Be sure to follow facebook.com/reasontorejoice to read all of my posts
6/12/2020: Having trouble forgiving yourself?
In January 2019, I published an article in a BYU journal that discussed misconceptions about the Atonement of Jesus Christ. This article can be especially helpful to those who have trouble forgiving themselves. Since the original article is rather lengthy, I have included selections below that provide a summary of the main points:
Soon after I was called to serve as the elders quorum president of a young single adult ward many years ago, the stake president gave me the difficult challenge to visit each quorum member individually during the upcoming school year. To this day, I remember one such visit to a young man I’ll call Robert. It was evident when I arrived that something was troubling him; his gaze alternated nervously between the floor and his visitor but gave preference to the floor. At the outset of our conversation, he was reticent and guarded, but at my prodding he began to share a mistake from his past which he could not let go. A few years prior to our visit, Robert had cheated on one of his college exams. As an active member of the Church, he felt awful about his dishonesty and confessed it to the professor and his bishop but, in his apartment two or three years later, it was obvious that he had not let the matter go. “I should have known better,” he said apologetically.
Over the last several years, I have met many people like Robert, who are in constant distress over their personal sins and weaknesses. Some are haunted by a distant memory, while others are troubled with ongoing sins which frequently beset them. I have tried a variety of approaches to help these people increase their hope in Christ’s infinite Atonement but have not always been successful. In the perilous times in which we live, this is a highly relevant subject as there are many who have succumbed to the temptations of the world and look back with deep regret. Perhaps the problem stems not merely from a lack of faith in the Atonement of Jesus Christ but from a fundamental misunderstanding of his redeeming sacrifice. This article will analyze one such misconception which, if clarified, may reduce the likelihood of individuals such as Robert suffering needlessly in the mire of self-denigration.
Doctrinal Surveys
In an effort to analyze the perceptions and beliefs of Church members concerning a potentially misunderstood doctrine, a nonscientific survey was conducted with 658 members of the Church early in 2017.[1] Survey respondents were first asked to select from a list of descriptive phrases that could apply to them and then asked two doctrinal questions, one of which was the following: “Please indicate if the following statement is true or false: ‘If we repent, the Atonement of Christ will cleanse us but if we knowingly refuse to repent, we will be required to atone for our own sins in the next life.’” Sixty-five percent of those who answered this question identified this statement as true.[2]
...Will those who knowingly refuse to repent be required to atone for their own sins in the next life? A common scriptural reference cited during a discussion on postmortal suffering is found in Doctrine and Covenants section 19: “For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; but if they would not repent they must suffer even as I; which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit—and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink” (Doctrine and Covenants 19:16–18). Closely related to this scripture is Amulek’s statement that “he that exercises no faith unto repentance is exposed to the whole law of the demands of justice” (Alma 34:16). Clearly, scriptures such as these could be used to make the case that those who knowingly refuse to repent while in this life must atone for their own sins in the life to come.
A correct understanding of postmortal suffering, however, can only be achieved by analyzing Doctrine and Covenants 19 and Alma 34 in concert with other scriptures and the teachings of latter-day prophets and apostles. Elder Neal A. Maxwell counseled against teaching “the scriptures in isolation from one another” but instead recommended “[clustering] your scriptures together.”[5] By clustering numerous scriptures and inspired writings, we can reach the conclusion that in this life or the next, no mortal man or woman can atone for his or her own sins.
Some Latter-day Saints may feel an innate desire to pay for their own sins through a sustained period of self-deprecation, falsely believing that the longer they suffer, the closer they are to paying the debt created by their transgressions. This misconception could be reinforced by the belief that Doctrine and Covenants 19 suggests that the unrepentant will be required to atone for their sins after this life. Robert and many others may feel the need to make up for their mistakes by suffering day after day or even year after year, but their efforts will prove futile. No amount of personal, mortal suffering, in this life or in the next, can atone for sin. Furthermore, the belief that a personal atonement is required for sin may catalyze a withholding of forgiveness from another person until we believe the transgressor has suffered for an appropriate amount of time. The following five principles may help Robert and others gain an accurate understanding of the price of sin, the futility of self-atonement and the necessity of “[casting our] burden upon the Lord” (Psalm 55:22).
