[Roy]

“My hair like Jesus wore it. Haleluya, I adore it!”

You could tell him you are trying to be like Jesus 😆

I am sorry for your challenges. For what its worth, I don’t think there is a “right” decision or a “wrong” decision. It sounds like you have weighed your options carefully.

Hang in there.

[Roy]

cwald wrote:

Legends has it that GBH personally talked to GS and asked him to stay in the senate after the suicide.

I think the relevant portion of the book is worth citing here:

G. H. Smith wrote:

(GBH) He told us that, while he did not know Garrett, our Father in heaven did; that God understood Garrett’s capacities and limitations, his afflictions and infirmaties. his heart and mind. He assured us that Garrett was in the arms of his Heavenly Father, and that his mind was now calm and clear. He reminded us that the Lord himself had suffered all things in the flesh, even our pains and sickness, so that he could care for all, even Garrett, in the courts of mercy and justice.

” pg 125-6

What a wonderfly Staylds type answer, I love GBH!

G. H. Smith wrote:

(Elder James E. Faust, a democrat) On the third call he told me he felt moved to inquire about my feelings and intentions…I shared with him my thoughts about resignation…”that’s what I thought you’d say,” he responded. “Now you listen to me, Senator, and you listen to me good! The devil knows you’re down and you’ve just given me his line. You need to fully grieve for Garrett and get back to work! You are needed, and your children need more than your time, they need most to see your good example, especially now!”

” Pg 130

So it would seem that the legend is based in truth, GBH did call at least once and Elder Faust called at least 3 times and during one such call “He verbally grabbed (Bro. Smith) by the lapels and gave him a good shaking.” :angel:

[Roy]

Old-Timer wrote:

a “creed” – call it what they may. I believe that pretty much anything that attains to the status of “creed” is “false” – since I just don’t believe we know enough to say it never will change.

I remember hearing GBH on Larry King say that women could receive the priesthood if God so directed through the living prophet. At the time that was a puzzler for me. Aren’t there eternal principles and aren’t the gender differences on of those? It gave me something to think about. What else could change in the future?

Also in reading the scriptures, I am finding that there is enough to support my personal understanding and interpretation- but there is also enough contrary to my particular framework. It would seem that the scriptures do not lay out a clean unequivocal handbook for eternal understanding. Even with the BOM and modern scriptures, there could be many interpretations. Often accepting these modern scriptures means accepting the current interpretation, emphasis, and spin that these things are given from church leaders, but as many here are discovering- there is some wiggle room even there.

So I continue to love the scriptures that support me and ignore or explain away those that would rain on my parade, I just do so more consciously than in the past. I am coming to own “the gospel according to Roy,” and I make no pretenses that it should work for anybody except for me.

[Roy]

When I first began having my faith crisis my home teacher and EQ pres. came over and we had some conversation.

I had not yet discovered Staylds and was in a state where I felt compelled to talk to nearly anyone who would listen (not in a destructive way but in a rebuilding my assumptive world way). I don’t remember all the things we talked about. I seem to remember questioning the infalability of scripture. He gave an example of driving as far away from the ledge as possible. He defined my process as struggling and for what ever reason I took issue with the use of the term. In the end and after much additional talk he re-affirmed that what I was going through was “struggling” and he seemed to think devotion to scripture reading, prayer, church attendance could cure it. I respect this man and understand that from his perspective he was coming to reclaim me like a lost sheep or coin.

The sad part is that things have since been different between us. Our families used to get together for parades, holiday meals etc. My duaghter has worn their daughter’s hand me down dresses. All of this has since stopped. I don’t know if it is intentional but the result is the same- no more invites to their kids b-day parties and polite/civil but only surface level conversation at church.

I’m sure others have lost much more in being “outed,” but for me this experience offered just a taste. I will choose my battles and “follow the prophet” doesn’t seem to be a battle I can win.

