The Nehor Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 1 minute ago, CV75 said: Yes, and where ssm is not recognized by the Church as marriage, there is no adultery (strictly speaking) when the partners break their sexual exclusivity to each other, but tehr is sexual sin (broadly speaking). At that point it is fornication and not adultery and adultery is generally considered to be much worse.
CV75 Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 55 minutes ago, california boy said: So now back to the OP of this thread. Marrying someone after divorce IS a sexual sin according to the words of Christ. He calls it adultery when they remarry, Last time I checked, adultery was a sexual sin. Explain that away. And I didn't derail the thread. The two subjects can be addrssed together. I am cautioning against this becoming a thread about the right or wrong of gay marriage. My comment is about the right or wrong of divorce, which IS what this thread is about. See here: Posted 18 hours ago and here: Posted 16 hours ago You were the only one talking about gay marriage and challenged us to "apply gay marriage as the topic" followed by a rant about the Church being a hypocrite over her positon on gay marriage. I think you were derailing. Let's see how successful you were.
CV75 Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 5 minutes ago, The Nehor said: At that point it is fornication and not adultery and adultery is generally considered to be much worse. See here: Posted 18 hours ago and here: Posted 16 hours ago Given your choices of sexual sins, how much less worse do you wish to commit before repenting?
clarkgoble Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 16 minutes ago, The Nehor said: Yes, but generally that is contingent on not sinning anymore. Yes but if one has divorced, not sinning again relative to divorce means not divorcing again.
Popular Post MustardSeed Posted May 20, 2019 Author Popular Post Posted May 20, 2019 Let me try again. As OP, My struggle is that I have a terrible relationship with the scriptures. This situation doesn’t help. I am satisfied with the reality that we are disregarding Jesus of the NEW testament, not mosaic law. I’m also satisfied that God wants us to be happy, not alone. I also believe in divorce. I believe in flexibility in religion. I also believe no one has adequately addressed an official stance on this scripture. I think it protects all of us that we defend to disregard Christ’s position. There but for the grace of God go I. I can also understand California’s observations here. As OP I’m fine with ending this thread and shifting to his point. I think he has a legit point regardless of where I stand on LGBTQ issues. Thank you all for feedback, I appreciate it. 5
CV75 Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 1 hour ago, california boy said: If Christ calls remarrying after a divorce adultery, then the only way to repent of that is to cease to be married. Christ is not talking about adultery outside of marriage. He is telling us that the act of marrying after divorce is living in adultery. Not so, and you know you only say that because you have a bone to pick. They repent by keeping those marriage covenants. They can do that by being chaste in that marriage. It does not require celibacy. They repent on all levels as anyone else must for any other sin, commensurate with the form and seriousness of the sin which in this case is adultery (“I cannot tell you all the things whereby ye may commit [adultery]; for there are divers ways and means, even so many that I cannot number them”). 2
The Nehor Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 45 minutes ago, CV75 said: See here: Posted 18 hours ago and here: Posted 16 hours ago Given your choices of sexual sins, how much less worse do you wish to commit before repenting? Saying some sins are worse then others does not mitigate the seriousness of the “not quite as bad” sins. 2
The Nehor Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 43 minutes ago, clarkgoble said: Yes but if one has divorced, not sinning again relative to divorce means not divorcing again. But the Savior says it is still adultery so they are repenting of the wrong sin. 3
The Nehor Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 34 minutes ago, CV75 said: Not so, and you know you only say that because you have a bone to pick. They repent by keeping those marriage covenants. They can do that by being chaste in that marriage. It does not require celibacy. They repent on all levels as anyone else must for any other sin, commensurate with the form and seriousness of the sin which in this case is adultery (“I cannot tell you all the things whereby ye may commit [adultery]; for there are divers ways and means, even so many that I cannot number them”). So if I lust after someone else in marriage, obtain a divorce, and marry the person I had I just need to repent and the scales rebalance? Sounds like a dangerous teaching...... 3
HappyJackWagon Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 52 minutes ago, CV75 said: Not so, and you know you only say that because you have a bone to pick. They repent by keeping those marriage covenants. They can do that by being chaste in that marriage. It does not require celibacy. They repent on all levels as anyone else must for any other sin, commensurate with the form and seriousness of the sin which in this case is adultery (“I cannot tell you all the things whereby ye may commit [adultery]; for there are divers ways and means, even so many that I cannot number them”). That's how repentance works? Break a commandment- continue breaking the commandment - covenant to be faithful to the person with whom you are breaking the commandment- receive forgiveness. Really? Is that what you are claiming Did you think that through ? 3
CV75 Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 12 minutes ago, The Nehor said: But the Savior says it is still adultery so they are repenting of the wrong sin. Adultery is serous because of the particular covenant it is breaking, which involves the man, woman and God. In the scriptures, idolatry is often called and compared to adultery for he same reason (breaking God's covenant physically and spiritually). Keeping the covenant of marriage after it is broken can still be accomplished. Other covenants with God must also be kept, and repaired if broken, but marriage is uniquely significant because as the highest priesthood order, the man and the woman are making it together with God, not individually as with all the other covenants.