...[T]he Guide to the Scriptures explains, “As used in the scriptures, to atone is to suffer the penalty for an act of sin, thereby removing the effects of sin.”[9] David R. Seely, analyzing William Tyndale’s early translation of the New Testament, offers this helpful insight into the etymology of the word atonement: “In the New Testament, the verb [katallassō] is used in one passage describing the reconciliation of one human with another (1 Corinthians 7:11), but it most often describes the reconciliation of humans with God (Romans 5:10–11; 2 Corinthians 5:18–20; Colossians 1:20, 22; Ephesians 2:16). It is this Greek word that Tyndale translates with the word atonement.”[10] Will the personal suffering that inevitably emanates from sin—either in mortality or postmortality—remove the effects of sin or enable a reconciliation of humans with God? The answer is a resounding no.
The verses cited above in Doctrine and Covenants 19 compare the suffering of the unrepentant to Christ’s suffering in the garden, but they do not imply that this suffering will have the same redeeming or atoning effect. Some may conclude that the intense suffering described in section 19 will be sufficient to completely satisfy the demands of justice, hence allowing unrepentant sinners to make up for their own sins; however, the suffering that originates from recognizing the debt created by our sins is not synonymous with an actual payment of that debt. To comprehend the doctrine taught by section 19, one must first consider whether fallen, mortal beings are capable of paying the price of sin.
According to President Joseph Fielding Smith, “The effect of Adam’s transgression was to place all of us in the pit with him. Then the Savior comes along, not subject to that pit, and lowers the ladder.”[11] Clearly, individuals who have fallen into a deep pit are incapable of lowering their own ladder or escape rope; as the Book of Mormon teaches, “Since man had fallen he could not merit anything of himself” (Alma 22:14). President Joseph Fielding Smith taught simply, “Since we were all under the curse [of the Fall], we were also powerless to atone for our individual sins.”[12] President Joseph F. Smith stated, “Men cannot forgive their own sins; they cannot cleanse themselves from the consequences of their sins.”[13] In order to receive a remission of sin, every man, woman and child born into a fallen world is entirely dependent on him who is neither subject to the Fall nor to any personal sins. As the hymn declares, “There was no other good enough to pay the price of sin. He only could unlock the gate of heav’n and let us in.”[14]
...[T]he suffering of the wicked does not in itself have any atoning effect but instead leads the sinner to the one source of hope: the Lord Jesus Christ.
This principle is profoundly illustrated in the parable of the prodigal son. In the well-known narrative, the departing prodigal squanders his entire inheritance “with riotous living” (Luke 15:13) and is left “in want” (verse 14). Previously an heir to a fortune but now a lowly caretaker of swine, the prodigal experiences suffering likely unknown in his previous life, with the pangs of hunger and abandonment weighing on his sinful soul. The scriptural account does not elucidate how long he suffers until he finally comes to himself with the realization that many of his father’s servants “have bread enough and to spare” (verse 17), and yet he perishes with hunger. He devises a plan to return to his father—not as son but as servant—and humbly beg his pardon. In “one of the most moving and compassionate scenes in all of holy writ,”[21] the returning son, who fully expects to be disowned by his father, receives instead a warm embrace, a kiss, “the best robe,” “a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet” (verse 22)—all of which remind us of the power of Christ’s infinite Atonement to reconcile and to heal. President Russell M. Nelson explained that in “Hebrew, the basic word for atonement is kaphar, a verb that means ‘to cover’ or ‘to forgive.’ Closely related is the Aramaic and Arabic word kafat, meaning ‘a close embrace.’”[22] Those who suffer under the burden of sin can, like the prodigal, forsake their sins, confess them before the Father and receive the close embrace of our Savior.
What if the prodigal son had suffered for a longer period of time? Would that have made up for his sins? In reality, no amount of suffering as a swineherd would atone for his riotous living. The only way for the prodigal to overcome his sins was to return to his father and receive forgiveness. It is the same way with us. Whether in this life or in the next, no amount of suffering on our part will make up for even an iota of transgression—our only hope is that the suffering will lead us to return to our Father with a broken heart so we can be “clasped in the arms of Jesus” (Mormon 5:11). In this way, the postmortal suffering of the wicked will play a similar role as with Alma the Younger, who, after being “harrowed up to the greatest degree and racked with all [his] sins” (Alma 36:12), was lead to cry, “O Jesus, thou Son of God, have mercy on me” (Alma 36:18). Alma’s suffering came to an end because he turned to Christ, not because he satisfied an inherent requirement to suffer for a fixed period of time....
