Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Tom Haws wrote:
That’s really neat, HiJolly. Can you expand on being “in a position” where you can afford to say such things? You mean your age?
Well, it’s a combination of factors. (1) My primary calling is a General Church calling (in SLC), where I represent the Church a lot in public. The calling requires a current TR. Everybody knows.* (2) I’ve been teaching the Gospel Doctrine class this year, and I don’t think anyone can doubt that I really have a testimony. I’ve been bearing my testimony powerfully and the Spirit has attended us. (3) My family– we have lots of kids, the oldest are married in the temple, my wife has a very visible Stake RS calling, etc., etc., (I know, all that doesn’t mean squat, but some people think it does…) (4) I guess my age might be a factor… I have lots of gray/white hair…BTW, Tom, did you grow up behind the old Safeway there in Mesa?
HiJolly
* BTW, I’ve held this calling for some eight years, and my crisis of faith was all the more poignant because of how things might have affected me, my family, and to some extent, the Church.
Beautiful Post, Ray. Especially this: If someone can’t get what you believe, and if it causes intense pain to try to make them understand, stop!So true.
HiJolly
Tom Haws wrote:HiJolly, by special temple blessings, do you mean
thisthisthisthis
#1 — yes,#2 & 3 — not so much,
#4 — yes.
BTW, I’d not read those threads linked to on #4. Very interesting, thanks. I kept thinking as I read, I can answer that… I can explain that… That’s the opposite of how I’d speak about that…
Without the spirit none of it works, anyway. HiJolly
bridget_night wrote:My old missionary companion and a medical doctor I brought to the church believe Joseph Smith was a fallen prophet. They think he started out sincere and did lots of good stuff but then got full of himself. They think when he tried to cover up his secret polygmany and take Law’s wife and Law tried to expose him in the Expositor, that the Lord took him down.
Any thoughts on that? Bridget
I think the whole polyandry thing is a real problem for many reasons. All the reasons added up to one practical key: It had to be done ‘secretly’.It HAD to be done secretly since it was so contrary to our societal norms that to hear about it was to be offended, to be disgusted, to be scandalized. Not to mention being asked to participate, or for the brethren, being asked to *not* participate. Or were they? (see below)
And then there’s the ‘why’ it had to be done, which question Joseph answered, but only secretly, so very little of his explanations are available today. As I posted previously (somewhere on this site), I personally think it was his effort to continue the process of bringing the order of heaven to earth among men. I think he was morally fine to attempt it, as God defines what is morality (or, He should) is; but socially speaking it was impossible. Joseph had commented on how difficult it was to teach new things to the Saints, he knew it. He still proceeded, I am convinced (subjectively) he did so because he could see how it ‘worked’ in heaven.
His whole prophetic mission was to create the Kingdom of God on earth, so it can be seen as a continuation of his work since he was a youth. Evidence of this would be that this ‘sealing’ of Joseph to other men’s wives was matched by a ‘sealing’ of Joseph to *men* as well. This was called the ‘doctrine of adoption’.
The goal, it seems to me, was to have as large a network of men AND women sealed to Joseph as was humanly possible. This polyandry thing was only 1/2 of what Joseph was doing, the other 1/2 involved men being sealed to him. That’s one reason I don’t think sex was a motivating factor here, despite the affadavits given by his wives in the mid 1800’s. I think those were polemical against the Reorganites. Rather, I do think he was attempting to duplicate the network of relationships that he saw in his many heavenly visions.
He makes some remarks in his letters and journal entries that serve, for me anyway, as evidence for this view. I think if he were wise as a serpent he would not have done the polyandry thing and limited himself to patriarchal sealings only. Wish he had, but then, I haven’t gazed into heaven as he had.
HiJolly
happymom wrote:Hi Jolly,
Thanks for your story. That had to be very hard to go through. Any advice on how to be supportive to my dh. I don’t think I’m doing a very good job.
What is in your dh’s heart is the key. Does he want to be free of the compulsion? Is he addicted to sex, porn, or just “instant gratification” (IOW, does he over-eat, too)?Does he try to hide it? If so, what are his motivations in doing so? To escape censure? To spare your feelings? Does he try to “make it up to you” in one way or another?
Could this be a reaction or result of unmet needs he experienced as an infant? These questions are all so personal,
I don’t really want answers, unless you email or PM me, but even then I’m not a psychologist or anything. There are hundreds of nuances that could affect the whole situation. I went to a LDS Social Services counselor for about 6 weeks at one point, but that was a REAL waste of time, unfortunately. The counselor had no idea what my motivations and such were. That was a sad deal.
ANYWAY, I said all that because how he “is” will affect how you can support him in his needs. I think he needs to do everything he can to support your need to maintain your dignity and respect. You need to stand up for yourself. He needs to have hope in himself, in HF. I don’t really know how to say it. If I knew everything in your personal lives and your relationship and family lives, then I might could help. HF alreadys know it all—- so you’ve got to cling to Him. I know He can help. That’s my best advice.
HiJolly
Bouvet wrote:
This is very disturbing imho. We hate our sex drive so much we think testicular cancer is a blessing? Wow.
