ryanh
-
Posts
865 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by ryanh
-
-
A successful marriage most certainly IS work, but . . . a "battlefield"?Hello, sbg. Honey, you will always love your husband. And who said that marriage was not at some times a battlefield? I want you to go out and find the most interesting historical war book on the market, and read it cover to cover (even stop to notice the pictures). For the most part, you will find that the strength of your spirit is much like that of a courageous soldier on the battlegrounds- wounded, negleted and sometime all alone, but fighting hard and strong for a good cause. Come on. I've been there with you; I made it through the barbed wire and so can you. Shucks, at times I'm still tugging at the wires, but it is worth it. Stop thinking about yourself so much and focus on your husband's and the kids' needs for a change.
If our spouse, or our marriage is viewed as an 'enemy', or the relationship is viewed as a hated contest of conquering, I dare say that marriage is going to be a miserable one!Such a relationship in no way shape or form is a marriage that is progressing towards the Celestial standard. No, that is not a marriage - that is the lowly state of roommates with financial ties and occasional 'benefits'. Such is wrong in light of the higher law, and steps should be taken to repent and change the nature of the relationship, starting with one's own view of what a marriage is supposed to be. The same goes for the OP. I think you will get some clarity over your own extreme ambivalence when you rightly view your marriage for how truly broken it is.
-
Elizabeth: As I heard the following talk recently, I thought of this thread and your current dilemma with postponing baptism. Elder Holland lays out well why you are experiencing opposition.
-
I'm not sure why there is a presumption that the OP is considering divorce out of the blue, undiscussed.
I told him that once it is over my support of him is gone and he looked kind of shocked, but I mean it.
-
Roxi, as I was having to come to terms with the end of my 14 year marriage, what gave me the most comfort was a confirmation that it was a correct path to follow.
In general terms, when I brought my decision, and all that I had done before Heavenly Father, and earnestly sought His counsel in all my decisions, peace did come. It wasn’t a peace because I thought I had done whatever I could, but the peace that comes when He confirms that efforts are acceptable. It actually was an extremely spiritual experience, despite the situation giving rise to it. Like the Prophet Joseph in Liberty Jail, some of our hardest experiences can become some of the most rewarding if only we will let them. (Lessons From Liberty Jail)
Like most struggles in life, I suspect that achieving peace with a decision to divorce has no set path. It probably is something that has as many solutions as there are people that actually go through the process. Clearly, there are more healthy ways than others (resentment, anger, etc among the least healthy), but you need to find what works for you. My one biggest suggestion is to seek Heavenly Father’s guidance. When you have directions from the Spirit, even if the path may be hard, at least you can know it will all work out for the best in the end.
If you are not sure yourself whether you have done all you can, and are not at a point yet to take a ‘decision’ to Heavenly Father for ratification, one book I would suggest is Too Good To Leave, Too Bad To Stay. The author does an excellent job walking a person from the point of the catch 22 of relationship ambivalence to the point of having clear information needed to make a well measured decision.
Behind The Smiling Faces was not a tremendously helpful book, but it did lay out nicely, in first person recounting, of the struggles other LDS have gone through when making the decision to end a marriage that was sealed in the temple. It’s been quite a while since I read it, but if I recall correctly, I think you will find therein people recounting some parts of how they dealt with the emotions and came to grips with the death of what was supposed to be an eternal relationship.
Best of luck to you. It is a tremendously hard process. One of those proverbial situations I wouldn’t wish on an enemy. Spend lots of time on your knees. Seek and obtain personal revelation. Our Father in Heaven knows the best way through this for your, and your daughters’ particular circumstances.
-
As I read, reread, and then read again all the advice I could find on LDS.ORG in regards to divorce and how much effort one should put into a marriage, it was my perception that quotes such as Faust's are aimed at individuals that give up to quickly. Esp Pres Kimball's oft repeated admonitions. Quotes by General Authorities, when taken in full context, are clearly aimed at those that simply give up all too soon - without giving it their all.
Let's look at Faust's quote a little more closely Rex: He doesn't point out that one spouse or the other needs to be "destroy[ing their partner's] dignity as a human being”. He is not saying that one person has to be absolutely a monster to justify divorce. He points to a "prolonged and apparently irredeemable relationship".