Conclusion
As cited above, the Guide to the Scriptures explains that “as used in the scriptures, to atone is to suffer the penalty for an act of sin, thereby removing the effects of sin.”[55] While it is clear from Doctrine and Covenants 19 that unrepentant sinners must suffer because of their sins, it is unclear from that section whether this intense suffering will remove the effects of sin. A careful analysis of section 19 in conjunction with other inspired writings leads to an understanding that the suffering of the wicked does not in itself have any atoning effect but instead is part of the repentance process and leads sinners to Christ, who alone can cleanse and sanctify us.
During my years as a professional religious educator, I met many people like Robert who have derided themselves for years over a past sin, perhaps mistakenly believing that this self-inflicted suffering would somehow make up for their sins. Wallowing in self-hatred and regret, these individuals for whatever reason refuse to apply Christ’s Atonement, opting instead to engage in a futile attempt to make infinite restitution with a finite capacity. Among other things, the principles outlined in this article may help such individuals realize that since no amount of human suffering will make up for sin, their prolonged, self-inflicted suffering is fruitless unless it leads them to repentance. We cannot atone for our own sins no matter how long we try or how hard we suffer. In contrast, the Atonement of Christ “begins to work the day you ask”[56] and will “[restore] what you cannot restore, [heal] the wound you cannot heal, [and fix] that which you broke and you cannot fix.”[57]
The decision is this: we can rely on the Atonement now or we can stubbornly refuse and suffer, in this life and possibly in the next, until we finally decide to come unto Christ and rely on his Atonement. With this in mind, we should not view Christ as one of many alternatives for salvation, but as the only way to salvation. Nephi left little room for multiple paths to salvation when he said at the conclusion of an authoritative discourse on the doctrine of Christ, “This is the way; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God” (2 Nephi 31:21).
In 1763, the Anglican cleric Augustus Montague Toplady, penned the words to a hymn that has been included in the Latter-day Saint hymnbook since 1948. The second verse of that hymn is a poetic treatise on the impossibility of atoning for one’s personal sins:
Not the labors of my hands
Can fill all thy law’s demands;
Could my zeal no respite know,
Could my tears forever flow,
All for sin could not atone;
Thou must save, and thou alone.[58]
For a complete discussion, please read the whole article: "They Must Suffer Even As I": Misconceptions concerning Personal Payment for Sin, The Religious Educator 20, no. 1 (2019).
Over the last several years, I have met many people like Robert, who are in constant distress over their personal sins and weaknesses. Some are haunted by a distant memory, while others are troubled with ongoing sins which frequently beset them. I have tried a variety of approaches to help these people increase their hope in Christ’s infinite Atonement but have not always been successful. In the perilous times in which we live, this is a highly relevant subject as there are many who have succumbed to the temptations of the world and look back with deep regret. Perhaps the problem stems not merely from a lack of faith in the Atonement of Jesus Christ but from a fundamental misunderstanding of his redeeming sacrifice. This article will analyze one such misconception which, if clarified, may reduce the likelihood of individuals such as Robert suffering needlessly in the mire of self-denigration.
Doctrinal Surveys
In an effort to analyze the perceptions and beliefs of Church members concerning a potentially misunderstood doctrine, a nonscientific survey was conducted with 658 members of the Church early in 2017.[1] Survey respondents were first asked to select from a list of descriptive phrases that could apply to them and then asked two doctrinal questions, one of which was the following: “Please indicate if the following statement is true or false: ‘If we repent, the Atonement of Christ will cleanse us but if we knowingly refuse to repent, we will be required to atone for our own sins in the next life.’” Sixty-five percent of those who answered this question identified this statement as true.[2]
...Will those who knowingly refuse to repent be required to atone for their own sins in the next life? A common scriptural reference cited during a discussion on postmortal suffering is found in Doctrine and Covenants section 19: “For behold, I, God, have suffered these things for all, that they might not suffer if they would repent; but if they would not repent they must suffer even as I; which suffering caused myself, even God, the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore, and to suffer both body and spirit—and would that I might not drink the bitter cup, and shrink” (Doctrine and Covenants 19:16–18). Closely related to this scripture is Amulek’s statement that “he that exercises no faith unto repentance is exposed to the whole law of the demands of justice” (Alma 34:16). Clearly, scriptures such as these could be used to make the case that those who knowingly refuse to repent while in this life must atone for their own sins in the life to come.
