LDS Freedom Forum

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 8:31 am**

Sarah wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 8:24 am
Durzan wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 11:57 pm
[email protected] wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 11:09 pm
Sarah wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 10:33 pm Do you think Heavenly Father is concerned about Heavenly Mother obeying him? When Adam and Eve were married in the GofE, did HF tell Eve her role was to obey Adam?
Well...yes? How can Heavenly Father BE Heavenly Father if his own spouse doesn't obey him and he doesn't care? This is what I'm talking about with authority being undermined by having two co-equal individuals running a home, it makes no sense. Another way to look at it, can a company or business have two CEOs? Can a country have two Kings or two Presidents? No. The way that has always made sense to me is if the home were a company or corporation the mother would be the CEO and the father the Chairman of the Board of Directors. The CEO manages the day to day tasks and empoyees (children so to speak) of the organization but the highest authority is the Chairman of the Board. Just some of my thoughts. Also I don't believe in a matriarcy (neither did Bruce R. McConkie) in fact a patriarchy and matriarchy are mutually exclusive. One of God the other is not. Equality as we understand it today is a modern 20th and 21st century notion derived from cultural marxism as taught in our western academic institutions and reinforced in western literature and media going back to roughly the 1930s. It is not of God but I am convinced this is source of much of the "hurtful feelings" with regard to the pre-2019 Temple Endowment ceremony.
Who says she doesn't care?
What I mean by this question, is I don't believe he worries about it because they have already become completely united. He is just as willing to hearken to her and she is willing to hearken to him. They each are working together and have different roles at the same time.
Even though my husband leads our family, he leads us as he obeys God, doing the things he believes God wants him to do. If I were to disagree, because I felt that God had commanded differently, there is no reason I need to do something I disagree with. The problem is that we are not united under the direction of God. It would concern me if my husband didn't listen to my counsel as much as he would be bothered if I didn't listen to his. And so him presiding is to teach him to be one with God and his wife in leading the family.

The goal is to be united though proper councils and councilling. Kings, branches of government, are stepping stones to help us learn to obey and listen to each other until we all become one in Christ.

Sarah, it doesn't sound to me like you have fully embraced the implications of the Temple endowment changes & their significance. Women no longer covenant to obey their husbands or hearken to their counsel, but to God directly. It's not just semantics - it's freedom! You are no longer subject to your husband - you are equal. What I wonder is whether this only really applies to new initiates. All of us older folks made the old covenants & we are bound by them. It's interesting though. Things have changed & by changing the ordinances/covenants, it marks palpable changes in the way LDS marriages will function moving forward. The Family Proclamation, at least the gender roles portion, is already being overturned (& it's a generation old now, too). It was never formally made scripture anyway - it was just a proclamation with signatures by Leaders, half of whom are dead now.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 8:35 am**

In order to "obey" must not a "command" be first given. I have never commanded my wife. I can never imagine doing so in the future.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 8:48 am**

I AM wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 7:58 am
Arganoil wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 5:50 am Hi, I am new here, but I also wanted to hand over my 2 cents. I strongly have the feeling that this temple change is just preliminary for much bigger changes in the future. Somehow the rushed way this has been implemented and the unfinished look of it gives me the feeling it is just a first step towards something bigger. Doe anyone shares my feelings about this?
I for one cannot wait. I am very happy with these changes and I am full of anticipation of that which is about to come!
----------------
Hi, and welcome to the forum.
I think you'll find that there are many DIFFERENT opinions here,
and ALL are important, so thank you.
However, I disagree, and believe the "something bigger", as you say,
is kind a like - "Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall."

No, bigger changes are VERY LIKELY coming. I predict that women will slowly receive priesthood authority as well. President Nelson made a subtle reference or foreshadowing for it in Arizona last night at the devotional - he said “women are endowed with / receive Priesthood Power in the Temples” - acknowledging that women administer priesthood ordinances to women there already. It’s just a matter of time for that pattern to come outside the temple. The veil over women is literally & symbolically being lifted & they are being made EQUAL (not subject to, less than men). This is a pretty big change for the Church. Write it down - it’s as good as prophecy. It would not surprise me if they reveal that plural wives go to other worthy single men in eternity, one to one. This would actually be exciting & go a long way to diffuse the bomb & scourge from our history called polygamy. I think more historical corrections/changes might be coming. Many, of course, the older, will have a problem with change - but the Leaders are trying to save the rising generations who just aren’t taking to this old-style socially structured patriarchy.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 9:23 am**

Sarah wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 8:09 am
Alaris wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 12:41 am
Sarah wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 10:33 pm Do you think Heavenly Father is concerned about Heavenly Mother obeying him? When Adam and Eve were married in the GofE, did HF tell Eve her role was to obey Adam?
May I answer this?