BTW, I complain/express my view to my wife after church and she sometimes asks me why I don’t share this perspective with the teacher/speaker after the meeting. I answer that I don’t want to be labeled a trouble maker.

My thoughts are with you Cwald and Jwald. You are undoubtedly braver than I, please continue to fight the good fight (whatever that means for you and your journey).

[Roy]

GBSmith wrote:

Sorry but I don’t see that our lives are orchestrated or that there’s any evidence that someone or something will fix the time when trials will be over other that at death. This all seems like wishful thinking and a need to explain. I know what I’m saying is my opinion but for me “orchestrates” is a bit of a stretch.

I too have come to identify with a (mostly) non-interveneing God. For me the idea that things just happen brings comfort, NOT for a hidden reason, or meaning, or we would understand if only we could see the big picture. For me this allows me to not try incessantly to understand the why.

But I have also seen persons who take much comfort in the idea that God does orchestrate, not just with broad strokes of empires and erosion- but even the individual lives of his children. For them, this highlights the belief that God is aware and concerned for them individually. It is also quite easy to find adequate quotes from GA’s past and present to support this position and is therefore quite tenable in the church. There is still the matter of “what about agency?”, but as has been said many times here at StayLDS- We are capable of holding contradictory beliefs at the same time.

I have spoken to a good number of people who have drawn the conclusion that gay people must choose to be gay or God wouldn’t be fair- I’m just glad that these statements of Bro. Millet offer an alternative position.

[Roy]

Hi Eric,

I was wondering if your complete screenname was going to be “some guy living in a van down by the river?”

Welcome. This year has been a hard year for us as well, I was recently laid off and we are hoping to get a far away job we know of that pays less money. So I guess I am trying to say that I can relate.

I can also relate to the in and out thing. My wife was talking to some other moms from the ward and one suggested that we pray about where God wants us to look for work. DW replied, “That would be difficult as my husband doesn’t believe in an intervening God.” After some explaining the other mom said “but I though he was doing so much better, I heard the talk he gave where he said he knew he would be with your deceased daughter again.” To which DW replied, “Yes, but he thinks we will as be together again regardless of the church we attend.” “Oooooh,” was the response.

When DW recounted this to me I asked her not to explain my views to ward members in the future, not because she is not describing them accurately but because I worry that some people might treat me differently if they no longer see me as on their side of the fence. So if we do get this job and move, I am hoping for a clean slate

[Roy]

mercyngrace wrote:

Another thing that changed for me is that I stopped expecting miracles that I designed and started accepting the miracles that God performed. More than once I followed the standard methods for getting what I want out of God. Praying, fasting, attending the temple, living the commandments, and having blinding faith did nothing to change the circumstances. Where was this God of Miracles? And yet I couldn’t deny the unseen hand that was giving me nudges toward understanding and flashes of insight and wisdom that could have been acquired no other way but through my adversities. It turned out that I was the miracle. Or rather, the changes wrought in my heart.

Thank you M&G. I really like that perspective. It gives me alot to think about. You are very welcome here. :wave:

[Roy]

Roy wrote:

“If I do the things you have asked me to do- go to Church, read the scriptures, fast and pray, plead for divine help, receive priesthood blessings when necessary, and be chaste- can you assure me that the Lord will take away these desires, these attractions? Can you promise me they will go away?” It was a tough question.

As I recall, I said something like this; “I know the Lord can indeed change you, change your heart, change your orientation. I know that he can do that instantaneously if he chooses to do so. I know that the power of change is in Jesus Christ and that dramatic and rapid change can take place. I do not know, however, whether the Lord will change you right away. I do know this, however: If you do what you have been asked to do, and you do it regularly and consistently from now on, God will change you, either here or hereafter. You may be required to deal with these feelings until the day you die.”

Later in the same book, Brother Millet was even more explicit (though now talking human tragedy and adversity in general and not about homosexuality specifically). He wrote, “Perhaps some of us will wrestle all our days with traumas and trials, for He who orchestrates the events of our lives will surely fix the time of our release.”