A correct understanding of postmortal suffering, however, can only be achieved by analyzing Doctrine and Covenants 19 and Alma 34 in concert with other scriptures and the teachings of latter-day prophets and apostles. Elder Neal A. Maxwell counseled against teaching “the scriptures in isolation from one another” but instead recommended “[clustering] your scriptures together.”[5] By clustering numerous scriptures and inspired writings, we can reach the conclusion that in this life or the next, no mortal man or woman can atone for his or her own sins.
Some Latter-day Saints may feel an innate desire to pay for their own sins through a sustained period of self-deprecation, falsely believing that the longer they suffer, the closer they are to paying the debt created by their transgressions. This misconception could be reinforced by the belief that Doctrine and Covenants 19 suggests that the unrepentant will be required to atone for their sins after this life. Robert and many others may feel the need to make up for their mistakes by suffering day after day or even year after year, but their efforts will prove futile. No amount of personal, mortal suffering, in this life or in the next, can atone for sin. Furthermore, the belief that a personal atonement is required for sin may catalyze a withholding of forgiveness from another person until we believe the transgressor has suffered for an appropriate amount of time. The following five principles may help Robert and others gain an accurate understanding of the price of sin, the futility of self-atonement and the necessity of “[casting our] burden upon the Lord” (Psalm 55:22).
...[T]he Guide to the Scriptures explains, “As used in the scriptures, to atone is to suffer the penalty for an act of sin, thereby removing the effects of sin.”[9] David R. Seely, analyzing William Tyndale’s early translation of the New Testament, offers this helpful insight into the etymology of the word atonement: “In the New Testament, the verb [katallassō] is used in one passage describing the reconciliation of one human with another (1 Corinthians 7:11), but it most often describes the reconciliation of humans with God (Romans 5:10–11; 2 Corinthians 5:18–20; Colossians 1:20, 22; Ephesians 2:16). It is this Greek word that Tyndale translates with the word atonement.”[10] Will the personal suffering that inevitably emanates from sin—either in mortality or postmortality—remove the effects of sin or enable a reconciliation of humans with God? The answer is a resounding no.
The verses cited above in Doctrine and Covenants 19 compare the suffering of the unrepentant to Christ’s suffering in the garden, but they do not imply that this suffering will have the same redeeming or atoning effect. Some may conclude that the intense suffering described in section 19 will be sufficient to completely satisfy the demands of justice, hence allowing unrepentant sinners to make up for their own sins; however, the suffering that originates from recognizing the debt created by our sins is not synonymous with an actual payment of that debt. To comprehend the doctrine taught by section 19, one must first consider whether fallen, mortal beings are capable of paying the price of sin.
According to President Joseph Fielding Smith, “The effect of Adam’s transgression was to place all of us in the pit with him. Then the Savior comes along, not subject to that pit, and lowers the ladder.”[11] Clearly, individuals who have fallen into a deep pit are incapable of lowering their own ladder or escape rope; as the Book of Mormon teaches, “Since man had fallen he could not merit anything of himself” (Alma 22:14). President Joseph Fielding Smith taught simply, “Since we were all under the curse [of the Fall], we were also powerless to atone for our individual sins.”[12] President Joseph F. Smith stated, “Men cannot forgive their own sins; they cannot cleanse themselves from the consequences of their sins.”[13] In order to receive a remission of sin, every man, woman and child born into a fallen world is entirely dependent on him who is neither subject to the Fall nor to any personal sins. As the hymn declares, “There was no other good enough to pay the price of sin. He only could unlock the gate of heav’n and let us in.”[14]
...[T]he suffering of the wicked does not in itself have any atoning effect but instead leads the sinner to the one source of hope: the Lord Jesus Christ.
