Are The Filthy Ever Made Truly Clean Again?

[Anijen]

That's the point I'm trying to make. The OP asked if they sinners are ever made truly clean again. Clearly the answer is yes, but the effects of their sins continue regardless of their repentance.

QUOTE

Sometimes those who are sin free have the sin of pride knowing they lived worthily thereby thinking they are more deserving than a repentant soul.

I hope you aren't referring to me with this comment. I am speaking here as someone who has first-hand experience of the consequences of sin, not as one looking down on anyone else. I am the lowest of God's creatures and struggle with my own weaknesses.

Dave,

I believe we are closer in agreement than I first thought. Yes consequences of sin are there. Especially if the wife decides to divorce the sinning husband. The only point I was trying to make is that serious sin happens and that sinner in our scenario the husband can and will through the repentance, baptism (or re baptism) and the atonement is made new and whole. If the wife stays with the hubby and hubby repents their marriage can be just as strong as before. The beauty of the atonement is cool that way. Yes I agree that trust is lost but that can be regained. etc etc

I ramble on bottom line those who have committed serious sin and repent are no less deserving than those who did not commit said sin. The big loss is the time the family did not receive blessings such as unable to pay tithing, going to the temple and many many others... After the sinner has been found worthy again he is just as worthy as the day he was baptized at eight years old, he is new, he is pure, he is spotless and the Lord remembers his sin no more.

You make an interesting point when you said;

- When the person who had sex before marriage is asked by his future spouse if he has ever had sex with anyone else, they will have to answer that they have. Their future spouse's wish for someone who has lived a pure life will be unmet. Regrets may continue throughout their life because of that poor choice.

I guess they don't meet that persons conditions then. Some of the best people I know are converts who have not met that condition. Geesh have ya never seen Charlie? TIC

Sometimes those who are sin free have the sin of pride knowing they lived worthily thereby thinking they are more deserving than a repentant soul.

I hope you aren't referring to me with this comment.

Nope but after rereading it, it sure appeared that way. Sorry bro not much sleep last night.

I meant that some even on this board I have read are a little self righteous and need to know that some of us have come back from devastating mistakes and grow weary of the I am better than you attitude because I never did such an such...

[Tchild2]

I think analogies often fall short or can be misleading.

Both statements "sin + repentance leaves a hole" or "sin + repentance makes everything like new" are incorrect, IMHO.

As has been already stated, sin can change us permanently. Someone who commits serious sin is not the same. They can repent and return to the path, but they are likely changed and have lost ground in their spiritual progression.

But that is contrary to Mormon Doctrine. Once it is forgiven, it is gone and scriptures attest to that. Any lamenting after the fact is due to excessive guilt built into it by the person or the institution that creates that guilt. Not to a God who has forgiven...but not quite.

- Does a father who commits adultery become "like new" after repentance? Does his wife's trust and love return the same as before?

Not to his wife perhaps, but to God he has, according to the doctrines of repentance. If God can forgive and forget then spiritual progress can resume as soon as the individual lets go of their personal hang-ups. The individual still has the consequences of their actions to deal with, but that has nothing to do with God or his forgiveness.

- Does a person who has pre-marital sex become "like new" if they return to the path and become worthy later to marry in the temple?

Do they become a virgin again? Of course not, but innocence is not spiritual progress in the slightest. Again, if God forgives, then they most definitely are "worthy" to marry in the temple. Unless your judgements of the person are better than God's?

I'd say the answer is no. Regrets remain. Trust is destroyed and has to be rebuilt. Spiritual progress is halted for a time. Things are not put back "like new."

Regrets are part of the human experience. Trust may be destroyed but it is between human parties. If an eternal God forgives, but cannot "trust", then that God never knew our heart to forgive us in the first place.

"The filthy" are nothing more than religiously defined persons who act contrary to specific religious rules of conduct. It is a state of mind, not a set of actions one makes. If a person can forgive themselves and have forgiveness from others then of what use is God in the equation?

[wenglund]

While I do believe that our sins can be washed clean, I also understand that this does not mean that the affects of our sins will all be washed away.

For example, I knew of a member of the Church who, through illicite sexual relations, contracted a severe case of syphilis and was wheel-chair bound for the remainder of his life. He had truly repented and was cleansed of sin, yet the consequences of his sins remained--that is, I suppose, until rectified through the resurrection.