I’m sorry you are disturbed by it. I am the one who lived it, and I am totally at peace.I understand that the entire conflict would not have existed except perhaps in a minor ‘socially acceptable’ way, were I not religious. And yes, some religions say masturbation is Ok, I know. But most religions that I have seen acknowledge that it is desirable to use our will to limit our natural tendencies. I personally believe that conscious self-limitation is the key to all spiritual progress.
I am blessed because now my heart, my mind and my actions are at last in synch. And FWIW, I never hated my sex drive, I hope you didn’t get that out of my comments.
HiJolly
I’m with Valoel on this. I do, and I don’t. Last year (or was it 2007?) there was a First Presidency message in the Ensign that stated “Satan is the source of all evil.” Well, I just don’t believe that AT ALL. I even had to confess it to my home teaching families as I gave the message. But I did explain, and it went over pretty well.
I do think that there is a Lucifer-type being, who is kinda the poster-child for bad choices. But the source of all evil to me is God, via the agency She/He insists upon within all manifestation.
HiJolly
Old-Timer wrote:I love the Book of Abraham – largely because I don’t believe it is a traditional “translation”. I just am compelled by its content and message.
Joseph was “a visionary man”. That’s the way he “translated” – and I personally think that’s pretty clear from the records we have. I’m tied much more to the Book of Mormon as a “correct/accurate” record of an actual people than I am to the Book of Abraham as such a record, but I see even the BofM as more of a “visionary transmission” than as a “literal translation”.
Many people are bothered that Joseph seemed to believe he was translating in the common definition – actually transcribing directly from one language to another. I’m not, for the same reason I actually like the fact that Joseph didn’t seem to understand much of what the BofM actually says. If he was the genesis of it (the “author” in a traditional sense), I think he would have “understood” it better. (Think of JK Rowling or Stephenie Myers. They know “Harry Potter” and “Twilight” backward and forward – in minute detail. It’s hard to picture them misunderstanding something any of their books say. I think there are lots of things Joseph didn’t understand, because, frankly, I don’t think he was focused on the details but rather on the prophetic gift to which the overall record pointed.)
Awesome post, Ray. I think there were more influences than any mortal can define or analyze, in the process of Joseph’s work with the BoM, BoA, BoM(oses) & JST. But even though I sometimes choose not to take literally some of the words therein, nevertheless I feel the ‘truth’ when I read them. I am convinced that Joseph truly communed with God, and even better, could produce something in the process that we all could share and benefit from. What a cool thing *that* is!HiJolly
Tom Haws wrote:I think, bridget_night, that to appreciate the temple in the sense Ray and HiJolly are proposing, you need to be of such a mind that you are prepared for revelation at any moment, and anything at all can be the catalyst. If the temple ends up being that catalyst, you may say that you have an “appreciation” of the temple. Is that fair, Ray and HiJolly?
Yes, I’d say that’s fair. I would add, though, that the instruction on the true order of prayer is REALLY important to me. I am saddened that President Kimball stopped the practice outside of temples, but I can still do it in my mind — and I do. And what he restored in that same basic time, the “special temple blessings”, are awesome.HiJolly
happymom wrote:I understand that men need that sexual drive in order to have kids or otherwise the human race would not have survived.
Sometimes our weakness, or inability to control our bodies, causes us to give up hope. I’ve been through it myself. In my case I didn’t get addicted to porn (thank God – that would’ve REALLY beat me down), but I did use it often to facilitate my need for mindless, immediate gratification. For many years, I just gave up trying to stop because after trying and failing hundreds, maybe thousands of times (over 30 years), I couldn’t honestly keep the hope up.I guess I went through stages of trying and failing, then giving up, then trying and failing, ad infinitum. Or so it seemed. Over the years I learned new ways to work on it. Instead of praying to be able to stop, I began praying to be able to WANT to stop. In the end, God blessed me with testicular cancer, and I no longer have the problem at all. I sometimes am tempted to be depressed, thinking that God helped me ‘cheat’ instead of beating it all by myself, but then I come to my senses and thank God that She/He stepped in and dealt with it for me. Repentance is a lot like that, come to think of it.
HiJolly
I’m here on this site because of those sorts of feelings in my life, just a few years ago. I’ll admit it wasn’t really for very long. Nevertheless, I reached the point where I had to consciously choose to *not* believe anything I’d ever been taught concerning God, the Church, religion in general, etc. I gave it all up. If you haven’t read my introduction, I encourage you to do so.
Now I know that I
neededthat experience in order to learn the ‘truth’ that was waiting for me. But it was so painful at the time! Anyway, I encourage you to believe that there is a loving Father & Mother in Heaven. I at least had that ‘truth’ from God personally and not from any other, before my trial of faith. Have hope that all this will be for your good. Hang onto that, and all things will work out. Blessings,
HiJolly
happymom wrote:I feel just like you bridget night. It is hard to fit into the blindly believing when you know some of the falicies and yet you do not want to take out religion. I’m glad you’re on here.
