Oaks talk doesn’t explain the scripture on remarriage

[MustardSeed]

I have issues. 😳Apparently. 😂

Edited May 20, 2019 by MustardSeed

[bluebell]

16 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

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. 

It can be hard for some from the older generation of male leaders to get push back from anyone, especially a woman.  Keep it up!  It's good for all of us.

[The Nehor]

21 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

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. 

Oh, so you came to my class? Introduce yourself next time I teach.  

[MustardSeed]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

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.

We had a great family discussion on that yesterday.

we have some teens living with us for a short while, and one young man talked about identifying with the laborers.  He said he has always been active and involved, sort of a front runner in church classes. Recently, a more rebellious youth has felt the fire of the Holy Spirit and has become a very enthusiastic participant.  Our young tenant admitted that he’d felt resentful that this boy who had rebelled so long is just now coming around and is getting a lot of attention and blessings.  We talked about the added blessings HE has though, of having enjoyed all those years of peaceful righteous living, and self respect and honor for a life well lived.  It was a powerful discussion and I’m so grateful for that home experience. 

[The Nehor]

Just now, MustardSeed said:

We had a great family discussion on that yesterday.

we have some teens living with us for a short while, and one young man talked about identifying with the laborers.  He said he has always been active and involved, sort of a front runner in church classes. Recently, a more rebellious youth has felt the fire of the Holy Spirit and has become a very enthusiastic participant.  Our young tenant admitted that he’d felt resentful that this boy who had rebelled so long is just now coming around and is getting a lot of attention and blessings.  We talked about the added blessings HE has though, of having enjoyed all those years of peaceful righteous living, and self respect and honor for a life well lived.  It was a powerful discussion and I’m so grateful for that home experience. 

The lesson we had we talked about the laborers who did not get hired in the beginning watching the sun go down as others are picked and not sure how they are going to eat that day. The early laborers got certainty early on. We also compared it to the prodigal and seeing others as siblings and not rivals. No one is getting their just desserts. We are getting something better.

[california boy]

2 hours 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”).

I am discussing the two issues together because one of the issues, the church does not recognize gay marriage and requires celibacy for life.  If a person is not celibate, then they are committing a sexual sin. 

Let's revisit exactly what Christ said about a second marriage.

 

Quote

 

Matthew 5:32 King James Version (KJV)

³² But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

 

 

In no way can you read this to mean that if you get divorced, then remarry again and you are ok.  Christ literally says if you remarry after a divorce, YOU ARE COMMITTING ADULTERY.  Christ isn't saying if you divorce, then remarry and repent.  He is literally saying that the second marriage is still living in adultery.  You can not repent while you are continuing to sin.  So unless you are celibate after that divorce, whoever you have sex with even if you are married you are committing adultery.  

So the question arises, isn't celibacy required with BOTH groups?  Because the only way to not commit a sexual sin after divorce is celibacy.  If not, why not.

[CV75]

22 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

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. 

I would say that is the important thing and how we get to understand His complete message from the various seemingly contradictory scriptural passages. Through His Atonement, that which is not lawful on any level can still be forgiven, and the forgiven can enter (or return) to the highest law, whichever the case may be.

[MustardSeed]

3 minutes ago, california boy said:

I am discussing the two issues together because one of the issues, the church does not recognize gay marriage and requires celibacy for life.  If a person is not celibate, then they are committing a sexual sin. 

Let's revisit exactly what Christ said about a second marriage.

 

 

In no way can you read this to mean that if you get divorced, then remarry again and you are ok.  Christ literally says if you remarry after a divorce, YOU ARE COMMITTING ADULTERY.  Christ isn't saying if you divorce, then remarry and repent.  He is literally saying that the second marriage is still living in adultery.  You can not repent while you are continuing to sin.  So unless you are celibate after that divorce, whoever you have sex with even if you are married you are committing adultery.  

So the question arises, isn't celibacy required with BOTH groups?  Because the only way to not commit a sexual sin after divorce is celibacy.  If not, why not.

You are saying if we can make an exception for ourselves with one, why not the other. 

I think it’s a legit question. 

[CV75]

7 minutes ago, california boy said:

I am discussing the two issues together because one of the issues, the church does not recognize gay marriage and requires celibacy for life.  If a person is not celibate, then they are committing a sexual sin. 

