Jump to content

Gillebre

Members
  • Content Count

    316
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

276 Excellent

About Gillebre

  • Rank
    Witness of Jesus Christ
  • Birthday 10/08/1989

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Ogden, UT

Recent Profile Visitors

2,080 profile views
  1. I think you're right. I've found often enough the Lord using my own words to form the answer He wants me to consider. It's so easy for Satan or other influences to slip in, and if we don't dig around and expose them to the Light they'll fester like a spiritual infection. Ideally shouldn't we expose all ideals or concepts we ascribe to, to the Light, and the Holy Ghost? Then He can teach us the truth and show us how we should be looking at things.
  2. It's easier to choose to get back up if the journey back to where you were is only a few steps, including a broken heart, contrite spirit, and a game plan for victory when the next opportunity to choose righteousness and prayer over sin presents itself.
  3. My thought process being this: should I be feeling crushing weight from sins repented of and learned from? Or put my emphasis on repenting of this this, in the larger picture, small mistake, rather than yielding to the dark and evil feelings that come with ideas such as: you never really repented, there's no point because clearly you never had forgiveness at all, stop bothering the Lord.
  4. This is a perfect example. Thank you! Regarding that verse in D&C 82, does that apply to those who return to sin and refuse to repent and turn back? That's when the past sins return?
  5. I always appreciate the scriptures, thank you for sharing. My goal here is to make sure I'm not operating under false ideas of any kind. Having brought that verse forward, what do you make of all of this? Does this verse suggest we invalidate our previous repentance if we falter again in the future?
  6. I've been pondering lately about these three things and hope to get your thoughts and insight. For the longest time I've labored under the idea that if you repent of a committed sin, make real progress, and then stumble and sin again as before, then the weight, burden, and guilt of every past same sin rushes back as if you never repented of it at all. Would someone be willing to help me clear up the way I'm understanding/seeing this? I'd love any references to teachings from Scripture and/or modern Prophets that could shine a light on this potential misunderstanding. When the Lord forgives and repentance is complete, but you fall again, are you repenting from the fresh start the Savior so mercifully provided? Or are you again repenting of a now larger stack of the same sin? Some might see this idea as a cousin of once saved always saved, or you were never saved at all. This extends into the idea of whether one's repentance and the Lord's forgiveness make it as you never committed that sin, and this new instance is your "first" because the past sins were washed away, "remembered no more" by Him. I have a creeping suspicion that I've been vastly too harsh and perfectionistic by holding onto this understanding of sin and repentance. I really appreciate your thoughts.
  7. I always thought they'd be on different planets.
  8. I think it's interesting that this would also be during the year of the 200th anniversary of the organization of the Church, and the Restoration.
  9. I haven't made up my mind about this. I generally dismiss most things which use the word translation. It's just so easy for Satan to manipulate people, however I do think the phrase "you will be perfect" is interesting and thought provoking.
  10. I think you've put it very succinctly. The Church has judged that two types of family situations might present a greater challenge where family life and faithful activity meet: families of same-sex couples and those involved in polygamy. Since the precedent for this practice has already existed for years (and without the same attention this latest iteration has received), I feel like the connection and reasoning should be obvious. If I considered myself on the other side of the argument I'd want to ask, and know: what makes these kinds of families different, in the eyes of the Church, than other family types (part-member, inactive, etc...). As bluebell pointed out there is an distinction as it relates to Church membership and activity. Ignoring that distinction only demonstrates, in my opinion, that one is only perceiving part of the whole story. Why does it matter if polygamous families allow their children to join The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? What might happen if there were no protocols for handling such situations? I can't imagine the difficulty this must pose for some couples and families, but I genuinely believe that their happiness and peace would not be helped in the long term we're this policy not in effect.