SouthernMo Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 (edited) The quest to reconcile teachings from scriptures and modern day teachings into one great whole is an unproductive exercise. I wish it were possible, but it just isn’t. Those who try to stitch it all together in one big faith promoting narrative just look foolish to me. I think trying to do so will only diminish one’s testimony in the correlated LDS orthodoxy because it doesn’t stand the test of logic. A supreme amount of faith is required to accept a long chain of the least likely meanings and contexts behind seemingly contradictory scriptures, statements, and practices. Edited May 20, 2019 by SouthernMo
CV75 Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 (edited) 25 minutes ago, The Nehor said: Saying some sins are worse then others does not mitigate the seriousness of the “not quite as bad” sins. I'll take that as you would rather not commit any sin of any kind or degree at all. 22 minutes ago, The Nehor said: So if I lust after someone else in marriage, obtain a divorce, and marry the person I had I just need to repent and the scales rebalance? Sounds like a dangerous teaching...... No, that's a dangerous application of an incompletely articulated teaching that hasn't been sufficiently integrated with other teachings. 5 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: That's how repentance works? Break a commandment- continue breaking the commandment - covenant to be faithful to the person with whom you are breaking the commandment- receive forgiveness. Really? Is that what you are claiming Did you think that through ? Ha-ha... see above. Edited May 20, 2019 by CV75
RevTestament Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 52 minutes ago, MustardSeed said: Let me try again. As OP, My struggle is that I have a terrible relationship with the scriptures. This situation doesn’t help. I am satisfied with the reality that we are disregarding Jesus of the NEW testament, not mosaic law. I’m also satisfied that God wants us to be happy, not alone. I also believe in divorce. I believe in flexibility in religion. I also believe no one has adequately addressed an official stance on this scripture. I think it protects all of us that we defend to disregard Christ’s position. There but for the grace of God go I. I can also understand California’s observations here. As OP I’m fine with ending this thread and shifting to his point. I think he has a legit point regardless of where I stand on LGBTQ issues. Thank you all for feedback, I appreciate it. Ok, I will try to relate some of the comments I made in class about this topic. The first is that Yeshua's comments appear to expressed to men. How is it wrong for a man to "put away" his wife? She has not broken her covenant - she still has covenanted herself to him. So for her to then go elsewhere is adultery from that standpoint, and it is adultery for the man who she is still covenanted to. What if they both agree to end their covenants? Then I think you have a slightly different situation not really addressed by Yeshua. Then there is no outstanding covenant - implying mutual divorce is not a sin because neither party is being "wronged." Then there is the fact that Yeshua gave an exception if one party has broken their covenant though commission of adultery. If the wife commits adultery, then the husband does not sin by asking for divorce. What if the husband breaks his covenant to love and cherish his wife, and beats and abuses her instead? Does she sin by seeking a divorce then? I would say no - the husband has violated his marital responsibilities. Why didn't Yeshua say that? Probably because he was talking to a group of men, and women didn't become husband beaters. Yeshua is teaching an ideal - don't become covenant breakers - love and honor one another. So looking from this standpoint it appears modern divorce is ok if it is a mutual agreement - then neither party is making the other break their agreement. Beyond that I offer nothing else at this time. One can defer to modern authority. 2
MustardSeed Posted May 20, 2019 Author Posted May 20, 2019 5 minutes ago, SouthernMo said: The quest to reconcile teachings from scriptures and modern day teachings into one great whole is an unproductive exercise. I wish it were possible, but it just isn’t. Those who try to stitch it all together in one big faith promoting narrative just look foolish to me. I think trying to do so will only diminish one’s testimony in the correlated LDS orthodoxy because it doesn’t stand the test of logic. A supreme amount of faith is required to accept a long chain of the least likely meanings and contexts behind seemingly contradictory scriptures, statements, and practices. Well our Sunday school teacher yesterday made me out to look foolish as well so I’ll accept that perhaps I am. In all honesty I just need to know what God wants from me, not regarding remarriage but regarding all things, and indeed He is mysterious. We all see different things when we see God. We project a lot. I’ll keep trying, doing my best, failing, and asking questions. Even though others may not tolerate it well. I just prefer things to make sense. 2
MustardSeed Posted May 20, 2019 Author Posted May 20, 2019 5 minutes ago, RevTestament said: Ok, I will try to relate some of the comments I made in class about this topic. The first is that Yeshua's comments appear to expressed to men. How is it wrong for a man to "put away" his wife? She has not broken her covenant - she still has covenanted herself to him. So for her to then go elsewhere is adultery from that standpoint, and it is adultery for the man who she is still covenanted to. What if they both agree to end their covenants? Then I think you have a slightly different situation not really addressed by Yeshua. Then there is no outstanding covenant - implying mutual divorce is not a sin because neither party is being "wronged." Then there is the fact that Yeshua gave an exception if one party has broken their covenant though commission of adultery. If the wife commits adultery, then the husband does not sin by asking for divorce. What if the husband breaks his covenant to love and cherish his wife, and beats and abuses her instead? Does she sin by seeking a divorce then? I would say no - the husband has violated his marital responsibilities. Why didn't Yeshua say that? Probably because he was talking to a group of men, and women didn't become husband beaters. Yeshua is teaching an ideal - don't become covenant breakers - love and honor one another. So looking from this standpoint it appears modern divorce is ok if it is a mutual agreement - then neither party is making the other break their agreement. Beyond that I offer nothing else at this time. One can defer to modern authority. Thank you - And remarriage?
