Finrock

I know the following is an extreme example, but it is something that has caused me to always take pause and reconsider my motivations just to make sure they are righteous when I am in a similar situation. Some years ago now, my best friend called me up and wanted to know if he could come stay with my wife and I. Well, I recall being kinda open to the idea but not really loving it. Neither was my wife all gunho about it either. I remember thinking that I didn't really want to deal with some of the issues my friend was going through because I was feeling stress and pressure from having been newly married and having become a first time father. So, I didn't exactly say no, but, my friend got the message that perhaps if all else fails, he can come over and stay with us, but otherwise no. Now, I didn't think much of the incident until a few months later when I received a call from my best friend's father telling me that my best friend had taken his life. I was devastated. On top of the sadness I felt for having lost my best friend, I have also felt guilty for not being more accepting and willing to allow my friend to come over and stay with us. Perhaps, I have thought, this was an opportunity for me to have made a difference but because of my selfishness I turned that opportunity down and perhaps I missed a chance to prevent my friend from taking his own life. I cannot dwell on those thoughts forever and the pain of all of that has lessened with time, however, I still make sure that before I make a decision in such situations that I am doing it only after I have checked my motivations and I have received confirmation for my decision from the Spirit. But, on second thought, I might not be a good person to be giving advice on this point. Regards, Finrock

Good evening Yana. It is a pleasure to meet you. I hope you have had a good evening! :) Here are my thoughts and my advice: It sounds like to me that you have two competing desires and you are perhaps looking for validation to a lifestyle that, in your opinion, fits the times better. Well, all I can say is that you need to get your priorities straight. Determine right now what you want to do with your life and who do you want to be? How important is the gospel to you? Are you ready to dedicate your life to living as a disciple of Jesus Christ? Because if you truly desire to serve and love God then your pursuits in life would reflect that. What I mean is, do you have a true, solid, testimony of the gospel? If yes, then do your desires and your pursuits match up with the gospel of Jesus Christ? Are you concerned for what God wants for you above all else? If you do not have a solid testimony of the gospel then I encourage you to take the time to find out whether or not the gospel is true and then make a determination as to what type of life you want to live. If you make the determination to dedicate your life to serving and following God, which I hope you do or already are doing, then afterwards, seek guidance from Heavenly Father giving deference, preference, and faith in the principles of the gospel to guide your decisions in life. Regards, Finrock

I'd like to point out that Jesus was completely naked while being tortured and while he hung on the cross. We know he prayed during these times. He showed, by example, that we should pray no matter where, or no matter the situation, it is OK for us to pray. Regards, Finrock

Good afternoon Misshalfway! I hope you are having a good day. :) Of course you are right Misshalfway! I know about the atonement and its all wrapped up in this conversation. All truth is circumscribed in to one great whole. I am focusing on a particular point, but not at the exclusion of other truths. I suppose I'm not use to having to explicitly acknowledge every aspect of the gospel when I'm trying to focus on one point. I simply don't have the skill and I don't know how to communicate in a way where each time I focus on one point I'm able to successfully pull all other truths in to the conversation and then focus on them, while at the same time having an intelligent conversation that isn't all over the place. But, you are preaching to the choir. Please understand that because I point out that serving a full-time mission when you are 19-25 is a commandment and is a priesthood obligation does not mean that I am denying the power of the atonement. What I am saying is that breaking a commandment is breaking a commandment. When we break any commandment we must account for that. We make an accounting for it by either repenting and applying the atonement or by persisting in a non-repentent state until the last day, when we make an accounting for it then. But, that is a truth. Of course people can repent. Of course people can move on from past mistakes. Of course you have other opportunities to serve. Of course God is merciful and kind. Of course we should treat each other with respect. Of course we should not gossip. Of course we should be gentle, loving, empathetic, kind, helpful, merciful, and just. When I say we need to teach the young men that they have a priesthood obligation to serve missions of course I mean that it should be done in a way that is best for those you are teaching; and what is best for those you are teaching can vary and likely you will need to depend on the dictates of the Spirit. None of this changes the fact that serving a full-time mission is a commandment to those who are 19-25 and when something is truth, we need to teach it. Any suggestion that we don't teach a truth is misguided and I am pointing that out. Any other issues, such as we need to teach it with compassion, etc., I don't have any issues with. Although I think a more accurate summary of how we should teach is simply to state that we need to teach any principle, including missionary principles, following the dictates of the Spirit (which sometimes includes using harsh and potentially offending language). Regards, Finrock