Let's revisit exactly what Christ said about a second marriage.

In no way can you read this to mean that if you get divorced, then remarry again and you are ok.  Christ literally says if you remarry after a divorce, YOU ARE COMMITTING ADULTERY.  Christ isn't saying if you divorce, then remarry and repent.  He is literally saying that the second marriage is still living in adultery.  You can not repent while you are continuing to sin.  So unless you are celibate after that divorce, whoever you have sex with even if you are married you are committing adultery.  

So the question arises, isn't celibacy required with BOTH groups?  Because the only way to not commit a sexual sin after divorce is celibacy.  If not, why not.

See this directly above: Posted just now

2 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

You are saying if we can make an exception for ourselves with one, why not the other. 

I think it’s a legit question. 

I believe I adressed this above: Posted just now

If unmarried people are committing sexual sin with each other, and they break up and find other partners, they can repent of any of the offenses. Additionally, they can go on to marry or live celebrate lives.

 

Edited May 20, 2019 by CV75

[JLHPROF]

I think the more interesting question isn't about the adultery aspect, but about the validity of divorce in the eyes of God.

I think we are far too quick to assume that a legal/civil divorce does anything at all to release us from that marriage covenant.  Leaving aside sealing cancellations which are relatively rare, if we are married and sealed in the temple I don't see that a piece of government paper has ANY effect to end that marriage.

As long as we give equal weight to the civil marriage/divorce as we give to the eternal marriage/sealing cancellation I don't think we are getting the right ideas.

Try looking at this topic as if ONLY the authority to bind and loose count for anything and things become clearer, including adultery.

[Wade Englund]

4 hours ago, juliann said:

BY also gave out more divorces than almost all states to the point Utah became the Las Vegas divorce destination of the nation. 

CFR

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[CV75]

Just now, JLHPROF said:

I think the more interesting question isn't about the adultery aspect, but about the validity of divorce in the eyes of God.

I think we are far too quick to assume that a legal/civil divorce does anything at all to release us from that marriage covenant.  Leaving aside sealing cancellations which are relatively rare, if we are married and sealed in the temple I don't see that a piece of government paper has ANY effect to end that marriage.

As long as we give equal weight to the civil marriage/divorce as we give to the eternal marriage/sealing cancellation I don't think we are getting the right ideas.

Try looking at this topic as if ONLY the authority to bind and loose count for anything and things become clearer, including adultery.

I think this is what Jesus (and Brigham Young in your quotes) are getting at.

However, Jesus did not say that divorce and adultery could not be forgiven. Any sealing, unbinding, forgiving and healing must come by Jesus (His authority).

 

[JLHPROF]

5 minutes ago, CV75 said:

I think this is what Jesus (and Brigham Young in your quotes) are getting at.

However, Jesus did not say that divorce and adultery could not be forgiven. Any sealing, unbinding, forgiving and healing must come by Jesus (His authority).

 

True, but in D&C 132:41-44 Jesus clearly differentiated between adultery within the covenant and outside of it.  Adultery within the covenant seems much harder to repent of.

See, I always try and look from the eternal marriage covenant since this is a Mormon board.  What the civil legal world thinks about marriage or divorce doesn't really apply.   They aren't under covenant.

[CV75]

14 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

True, but in D&C 132:41-44 Jesus clearly differentiated between adultery within the covenant and outside of it.  Adultery within the covenant seems much harder to repent of.

See, I always try and look from the eternal marriage covenant since this is a Mormon board.  What the civil legal world thinks about marriage or divorce doesn't really apply.   They aren't under covenant.

I think Jesus' NT sayings well apply to the marriage covenant as described in D&C 132. Neither scriptural reference speaks to the impossibility or difficulty of repentance for breaking it.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, MustardSeed said:

You are saying if we can make an exception for ourselves with one, why not the other. 

I think it’s a legit question. 

Likewise, if married people divorce, and their remarriage is a type of adultery, they can repent of either by living chaste lives going forward, remarried or not.

Maybe this is too “higher-lawish,” but when a couple divorces for the wrong reasons, they are in essence causing their former spouse to commit adultery should they remarry, which is just as bad as committing it, which is perhaps why, in the way the covenant is structured between two people and God, what God forbids can be forgiven; part of the sin is on the causing spouse's head even if he doesn't remarry. But once they’ve hit that point of depravity and are willing to do that, they need to repent even if they don’t get a divorce. People often get divorced “in and because of the hardness their hearts” while technically remaining married, whether they are sealed by proper authority or not.