The Nehor Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 13 minutes ago, CV75 said: I'll take that as you would rather not commit any sin of any kind or degree at all. No, I like sinning. It is fun.
The Nehor Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 (edited) 8 minutes ago, MustardSeed said: Well our Sunday school teacher yesterday made me out to look foolish as well so I’ll accept that perhaps I am. In all honesty I just need to know what God wants from me, not regarding remarriage but regarding all things, and indeed He is mysterious. We all see different things when we see God. We project a lot. I’ll keep trying, doing my best, failing, and asking questions. Even though others may not tolerate it well. I just prefer things to make sense. I skipped over a lot of that when I taught Sunday School yesterday. Parable of the Laborers was much more interesting and had a fascinating and deeply spiritual discussion with a lot of Holy Ghost testifying going on. Good times. Edited May 20, 2019 by The Nehor
SouthernMo Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 13 minutes ago, MustardSeed said: Well our Sunday school teacher yesterday made me out to look foolish as well so I’ll accept that perhaps I am. In all honesty I just need to know what God wants from me, not regarding remarriage but regarding all things, and indeed He is mysterious. We all see different things when we see God. We project a lot. I’ll keep trying, doing my best, failing, and asking questions. Even though others may not tolerate it well. I just prefer things to make sense. It is hard to make sense of it all. It makes it harder when people in teaching or authoritative roles tell you something that just doesn't make sense, but convince you that you are the one with the problem. Reject the notion that you are foolish. Or, if it's easier (as it is for me), try to accept that everyone else is equally foolish, no matter their mantle or intellect.
CV75 Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, The Nehor said: No, I like sinning. It is fun. Me too and alas I don't have nearly as much fun as I deserve. Edited May 20, 2019 by CV75
CV75 Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 1 hour ago, MustardSeed said: Let me try again. As OP, My struggle is that I have a terrible relationship with the scriptures. This situation doesn’t help. I am satisfied with the reality that we are disregarding Jesus of the NEW testament, not mosaic law. I’m also satisfied that God wants us to be happy, not alone. I also believe in divorce. I believe in flexibility in religion. I also believe no one has adequately addressed an official stance on this scripture. I think it protects all of us that we defend to disregard Christ’s position. There but for the grace of God go I. I can also understand California’s observations here. As OP I’m fine with ending this thread and shifting to his point. I think he has a legit point regardless of where I stand on LGBTQ issues. Thank you all for feedback, I appreciate it. We are not disregarding what Jesus is saying in this verse, and also considering everything else He has said in every other verse, and what was reported as His attitude and response to sin and sinners in every other verse. As far as an “official stance on this scripture”, what do the correlated materials say about this verse? They are easy to find.
clarkgoble Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 1 hour ago, The Nehor said: But the Savior says it is still adultery so they are repenting of the wrong sin. Either way, once you're divorced and not sexually active you're not committing adultery. The point is this is a sin that has a finite duration. You can repent of that.
bluebell Posted May 20, 2019 Posted May 20, 2019 32 minutes ago, CV75 said: As far as an “official stance on this scripture”, what do the correlated materials say about this verse? They are easy to find. The official stance seems to be that those who have caused a divorce (through their actions or attitudes) need to repent and that those who haven't will find comfort through Christ and work towards forgiveness. 3
MustardSeed Posted May 20, 2019 Author Posted May 20, 2019 10 minutes ago, bluebell said: The official stance seems to be that those who have caused a divorce (through their actions or attitudes) need to repent and that those who haven't will find comfort through Christ and work towards forgiveness. So many don’t see their contribution. But that’s another topic for another time. I have zero doubts that the Lord today endorses many divorces, as well as endorses remarriage. And I think affairs are redeemable, if corrected in the right way. I believe (IMO) God is more flexible with individual circumstance than scriptures lead me to believe. This is why I struggle in my study. I feel closer to him in my prayers than I do in my study. 3
MustardSeed Posted May 20, 2019 Author Posted May 20, 2019 1 hour ago, SouthernMo said: It is hard to make sense of it all. It makes it harder when people in teaching or authoritative roles tell you something that just doesn't make sense, but convince you that you are the one with the problem. Reject the notion that you are foolish. Or, if it's easier (as it is for me), try to accept that everyone else is equally foolish, no matter their mantle or intellect. My SS teacher is arrogant, and the class is filled with The Elite Brethren who would be just as happy to sit the 4 of themselves down and share their Great Knowledge and impress each other for hours on end. Heaven forbid I , lowly woman, should ask a question that is in our reading three times, no less, and not know the answer to my own question. I will need to repent of my strong and negative feelings before next week. This won’t be easy. 1
Recommended Posts