mdfxdb
-
Posts
712 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by mdfxdb
-
-
3 minutes ago, Latter-Day Marriage said:
It would have been so much better if she had told him before they married but the past can't be changed. The best she can do is tell him now. The longer she hides it, the longer she is lying to him, deceiving him, and the harder it will be for them to reconcile.
Yea, you said it bro. The past can't be changed. However, the worst she can do is tell him now. She repented, her repentance is between her and God. She was under no obligation to disclose anything about forgiven sins. If he asked, and she lied, then that is a different scenario. If she felt at the time no need to disclose the 2nd incident, then she needs to stick by that decision and not hurt him or their relationship.
If she is having trouble forgiving herself, she should see the bishop, or seek professional counseling.
-
Citation is letter from first presidency upon request of dissolution of temple sealing. They make you return the letter, so I don't have it anymore.
Church tracks excommunicated members. They have a system, and formal written letter must be sent to request clearance.
-
"The church affirms that marriage between a man and a woman is essential to the Creator's plan for the eternal destiny of His children........ Sexual relations between persons of the same gender are sinful and undermine the divinely created institution of the family. The Church accordingly affirms defining marriage as the legal and lawful union between a man and a woman." - Handbook
Excommunication is not automatic for same gender marriages. It is only automatic for Murder, and almost always required for incest. Typically excommunication is reserved for those who commit grievous sins, including violation of temple covenants, and are not repentant.
First presidency approval is required to perform temple ordinances for deceased persons, who at the time of their death were excommunicated or had their names removed from Church membership records.
If biological children were born in the covenant, then they do not require subsequent sealing. If their parents got divorced, and had their sealing cancelled, then the children are not sealed to the mother anymore.
- Sunday21 and Just_A_Guy
-
1
-
1
-
16 hours ago, Latter-Day Marriage said:
And how is he going to feel on judgement day when he finds everything out plus the fact that she hid it from him his whole life? Everything done in the shadows will be shouted from the housetops.
Her conscience is bothering her about this for a reason and she should listen to that. You can't become one with somebody you are keeping secrets from. It was wrong of her to keep this from him and she has not repented of that. Repenting of that includes telling him. Yes it will upset him, but if they work through it well they will have a much better relationship than what is possible if she doens't tell him.
On judgement day presumably he will be in the presence of our Savior, and will feel nothing but compassion and the pure love of Christ towards his wife. No shadows there, she visited her bishop, and fully repented, so nothing to shout about. She is and was under no obligation to disclose either incident to her boyfriend/fiance.
If her conscience is bothering her, then she should visit with her bishop, or seek professional counseling. In what way was it wrong of her to keep her prior previously confessed and forgiven transgressions from her boyfriend? Repentance does not include telling him about that stuff.
Yes it will upset him. What benefit to the relationship is there in that? How will it bring them closer? Her need to "clear" her conscience might be considered a selfish act which will leave nothing but pain and hurt in it's wake. The OP needs to figure this out for herself and forgive herself, but not involve her husband. Again, this might involve professional counseling.
-
Whatever you do don't tell him.
You went through the proper channels, repented, and found forgiveness. Now you need to forget about it. That isn't your life anymore, and there is no benefit in telling your husband about it. If he wasn't happy that you told him about the first one, believe me, he wont be happy about the second one.
He will be mad that you did it, and mad that you didn't come clean to him about it, and upset because he will suspect there is more you aren't divulging. Do you really want to relive something for which you have been forgiven of? You do not need your husbands forgiveness on this one. It's over.
Time to put on the big girl panties and move forward.
- VelvetShadow and mrmarklin
-
2
-
Here is your answer:
"It is expected that members will wear the garment both night and day, according to covenants made in the temple. Members should not adjust the garment or wear it contrary to instructions in order to accommodate different styles of clothing, even when such clothing may be generally accepted. The garment should not be removed either entirely or partially, to work in the yard or for other activities that can reasonably be done with the garment worn properly beneath the clothing.
Members who have made covenants in the temple should be guided by the Holy Spirit to answer for themselves personal questions about wearing the garment. These sacred covenants are between the member and the Lord, and the proper wearing of the garment is an outward expression of an inner commitment to follow the Savior Jesus Christ."