:->
Of course!

Thank you.

The first part of your question is an amazing perspective. The next question, imho, is, "Was there ever a time when Heavenly Mother made a covenant to obey her husband who would eventually become Heavenly Father?"

Then, "Did she later covenant to obey her God directly?"

That doesn't sound as straightforward as it is in my mind. The temple is highly symbolic. The new name we receive in the temple is not actually our new name but teaching us there is one and it is highly sacred.

We dress up like Adam and Eve and make covenants along with them. Why Adam and Eve? They are the stewards of this world and prime examples of who we should aspire to become.

Why are they the stewards of this world? Because they earned it the same way we earn it.

The temple endowment has been reflective of our time and season. Those of this time and season are neither priests & priestesses nor kings & queens but are anointed to become such. Adam is the chief prince.

Meaning they've already made these covenants step by step. As this season comes to a close, the change in language indicates the rewards to men and women who overcome together. This season has set up temples all over the world to enable mass sealings because those souls born into this season are ready for their first dominion and sealing. In order for a wife to overcome this step she must overcome by learning to submit to her husband. If she overcomes then this is not a lesson she must relearn as she becomes a priestess, then a princesses, then a queen. She's learned it already. As a priestess, she covenants directly with God. It's there in the title. Priestess. How does a women become a priestess if she's not dealing with God directly in her covenants?

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 9:27 am**

Jesef wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 8:31 am
Sarah wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 8:24 am
Durzan wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 11:57 pm
[email protected] wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 11:09 pm

Well...yes? How can Heavenly Father BE Heavenly Father if his own spouse doesn't obey him and he doesn't care? This is what I'm talking about with authority being undermined by having two co-equal individuals running a home, it makes no sense. Another way to look at it, can a company or business have two CEOs? Can a country have two Kings or two Presidents? No. The way that has always made sense to me is if the home were a company or corporation the mother would be the CEO and the father the Chairman of the Board of Directors. The CEO manages the day to day tasks and empoyees (children so to speak) of the organization but the highest authority is the Chairman of the Board. Just some of my thoughts. Also I don't believe in a matriarcy (neither did Bruce R. McConkie) in fact a patriarchy and matriarchy are mutually exclusive. One of God the other is not. Equality as we understand it today is a modern 20th and 21st century notion derived from cultural marxism as taught in our western academic institutions and reinforced in western literature and media going back to roughly the 1930s. It is not of God but I am convinced this is source of much of the "hurtful feelings" with regard to the pre-2019 Temple Endowment ceremony.
Who says she doesn't care?
What I mean by this question, is I don't believe he worries about it because they have already become completely united. He is just as willing to hearken to her and she is willing to hearken to him. They each are working together and have different roles at the same time.
Even though my husband leads our family, he leads us as he obeys God, doing the things he believes God wants him to do. If I were to disagree, because I felt that God had commanded differently, there is no reason I need to do something I disagree with. The problem is that we are not united under the direction of God. It would concern me if my husband didn't listen to my counsel as much as he would be bothered if I didn't listen to his. And so him presiding is to teach him to be one with God and his wife in leading the family.

The goal is to be united though proper councils and councilling. Kings, branches of government, are stepping stones to help us learn to obey and listen to each other until we all become one in Christ.
Sarah, it doesn't sound to me like you have fully embraced the implications of the Temple endowment changes & their significance. Women no longer covenant to obey their husbands or hearken to their counsel, but to God directly. It's not just semantics - it's freedom! You are no longer subject to your husband - you are equal. What I wonder is whether this only really applies to new initiates. All of us older folks made the old covenants & we are bound by them. It's interesting though. Things have changed & by changing the ordinances/covenants, it marks palpable changes in the way LDS marriages will function moving forward. The Family Proclamation, at least the gender roles portion, is already being overturned (& it's a generation old now, too). It was never formally made scripture anyway - it was just a proclamation with signatures by Leaders, half of whom are dead now.