Good afternoon Backroads! I hope you are having a good day. :) Thanks for trying to understand my post. I'm saying that our priesthood obligation to serve full-time missions is real. If a young man understands his duty and his obligation then he will also understand that he needs to live his life so that he will be ready to go when the time comes to go. Our young men need to know that serving a full-time mission is a commandment so that they can understand how important it is for them to prepare and to be worthy to serve missions when the time comes. They also need to understand that if they choose to ignore this obligation to serve a mission by not preparing or by not being worthy to serve when the time comes, then they will be held accountable to God for breaking this covenant and that they will miss out on a tremendous blessing not only for them but for others as well. Regards, Finrock

I don't mind talking about "branding" but I do want to point out that it is a diversion from the original point. How people judge others has nothing to do with the correctness/truthfulness of the Church policy on missionary work, on commandments that deal with missionary work, and with the priesthood obligation dealing with missionary work. I have no reason to doubt what you say happens. I don't take part in such things and I don't pay attention to gossip, in general. But, if it happens then that is a problem with those acting like that. I just don't see what that has to do with the commandment for young priesthood holders to serve missions when they are 19-25. Regards, Finrock

I'm only emphasising the obligation because the obligation is being questioned. I don't see spiritual preparation as a separate issue. Our obligation includes the obligation to be spiritually prepared. I think you've read too much in to my post because I haven't given any explanation as to how I approach this subject. I have no idea what you mean when you say my "approach emphasizes more on the going and working your way backwards putting exceptions". What do you mean by this? Regards, Finrock

Good afternoon anatess! I hope you are doing well. :) It is true that there are other missionary programs in the Church other than serving a mission when you are 19-25. However, the obligation still remains. If at all possible, a 19-25 year old priesthood holder needs to serve a mission, if they intend to fulfill all of their priesthood obligations and if they intend to obey God's commandments. Yes, there is a deadline of 19-25 to serve as a young full-time missionary and it is an obligation to do it at that age, if at all possible. I also agree that if a young man doesn't go on their mission when they are 19-25 that they should not be branded anything. Regards, Finrock

You've come up with a creative interpretation of scripture. I believe, however, that the OP was wanting to know what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches about this subject matter. Regards, Finrock

Good afternoon lovingwife. Welcome to the forums! I hope you are doing well today. :) Assuming that what you've posted is absolutely true (I qualify this only because I don't have your husbands perspective to draw on), then what your husband is doing is absolutely wrong. You ought to be able to talk to him about it. What I mean is that in a healthy, loving relationship, a husband will never get upset when a wife brings to his attention a concern. You ought to not be afraid to confront him. In this case, however, its hard to say how he will react given that he has justified his flirting with other women. What your husband is doing is a form of infidelity. He needs to stop and repent. You need to be able to help him and he needs to work at gaining your trust back again. I would suggest that you talk with your bishop. I would suggest that he do so as well. I believe you ought to speak with him about it. You need to let him know how it makes you feel. Just let him know calmly how much it hurts you. You need to also start figuring out why this gap exist in your marriage. What is it that is behind your husband acting the way that he does. I'm not suggesting at all that it is your fault. I simply mean that often conduct like what your husband is doing is caused by some underlying issue that should be addressed. Remember to pray for your husband. You need to also make sure that you are doing your best to obey God's commandments. Your righteousness can do much to help bring your husband back. Regards, Finrock

Hi myalternate! It is a pleasure to meet you. I hope you are having a good day. :) I don't understand where you are coming from. I don't understand why someone has to be careful if they describe something as spiritual. Are you claiming it is some sort of personal offense against you if a person describes a disciplinary council as spiritual because your experience wasn't spiritual? Regards, Finrock

First, I think your experiences are anecdotal, not representative. I agree that all young men ought to serve a mission based on their own choice. I agree that all young men ought to be motivated by righteous desires to serve a mission. However, those are personal issues. Meaning, the prolem is with the individual if they go for other reasons than good reasons, not with the message. I know of no situation where a missionary was actually (in reality) forced to go on a mission. Essentially your post is saying that the Church is wrong in how it handles missionary work and you are right and that the Church needs to conform to your method of handling missionary work. At the end of the day, I think the real issue here is that you believe that missionary work ought to be presented as something that is good but a strictly optional thing for a young man to do and that is why any suggestion that contradicts that bothers you. Regards, Finrock

Good morning StephenVH! I hope you are enjoying your day. :) You aren't slow. We simply disagree as to the nature of God's plan. I believe the Fall was by design. The state that Adam and Eve were in before the fall was incomplete. It wasn't a perfect state. They could not progress, fully, in their pre-Fall state. This is why the Fall was necessary. God intented that Adam and Eve live a life of strife and hardship. He wants us to live a life of strife and hardship because he knows that it is better for us to wade through sorrow and strife so that we can learn through experience to know the good from the evil. The Fall allows us to progress. It allows God's plan to be fulfilled. It is a necessary component of God's plan. When you understand that, then it becomes clear that Adam and Eve had to eventually fall from the state they were in. So, the best choice was for Adam and Eve to transgress God's law so that the Fall could come about. There really was no other way for this event to happen, that would respect Adam and Eve's agency. It is, what it is. I don't believe that this act makes God not good. I believe this event shows the mercy, wisdom, and great power of God and it allows me to have a profound appreciation to our first parents that they were brave enough to transgress God's law knowing that doing so would take them out of a state of peace and ease in to a state of hardship and death; knowing at the same time that passing through this phase of hardship and death would allow them to gain exaltation and eternal life by applying the atonement of Jesus Christ in their life. Regards, Finrock