Again, this whole concept excites me because it just seems like such a better position than to say that people choose to be gay (perhaps by allowing themselves to be decieved by Satan) and that they can stop being gay at any time through repentance. :clap:

[Roy]

My time is very limited at the moment, but I wanted to welcome pickles and to thank you for sharing with us. We all share and we all benefit.

In one particular circumstance an investigator felt claustrophobic around the small baptismal font. My cool bishop made arrangements for us to use a local hotels swimming pool. It was cool and helped me to understand how things can be modified to fit the situation.

I admire your determination to stay close with your husband. Sounds like he is a lucky man.

[Roy]

Heber13 wrote:

To me, faith in an all-powerful God and the idea of random events are incompatible. To say that such-and-such happened randomly implies that God had no idea of its happening, or perhaps that he saw it coming but that it wasn’t his original intent, neither of which makes much sense to me. To say that God is all-powerful but that some things, no matter how seemingly insignificant, are out of his control also doesn’t seem to make sense. If we choose to see God as being involved in our lives, then I think we have to see him as being involved completely, and that there is no difference between trials occurring ‘just because’ and trials occurring because God willed them to happen. I can’t distinguish between God consciously making something happen and that same thing happening as a result of a long sequence of events that was originally put into motion by God.

I have sometimes said (though not at church) that I don’t believe in an interventionist God. I also don’t believe in an Omni God for some of the reasons Heber13 just mentioned. Another major component in my belief comes from the article “The Weeping God of Mormonism.” (feel free to provide a link, nice administrator)

It boils down to this, why would God cry if he can just change whatever is making him sad. In Ether, He is weeping for the suffering of his children. It would seem that he cannot eliminate our suffering, that God is constrained by our sacrosanct agency, or the pure testing experience needed in this mortal life, or by things we cannot imagine.

This has changed but also empowered my faith. I do not expect God to change the elements of my life but I do expect him to care and to listen, to view my heart and to see that I am doing the best that I can.

So no, I do not think that God actively tries us but the does not preclude the possibility that life is both trial and experience all rolled up in a jumbled mess. Perhaps randomness and lack of clarity (on how this whole thing works and what it is we are supposed to be learning, etc) is a necessary part of it. Perhaps it allows us to choose for ourselves what direction we are to grow and who we might ultimately become, not right and wrong, just different and beautiful.

P.S. Butters, thank you for sharing your personal experience. For me the principles come most alive when they are applied by real people in real situations. I feel like the “test and trail for your learning” principle could have been helpful to you for a time (comfort) and then later it became an impediment and you moved on. Keep what you have gained, grow in new directions that bring new and greater meanings to your life, and share in a spirit of love with those important to you.

[Roy]

cwald wrote:

“The choices we make dictate the lives we lead, to thine own self be true.”

I heartily agree with your addition Cwald.

As far as the oral sex stuff I came of age around 2000, so there was never anything explicit said to me about it. I can certainly testify that, not having known this was frowned upon, I never felt any guilt, or departure of the spirit or any of that. I had understood that your intimate relations with your spouse should be sacred and leave room for the spirit. I had interpreted that as being against bondage, S & M, etc. I guess it would depend on the couple as to whether they feel oral sex as an impediment to feeling the spirit.

[Roy]

Old-Timer wrote:

My own definition of sin is, basically, the definition in James 4:17.

Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

Iow, it’s not doing something I feel I should do. (Just to be clear, ALL things can be phrased this way. Murdering someone is not doing something I feel I should do – the “something” being abstaining from murder – or, from a more “enlightened” perspective, not loving someone enough to avoid murdering them.)

I believe this mostly because I accept the idea of being judged by how I live according to my conscience – which is the “pure Mormonism” definition of how we are judged, imo.

….…..