I am familiar with families where the fathers or the mothers had committed adultry, and the families were subsequently shattered into pieces. Some of the offending parties later repented, but that did not restore the family to their prior wholeness--in part because other people (new spouses and children of the offending parties) had been added non-congenially to the mix.

I could go on...

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Lightbearer]

Perhaps one of the most serious consequences of sin and especially with major transgressions, is the loss of the spirit. If not corrected in a timely manner through repentance, it can lead to spiritual blindness and ultimately a loss of testimony and of even the desire to repent. To me, that is the greatest problem with sin, it effectively separates us from God and if the "mists of darkness" last long enough we could find ourselves wandering into strange roads and becoming forever lost. That is why God requires of us a "broken heart and a contrite spirit" because that is the only sure way to avoid "hardening our heart" and then becoming spiritually blind. If we have that "Godly sorrow" that leads to true repentance we do not seek to justify our sins, only want to make it right and to overcome so that we can get back to the "straight and narrow path" which leads to eternal life. Our salvation is a journey, a path that we must follow to attain. If we take a detour we may loose some time or we may not find our way back to the path. The scary part of sin is that we may loose our desire to repent and thus cut ourselves off. That is why the thrust of most of the messages we get in Conference is either to keep the commandments and avoid sin or to repent, either way the result is the same. If we keep the commandments we have the spirit to help us on the path, if we repent we can have the renewal of that spirit and thus continue on enduring to the end.

[consiglieri]

Your a hayseed.

But you can repent.

[consiglieri]

I would add to this the seemingly related teaching in the LDS Church that those who do not make it to full exaltation in the celestial kingdom will spend the rest of eternity lamenting the fact.I think what this is driving at is that though their sins are forgiven and they are saved in a degree of glory, the effects of those sins remain to punish them forever.I think I have never really bought that.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

But that is contrary to Mormon Doctrine. Once it is forgiven, it is gone and scriptures attest to that. Any lamenting after the fact is due to excessive guilt built into it by the person or the institution that creates that guilt. Not to a God who has forgiven...but not quite.

And I think a prominent thrust of LDS Church teaching is recently going to the need to forgive ourselves after God has forgiven us.

[Mudcat]

Psa 103:8 The LORD is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy.

Psa 103:9 He will not always chide: neither will he keep his anger for ever.

Psa 103:10 He hath not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities.

Psa 103:11 For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him.

Psa 103:12 As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us.

I believe the filthy can be made clean again.

This is may be off topic.

Do LDS believe its possible that Mary Magdalene could have been a prostitute?

If so, the logic behind the fellows words to the girl, in the OP, becomes more opaque.

[kawikadave]

While I do believe that our sins can be washed clean, I also understand that this does not mean that the affects of our sins will all be washed away.

For example, I knew of a member of the Church who, through illicite sexual relations, contracted a severe case of syphilis and was wheel-chair bound for the remainder of his life. He had truly repented and was cleansed of sin, yet the consequences of his sins remained--that is, I suppose, until rectified through the resurrection.

I am familiar with families where the fathers or the mothers had committed adultry, and the families were subsequently shattered into pieces. Some of the offending parties later repented, but that did not restore the family to their prior wholeness--in part because other people (new spouses and children of the offending parties) had been added non-congenially to the mix.

I could go on...

Thanks Wade. That was the point I was trying to make and your illustrations do a better job of clarifying what I was trying to say.

[Anijen]

I believe the filthy can be made clean again.

This is may be off topic.

Do LDS believe its possible that Mary Magdalene could have been a prostitute?

If so, the logic behind the fellows words to the girl, in the OP, becomes more opaque.

I do not believe MM was a prostitute but made to look that way by ECF and historians to lessen her role.

[Bond...James Bond]

Survival is better than virtue. Anyone who thinks death is preferable to keeping one's virtue has very screwed up ideals. Chastity is something that imho has to be given up willingly. Virginity can be taken, but is not the same as chastity.

[Mark Beesley]

There is nothing in Mormonism that would preclude Brother Kane from entering the Celestial Kingdom and achieve his full glory and become the God of future worlds.

There is nothing in LDS scripture that speaks to any of us having future worlds. Any comments that being exalted means we will have our own worlds is speculation. I personally doubt it. I believe that the same sociality that exists among us here will exist among us there, and that we will accomplish things as a community.

In a sense, Mormonism offers the ultimate form of redemption because our God may well have been the vilest of sinners during his mortal existence.