I know what you mean. Yesterday I taught the Gospel Doctrine class “The only true & living Church”, and I really raised some eyebrows. Even had one fellow say something about “sticking to the manual” — but hey, at least I didn’t get into the Buddhist saying “If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him!”! I could have – it was ‘on topic’ so to speak…But I *did* get into the 1 Cor. scripture about “when I was a child I thought as a child”, equating it to how I felt about my dad when I was 5 or 6 years old. In my eyes, he could do no wrong. Now as I approach 50, I see his strengths and his weaknesses. I love him more ‘truly’ than I did as a child, knowing these things and what he’s been through in his life.
Then I said that when I said “I know the Church is true” as an 8-year-old, I meant something entirely different than what I mean when I say it today. It is not on a false pedestal to be worshipped, etc. etc. But in both cases, I was/am entirely serious and sincere. I *do* know the Church is true! I had a High Councilor, a former Bishop and others in the class give me positive feedback. And the former polygamist in our neighborhood who is trying to re-join the church (his second wife recently passed away) said I was braver than he is. A compliment indeed.
Well, I’m in a position where I can afford to say such things. So, I do.
HiJolly
bridget_night wrote:Since we are talking about Temple stuff, I wondered if anyone has ever had problems with their experiences in the temple?
No, I’ve not really had problems, though I will say my first time through, I wondered what on earth was up with this “leave now if you don’t want to proceed with the temple covenants” statement. I thought “What!? Tell me what they are, and I’ll let you know!” —-but I sat there quietly, trusting blindly that it would all be Ok. And, it was Ok. Odd, yes, but I felt fine.
bridget_night wrote:It is so different from regular church attendance and I think alot of people are afraid to sound like they are unspiritual and so do not express how they really feel. I mean the inside is beautiful and the people are real nice, but my husband said it reminded him of a Klu Klux Klan meeting the first time he went through in St. George Utah. We went during the time that they still had the blood oaths and actors (no movies.) I felt strange during washings and anotings and even though I fasted and prayed to know if this crazy stuff was from God, I never got a testimony of it. I have never really had spiritual experiences there. In fact, often the opposite. One time I wanted to divorce my husband right after it. And I do not like husbands and wives having to sit on opposite sides. Nevertheless, I have just looked at it like when Adam and Eve were offering animal sacrifices and asked by God why they were doing it and they said they knew not why, but were just being obedient. I have to know something is from God before I do things that seems too strange to me.
I guess you know that is antithetical to ‘faith’, and nothing in the spiritual realm comes into manifestation here on earth without faith…
bridget_night wrote:I do believe man can become like God just as a princess can become a Queen, but I don’t understand why the temple ceremonies would have to be part of the process. So, is there something wrong with me? Bridget
No, nothing wrong. The time is just not yet.The temple is the ‘mystery’ aspect of the Church. There is only one religion that I know of that has a ‘mystery’ component, and we are it. There are many ‘mystery’ groups such as BOTA, Golden Dawn, Rosicrucians, Pagans, and Freemasonry, but none of these are a ‘Church’.
I myself have only had one significant temple experience, and it occurred 29 years after my own endowment. Interestingly enough, it was a beautiful experience for me, being the third and final initiation into the mysteries.
HiJolly
LadyWisdom wrote:Because of Dehlin’s essay, I have been able to reframe for the most part. Then I get caught up or the leader interviewing starts defining what it means to me and I get tripped up and last week got denied by a SP counselor, so I still have the recommend with no second signature.
I think the key is that you don’t have to accept anyone’s “reframing” but your own. IOW, that SP counselor can say whatever he wants, but if it’s not the text of the written questions then it’s HIS reframing that is the issue, not the Church’s guidelines. Now, I’d never tell HIM that, but that’s how I’d look at it myself. I would say to myself, “This good brother is not perfect enough to reframe the qualifications for temple worthiness on this own merits; therefore, I shall keep the interpretation and ‘reframing, if any, of the questions to myself, for myself, as I see it. Because this interview is about my beliefs and ‘worthiness’, not his”. And then respond to the question the way you reframe it. I think that’s reasonable.
LadyWisdom wrote:I was made to feel that I had to accept JS’s First Vision in order to pass the question. … due to the feeling of that I cannot seem to balance out in my mind with integrity all the things that bother me or continue to deal with certain aspects of what is taught that I no longer fully trust in. I have to chalk it up as mystery. I do believe JS brought back some unique concepts that most didn’t know at the time and he was clearly well read or gifted to know or see things in the bible and understand them more than others of his day, so in a sense he did feel the office of a prophet.
I can believe things I can’t fully trust in.
Like in the movie
Second Hand Lions. Part of Hub’s “What every boy needs to know to be a Man” speech, a response to Walt saying: “I don’t know what to believe in.” goes like this: “If you want to believe in something, then believe in it. Just because something isn’t true, there’s no reason you can’t believe in it. Sometimes the things that may or may not be true are the things that a man needs to believe in the most: that people are basically good; that honor, courage and virtue mean everything; that power and money mean nothing; that good always triumphs over evil; that true love never dies. It doesn’t matter if they are true or not. A man should believe in those things, because those are the things worth believing in.” I actually quoted Hub in Sacrament meeting two years ago when giving a talk of being happy. Love that movie.
HiJolly