I agree that there is the reinforced concept now of women being free to hearken to God rather than their husband. Ideally we should all hearken to each other. But I'm being careful not to suggest that the husband no longer presides in his home, as I still want my husband to learn to lead righteously, and that means, doing the duties of a presiding officer with the Priesthood in the home. He's still being tested that way, to see if he will use his priesthood appropriately. It means leading out in Family Prayer and FHE and scripture study, and not just waiting for his wife to initiate it. It means giving blessings to me and his children. He can still be a spiritual leader. He can delegate the wife to lead, or she can lead in those spiritual things when he is gone. This presiding role doesn't mean he should feel entitled to my obedience, just like a presiding officer should never expect that. If you are asking those under your authority to do something, there should be trust involved that what you are asking them to do is God's will.

I also don't believe the curse has been fully lifted yet, nor are men and women fully equal, which won't happen until the resurrection. Women are not priestesses yet in the new and everlasting covenant.

You bring up an interesting question though about gender roles. When all the curses of mortality are lifted, men won't have to toil all day to provide, and the burdens children place upon women in this life won't be to the same degree. So I wonder when it comes to creation of worlds and spirit bodies, if men and women will participate more equally rather than a strict divide.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 9:29 am**

I AM wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 8:11 am
Juliet wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 6:00 am Our brain has two equal halves. And the right brain actually submits to the chronological order of the left brain. This prevents insanity since the right brain has no concept of time. Also, the left brain does the talking and the right brain does the seeing. I thought this was why Eve was silent in the first movies.

Nevertheless, all males and females have both a male and female brain. That means as human beings we are all capable of thinking sovereignly. No one has the authority to think better than anyone else.

Why is Eve a helpmeet? Well, if Adam is to lead his family, then he is responsible for which directions things go. What if he unknowingly leads things in a bad direction? Well, luckily, he has a helpmeet. If he is doing something wrong, surely his helpmeet will know about it and provide him with necessary information so Adam does not lead the family into evil, as good as his intentions are.

Having a knowledge of good can be very bad if not coupled with a knowledge of evil. If good is all you know, how do you protect against bad? You wouldn't be able to but would unknowingly create evil. How many times has communism done this. The ideals of communism are not much different than the ideals of the united order. The difference is the leader.

If Eve can provide her husband an understanding of how some directions lead to evil, then her insights are a great help. If Adam is wanting to lead in righteousness but is actually hurting the hearts of his family, Eve will know and provide him with this important information he may not have any other way.

Nevertheless, just because Eve knows what not to do, doesn't make her the leader. If you put the person who knows what not to do in front, then all they can lead the family to do is what not to do, since that is what they know.

So, Adam has the leadership and Eve has an understanding of the laws of nurturing which means you don't let your great knowledge of truth burn so brightly that nothing grows. There has to be milk. There has to be patience. Together this creates love. This creates growth. How many times must Eve tell her husband, "For they cannot bear meat now, but milk they must receive; wherefore, they must not know these things, lest they perish." (D&C 19)

Therefore a knowledge of truth must be tempered with a knowledge of pain and evil so the truth doesn't kill everything on its mission to implementing it's high ideals. The dark compliments the night and allows plants to rest from sun and to grow bigger the next day.

The more I know God, the more I see how He is both the light and dark together. He is not only light. In fact, it is Lucifer that never will have a body. He only knows light. He will never know the information that pain from a body can give if you make a violation of life. This knowledge of evil and pain the body provides allows us to not do things to the body that would kill us. Therefore, Lucifer the light bearer will never be God since He will never have a body and will never know how to create, since creation is a function of light and dark.

If the right and left brain try to take over each other then that creates a bi polar effect. Let the left brain lead but realize it is blind. The right brain has access to creation power via emotional states. We are all emotional beings and this is creation power. The left brain creates a language processing center or a house for the creation power to live in and function in in this plane of existence.
----------------
I don't know if you wrote this, but I think it's very interesting.
don't know that I agree with everything; haven't really thought about it long enough.

I learned this from a psychology class where we learned about how people with intense seizures sometimes get surgery to disconnect the halves of the brain, and the resulting experiements they have done.