This principle is profoundly illustrated in the parable of the prodigal son. In the well-known narrative, the departing prodigal squanders his entire inheritance “with riotous living” (Luke 15:13) and is left “in want” (verse 14). Previously an heir to a fortune but now a lowly caretaker of swine, the prodigal experiences suffering likely unknown in his previous life, with the pangs of hunger and abandonment weighing on his sinful soul. The scriptural account does not elucidate how long he suffers until he finally comes to himself with the realization that many of his father’s servants “have bread enough and to spare” (verse 17), and yet he perishes with hunger. He devises a plan to return to his father—not as son but as servant—and humbly beg his pardon. In “one of the most moving and compassionate scenes in all of holy writ,”[21] the returning son, who fully expects to be disowned by his father, receives instead a warm embrace, a kiss, “the best robe,” “a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet” (verse 22)—all of which remind us of the power of Christ’s infinite Atonement to reconcile and to heal. President Russell M. Nelson explained that in “Hebrew, the basic word for atonement is kaphar, a verb that means ‘to cover’ or ‘to forgive.’ Closely related is the Aramaic and Arabic word kafat, meaning ‘a close embrace.’”[22] Those who suffer under the burden of sin can, like the prodigal, forsake their sins, confess them before the Father and receive the close embrace of our Savior.
What if the prodigal son had suffered for a longer period of time? Would that have made up for his sins? In reality, no amount of suffering as a swineherd would atone for his riotous living. The only way for the prodigal to overcome his sins was to return to his father and receive forgiveness. It is the same way with us. Whether in this life or in the next, no amount of suffering on our part will make up for even an iota of transgression—our only hope is that the suffering will lead us to return to our Father with a broken heart so we can be “clasped in the arms of Jesus” (Mormon 5:11). In this way, the postmortal suffering of the wicked will play a similar role as with Alma the Younger, who, after being “harrowed up to the greatest degree and racked with all [his] sins” (Alma 36:12), was lead to cry, “O Jesus, thou Son of God, have mercy on me” (Alma 36:18). Alma’s suffering came to an end because he turned to Christ, not because he satisfied an inherent requirement to suffer for a fixed period of time....
Conclusion
As cited above, the Guide to the Scriptures explains that “as used in the scriptures, to atone is to suffer the penalty for an act of sin, thereby removing the effects of sin.”[55] While it is clear from Doctrine and Covenants 19 that unrepentant sinners must suffer because of their sins, it is unclear from that section whether this intense suffering will remove the effects of sin. A careful analysis of section 19 in conjunction with other inspired writings leads to an understanding that the suffering of the wicked does not in itself have any atoning effect but instead is part of the repentance process and leads sinners to Christ, who alone can cleanse and sanctify us.
During my years as a professional religious educator, I met many people like Robert who have derided themselves for years over a past sin, perhaps mistakenly believing that this self-inflicted suffering would somehow make up for their sins. Wallowing in self-hatred and regret, these individuals for whatever reason refuse to apply Christ’s Atonement, opting instead to engage in a futile attempt to make infinite restitution with a finite capacity. Among other things, the principles outlined in this article may help such individuals realize that since no amount of human suffering will make up for sin, their prolonged, self-inflicted suffering is fruitless unless it leads them to repentance. We cannot atone for our own sins no matter how long we try or how hard we suffer. In contrast, the Atonement of Christ “begins to work the day you ask”[56] and will “[restore] what you cannot restore, [heal] the wound you cannot heal, [and fix] that which you broke and you cannot fix.”[57]
The decision is this: we can rely on the Atonement now or we can stubbornly refuse and suffer, in this life and possibly in the next, until we finally decide to come unto Christ and rely on his Atonement. With this in mind, we should not view Christ as one of many alternatives for salvation, but as the only way to salvation. Nephi left little room for multiple paths to salvation when he said at the conclusion of an authoritative discourse on the doctrine of Christ, “This is the way; and there is none other way nor name given under heaven whereby man can be saved in the kingdom of God” (2 Nephi 31:21).
In 1763, the Anglican cleric Augustus Montague Toplady, penned the words to a hymn that has been included in the Latter-day Saint hymnbook since 1948. The second verse of that hymn is a poetic treatise on the impossibility of atoning for one’s personal sins:
Not the labors of my hands
Can fill all thy law’s demands;
Could my zeal no respite know,
Could my tears forever flow,
All for sin could not atone;
Thou must save, and thou alone.[58]
For a complete discussion, please read the whole article: "They Must Suffer Even As I": Misconceptions concerning Personal Payment for Sin, The Religious Educator 20, no. 1 (2019).
© 2022 by Christopher J. Porter. Images from ChurchofJesusChrist.org and licensed from Shutter Stock. This is not an official website of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The opinions expressed herein are the responsibility of the author.
