Vort

Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as a "temple divorce". When the marriage sealing is dissolved, the children's sealing to parents remains intact, whether they were sealed to their parents after their birth or born in their parents' covenant.

A short cubit was the length of the forearm, not including the hand. Using the short cubit, Goliath's height would have been a much more believable 6'9" -- huge by ancient standards, but not out of the realm of believability.

I am quite sure that you are mistaken. Only holders of the Melchizedek Priesthood can perform (officiate in) proxy baptisms.

You are a diehard traditionalist. You are an iron glove covering a velvet fist, aka a HINO (headbanger in name only). Master of Puppets You're an old-style 80's era shredder; you probably listen to , too.Enter Sandman Strictly a bubble-gum headbanger. (Bob Seger cover)You are not a headbanger, but you recognize talent when you hear it. (Blue Öyster Cult cover)Seriously? A cover of a relatively obscure but absolutely awesome BÖC tune? Dude (or dudette), you may not be a headbanger, but you are my kind of person. And if your is from Some Enchanted Evening, you are my long-lost twin (freak). (Misfits cover)You are messed up. Your future's in an oblong box. But you're fun to hang out with, at least until the cops show up. You're a Metallica groupie. Not that there's anything wrong with that (weirdo). I don't listen to that kind of garbage. I'm so, so sorry for you. Welcome to the wide world of music! You're in for a treat!

I am entertained to see a Catholic lecture a list full of Mormons on what they (the Mormons) believe. And here I thought I believed, you know, what I believe. Glad you're here to set me straight.

That's more than a little harsh, don't you think? A man, especially a young man, can be perfectly honorable and decent, yet still not want to date or marry someone who already has children.

I read on certain antiMormon sites that people sacrifice their oldest child on the temple altar and that Mormons keep their horns sanded down so no one suspects. Not that I'm saying this is the case, but, um, is this the case? Of course, if you say no, then you're probably just hiding something. I read Mormons do that a lot. Those antiMormon sites really are a great help to me.

Fry's, huh? So I can get that laptop memory expansion and pick up a gallon of milk while I'm there?

Sorry, I see a couple of mine were already cited, including on DRAVIN'S ORIGINAL POST. I really do read before posting, generally speaking. Really. I do. Seriously.

Fred Meyer in the west is Kroeger's in some other faraway place (and I think they bought out the Utah Smith's chain, as well). Fred Meyer also owns the QFC chain, I believe. I believe Dreyer's ice cream is called Edy's in the east. "Chuck E. Cheese's" in the US is known everywhere else in the world as "the institute for the criminally insane".

That's the point. She feels utterly alone. We are suggesting she go see her bishop rather than talk to a bunch of anonymous internet people. We are not suggesting she go see her bishop to tell on her husband; we are advising her to see her bishop as a way to cope with and overcome this horrible trial. Some have objected that doing so could put a strain on their marriage by "outing" the husband's infidelity. Our response is that the husband can go tell the bishop himself if he doesn't want his wife to "tell on him", but she should go see her bishop regardless. If the result is that she "tells on" her husband, so be it. If he wants to be man enough to confess his own adultery, that's better. But in either case, she should be on her way to see her bishop post haste.

I disagree. As Eowyn pointed out, she needs to go to the bishop for her own benefit. Her husband's confession is incidental to that.

Agreed.

s_i_f, you appear not to recognize the irony of your post. Dravin's suggestion to you was to quit assuming everything targets you personally and to read others' posts more carefully. In responding to his post, you ignored both items. Dravin's post was not at all unkind, though that is how you took it. You have used the "I'm so confused" smiley icon () in several of your posts. If you include a little icon that announces "I'm confused", do you think people should not assume that it means you're confused? The nature of a discussion list such as this one is as follows: People offer their opinions and views on various topics, some gospel-related, some not. Other people then offer their feedback on those opinions and views. Not surprisingly, people often do not agree. That's the whole point of a discussion list -- that people discuss such issues, arguing their point or getting new insights from others. I have little doubt you will take offense at this post as well. I admit I often come across as pedantic, so you are not alone in taking offense at what I write. But when several of us are saying the same thing, you would be wise to consider what we say and see if we are not speaking the truth. We don't dislike you. We are glad you're here. We welcome your participation. We would simply like to see you quit taking personal offense at so much of what others write and assuming that everything anyone else writes is pointed directly at you. Careful reading of what others write goes a long way toward doing this. For example, you took tremendous offense at some things I wrote a few weeks back, and no amount of exhaustive explanation on my part would convince you to back off of your outsized offense. Yet a careful reading of what I originally wrote, and certainly a careful reading of my follow-up posts, would have demonstrated that your offense was misplaced. If my writing is not clear enough for people to understand, that's my bad. If you neglect to read my post carefully enough to understand what I'm actually saying, then that's your bad. Discussion list participation is supposed to be fun. Otherwise, why bother? But it doesn't seem like you can be having much fun when you are taking offense at half of what other people write in responding to your posts or topics. What Dravin wrote to you applies to everyone: Don't assume that everything people write is aimed at you, and read what they write carefully to make sure you understand it. This is not unkind; it is basic list etiquette and vital to participation in such an environment.

