james12

So a Catholic assumes there spouse is irrational? Wouldn't that bad assumption destroy the relationship since the Catholic would not trust their spouse or listen to them on the matter? That is one of the reasons why I am saying this issue of control needs to be dealt with first, before any give and take on religious matters is discussed.

This is not a valid comparison because if my wife were planning to shot herself in the head I would assume she had some mental disorder and was not thinking rationally. Choosing to be baptized into a different religion does not imply irrationality.

Yes the law exists to instill fear of punishment and it is needed to bring about righteousness. But religion does not end there. If it was all about fear and punishment religion would be very disappointing indeed and I might agree with how the author of the article puts it, "Behaving morally because of a hope of reward or a fear of punishment is not morality. Morality is not bribery or threats. Religion is bribery and threats. Humans have morality. We don’t need religion." The problem here is that he misunderstands the purpose or end of religion. In the end we will find that we are not bound by law, because law applies to the disobedient as Paul said, "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and the sinners..." (1 Tim 1:9). The righteous man is clean and follows the Spirit, which is amenable to circumstances, which gently whispers. There is no fear of punishment or threat. It is as Mormon said, "For behold that all little children are alive in Christ, and also all they that are without the law. For the power of redemption cometh on all them that have no law...for repentance is unto them that are under condemnation and under the curse of a broken law." (Moroni 8:22,24). This theory of eat or be eaten must be banished from our collective thought. The animal kingdom is much complex and does not evolve solely by competition. Yes looking by species only it often involves prey and predator, but viewing it from a larger ecological standpoint it involves self organizing systems, whole ecosystems that increase complexity and order in the world.

So will he allow you to be baptized even if he disagrees with your choice? Because I am LDS and that is what I would do if my wife came home and told me she was going to be baptized Catholic. Certainly we would discuss it, and I would try to dissuade her. I would even let her know in clear terms what a mistake it would be to join them. But at the end of the day, I would allow her the freedom to choose. That is how a good marriage works, that is how the Lord works. Know this, that ev’ry soul is free To choose his life and what he’ll be; For this eternal truth is giv’n: That God will force no man to heav’n. (Anon., ca. 1805, Boston. Included in the first LDS hymnbook, 1835)

From the church's perspective it is right to not baptize someone without the spouse's consent. The church is not about creating a wedge between a husband and wife. However, I am approaching this from a different angle. This is about how a husband should act within his marriage. It is not right for him to control his wife and not allow her to be baptized if she so chooses.

I have a problem with him telling you you cannot get baptized. A relationship must be one of give and take, not control by one party or the other. I have discussed passages from the Bible for years with Catholics. Almost none of them have changed their view because of what I have shown them, even when they don't have a good explanation. Holding you hostage to his interpretation of the Bible does not seem right. I think you need to talk to him about how your beliefs can be different and how you need freedom to choose your own way.

A few years ago on the Catholic Answers Forum he and I had quite a few debates about the Book of Mormon and the LDS church. He told me on that forum that he had decided to come back to church. This was a complete shock to me. We had a few conversations and then I didn't here much until Elder Uchdorf's talk. Right after his talk I sent him an email telling him that it sounded very similar to his story. He wrote me right back and confirmed that it was about him. He is a testament to me that anyone can come back to the church.

This is a tough road you have chosen, and remember that through the hard times you did choose this, so at all costs avoid blaming your husband or being frustrated with the in-laws etc.. You must not let this spin into anger, frustration, or discord. My remarks are based on the assumption that you want your family to stay together even if they do not join the LDS church. Now here are my thoughts on what to do. In this situation there are many relationships and situations to consider: 1. You attending: If you want to go to the LDS church then you should be free to make that choice. It is your choice, not his, although you must be as kind and gentle as possible. Keep in mind that this may come at a cost. He may resent your choice for a long, long, time. It may create a wedge in your relationship that does not heal. You know your husband best so you can probably guess what is going to happen. 2. Your children: This situation is even more tricky than the first and I would not tackle it right away. If your children ask to attend with you, and your husband disagrees, then have them continue to attend his church. Don't force your children to chose between you and your husband's church, this may create a wedge in your family. I know this is hard, but you must first focus on getting yourself back to church and you simply can't face every situation now. My suggestion, if one of your kids continues to ask to go to the LDS church, work it out with your husband first behind closed doors. You must present a united front to them even if this rips your heart out. Work it out together. That may mean they continue to go to his church until they are 18 years old. 3. Your husband converting: If you go back to church he will have to make all sort of changes so I would not focus on this at first either. There may be times when you can approach him and ask him to read the Book of Mormon or have discussion with him about your faith, but you should almost never push him. Just as you should have the choice to attend the LDS church you likewise need to give him the freedom to attend his church. If one day he gains a testimony it will likely throw a wedge between himself and his family so this has to be his choice. 4. In-laws acceptance: You may never get this. If by some miracle your children and husband join, the best you could probably expect is grudging consent from the extended family. There's my two cents. It's a tough road. Trust on and hope on but be loving and kind. If you want your marriage to be eternal then keep it together while in this life, otherwise it will never make it in the eternities.

lfh2d, Just to add a prophets words to what has already been said:

Trust is vital to relationships with men and with God. When we carry mistrust to the extreme no one can get in. Not our wife, not our children, not even God. He will stay in that room you placed him in knocking to come out but you must open the door. With regard to this subject, I ran across this statement and tend to agree with it: Also worth considering are Elder Packer's words:

I did find it on Open Library here: https://openlibrary.org/books/OL1419363M/Our_search_for_happiness

KY93, There is a little book about our beliefs I have always liked it's called Our Search For Happiness. It was written by Elder Ballard, one of the apostles. It covers our beliefs in a very conversational tone and has a good spirit about it. It does not replace the Book of Mormon but if your in the mood for a little lighter reading and want to understand how we think a little better, this is the book.

There is a quote from President Monson that has kind of become a Mormon platitude. It goes, "find joy in the journey". In general I like the quote but I have always been a little disappointed because it is missing an important word. He was talking about life and how we should live it. He says, "This is our one and only chance at mortal life—here and now. I plead with you not to let those most important things pass you by as you plan for that illusive and nonexistent future when you will have time to do all that you want to do. Instead, find joy in the journey—now" ("Finding Joy in the Journey", GC Oct 2008, italics added). Did you catch it? It's the word "now". Some time ago after reading this talk and others, the spirit whispered to me that religion is intended to bring us joy now, not simply tomorrow, not after we die, now! This started changing how I lived my life. I started asking myself questions like, "Am I miserable today? Why?" I started to realize that much of my religious posturing had not brought me closer to the joy I sought. My religion was not taking me where I needed to go and something was wrong. That may be what you are feeling and if it is I'm here to say that that feeling my indeed be very right. Now, as others have done I must provide a word of caution. Because you have found that you need to change do not make the mistake of assuming that sin is what is missing. That path will lead to almost nothing but despair. But make no mistake, some of what we call "religion" is not the real thing and instead of providing joy can bring us down. Maybe I can provide an example from my own life. I once went on a date with a girl who would not watch any movie that had a swear word in it. As we were talking I asked her if she had seen The Truman Show. She asked, "does it have a swear word?" I was shocked. I didn't know if it had a swear word! How was I going to remember that? After all, that was totally beside the point. The movie was not about some swear word. It was about experiencing life! It revealed what made us human and our need to connect with real people. She had cut herself off from that because the movie might have a swear word. Now that is just one example, but if your life is composed of these types of rules in all sorts of areas your false sense of "religion" will cut you off from living to the fullest. Jesus him self once said, "I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly" (John 10:10). I urge you to go and find the abundant life. Use the spirit as your guide and let go of so many rules. After all, that was a large part of Jesus' message. The people were bound down by the Law of Moses. Over and over again Jesus broke the rules. Not God's laws but the false structures that men had built up. Let the spirit be your guide. Find the false structures you have built up that are causing you to not connect with people and situations that will allow you to live in joy today.

As Maureen pointed out, this is definitely too narrow of a window. In fact, I believe it is important to sometimes look at sources outside the church. That does not mean I take every report, including those anti-LDS, and listen to all they have to say. But different views, so long as they are sincere and approached in the right attitude, can give us perspective and broaden our understanding. For instance, the church has published articles discussing difficult topics in the last few years. It seems to me that these were related to the comments about the church white washing their history. For this reason and many others, we need to be open to and recognize opposite opinions, even if we ultimately disagree.

1. Jesus satisfied the law of Moses in that he kept the requirements of it. No other person could have kept all the statutes except for Jesus. 1a. Our own imperfections coupled with Adam's transgression cut us off from full and complete communication with God. Jesus, upon entering this world suffered no such separation. Because he was more advanced than us he was not cut off from God as are we. 1b. I believe there is a mystery here. Jesus is called the first born in the spirit and the only begotten in the flesh. His unique status was earned over time before entering this mortality. The fact that is mortal Father was God is due to his obedience and not simply his genes. 2. Christ had progressed further than us before this earth life. For that reason he was the Lord. 2a. Yes Jesus did obtain his pre-mortal intelligence and power through obedience. 3. All beings, including ourselves, are independent in their own sphere. Like Jesus, a portion of who we are is not created, nor indeed can be as Joseph Smith stated in the King Follet discourse. We are free to act. God cannot take it away, only we ourselves through our own disobedience can give it up. 4. Because of the glory and stature he obtained before this life.

This question has been on my mind. Particularly how to provide a simple explanation regarding celestial marriage that actually fits with our doctrine but is not so simplistic as to be confusing. So here is where my thinking lies... Celestial marriage is about much more than being together in the here after. Certainly many husbands and wives, family and friends will be together. It is not the Lord's plan or purpose to split up families. The importance of celestial marriage has to do with glory, light and exaltation. Such glory and exaltation is intimately tied to priesthood. We believe that in order to receive the highest glory a man and woman must enter into the highest order of the priesthood. This order of priesthood in ancient days was called the Patriarchal Order but in our day is called the "new and everlasting covenant of marriage". To enter this priesthood order a man and woman must be sealed to each other by authority and then live worthy to receive the Lord's confirmation through the Holy Spirit. Then and only then, will they enter the glory prepared for those who keep this covenant.

That was just the story they wanted you to hear. I think it's time someone saw "Wicked".

Jeffery R. Holland reviewed this question in significant detail in his book "Christ and the New Covenant". Here is some of what he said: The entire first four chapters of Either can be seen as a guide to gaining faith a rending the veil. First the brother of Jared hears the Lord, he then sees him in a cloud, he finally sees his finger and then his entire body. Because of his faith and the promises the Lord has made to him he cannot be kept within the veil. We are invited to do the same. Moroni quoting the Lord says, "Behold, when ye shall rend that veil of unbelief which doth cause you to remain in your awful state of wickedness, and hardness of heart, and blindness of mind, then shall the great and marvelous things which have been hid up from the foundation of the world from you—yea, when ye shall call upon the Father in my name, with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, then shall ye know that the Father hath remembered the covenant which he made unto your fathers, O house of Israel." (Ether 4:15).

I do. In particular I disagree with this sentence, "As a perfect spirit subjected to the veil, he is not subject to change even as he was stripped of knowledge of pre-mortal life". For we read, "Yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered" (Heb 5:8). There is no lasting learning separate from the spiritual. Yes, before he came to earth Jesus was perfect in his sphere. And yet while here he grew to reach a new sphere.

A few contemporaries of Joseph said the following:

I have mixed feelings about the change. I have been in scouting for many years. I was over the Varsity program at the stake level as the Stake YM 1st Councilor and on the ward level as the Varsity Coach, and now I'm serving as the YM President. It has always been hard to get buy in from some parents (and consequently some young men). Quite a number of leaders did not want to be trained. There were complaints about the program, just like I see here. It was indeed an uphill battle. But the YM who have been involved have turned out to be great YM. We had three of them get there Eagles last month. Over many years I have found that we love to find problems with current programs (scouting, work systems, government, etc). Once we find a problem we harp on it over and over again. It's kind of like beating a lame horse. This really was impressed on me at work a number of years ago. I used to deal with quality problems with consumer products we would design and produce. The were many people who would dig and find some issue with a part. I think they felt some sort of satisfaction on being able to dig and find a problem, and certainly these needed to be found. But after a while I started getting tired of it because these same people would never present a solution. They continued to find problem after problem. But they would never be bothered by having to find a solution and make it work. This is now what the leadership of the church must do (that includes you and me). We must take what we have been given (http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/multimedia/file/first-presidency-letter-young-men-program-changes-may-2017.pdf) and form it into a program that is more effective to our 14 -18 year old YM than Varsity and Venture scouting was. If we cannot do that, than all our complaints have not helped our YM be more prepared for missions, for marriage, or for life. I hope it will get the support it needs.

This looks to me like the beginning of the program: http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/multimedia/file/first-presidency-letter-young-men-program-changes-may-2017.pdf. See this also: https://www.lds.org/youth/ymactivities?lang=eng. I generally like this direction of spiritual, intellectual, physical, and social. I also like some of the suggestions.

A lot of speculation here particularly since Nephi tells us, "And I was led by the Spirit, not knowing beforehand the things which I should do." (1 Ne 4:6). I can only suppose that you assume he was led by the spirit to Laban but after he cut off Laban's head he somehow figured it all out. He knew he was going to bump into Zoram. He knew Zoram would believe him if he talked like Laban. He even knew that Zoram would try and run away so he planned to grab him and swear him to an oath. This is quite a stretch. Is it possible that Nephi was following the spirit at almost every turn? Might he have seen Laban, then was directed to cut off his head? Once he cut off his head he understood that he could take the sword and outer garments off Laban and put them on? Once he got the plates he decided to have Zoram carry them to the outer wall? Once he reached his brother's he decided to yell at them in his own voice and hold Zoram so he could not escape? Indeed this may look like planning but perhaps it wasn't Nephi's plan at all but instead the Lord's. Of Nephi's experience Elder Carmack once said this, "Notice that faith and trust in the Lord come first. Then came action. He had no plan except confidence in the Lord. It was really a "ready, fire, aim" approach, the opposite of conventional wisdom...Then the Lord's plan unfolded with Nephi being guided by unseen hands." (General Conference, April 1993). The takeaway here is not that one should (or even can) plan our each and every move like a military general. Instead, do as Nephi did, and follow the spirit every moment. Sometimes you will be able to see a few steps ahead. But many times you will not. During moments where you cannot see far, you can move forward in faith. Do what is required in the moment given you. Then do the next thing and the next, with confidence and trust in the Lord. In doing so it may appear to others as though you had a plan. But you will know it was not your plan but the Lord's who was guiding and directing you each step of the way.

It is the portion in bold I question. What evidence do you have to support that assertion?

I don't believe the scriptures support your interpretation that Nephi did not see killing Laban as a severe trial. Nephi tells us that he debated within himself about killing Laban, "but I said in my heart: Never at any time have I shed the blood of man. And I shrunk and would that I might not slay him" (1 Ne 4:10). This man of courage and of a burning desire to follow the Lord questioned in his heart. This is the same man who said, "for thus hath the Lord commanded me, and I must obey" (2 Ne 33:15). He did not say, "should obey", he did not say "might obey" he did not even say "will obey" he said "must obey". This same man questioned the Lord when commanded to kill Laban. This was a trial indeed.