When one spouse plays the good person for many years (remember the OP points out that there was a FIRST separation 12 years ago!!!), and the other spouse does not respond for that "prolonged" period of time, it DOES become dignity destroying. The basic lack of respect and affection, esp from a typical woman's standpoint, is demoralizing. Just as demoralizing as withholding of physical affection would be to the typical man.
I'm not going to be tossing pebbles at Roxie as ‘needing to give it more effort’ when clearly there have been problems for well more than a decade. Esp from the (albeit one-sided) perspective shared that she has tried and tried, but he is not upholding his end of the marital contract, and she is now at the end of her rope. Just because divorce is not an ideal (and often not even a good) solution.
The kind of marriage required for exaltation—eternal in duration and godlike in quality—does not contemplate divorce. In the temples of the Lord, couples are married for all eternity. But some marriages do not progress toward that ideal. . . .
When a marriage is dead and beyond hope of resuscitation, it is needful to have a means to end it.
Elder Oaks - Divorce
How about we deal with advice of how cope when one is at the end of their rope rather than a over-generalized ‘you need to work harder’? How about something of use rather than telling the one struggling that they are the one not doing enough?
-
After removing the sheet from the dryer (or clothes line) . . . remove the other fitted sheet from the bed, and place the clean one on the bed. Roll up the removed sheet and store in a laundry basket out of sight until it is time to change sheets, and then do the laundry. Repeat.
Viola! No folding of the impossible to fold sheets necessary! That's my guy-solution for the problem.
-
How do you fit in the impossibility that "unfaithful [LDS]" were around to remove "plain and precious" parts out of the stick of Judah at a time when removing such parts would have been possible?This might be a bit blunt and I would like to know what others think of this but my feelings about who the "great and abominable church" and also know in revelations as “the great whore” and “Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth.” Is more accurately displayed by unfaithful members the “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints “ more than another denomination.
Why would Nephi bother to describe systems and organizations if he was talking about individual choices? Clearly, when Nephi wanted to address individual choices, he did not beat around the bush in doing so. So, how does a "church" equate "unfaithful members". I can't understand where you are coming from without your fleshing out your thoughts more.
I also take the position that calling all "unfaithful" members as "display[ing]" the epitome of the mother of harlots, and abominations of the earth is painting a diverse group with an awfully wide brush stroke. Are you instead meaning to refer to a select subset that are wolves in sheep’s clothing?
-
Dahlia, the understanding of what Nephi was speaking of has undergone some shift as the study of what lead to loss of plain and precious truths has advanced. Early protestant efforts were aimed at demonizing the Catholic church, and many early LDS picked up where they left off. However, more recent research notes that "plain and precious" parts were removed from the scriptures before the Catholic church was even organized in the third and fourth century.
Noel B. Reynolds gave a interesting discourse on all of this at BYU-Idaho in 2004. See: http://www.byub.org/talks/Talk.aspx?id=1010 A small part of that devotional is reproduced below.
Myth 3: The Roman Catholic church specifically is the great and abominable church spoken of in Nephi’s vision.
Given the dependence of the early LDS writers on Protestant historians, who were themselves often anti-Catholic, it is not surprising that Latter-day Saints tended to interpret Nephi’s vision in this way. The Protestant emphasis on the corruption in medieval Christianity naturally suggested the Catholic Church as the church of the devil described by Nephi in his vision. But if we look more closely at these scriptures, we will see that the church of the devil arose centuries before the Catholic Church was established as such, and we will see that it includes much more than just one such organization. There is much more to it.
In the vision recorded in 1 Nephi 13, Nephi saw that the great and abominable church was formed in the first century when the record of the Jews went forth from the Jews to the Gentiles (v 25-26) and that it was founded in opposition to the Church of God (v. 5), which tells us that the two existed simultaneously. Nephi saw further that the devil’s church took away many parts of the gospel, including the covenants, as verse 26 tells us, and later took away many precious things out of the Bible (v. 28). Now, in the first century, the Christian scriptures consisted principally of the Old Testament, available principally in a Greek translation, called the Septuagint. A few years ago I had a personal experience that confirmed Nephi’s account in a dramatic way. I was a guest of the director of the Vatican Library in Rome, and he brought out their fourth century copy of the complete Bible for me to see—Codex Vaticanus B. The first page we looked at had numerous erasures, additions, and changes written right on the page in different inks and different hands! I asked, pointing to some of these, “What is that?” The reply: “Oh, that’s where they made corrections.” Over the last two decades, many New Testament scholars have argued convincingly that the final texts of the gospels and the epistles that were eventually canonized, took shape during a long period in which they were modified as necessary to support the emerging theological orthodoxy among the leaders of the Christian churches. Their principal evidence comes from scriptural quotations in second century documents which are different and which would not have supported the theological orthodoxy that emerged later.