You are making assumptions here about the nature of God, as opposed to gods. You are also making assumptions about what atonement and redemption mean in an eternal sense. I suggest that a full understanding of such concepts would lead a person to conclude that there is zero possibility that our Father in Heaven was ever a sinful being.

[Thunderfire]

And I think a prominent thrust of LDS Church teaching is recently going to the need to forgive ourselves after God has forgiven us.

Great point indeed!

While it's not completely laid out in scripture, we "may" have an account of Paul (2nd Corinthians 12:7-9) dealing with this very issue. Three times he plead with the Lord to remove a thorn in his flesh, a messanger of Satan, which tormented him. But the Lord would not take it away saying that his grace was sufficient.

We have no clue what this thorn was, only that it was a messanger of Satan sent to torment him. It very well could have been the knowledge of his sins (how he tormented the Christians) and his inability in forgiving himself for what he had done.

In Isaiah (43:25) the Lord says, "I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more". Meaning, while the Lord may forget our sins, it may also be a "grace" (or blessing) where the Lord does not allow us to forget, until we are able to sin no more or have godly patience with and share unconditional love with others in their sins.

Yet are the filthly ever made truly clean? Oh my yes! By the infinite power of the atonement where both the Lord and us remember our sins no more...

Just pondering....

In Christ I Serve,

Thunderfire

[Paul Ray]

If we could get rid of the bad memories that are associated with the sins we have committed, everthing would be as good as new, but as it is now, I still remember the sins I have committed.

Sometimes I hope that, someday, those memories will be wiped completely from my mind, kinda like I don't remember my life in heaven before I came here, but it seems like the closer I get to God the more I remember everything that I know and/or have experienced, on occasions.

Do you think we will ever forget the sins we have committed, or do you think we will simply learn to cope with them and use them for our benefit, and the benefit of other people?

[kawikadave]

I would add to this the seemingly related teaching in the LDS Church that those who do not make it to full exaltation in the celestial kingdom will spend the rest of eternity lamenting the fact.I think what this is driving at is that though their sins are forgiven and they are saved in a degree of glory, the effects of those sins remain to punish them forever.I think I have never really bought that.

I think even God has a difficult time striking a balance between warning us of the eternal effects of sin while comforting us that repentance and renewal is available. You can certainly find both messages clearly given in the scriptures.

I think someone who falls short in the eternities will have regrets - very sore at times - but will eventually focus on what they can do and will build the relationships and life that will bring them happiness.

And I think a prominent thrust of LDS Church teaching is recently going to the need to forgive ourselves after God has forgiven us.

Forgiving yourself is one thing. I don't know that it eliminates the regret and consequences of doing wrong.

[kawikadave]

There is nothing in Mormonism that would preclude Brother Kane from entering the Celestial Kingdom and achieve his full glory and become the God of future worlds. In a sense, Mormonism offers the ultimate form of redemption because our God may well have been the vilest of sinners during his mortal existence. So one can fully repent and achieve the ultimate goal.

I think your extrapolation that Kenny Kane is potentially the God of another world is strictly poisoning the well and doesn't really relate to the question the OP asked.

[wenglund]

Survival is better than virtue. Anyone who thinks death is preferable to keeping one's virtue has very screwed up ideals. Chastity is something that imho has to be given up willingly. Virginity can be taken, but is not the same as chastity.

Those were some interesting bumper-sticker comments, though they way over-simplify a rather complex issue.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Cold Steel]

Or the demonstration about a white cloth that is made filthy and then goes through repeated washing, but is always dirtier and dingier than the white cloth that never got filthy in the first place. This is one of those attitudes that diminishes the efficacy of the atonement of Christ, in my opinion.

I think one has to ultimately believe the words of scripture: "...he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more" (D&C 58:42).

Still, one can lose blessings and reputation. Today, what do most of us think when we hear the name Oliver Cowdery? Do we think of a great prophet of the restoration or do we think of a man who fell? We know that the blessings he had were given to another, namely, Hyrum Smith, but based on the rest of Cowdery's life, I see a man who repented of his sins and who will be saved in the Kingdom of God. Still, the tragic aspects of his life can never be truly forgotten, and probably shouldn't be. He's an object lesson of a great and proud man who stumbled because he overestimated his own worth to the Restoration. Indeed, the lesson is that God's work goes on despite the loss of such great men. But he's also a lesson in repentance and integrity. He never denied the revelations he received and in his last days gained the humility that he lacked when he was young.