I disagree on several levels and for many reasons. The most obvious is: When someone is drowning, she need not ask another drowning person's permission before grabbing on to a life preserver. tattered_torn owns her own life, at least as much as any of us own anything. She gets to make decisions about her life. Right now, her life is in shambles because of a betrayal. She needs emotional support, far more than she can get on an anonymous discussion list. She also needs spiritual guidance. She also needs moral counsel. The bishop can give her all of those. In point of fact, that is one of the reasons he is put in that position. I am all for the husband supporting his wife -- but then, I'm all for the husband keeping his pants zipped up outside their bedroom, and he didn't do so great in that. If he supports his wife in telling the bishop the way he kept his marriage covenants, she will remain isolated and miserable. You are welcome to your opinion, of course, and your counseling background might give your words added weight in the minds of some. But I think you are mistaken and that your attitude toward the Church's place in this debacle is misguided. She should tell her husband that she is talking to the bishop tomorrow, and that he has the rest of the day to go to the bishop first so that the news of his infidelities reaches the bishop from his own mouth rather than hers. Then let him act according to his own conscience. But she's talking to the bishop, regardless of his choices. That is what she needs to do for her own protection and for the good of her family, including (ironic though it may seem) her marriage.

Once, when George Washington was a child, his father gave him a brand new hatchet, sized just for him. Elated, little George went out to test out his new hatchet, and cut down one of his father's cherry saplings. His father found the tree cut down, returned to the house, and demanded to know who had done this. Little George replied, "Father, I cannot tell a lie. I did it with my little hatchet." Please note two things related to this famous story: So far as anyone has been able to determine, the story is a complete fabrication, with no basis at all in literal reality. It is a morality fable, nothing more.George Washington was still a real person, an actual historical figure, and the morality tale was designed to highlight personal moral attributes for which Washington was famous.Real people. Fabled lives.

The book of Job is a fable, a fairy tale. Job himself may have been a real man, but the presentation of the book of Job is very obviously the presentation of a morality tale, not a straight history.

Oh, the irony!

Perhaps I misunderstood you when you wrote: An associate of mine is happily married, but is also "in love" with a co-worker...now there is something deeper going on...the feelings are real and he thinks she feels the same. The knowing glances...He feels guilty for having these feelings....should he?...there is a danger because these feelings of "love" or super attraction can be overwhelming. Sounds to me like an inappropriate emotional attachment, whether or not it rises (or sinks) to the level of "emotional affair".

Disagree. If he's involved in an emotional affair, nothing else matters. He must stop.

He should quit working with the woman, change departments if necessary. Or jobs.

Please go to the bishop FOR YOURSELF, not for your husband. Let your husband know you have to go because you must have support, and suggest that he might want to see the bishop first, because you don't want to be the one to "tell on him". But go. Please. You need it, and that's why the bishop is there. You need far more support then you can get from random people on a discussion board. As for excommunication: It is certainly possible, and a man who would do what your husband has done can have no excuse to avoid excommunication. But if he is sincerely repentant, he might avoid it. Please understand that it doesn't matter. Excommunication is beside the point. Your husband must repent and become clean of this betrayal or he will have no part in the kingdom of heaven. If excommunication helps that process, I sincerely hope he is excommunicated. Whatever it takes. All the best to you. Please go get support. Right now. Today, or no later than Sunday if you feel like you have to give your husband time to confess.

Many such stories are false, reducing the credibility of the true ones.If true, such an experience is a sacred thing, not something to be spread around just to impress people.We are told not to cast our pearls before swine. Subjecting such experiences to public ridicule is exactly that.Such stories foster an unhealthy fascination with the deceased and the afterlife. We spent uncounted ages before this life in the Father's presence; soon enough, we will experience the afterlife firsthand, and after the resurrection will live forever. At the moment, we are in a mortal life. Our minds should be here, on our duties in this life, not pining away for something better or burning with desire to know the great mysteries of death -- which we are all going to find out anyway.Those are a few of the reasons. I am sure others could add more.

This thread illustrates one reason we hold such experiences sacred and keep them personal: They often come off sounding of dubious authenticity and frankly superstitious. Sacred things ought not to be held up to public ridicule or contempt, and "ghost stories" ought not to be told at all.

This is ridiculous. You folks want to crucify Traveler for what he didn't say? You want to avoid paying attention to what he wrote and instead demonstrate how wonderfully politically correct you are? Be my guest. If you butcher my words like that, I will gladly call you out and point out your lies and your stupidity. But Traveler is a big boy and can fight his own battles. He doesn't need me to defend his choice of words, a choice that I don't even agree with. Knock yourselves out. I will remove my last several posts.