Nor did this process of change go unnoticed in those early centuries. Paul warned the Thessalonians that some people might try to stir them up with false letters addressed from the apostles. Peter said that many in his day were “wresting” the scriptures, or distorting their true meaning (2 Pet 3:15-16). Ignatius of Antioch, a bishop who was martyred around 110 AD said that he could not write down all of the teachings of the apostles because they were too sacred. Justin Martyr, whom we mentioned before, accused Jewish leaders of deliberately removing passages from the Old Testament. During the second century, many bishops and writers in the church accused “heretics” of changing the scriptures. Tertullian of Carthage claimed that Marcion, a leader in what is now Turkey, deliberately cut out pieces of the scriptures that he did not like, and Clement of Alexandria accused some people of rewriting parts of the gospels. By the third century, the accusations of changes in the scriptures die down. However, we have virtually no texts predating the third century by which to verify this. Less than one percent of the existing New Testament fragments can be dated to the second century, and those are mere fragments. We also have other writings, letters primarily, from the second century which quote scriptures and these quotations frequently differ from what we have in the New Testament today.
In 1 Nephi 13:4-9, Nephi lists several identifying features of the church of the devil. He says they will torture and slay the saints. They will bind down the people with yokes of iron, which recalls Joseph Smiths comparison of creeds to iron yokes (Doctrine and Covenants 123:7-8 ). Nephi further tells us that this church was founded by the devil, followed materialistic pursuits, and sought worldly praise. He further tells us that there are only two churches, the church of God, and the church of the Devil, which is the great and abominable church. It seems, then, that Nephi did not have a single ecclesiastical organization in mind, but rather he was describing all organizations (for that is the original meaning of the word church, or ekklesia, in Greek) that sought worldly rewards and opposed the Saints of God. In summing up the constituents of this evil church, Nephi later says,
For the time speedily shall come that all churches which are built up to get gain, and all those who are built up to get power over the flesh, and those who are built up to become popular in the eyes of the world, and those who seek the lusts of the flesh and the things of the world, and to do all manner of iniquity; yea, in fine, all those who belong to the kingdom of the devil are they who need fear, and tremble, and quake; they are those who must be brought low in the dust; they are those who must be consumed as stubble; and this is according to the words of the prophet (1 Nephi 22:23).
Furthermore, as Nephi tells us later, many people throughout the ages preceding the Restoration and the Second Coming would be true, humble followers of Christ who erred only because of their leaders (2 Nephi 28:14). We know further that the Spirit continued to strive with men and that some men were inspired. Nephi said of Columbus that he was inspired by God. Joseph Smith, when he read Foxe’s Book of the Martyrs which records all those who have died for the faith from the early Apostles to the Protestant movements, said that many of these people were true disciples who would receive salvation. President John Taylor said in 1873, “There were men in those dark ages who could commune with God, and who, by the power of faith, could draw aside the curtain of eternity and gaze upon the invisible world… have the ministering of angels, and unfold the future destinies of the world” (JD 16:197). As the Prophet Joseph Smith revealed in these latter days, all those who died without knowing the gospel, who would have embraced it and lived it had they had the chance, will be heirs of the celestial kingdom. We must, therefore, be careful when we judge what the final state of others will be.
-
Also, consider your meds (still on anti-depressant?). Some meds contributed to my insomnia also, and cutting back on the dose helped some.
Doctors will often say that depression leads to sleep disturbances. I have (yet another) my own theory - when apnea or severe insomnia is present, the chronic sleep deprivation eventually leads to depression. I can look back over the last 20 years and see a very strong correlation between the amount of sleep I get, and the resulting mood. For me, sleep drives the low mood and related issues. In my case, depression absolutely did not drive sleep problems. Apnea and schedule restrictions hurt my sleep, which in turn hurt my mood. 10 years of reduced sleep (effectively 4 - 5 hours) takes it's toll.