I agree with Omega. The answer to your question is do not sleep naked if you are endowed.
-
not enough info to give a proper reply. We can only speculate as to what is going on.
-
OP, how old are you? Why is this so important now? It looks like you've posted a lot on this topic of marriage.
-
OP. do you have a link to the original article? I am of the opinion that women should not compromise their values by marrying outside of the faith.
-
4 hours ago, MormonGator said:
I'm with you, but showering once a week is a terrible idea if you want people to pay attention to you. Like it or not, most people in America/Canada etc (90% of so) shower daily. You need to shower much more frequently than weekly and practice decent hygiene if you want people to interact with you.
Agree, but OP only mentions church on Sundays, so in his case once would be sufficient, as long as it is Sunday morning.
-
5 hours ago, pwrfrk said:
I owe you guys another apology...I think I didn't exactly write the past post like I should have. There seems to be a misunderstanding.
It's not that I'm poor, really. I'm a hermit. Because of that, clean clothes usually are the least of my concerns. I live "out in the sticks" literally. After the past couple of years of turmoil I'm finally getting my finances back in line, but I won't be changing my way of living any time soon.
I simply stay away from people. Past couple of years have been rough on me as I've been going to college trying to get a degree. The more I'm around people the farther away from mankind I want to get.
It's not that I'm anti-social, because I'm not. I have grown fond of privacy, and being around people tends to interfere with that. And sometimes when someone steps too far into my private world, I bark at them. Not intending to be a jerk, really. So far the ward I'm going to is pretty cool and I get along with most anyone there.
I did not write this asking for anything but views and guidance. I appreciate the offers that came through, but I wrote this post for a different reason. You see, being a hermit made me, for the longest time, one that really wouldn't care the least if others were offended by my presence. Changing is hard.
I done said too much, odds are those that know me in real life, now know me here. Grrrr!
I don't really understand either of your posts, but here is my 2 cents:
If you want people to leave you alone, by all means continue to not shower or be clean. Really work on your smell, and the whole hermit thing will work out just fine.
If you want to have people talk to you and interact with you, then take a shower once a week and put on clean clothes. Sunday would be the day for this.
So the real question becomes "what do you want?"
-
OP
You need to move out of your parents home. In fact, you need to move out of your city, and county. If your location is accurate, then you are close to nowhere. You have an education, and need to move where there are jobs for people with educations. Don't make excuses. Take whatever savings you have, move to Houston, or Utah, or LA (one way ticket), make a deposit on an apartment, and find a job. It will be incredibly motivating for you to have to make rent next month.
If you don't move, then you will be stuck with a lifetime of excuses.
-
23 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:
Seriously?
Being disabled is NOT a sin...What are you on? Someone who has epilepsy is NOT simply throwing their life away if they go to the temple. The Lord loves them just as much as anyone else.
In that light, yeah, we are probably done here. I think discussing this with someone who judges people with disabilities as such and condemning them in this manner is probably going to make me get impolite sooner than later, and that's not a good thing for me to do.
So, I think we are done here on this item, or at least I am in regards to you.
The question I asked still stands in regards to what type of legal situation would arise....but probably not towards you on this one.
You're missing the point. Omega isn't stating that disability is a sin. Not at all. He is stating that knowingly engaging in a selfish act is a sin.
If I knowingly take a risk which will inconvenience, or endanger myself or others just because I want to participate in an activity, then one could argue I am making a selfish decision.
On a legal note, if something were to happen to this person while they were in the temple, and the temple denied them access to their service animal, then perhaps there is grounds for a lawsuit. Anyone with $500 can sue anyone for anything rightly or wrongly. Doesn't matter that Religious institutions are exempt from the ADA. Throw a dead person in front of a jury because they couldn't take their dog to church, and see how much sympathy you get.
-
On 3/26/2018 at 4:20 PM, Jason100278 said:
Thank you. I than Heavenly Father for her every day. I am thankful we are both able to attend temple now.
The meeting with the Stake President was Sunday. It was emotionally as bad as I expected. I don't like to talk about my emotional struggles in dealing with my ex wife's death. It doesn't matter how many years have past all that guilt and hurt comes right back to the surface. Hopefully this will be the last time I have to discuss it at church.