Will he be exalted? Undoutedly. But he will always be the one who was raised up by the Lord, yet fell. And I believe he should go down in history as a great man and as a great prophet who stumbled, but who rose through the atonement.

Oliver Cowdery was one of the great prophets of the Restoration, yet how do we

think of him today?

[wenglund]

Great point indeed!

While it's not completely laid out in scripture, we "may" have an account of Paul (2nd Corinthians 12:7-9) dealing with this very issue. Three times he plead with the Lord to remove a thorn in his flesh, a messanger of Satan, which tormented him. But the Lord would not take it away saying that his grace was sufficient.

We have no clue what this thorn was, only that it was a messanger of Satan sent to torment him. It very well could have been the knowledge of his sins (how he tormented the Christians) and his inability in forgiving himself for what he had done.

In Isaiah (43:25) the Lord says, "I, even I, am he who blots out your transgressions, for my own sake, and remembers your sins no more". Meaning, while the Lord may forget our sins, it may also be a "grace" (or blessing) where the Lord does not allow us to forget, until we are able to sin no more or have godly patience with and share unconditional love with others in their sins.

Yet are the filthly ever made truly clean? Oh my yes! By the infinite power of the atonement where both the Lord and us remember our sins no more...

Just pondering....

In Christ I Serve,

Thunderfire

Those were some wonderful thoughts, and I appreciate you sharing them.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[John Larsen]

For example, I knew of a member of the Church who, through illicite sexual relations, contracted a severe case of syphilis and was wheel-chair bound for the remainder of his life. He had truly repented and was cleansed of sin, yet the consequences of his sins remained--that is, I suppose, until rectified through the resurrection.

There are also those who are blind because their mothers contracted syphilis, and those whose years of adultery had no adverse effect on their lives. You proposition of a karmic after effect of sin does not hold in the real world. Many sin and prosper, others behave and suffer. Physical consequence such as disease, cancer, disability or the weather are not a result of any sinful action.

[Bond...James Bond]

Those were some interesting bumper-sticker comments, though they way over-simplify a rather complex issue.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Right. Just like "homosexuality is sexual attraction disorder, not unlike two keys or two locks trying to unlock each other" right?

[jwhitlock]

Those were some interesting bumper-sticker comments, though they way over-simplify a rather complex issue.

I like that!

[jwhitlock]

Physical consequence such as disease, cancer, disability or the weather are not a result of any sinful action.

Sometimes they are and sometimes they aren't. It's an over-generalization to take either extreme.

[wenglund]

There are also those who are blind because their mothers contracted syphilis, and those whose years of adultery had no adverse effect on their lives. You proposition of a karmic after effect of sin does not hold in the real world. Many sin and prosper, others behave and suffer. Physical consequence such as disease, cancer, disability or the weather are not a result of any sinful action.

That some may not experience noticable affects of transgression, does not negate the fact that others do. To think otherwise is to commit the fallacy of composition.

That you may not grasp the direct causal affect of sin in many cases, is to be woefully niave. If you distrust religious evidence, then try studying the social science reports on the deletarious sociological affects of teen pregnancies, abortion, and divorce. At the very least, surely you must agree that there is a profoundly negative affect caused by the sin of murder?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[John Larsen]

Sometimes they are and sometimes they aren't. It's an over-generalization to take either extreme.

Unless you can show me a case were "they are", I will stick with my "over-generalization".

[John Larsen]

That some may not experience noticable affects of transgression, does not negate the fact that others do. To think otherwise is to commit the fallacy of composition.

That you may not grasp the direct causal affect of sin in many cases, is to be woefully niave. If you distrust religious evidence, then try studying the social science reports on the deletarious sociological affects of teen pregnancies, abortion, and divorce. At the very least, surely you must agree that there is a profoundly negative affect caused by the sin of murder?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

It is true there is causal reaction to certain action--but this has nothing to do with the concept of sin. The idea that some actions are sinful has no influence on the outcome. You can show statistically that a certain number of individuals who have unprotected sex will become pregnant. However, no one has ever demonstrated that those who believe their actions to be sinful have a high likelihood of pregnancy.

I don't think you are asserting that actions that cause negative social effects are necessarily sin. If I demonstrated that the amount of time a bishop spends away from his children has a deleterious social effect, I doubt you would call it sin.