Again, I would urge you to continue aggressively treating the apnea and get it under control. For me, it was the root of many issues (insomnia, dysthymia, frequent illnesses, etc).
-
Like Pam, the sleep specialists I have consulted with (at the UofU Sleep Center) advise against sleep aids when apnea is present. It only compounds the issue.
It may seem counter intuitive, but in my case, I do believe much of my insomnia arose from the apnea. Only by getting the apnea under better control has the insomnia subsided. I suspect that the constant interruption of sleep predisposes our brains to not want to go back to sleep - even when we are exhausted.
Have you looked into mandibular advancement devices (if your apnea is obstructive)? What about devices to keep you from lying on your back? see: http://www.lds.net/forums/health-exercise/13562-sleep-problems-2.html#post489684
What about adjusting your pressure?
Keep looking for solutions to treat the apnea. Perhaps it won’t be as successful at resolving the insomnia for you as it was for me, but I really do suspect the two are connected for many people.
-
The quickest way to get me to shut my eyes and ears to an opinion is to act as if I have to listen to (and accept) yours, but cannot have hope of the same in return. I'm not sure you really are grasping how hypocritical your demanding acceptance of your opinion is.
-
Hayky: I'm presuming you are familiar with the story of Abraham and the command to sacrifice his son. What do you think his feelings where when the choice was presented to him to either follow God, or do what he wanted - keep his son safe? I would suppose that Abraham was figuratively being torn apart inside also.
I had an experience in my life recently where there was something I really didn't want to give up. I was torn between keeping the status quo, or following what I knew God wanted (knew in a way similar to how you know you need to go back to church - the Spirit is prompting you to do so).
I remained in an awful dilemma until the point that I prayed and let Heavenly Father know I was willing to give up what I wanted to follow His path for me. That was no easy feat! It tore me up inside something awful - for the 'thing' I was being asked to give up wasn't inherently bad - no vice or questionable item - in fact it was good.
It was only when I made the decision to follow Heavenly Father's promptings wholly contrary to what I wanted that the figurative "tearing me apart" ceased. Know what? Like Abraham, in the end, I didn't have to give up what I desired.
I suspect that you too are being tested. Can you too find the will to give up what you want most in order to follow what you know is right? I suspect you will be happy with the results. But, you have to really, truly, reach that point of being willing to give up what you want in order for the “tearing apart” to end. Not just “I’ll do so in order that I quit hurting”, but actually be willing to give up what you want.
I suppose the only other option is to shut out the Holy Ghost and no longer give it place in your heart so that you no longer feel drawn to what Heavenly Father wants for you. I don’t think that will end up being a positive experience.
-
Note: Chapter headings are NOT scripture. (neither are footnotes) They are were simply inserted to assist with study.
-
Welcome Powerja.
Dang, my one solution is ruled out.
I always turn to an extra large helping of Rocky Road ice cream. 
-
All of us who find that we need to take maintenance medications for the rest of our lives struggle with that at first. It takes time to come to grips with it. Very commonly, after a period of usage and finding all is well, we might begin to wonder if we are "cured", and try to wean off the meds. I did that at least 5 times in the first 10 years of taking maintenance medications.
Alas, with certain conditions, we are no more "cured" by medication than our poor eyesight is "cured" by prescriptions glasses or contacts. Thankfully, we live in a day when we have been blessed with corrective prescriptions for more parts of our temporal bodies than our eyes – including ‘out of focus’ brains.
-
Joseph F. McConkie, emeritus professor of Ancient Scripture at BYU, makes an interesting observation about the phrase "insofar as translated correctly". Dravin hit upon this thought a little bit.
Joseph F. McConkie indicated that we often use the word translation as singularly meaning the process of changing from one language to another. However, the latin root of the word means 'to hand over', or to 'bear across'. The issue is about transmission of texts, not the issue of the actual act of changing from one language to the other. He gave his opinion that the correct reading of the meaning of the phrase should be read as "insofar as it is transmitted correctly."
In short, there is much missing from canonized texts. Not so much the fault of inept or corrupt translators, but that through the process of selecting what to include it the Septuagint, and other canonized tests, there was a failure to transmit important parts. Many plain and precious parts were lost in this manner.
