunday when I am in classes to personal think about how the topic is connected to the Savior and make a comment to that effect in each class.
DeleteHey Josh,
ReplyDeleteGreat blog post. In light of the talk last General Conference that cautioned the overuse of phrases like "the atonement of Jesus Christ", "the enabling power of the atonement", et cetera, I had a thought. If we are about to use the word "atonement" and could just as easily replace it with "Jesus Christ", then we should say "Jesus Christ". The atonement by itself does nothing for us. The fact that Jesus Christ atoned for us does, however, allow Christ to do everything necessary for us provided we obey the gospel. It is Christ, not his atonement, who changes us, heals us, brings us back to the father.
-Dave
I will have to think about this Dave. I assume you are referring to President Nelson's talk. I didn't get the quite the same point from it that I am reading here (not that it is a huge difference). I understood President Nelson to be saying to avoid talking about "the atonement" without combining the phrase with the Savior's name. So, it is hazardous to say, "the atonement saves us" but very appropriate to say "Christ's atonement saves us". I don't think we need to avoid mentioning the word "atonement" but just be sure that we're using that word to describe an action Christ did. Of course, this isn't really that different than what I think you're saying. Speaking the way you recommend is totally awesome. I just think it's important to not fall into the trap Presdient Uchtdork described when, after President Benson's pride talk, members would unnecessarily avoid the word "pride". Am I making sense?
DeleteThis is the President Uchtdorf talk I'm talking about: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2010/10/pride-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng
DeleteAnd thank you very much for your complement on my post!
Delete