And might it be that the atonement of Christ pays the price in such instances

And might it be that the atonement of christ pays the

This preview shows page 40 - 43 out of 57 pages.

And might it be that the atonement of Christ “pays the price” in such instances? If so, this could explain the universality of the resurrection, since physical death came as a consequence of Adam’s transgression, for which individually we are not held culpable.44“Sin,” on the other hand, refers to the willful violation of divine law when no conflicts of law are present; and the Atonement applies only after the person repents.Before exploring a final idea, we should revisit the notion of complete-ness. As discussed earlier, complex deductive systems cannot be consistent and complete.45To show that such a system is incomplete requires us to find a truth (expressed in the language of the system) that cannot be deduced from the axioms. Pointing out inconsistencies—or even contradictions—has no bearing on whether the system is complete. Furthermore, when such a
Background image
41E-book: To Infinity and Beyond© 2013Kent A. Bessey. All rights reserved.system is complete, it will of necessity contain contradictions. If, as I have argued previously, Gödel’s results have analogous counterparts in the struc-ture of theological systems, then the purported completeness of a system of theology cannot be undermined by the discovery of contradictions. This potentially paints a bleak picture for those laboring to “overthrow” LDS theology by identifying inconsistencies or contradictions. Provided the thesis of this chapter holds, all such attempts will prove futile because a claim of completeness cannot be compromised by such discoveries.Some of the “noble and great ones”46in canonized scripture had to work their way through weighty contradictions. The notions of consistencyand completeness(taken from the study of deductive systems) together with Gödel’s conclusions provide an analogical context for studying systems of theology. In particular, embracing a “complete” theological system may require an individual to endure not only trivial inconsistencies but also contradictions. In the latter case, rules of inference will prove insufficient, and logic will fall short. For the correctness of a course of action cannot always be determined by an application of a finite set of rules but by an appeal to a living standard of truth: “For they that are wise…and have taken the Holy Spirit for their guide…shall abide the day.”47Ultimately, living the gospel is not algorithmic or mechanical—we need continual guidance from heaven in the choices we make and in the priorities we set. 1
Background image
42E-book: To Infinity and Beyond© 2013Kent A. Bessey. All rights reserved.NotesBy definition, a 1. deductive systemis a pair (S, R), where Srepresents the set of sen-tences of a formal language and Rrepresents a collection of inference rules on S.An2. axiomis a self-evident truth; it is a statement, assertion, or proposition that is accepted as true and is used as a basis for developing a system of logic.
Background image
Image of page 43

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture