omegaseamaster75

I agree watching cartoons and playing with toys is fine everyone needs a hobby......Once you house is in order, given the things that have been described by the OP his house is not in order so these things have to go. Priorities are what makes a man as you outlined providing for, temporally and spiritually, service, caring, tenderness......

It's no ones business but your own, you don't have to tell the bishop if you don't want to. There is no requirement to state changes in your relationship status to the bishop at all. Furthermore unless you want his advice in the matter (and I'm not sure why you would since he is probably not a trained marriage counsler) then and only then should you tell him....I would limit my tell of my personal situation to him in terms of asking for help with spiritual growth and lack of priesthood leadership in the home if this is important to you.

Special rules do apply to LDS charters, they have their own manuals. Our troops are not run or governed like a traditional scout troop

The church will continue as it has in the past, our scout leaders are chosen from within the church .

Whats a Pokemon? I must be old...... Cartoons? really......did she marry a man or a little boy? You made a big boy decision now its time to wear big boy pants......Vort posted excellent advice. I second what he said

I do...run..run far far away...and fast...

The issue with this scripture is that to a Catholic it is not scripture. We understand it from an LDS perspective. Other denominations will struggle with the concept.

This is a well thought out and great answer to the OPs question. Anatess, as an ex Catholic and a good one at that is able to provide much need insight into the mindset and doctrine of the Catholic faith

I am so watching that show!!!!!

We don't know that the patron was not a security threat, she just claims that she was not. The citation of song lyrics on a blog are an easy way to say things that if they were stated in plain English or as a matter of normal discourse they would be considered threats. The "these are just song lyrics" is a cop out, and I call horse dooty. No apology should be given.

The Book of Abraham falls into the Faith category for me. Was Joseph Smith a Prophet of God? If the answer is yes than the Book of Abraham falls into place. Scrolls or no scrolls. The Brethren and the body of the church view it as doctrine. Good enough for me.

1. I don't think that our current leaders receive revelation the same way that Joseph Smith did. 2. The foundation has been laid, See number 1. We are now adding to that foundation by small bits and pieces.

I think its in the food, what has changed since the 19790's/early 80's. No one eats at home anymore/cooks fresh. it is all processed junk.

Canonized Doctrine/revelation: 1830, Bible and Book of Mormon were officially accepted with the organization of the Church 1835, Doctrine and Covenants, first 103 sections were officially accepted 1880, Doctrine and Covenants additional 32 sections were accepted along with the Pearl of Great Price 1890, Polygamy was repealed (Official Declaration, p. 291) 1976, D&C sections 137 & 138 were officially accepted 1978, The priesthood was made available to all worthy males regardless of race (Official Declaration 2, p. 292)Our Prophets and leaders are inspired to lead us and guide the Church in these latter days, they receive revelation for the people of this church you can listen to it during conference. I believe that the stream of revelation is open to our leaders, but not how most people think that it is. I do not think that Pres. Monson is having sit downs with Jesus (he may be) but that is not how he leads his church.

Since kids were mentioned, I know from my own personal experience, having a twin brother and another brother 11 months after us and a sister 4 years later that reverence can be maintained during sacrament. There must be something in the air this new year because I have agreed with TFP and VORT in as many threads today.. Discipline your kids!!! Little Johnny needs to know that it is NOT ok bounce around like a maniac during sacrament meeting. Trust me by age 2 I had the fear of God in me instilled by my parents. My mom had 3 kids in diapers at one time, and we never got away with misbehaving during sacrament meeting. It simply was not going to happen on her watch. I now have my own children, and while times have changed (I don't beat my kids with a hair brush) they know that during sacrament meeting they are to be reverent. Trust me they DO NOT want dad to take them out.

I think that I agree with TFP, some items do not need to be disclosed. when I think of porn addiction I think of an individual who is totally consumed by it to the detriment of their work/school, family life/social circles. They would rather view porn than participate in society. This qualifies as an addiction, a chemical imbalance. Much like an alcoholic. Recovery is on going and lasts a life time. If this was your situation then YES you must disclose. If you have viewed porn and then repented then NO absolutely not. other items to be disclosed alcoholism, drug addictions, sexual abuse, physical abuse by a parent, big deal medical issues.

In the church and more so for those that are BIC we are raised in a glass box. Easily shattered by truths available to all but not taught in our meetings. Others will disagree, but information about the lives and pasts of our leaders are whitewashed to a large extent and how we "think they were" as people ends up not being the reality of who they really were. People are people and when they grow into adulthood and investigate for themselves they find that some things don't match up. I fall into the camp of accepting that our past and current leaders were/are just men. Subject to the same fallibility that all men are. Are they better men than me yes. They have a special relationship with our Heavenly father and his son. They have been chosen, ordained and sustained despite their faults and short comings. JS for all of the mistakes that were made was still able to accomplish something that only he was capable of doing. If we as members can't look past an individuals short comings we are all destined to be disappointed.

I hate church Basketball..... It's Church sponsored fight club....that's all it is..

Save the Souls of Transgressors The first purpose of Church discipline is to save the souls of transgressors by helping them repent (see D&C 1:31–32; 19:13–20; 42:37; 64:12–13). When people do not repent, they are exposed to the demands of eternal justice (see Alma 34:16). When they exercise faith unto repentance, God forgives them, granting mercy through the Atonement of Jesus Christ (seeAlma 42:23; D&C 58:42). Through this process, they may again become clean and worthy to inherit the kingdom of God (see 3 Nephi 27:19; Moses 6:57). Church discipline can facilitate repentance by helping transgressors recognize and forsake sin, seek forgiveness, make restitution, and demonstrate a renewed commitment to keep the commandments. Informal Church discipline is often adequate for this purpose. However, in some instances the only way to encourage true repentance is to convene a disciplinary council and consider formal discipline. Without formal discipline, some transgressors may never experience the change of behavior and change of heart necessary to qualify them for redemption through the Atonement, for “none but the truly penitent are saved” (Alma 42:24). 6.1.2 Protect the Innocent The second purpose of Church discipline is to protect the innocent. With inspiration, a priesthood leader should act to protect others when a transgressor poses a physical or spiritual threat to them, such as by predatory practices, physical harm, sexual abuse, drug misuse, fraud, or apostasy (see Alma 5:59–60). 6.1.3 Safeguard the Integrity of the Church The third purpose of Church discipline is to safeguard the purity, integrity, and good name of the Church. Consequently, transgressions that significantly impair the good name or moral influence of the Church may require the action of a disciplinary council.

Our doctrine must align with the standard works, our policies should expand on that doctrine, your example is a perfect one. If we as members were able to practice the word of wisdom as it is outlined in D&C there would be no need for the policies that outline specific items of which we can and cannot partake of. Our leaders are called to lead us in these latter days. Were I think we get into trouble as members is when we grasp on to something that a Prophet said and interpret it as doctrine. 99.9% of the time it is not. Should we follow their teachings? YES are they inspired men of God? Yes. Do they establish policies by which we should live and conduct our lives? Absolutely. When I hear the primary song "follow the prophet" I honestly think that we should. Hindsight is 20/20, political and cultural norms change over time and as human beings our leaders are subject to these things. This is why the policies of the church have changed and adapted with the times.

As per Estradling75 I have not stewardship over you or any potential decision that you may or can make. I suggest that you have a third option. I wouldn't marry this individual at all. Recent convert (this is a good thing), bad past, type 1 diabetes. this is just scratching the surface....No I say run far, far, away. Aside from being a recent convert the red flags abound. Omega

I know what FFS means.......

“For behold, thus saith the Lord God: I will give unto the children of men line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little; and blessed are those who hearken unto my precepts, and lend an ear unto my counsel, for they shall learn wisdom; for unto him that receiveth I will give more; and from them that shall say, We have enough, from them shall be taken away even that which they have.” (2 Ne. 28: 30) Learning Eternal Truths is an evolving process between man and God. As the ninth Article of Faith says, “We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God.”

Proclamation on the Family does not constitute doctrine because it was never accepted or submitted to a sustaining vote by the membership of the church. My theory is sound.

1902 Joseph F. Smith to Lillian Golsan, July 16, 1902. "[T]he theories, speculations, and opinions of men, however intelligent, ingenious, and plausible, are not necessarily doctrines of the Church or principles that God has commanded His servants to preach. No doctrine is a doctrine of this Church until it has been accepted as such by the Church, and not even a revelation from God should be taught to his people until it has first been approved by the presiding authority–the one through whom the Lord makes known His will for the guidance of the saints as a religious body. The spirit of revelation may rest upon any one, and teach him or her many things for personal comfort and instruction. But these are not doctrines of the Church, and, however true, they must not be inculcated until proper permission is given.” - Joseph F. Smith Correspondence, Personal Letterbooks, 93–94, Film Reel 9, Ms. F271; cited in Dennis B. Horne (ed.), Determining Doctrine: A Reference Guide for Evaluation Doctrinal Truth (Roy, Utah: Eborn Books, 2005), 221–222. Also in Statements of the LDS First Presidency, compiled by Gary James Bergera (Signature, 2007), page 121. Bergera indicates it is a letter from JFS to Lillian Golsan, July 16, 19 Dallin H. Oaks , "Teaching and Learning by the Spirit," Ensign (March 1997), 14 Revelations from God . . . are not constant. We believe in continuing revelation, not continuous revelation. We are often left to work out problems without the dictation or specific direction of the Spirit. That is part of the experience we must have in mortality. Fortunately, we are never out of our Savior's sight, and if our judgment leads us to actions beyond the limits of what is permissible and if we are listening, . . . the Lord will restrain us by the promptings of his Spirit. Boyd K. Packer, "I Say unto You, Be One," in BYU Devotional and Fireside Speeches, 1990–1991 Even with the best of intentions, [Church government] does not always work the way it should. Human nature may express itself on occasion, but not to the permanent injury of the work What constitutes official or "core" doctrine of the Church? Joseph Smith defined our fundamental core doctrine: "The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 121.) In Mormon Doctrine, Elder Bruce R. McConkie was equally clear: The books, writings, explanations, expositions, views, and theories of even the wisest and greatest men, either in or out of the Church, do not rank with the standard works. Even the writings, teachings, and opinions of the prophets of God are acceptable only to the extent they are in harmony with what God has revealed and what is recorded in the standard works.