Edited May 20, 2019 by CV75

[Wade Englund]

48 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

The lesson we had we talked about the laborers who did not get hired in the beginning watching the sun go down as others are picked and not sure how they are going to eat that day. The early laborers got certainty early on. We also compared it to the prodigal and seeing others as siblings and not rivals. No one is getting their just desserts. We are getting something better.

In our class, your wonderful point was underscored using the account of a certain rich ruler (Lk 18:18-30) who was told that, in order to obtain eternal life,  in addition to keeping the commandments, he needed to sell all and give it to the poor, and follow Jesus (which echoes the messages of the parable of the Pearl of Great Price--Mt 13:46) Beyond earning wages,  the sacrifice of all is required to attain eternal life, and this only because God makes all things possible.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Calm]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

aside sealing cancellations which are relatively rare, if we are married and sealed in the temple I don't see that a piece of government paper has ANY effect to end that marriage.

Anyone know if once a couple with a sealing cancelation dies, if they can be sealed again by children or others?

Can divorced couples be sealed when dead?

[MustardSeed]

I wouldnt hink anyone who is unmarried can be sealed. Otherwise, can someone please deal me to George Clooney when I’m gone?

And no one is going to be unsealed if they are not already divorced. 

Right? Maybe I didn’t follow. 

[Calm]

7 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

And no one is going to be unsealed if they are not already divorced. 

Widows have been required to be unsealed if they want to be sealed to a second husband.  However, if they stay sealed to their deceased first husband, once all are dead they may be sealed to their later husbands.

Edited May 20, 2019 by Calm

[USU78]

1 hour ago, Wade Englund said:

CFR

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Yeah

https://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Divorce

 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

I think the more interesting question isn't about the adultery aspect, but about the validity of divorce in the eyes of God.

I think we are far too quick to assume that a legal/civil divorce does anything at all to release us from that marriage covenant.  Leaving aside sealing cancellations which are relatively rare, if we are married and sealed in the temple I don't see that a piece of government paper has ANY effect to end that marriage.

As long as we give equal weight to the civil marriage/divorce as we give to the eternal marriage/sealing cancellation I don't think we are getting the right ideas.

Try looking at this topic as if ONLY the authority to bind and loose count for anything and things become clearer, including adultery.

If two people don't want to be together and want to be with others (and are sealed to those others) do you believe that God will force them to be together anyway?

[Wade Englund]

12 minutes ago, USU78 said:

Yeah

https://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Divorce

 

Fascinating.  Brigham gave preferential treatment to women?

I suppose it could be considered Vegas-like were the nation filled with polygamous wives looking to be freed from matrimonial bondage in an LDS ecclesiastical court. 

Thanks, -Wade Englund- 

[Calm]

31 minutes ago, Wade Englund said:

Fascinating.  Brigham gave preferential treatment to women?

I suppose it could be considered Vegas-like were the nation filled with polygamous wives looking to be freed from matrimonial bondage in an LDS ecclesiastical court. 

Thanks, -Wade Englund- 

I believe Juliann means that nonmember women came to Utah in order to use the easier divorce requirements like they used to (does anyone still do this?) for Nevada.  She has provided sources on that long ago, hopefully she still has them if you need the CFR for that.

Edited May 20, 2019 by Calm

[cherryTreez]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Anyone know if once a couple with a sealing cancelation dies, if they can be sealed again by children or others?

Can divorced couples be sealed when dead?

We have the option to seal my dad's parents to each other. They were not members. They divorced. My dad wishes he had the option to block any chance of that sealing happening. Grandma is sealed to her 2nd husband. My dad is sealed to them.  I think it would be a crime to ever seal grandma and her first husband. 

[Jeanne]

6 minutes ago, cherryTreez said:

We have the option to seal my dad's parents to each other. They were not members. They divorced. My dad wishes he had the option to block any chance of that sealing happening. Grandma is sealed to her 2nd husband. My dad is sealed to them.  I think it would be a crime to ever seal grandma and her first husband. 

I think it would not only be a crime....but down right mean if you believe in this.