  11. I really struggle to understand and accept that people can't see the Church's reasoning for this policy. Perhaps see isn't the right word, but it's what comes to mind at this point. If this policy were not in force then there would be greater division among the families of same-sex couples over the long term, in my opinion. Those that would have their children taken to Church, either by their own hand or that of relatives or friends, would see firsthand how awful it'd be for their little ones to have certain religious expectations set that they cannot uphold or witness upheld in their closest family relationships. The child will hear an affirmation from the Family Proclamation about the sanctity of marriage, of gender, and perhaps the different roles men and women fill as parents. This will confuse them because their situation can be vastly different. They might feel singled out because it's not like it'll be a secret that their parents are a same-sex couple (married or not). There will be an increase of anxiety and tension as the example of their parents and immediate family stands apart and in contrast to the teachings of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Every single person on this earth, member or not, should be valued, respected, and treated with as much mercy and dignity as we can give, for that is how the Lord treats us. This policy, in my belief, is part of the Prophets looking forward with seership and prophecy and heading off a worse trial for members of the Church who are gay and their loved ones. All I ask is that if you have serious concerns about this policy then take this line of thought and continue it, and keep in mind that Satan will always try and tear families apart, ruin relationships, and tarnish the benefit of the doubt members of the Church give the Prophet. Make it a thought exercise: what might a family look like that shows, by example, one aspect of life, and then on Sunday at least some within the family will be taught and have it reinforced that romantic and sexual relationships between two people of the same gender will keep them from being like their Heavenly Parents and their Savior. They'll be taught it as an absolute because that's what we believe and what Prophets inspired of God have taught us (both by inspiration and revelation, as well as the Scriptures) while their parents don't see it as such. I would feel awful for couples in such a situation as to have beliefs they don't agree with or support taught to their children at least once a week. If they can't, in their own good conscience, be members of the Church, then why on earth would they permit their children to be (I realize that culture and tradition are important concepts to some)? Church membership and same-sex marriage are fundamentally opposite and opposed because of the Father's end design for His children: eternal marriage and offspring as numerous as the stars. Many things on earth are patterned after things in Heaven, in my opinion. The creation of children, on earth, is only possible by certain means, and possibly by extension the same is true in eternity. This is about the Father's big picture for us. More than anything I think it (a same-sex relationship) nurtures ideas and seeds in the heart during a mortal life such that the person won't want anything to do with exaltation because of their long-term same-sex relationship or marriage (assuming for the sake of argument that progression between kingdoms is possible). Christ can't exalt those who don't choose and accept it as it really is (and not as they'd wish it to be).
  12. When I read this article what stood out to me was that he was not denying service in general to someone who was LGBT, but declining a customized service that he chooses not to offer for certain situations. He's perfectly willing to sell cake or anything else with the caveat that if it's to be customized there are extra guidelines he puts in place as the business owner. Doesn't sound unreasonable to me. What really bothers me is the apparent vindictiveness, the need to ruin someone and exercise malice and feed hostility. These are the shadows of Satan's work because of how it feeds contention, and especially for the sake of it.
  13. I think the deeper problem, one of them anyway, is the growing tendency to react poorly when someone expresses belief or action in a way we would not, and is opposed to how we see the world (or the Church, etc...). To use your example, jk, about your good friend being judged or attacked, or at the very least encountering enough perceived hostility from Church members that he feels so. The tendency to react strongly, because of our passion (very much borderline overreacting), is, in my opinion, tearing the fabric of our relationships and society. You can see this in politics, and in the Church. I think the reaction to the Church's donation highlights this. I think this thread is the perfect example of the need for more meekness in all people according to their need and circumstances. We get heated so easily when we feel like our dearly held values or positions are under attack when in reality the other person is just trying to share their experience and the way they see things. It all too easily warps into a form of contention and immediately the adversary takes advantage and drives us further apart from each other (and by extension, I think, the Spirit). I think this donation is wonderful, and while I haven't ever had a good impression of Affirmation it is gratifying to see that we are still able to find unity on important issues like this.
  14. The Lord would also speak quite clearly to both sides, and anyone else, about how the contention and destructive pride/stubbornness both sides foster (in their own way) will lead to the destruction of faith, family, and society. It really brings home, for me, the parable of the sheep and the goats.
×
×
  • Create New...