Have you had professional counseling to help you deal with your ex-wife's death, and your prior marriage/divorce? If so, then good and get some more. If not I suggest you put off your marriage to your fiance, until you are in a more emotionally stable position.
Your comments about the 4th party and the 1st presidency denote a certain amount of pride that should not be present during this process. The policies of the church exist for a reason, even if we don't like them.
-
Go see your bishop. Come clean with your husband. Take the consequences like a grown up. You knew what you were getting into, now it's time to face the music.
Likely outcomes are varied depending on both your level of repentance (as far as church discipline), divorce will be in play since you committed adultery. Your husband will have much to say on the matter. If divorce becomes a serious topic, then get an attorney and make sure you and your kids are taken care of. Don't discount your culpability...
-
2 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:
I agree with what you say. Im just saying that true love and compatability come first before the typicsl checklist-
1. Returned missionary? Check
2. Active LDS? Check
3. Will definitely marry in temple? Check
4. If all of said above requirements are fulfilled you can marry him.
Anyway, thats the point I was making. We must seek a compatable partner. That person may or may not be a member.
I would agree with others who state that your way of thinking is backwards. I would number 1-3 in that order as pre-requisites to even dating someone seriously. You may or may not believe it, but you marry who you date. If you do not have strict criteria for that person prior to serious dating, then you are setting yourself up for disappointment, and pain in the future. Even when all criteria are met, marriages don't work out. It would seem imprudent to go in a direction where your odds of success in eternity are even further diminished.
Love is great and all, but I've never been able to pay the rent with love, never been able to make a car payment, go on vacation or support my loved ones monetarily, or spiritually with "love". True love as described by one of the earlier posters transcends all of the Disney princess fairy tales. Who cares how comparable you are when items 1-3 aren't checked? Even Charlie Manson managed to get women to fall in love with him.
-
5 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:
"When we convene as a Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve, our meeting rooms become rooms of revelation. The Spirit is palpably present. As we wrestle with complex matters, a thrilling process unfolds as each Apostle freely expresses his thoughts and point of view. Though we may differ in our initial perspectives, the love we feel for each other is constant. Our unity helps us to discern the Lord’s will for His Church.
In our meetings, the majority never rules! We listen prayerfully to one another and talk with each other until we are united. Then when we have reached complete accord, the unifying influence of the Holy Ghost is spine-tingling! We experience what the Prophet Joseph Smith knew when he taught, “By union of feeling we obtain power with God.”7 No member of the First Presidency or Quorum of the Twelve would ever leave decisions for the Lord’s Church to his own best judgment!" Russell M Nelson
“The First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles, called and ordained to hold the keys of the priesthood, have the authority and responsibility to govern the Church, to administer its ordinances, to expound its doctrine, and to establish and maintain its practices.” Gordon B Hinkley
“… any major questions of policy, procedures, programs, or doctrine are considered deliberately and prayerfully by the First Presidency and the Twelve together.” ibid.
"And make no mistake about it: the Lord directs His Church through living prophets and apostles." M Russell Ballard
"This general conference was convened at a time when there is such confusion and such danger that our young people hardly know which way they can walk. Having been warned through the revelations that it would be this way, the prophets and apostles have always been shown what to do." Boyd K Packer
Not sure what you are trying to prove with the above. I think Omega is saying that not all general conference talks are scripture/doctrine. I think you are saying the church is run by committee. Your quotes are great, but we are a theocracy, and the Prophet is the only person who is authorized to posses and exercise all priesthood keys. There have been no fundamental doctrinal changes or scriptural changes for a very long time. The most recent change with the organization of the Elders Quorum is an inspired policy change, and a good example of inspired policy vs. doctrine/scripture.
-
The 14 points speech is interesting. it has been used in/referenced heavily in general conference several times. I have problems with the speech as presented. First, as Omega pointed out, he wasn't the prophet at the time. Second, the speech was given at BYU to a select audience, and probably not given with the contextual understanding that it would be disseminated as "doctrine" for the rest of the church. Third, have you read the 14 points?????? wow!!!
Point 5: The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act in any matter at any time.
If we do in fact believe the 14 points to be correct, then there are fundamental problems with accepting conference talks as scripture, and we might even have fundamental problems with our current cannon of scripture as we currently know it. We can all agree that there are/were many revelations that were left out of Doctrine and Covenants correct? Why was that?