I don't have access to the link. In any event, I know the audience here generally understands that God doesn't punish us for things we don't have control over. So, there seems to be some other motivation for requiring an explicit statement of a known truth. It seems to me that people want to define their own level of sacrifice. There is a taste of relativism in all of this talk about grey areas. The truth is that in the end there are only two choices: the choice God wants you to make and every other choice. We get to choose our actions but we don't get to choose the consequences. If someone decides they don't have to serve a mission then they need to be sure that their obligation to the priesthood has been fulfilled and that they are doing what God wants them to do. At that point it doesn't matter what the other choice is, if God wants you to do something you need to do it. I disagree that a priesthood holder can arbitrarily choose which priesthood covenants and which commandments they are obligated to fulfill and I disagree that we cannot teach and expect our priesthood holders that they ought to, that they need to, fulfill their priesthood covenants by serving a mission, if at all possible. I believe the SPs story was a wonderful example of the faith of these couple missionaries. They were willing to sacrifice all in order to obey God's commandments. I can't imagine being offended at such a story. I don't even think it was a tacky story or weird, at all. Regards, Finrock

So, you don't think the general membership of the church understands that God doesn't punish people for things they have absolutely no control over? Regards, Finrock

We are speaking about two different things. To me it is obvious that if a person is unable to go because of circumstances out of their control then they aren't responsible. I didn't realize that something that is assumed in all other conversations about the gospel needed to be explicitly clarified. If that is the extent of your objection, then there really isn't any disagreement. My statements assumes that it is possible for the people being obligated to fulfill that obligation. But, we assume this in almost all of our gospel conversations. Obviously God does not punish someone for something they cannot possibly control. When we speak of any gospel principle this idea is understood. Why does it need to be explicitly spelled out in this conversation about missionary service? Regards, Finrock

Every priesthood holder is obligated by commandment and covenant to serve a mission. If a priesthood holder is going to be true to their covenant then they need to serve a mission. The statements are equivalent in their meaning. They all end in the same logical conclusion. The priesthood obligates us to serve a full-time mission. To stay true to this covenant, we need to serve a mission. Saying it a different way provides no different obligation or meaning. We should prepare to serve a mission because we are morally obligated to do so by covenant. "Should" do something means that it is something that we must do in order to stay morally and ethically true. If we should/ought to do something it isn't something that we can simply reject without being accountable for our inaction. It equates to needing to act in order to maitain our moral standing. Regards, Finrock

I guess I don't understand what the dilemma is. It's offensive to say that every young man should serve a mission? First of all, why get offended at all? We choose to get offended, so what the speaker said is irrelevant to the question of being offended. If you get offended by someone's words its because you wanted to be offended by them. Every priesthood holder is obligated to serve a mission. That is gospel truth. They should do everything in their power to serve (live worthy, repent, etc.) and only if they cannot serve due to circumstance out of their control are they excused. Being a sinner isn't an excuse. It doesn't nullify the priesthood obligation. It might prevent one from going but it doesn't excuse them from the obligation. Regards, Finrock

The Fall was a part of the Plan of Salvation. It was designed to happen. God provided the conditions so that Adam and Eve could make a choice. The result of Adam and Eve partaking of the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil was that God's plan could move forward. It was obviously the best choice. In this case, the trangression of God's commandment was a necessary step required to kick-start the Plan of Redemption. Further, because the Fall was planned, God had already taken care of the results of the Fall by providing a Savior. So, God knew that by transgressing Adam and Eve would Fall but He also knew that they could be healed from the affects of the Fall through the atonement. The issue is that we are creating philosophical absolutes without properly understanding the nature and purpose of God. There is no other way for the Plan of Redemption to come about and thus God acting any other way would be bad. God's plan was perfectly good. Regards, Finrock

If the statement, I think therefore I am, is true, then why are there so many people who are not thinking and yet they exist? Regards, Finrock

Good afternoon MarginOfError! I hope you have been well. :) I think your experience with how the law of consecration has been implemented was probably the best way to do it in that situation, for that bishop, in that ward. I have no doubt that your bishops were acting under inspiration. However, what you suggest is simply another implimentation of the same subject. You are suggesting that the method of implimentation that you have dictated is the correct method. Thus, it sets up a litmus test of its own: I will only obey the bishop if I agree that he is doing it the right way. In my view, we ought not to setup limits on how God decides to implement the law of consecration and trust that the bishop is acting under inspiration for the specific needs of the Ward. Regards, Finrock