I understand the potential problems with such a definition, but I also believe the distinction between “transgression” (the broad category of things that are contrary to the will of God – or “all things that are wrong”) and “sin” (the sub-set of transgressions that we choose consciously to do – meaning we have to see them as wrong) is central to the concept of an Atonement – since we are told we will be punished ONLY for our unforsaken sins and not for Adam’s transgressions (which I interpret to mean the mistakes we make in ignorance as a result of what we inherit through being born into mortality).

I tend to agree with Ray’s comments above. For me it is all tied up in cognitive dissonance. If you act contrary to how you feel you should, you will feel it. You have two choices at this point, you can repent and return to your original path or deviate and find a new path that works for you.

I think the important thing is to evaluate the path and to choose and own it. I agree that in the end it is less about what you did and perhaps more about who you have become. I think the path you choose has an influence on who you become. What do you want your life to have been about.

Then it becomes “to thine own self be true.” You get to make the most of yourself in any direction you want and the “sin” is where you sabotage your efforts in becoming your ultimate you.

P.S. Cwald…is oral sex really a sin? 😥

[Roy]

Thanks for the clarification Ray.

I believe I remember Pres. Hinkley saying that the church doesn’t take a position on whether people are born with gay tendencies. I’m glad the church, to my knowledge, hasn’t painted itself into a corner doctrinally speaking. It is entirely posible that the future might contain the descovery of a “gay gene” etc.

I told DW that there should be a Gay GA. She was incredulous even aghast. 😮 I explained that if we are saying that persons can either overcome gayness in this life or successfully live a celibat lifestyle then wouldn’t it be nice if there was someone that we could point to as the role model, just to show that it is possible. What do you think?

[Roy]

SilentDawning wrote:

Good question. I don’t thinks Millet’s statement was a definitive, doctrinal answer.

I agree but neither was most of the stuff found in the book “Mormon Doctrine” and it was still pretty influential. I guess I am wondering what would be the influence of this particular passage.

Robert L. Millet wrote:

As I recall, I said something like this; “I know the Lord can indeed change you, change your heart, change your orientation. I know that he can do that instantaneously if he chooses to do so. I know that the power of change is in Jesus Christ and that dramatic and rapid change can take place. I do not know, however, whether the Lord will change you right away. …[snip]… You may be required to deal with these feelings until the day you die.”

So, to me, if Jesus has the power to change this young man “instantaneously if he chooses to do so” but “you may be required to deal with these feeling until the day you die”- then this is tantamount to saying that God makes him Gay. Just like the problem with evil…If God is all powerful and created all things and could uncreate anything he wanted to, then for evil to exist it must be part of God’s design or at least exist with his tacit approval. Similarly, if this young man is Gay despite his best efforts and God has the power to change him at any time but “you may be required to deal with these feelings until you die.” Then God either put the feelings there to begin with as part of his master plan for this young man or they just occured randomly but are part of a greater pile of advesity that we are expected to wade through in this life that will not be removed.

[Roy]

Cadence wrote:

behappy wrote:

I don’t believe God acts on anyone’s behalf. We are all blessed and we are all cursed. It is our choice on how we see ourselves in this life. We can focus on our “blessings”, whatever they are, or we can focus on our curses. What we decide to focus on will dictate how our life goes and whether or not we realize more “blessings”.

Makes perfect sense to me. Dare I say logical.

DW and I have had this discussion many times and we always reach this same conclusion. That believing these fortunate events are blessings from a loving interventionist God does not alter the probability of fotunate events happening but just your perspective to them. But that perhaps this change in perspective will increase your sense of gratitude and also perhaps humility and isn’t that a worthy goal in and of itself…something we would want to instill in our kids. Also that this constant “glass half full,” silver lining, “God has a grander plan for my sufferings” approach to life might result in greater feelings of contentment and (dare I say) happiness. Who doesn’t want happiness?

[Author]

Posts