-
"The" Septuagint? As I understand it, there were many versions of the Septuagint. And it underwent many revisions and modifications in the centuries immediately preceding Christ's birth. So, pointing to the Septuagint as a stable foundation seems to be a bit of a fallacy.That's right. The Septuigent is perhaps the most reliable OT text as a written text preserved through the centuries and it was also divisive among the Jewish community some accepting and some rejecting it. It's important to note that this was the version included in the original Christian canon and was the basis for translations into Latin and other vernaculars.
-
Saintish, as one that has had far worse happen to me than you described in your other thread, and had to get past it myself, I say to you: get over it already, or you yourself will destroy every last bit of testimony you have. At this point, your SP is not the one harming you. You are.
-
You two can likely figure out if the marriage is right or not. You have a right to have direction from Heavenly Father in such issues.
What worries me is how the in-laws are already affecting the relationship. If you think poor decisions by in-laws regarding when and how to interact with you to is painful now, it is possible you are in for a surprise to see how bad it can be during marriage. Been there, done that, it's no fun.
You are not marrying just your fiance. Hope as we might, when we marry someone, we marry their parents - esp if our spouse has a close relationship with them. At this point, if I were you, and having gone through what I did with my ex in-laws, I'd be very seriously reconsidering if they are the type of people that I would want in my life.
-
I liked Hugh Nibley's thoughts on why there is often disparity between the scientific community’s and religion’s understandings.
According to the "science" of today and yesterday, everything about the Savior – miraculous healings, His resurrection, and especially the atonement - is an impossibility. On matters of my faith, I am in no rush to attempt to merge my understanding of the two in many matters.The last word is a testimony of the gospel that comes only by direct revelation. Our Father in Heaven speaks it; and if it were in perfect agreement with the science of today, it would surely be out of line with the science of tomorrow. Let us not, therefore, seek to hold God to the learned opinions of the moment when he speaks the language of eternity.
-
Well . . . what size house are you looking to rent? Just so happens that I'm clearing mine out right now, and have considered renting it out.
Seriously!!! It's in the south end of Clearfield, two stone's throw away from Layton, 3 miles to the freeway, 3 bed, 2.5 bath, BIG yard, . . . . I'll send you a PM. -
Using on-line meeting sites I met plenty.
Have you considered, or have you dated divorcees? I found that divorcees were far more willing (and able) to discuss and understand such issues as you are facing. I met some great divorced LDS women who were pretty adamant they would not be 'neglected' sexually like they were in their previous marriage. I'd bet $0.02 that such a woman would take comfort from your struggles as she would feel confident that aspect of a relationship wouldn't be the same as what she experienced before.
-
How about a third:
I have wept in the night
for the shortness of sight
that to somebody's need
I may have been blind;
But I never have yet
felt a tinge of regret
for being a little to kind.
author unknown
-
Jakol, I have seen exactly what you are talking about in regards to different bishops applying different standards. It was certainly frustrating when I was dealing with such seemingly inconsistent standards. I feel for you. I'm likely one to lean towards the B's that measure effort and progress rather than absolute perfection.
I also understand the dating and temple recommend issue. I was there myself not too long ago, and yes, the temple recommend holding was a critical pre-screening applied to me. I can only imagine trying to explain that, but keep interest alive. Tough.
I'm a light sleeper too, although my frustrations while single (post divorce) were not something that caused me to awaken or prevented me from falling asleep. That has got to be maddening. When I don't get enough sleep, my ability to resist even donuts goes way down, (
), so I can imagine it would make your situation all the harder. Have you ever considered sleep aids? Perhaps if you took a prescription sleeping aid at those times when most tempted, the issue would self-resolve like its supposed to?I don't know what your situation is like, but for me, serious dating and remaining chaste was much harder than abstaining from masturbation. I might suggest you consider finding someone in a situation similar to yourself, who really wants to be married in the temple, but is willing to be married civilly first to get there, and go that route. If you have been trying this for years, and the end result is repeatedly the same, perhaps its time to try something different.
First though, I would see a doc about getting a prescription sleep aid if I were you.
I think I hate my husband
in Marriage and Relationship Advice
Posted
And then how does Gatekeeper's or your post in any way relate to the OP? This thread not about tackling in-laws, financial difficulties, etc. This is about direct interpersonal relations.