-
1. Get married. This will fix the Law of Chastity issues.
2. See your Bishop. He will take it from there. If you are truly repentant, you will make it to the temple, and so will your husband.
3. Don't wait to do number 1. if you put off number 1 it will be more difficult to do number 2
-
I guess I am deficient. I'm only a 9, and your husband is a 12.....
which by the way is a lie because there is no such thing as a 12.....
-
This is the weirdest thread ever.....
OP manages to pay off a 6 figure home in a few years. Good for him (passive brag?)
OP prays and gets confirmation that it is ok to go into debt. God / spirit confirmed this is ok. (passive brag?)
OP justifies the expenditure because he makes so much money and is so frugal. (passive brag?) I find this interesting because a $200K mortgage for 15 yrs at 3.25% is about $1,400/mo at 26.4% of OP net income means OP is taking home $64,000 per year more or less.....Which means OP is living off of less than half of his take home if he is paying off his house in 5-7 years. wow........what's for dinner top ramen? Spagetti o's?
OP then takes all of this info to an anonymous web- site asking if we think it is ok, even though he prayed about it and knows it's ok?
Weird.......
-
Interesting... wonder if they got tired of chasing down the people who constantly post the pdf of it on the internet...
-
4 hours ago, Subir Valhalla said:
I'm a solid 7-8 being overweight if I lost 20 lbs. I'm a 9. I'm actually scared of losing weight because I remember being thinner and have more attention from women. I don't want to blow up my family, and I don't want to be unfaithful. I've learned that sad song of sorrow before and look to learn from error of my past.
I feel your pain. As a fellow 9, I am accustomed to unwanted and unsolicited attention from the opposite sex.
My advice is to put your attraction to the younger sister out of your mind. It is normal to be attracted to women. If she is an attractive girl, and you are attracted to her then congratulations you are normal.
IT CAN'T GO PAST THAT
If you find you are unable to control your thoughts/desires/actions then seek professional help, see your bishop. DO NOT ruin your family and your life over this.
- Subir Valhalla and mrmarklin
-
1
-
1
-
1 hour ago, Turtle said:
I have been married to my spouse 12 years now. We have 4 kids together. He is not a member. I have been a member all my life but chose to attend his church. My kids and I have been going to to his church for 12 yrs now. Now that I am 30 I feel an empty piece that is missing within me. I have not given up on my beliefs towards the Mormon church. I want to come back to church. But my husband says I will only break up our family. He is against my will to go back to church as LDS. Hes always have been against it. What do i do? Do I risk my entire marriage ? Pls advise any advice.
You made a decision 12 years ago to go to his church. You also married a non-member. 12 years and 4 kids ago that all seemed like a good idea. Now you feel something is missing.........
You will not like my advice, but here it is: Your marriage is first, your children are second. You are reaping consequences of your bad decisions. Do not sacrifice the sanctity of marriage or break up your family by planting your flag on this. Once your kids are grown, do what you want. Until then sleep in the bed you made. If you are going to his church and he is an otherwise righteous man and good provider/husband, then you have no reason to go against his wishes.
- anatess2, NightSG, NeuroTypical and 4 others
-
7
Past sexual sins and new marriage
in Marriage and Relationship Advice
Posted · Edited by mdfxdb
D&C 58:42
Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more.
Luke 12: 2-3
2 For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hid, that shall not be known.
3 Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.
There is a problem here. Based on your interpretation, somehow the husband is going to find out about his wife's transgressions. However, if she has repented, then the Lord will remember them no more. If the Lord remembers no more, then Luke doesn't apply. Add to that Luke is referring to hypocrisies in teaching directly to his Disciples. For me, what would be the point of confessing to my Bishop, receiving forgiveness from the Lord if "all will be revealed" at some future date?
Unless OP lied to her future husband about guy #2, then she has no reason to disclose, or feel guilty. You are correct, we are not going to agree on this. I do agree with Omega somewhat in that OP will need to be careful if she discusses with her bishop this issue because he might tell her to tell her husband, and that would constitute bad advice. However, I will qualify that her bishop may be better informed than any of us on this presuming of course she tells him the full truth. In that event the advice to disclose to her husband may be correct advice. maybe.