Hi needsomehelp! I hope you are doing reasonably well today. :) I hope you know that those thoughts that you have about you being worthless, etc. are not true and they are not from God. We should feel sorrow for our sins but self-loathing will only lead to more sin. Trust me on this. Sometimes people struggle with depression, anxiety, or self-esteem issues. And, unfortunately, sometimes these people learn to deal with those feelings by looking at pornography. I don't know your history but it might be worth your while to consider that perhaps pornography for you isn't the problem, per se, but perhaps it is a symptom of some underlying issues you are dealing with. It can be helpful understanding exactly where our conduct stems from. Look, viewing pornography is very bad; no doubt. It is harmful to everyone. However, it doesn't have to define who you are as a person. You have a weakness. All of us have weaknesses that we must overcome. But, I would guess that you probably strive in every other way to do what is right. If that is the case, your heart desires righteousness and that is a good and wonderful quality. You just need to overcome this weakness. You can't do it alone. Even though your wife will probably be hurt, if you approach her with a broken heart and with humility, she will almost certainly admire your strength to make things right. You also know that these types of sins require you to confess to your bishop. Another danger in keeping things from your wife is that it can become easier to fall again. The devil loves for us to work in secret so that we can act under the delusion that somehow if noone knows then the sin isn't as bad. Remember: "And charity suffereth long, and is kind, and envieth not, and is not puffed up, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil, and rejoiceth not in iniquity but rejoiceth in the truth, beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things" (Moroni 7:45). "There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love" (1 John 4:18). Regards, Finrock

Hi Smeagums. It is a pleasure to meet you. I hope you are having a good morning. :) Do you mean literally filthy (actual garbage, dirt, and such all over the place) or in some figurative or spiritual sense filthy? Regards, Finrock

Good evening needsomehelp! It is a pleasure to meet you. I hope you are doing well. :) I hope that you are still participating in this thread even though it has devolved in to something different than what you intended. My thoughts: You can absolutely save your marriage. You must tell your wife. Please, tell your wife. She will likely feel very hurt and she will likely feel betrayed. Viewing pornography is a form of infidelity. God has commanded that a husband and wife must "honor marital vows with complete fidelity" (Family Proclamation). Complete fidelity means just that: the feelings and emotions of lust, sexual desire, and such must be to your spouse and your spouse only. All relationships are built on trust. By your actions you have broken that trust, even if your wife is ignorant to your actions. You have harmed her and your marriage. A part of repentance is making restitution to those we have harmed. I promise you that if you and your wife are committed to living the gospel of Jesus Christ you can work through this. Have faith in the covenants and commitments you made to each other. Also, understand that you are not alone. Viewing pornography is a plague and there are many who struggle or have struggled with this and they have been able to overcome it and often their marriages are stronger because husband and wife have worked together to overcome this challenge. You and your wife are partners, companions, and helpmeets to each other. Work on this issue together, with love, patience, and holding fast to the gospel. You will feel liberated when you speak to your wife. You will begin to feel free of the guilt and you will feel so much better knowing that you don't have any dark secrets tucked away in your heart. These types of things just aren't good for a marriage. With Respect, Finrock

Perhaps it wasn't the fish and the bread that was changed or multiplied. Perhaps the real change was with those listening to Jesus. It is possible that through the power of the Spirit and because of their faith the multitude was able to be sustained with very little physical food. Consider Jesus, when he fasted: 1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. 2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred. Surely Jesus was sustained by the Spirit while his physical body was without food. It is possible that what happened with the multitude is tied in with this idea: 4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. The multitude had been with Jesus for three days and many of them had travelled from afar to be there. This demonstrates their faith. In other places, God has also seemingly changed the person so that they can endure or are able to do things that a human normally could not do. For instance: 1. God made it possible for Lehi, his family, and those with him to be able to live off of raw meat only for several years. Furthermore, the women were able to provide plenty of breast milk to their babies even though the women weren't getting a "balanced diet." Yet, they were sustained because of their faith and the power of God. 2. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were temporarily changed, because of their faith, so that they could endure the furnace. 3. Abinadi was temporarily changed so that he could not be killed or touched by the wicked guards of king Noah. So, my point is that perhaps because of their faith and through the power of the Spirit, the people with Jesus did not need so much food in order to be filled because for the last three days they had been nourished and filled by the word of God and His Spirit. As they relied more completely on God they had less need to rely on bread alone. Thus, the meager amount was plenty because the multitude did not need much food in order to be filled. Their faith had allowed God to temporarily cause a change in them. In either case, it certainly is a "miracle" in the sense that it was as a result of faith and the power of God. Regards, Finrock