For example, they will show them a writing that tells them to stand up. Because they didn't speak it, their left brain doesn't know why they are standing up. So they verbally ask the person, "why are you standing up". Well the talking left brain doesn't know, but it thinks chronologically, so the person ends up making a lie to fit the story. They'll say, " to get a drink of water". Of course, the right brain knows the true reason but because the left brain is dissociated, it makes up a lie to fit a chronological timeline.

Now you understand the dangers of hypnosis, which essentially does the same thing, by distracting the left brain gains access to the right brain, telling it what to do, and the body will carry it out while the left brain sleeps and makes up a lie, such as, I was in bed all night when really you were at a satanic ritual or something.

In fact severe truama also dissociates the left and right brain, which is why a family that does generational satanic worship include truama and drugs to imbed their hypnotic codes. The CIA has taken it a step forward and used electroshock and virtual reality to easily imbed mind control programs. And they do work.

But, I digress. My soap box issue takes over again.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 9:46 am**

Changing the temple ordinance, specifically the covenant in which the women covenant to "keep the law of her husband and abide by his counsel in righteousness", to the woman directly covenanting with God, attempts to change the original order of things established by God for the man and the woman and how they are to interact.

Genesis 3: 16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

This is the way God ordered things. It is the way it has been established in the church for over 170 years. Now we are changing it? Just how long should and everlasting covenant last?

Paul admonished us to keep the ordinances as they were delivered to us and for the man to be the head of the woman. So it appears that the order that God established has been in place from the beginning as evidenced in Genesis, reestablished in the meridian of time and ordered again in the restoration by Joseph Smith in the endowment and in the Lectures on Faith.

1 Cor 11: 1“Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman, the man, and the head of Christ, God.”

LOF 2: 16 And again, the Lord said unto the woman, I will greatly multiply your sorrow, and your conception: in sorrow you shall bring forth children; and your desire shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you.

Reason would hold that if you received a revelation to change the covenant and ordinance that has been established from the beginning of time, you would also receive a revelation to correct our errant scriptures.

It is obvious that Joseph didn't deem it necessary to change Genesis or Corinthians in the Joseph Smith Translation. Not only that, he added the same order of things in the endowment and the Lectures on Faith.

I recognize that men have failed to cherish their wives as Christ has cherished the Church. But the answer is not to change the order of things established by God. The answer is for husbands to repent.

The result of changing the ordinance is to break the everlasting covenant and to further defile the earth.

Isaiah 24:5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 9:48 am**

investigator wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 9:46 am Changing the temple ordinance, specifically the covenant in which the woman covenant to "keep the law of her husband and abide by his counsel in righteousness", to the woman directly covenanting with God, attempts to change the original order of things established by God for the man and the woman and how they are to interact.

Genesis 3: 16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
This is the way God ordered things. It is the way it has been established in the church for over 170 years. Now we are changing it? Just how long should and everlasting covenant last?

Paul admonished us to keep the ordinances as they were delivered to us and for the man to be the head of the woman. So it appears that the order that God established has been in place from the beginning as evidenced in Genesis, reestablished in the meridian of time and ordered again in the restoration by Joseph Smith in the endowment and in the Lectures on Faith.

1 Cor 11: 1“Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman, the man, and the head of Christ, God.”

LOF 2: 16 And again, the Lord said unto the woman, I will greatly multiply your sorrow, and your conception: in sorrow you shall bring forth children; and your desire shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you.
Reason would hold that if you received a revelation to change the covenant and ordinance that has been established from the beginning of time, you would also receive a revelation to correct our errant scriptures.

It is obvious that Joseph didn't deem it necessary to change Genesis or Corinthians in the Joseph Smith Translation. Not only that, he added the same order of things in the endowment and the Lectures on Faith.

I recognize that men have failed to cherish their wives as Christ has cherished the Church. But the answer is not to change the order of things established by God. The answer is for husbands to repent.

The result of changing the ordinance is to break the everlasting covenant and to further defile the earth.

Isaiah 24:5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.

So do you consider this an apostate move on the church's part? Or would not accepting such a change by the Prophet and Apostles be considered an apostate move on the individual part?

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 9:52 am**

justme wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 9:48 am
investigator wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 9:46 am Changing the temple ordinance, specifically the covenant in which the woman covenant to "keep the law of her husband and abide by his counsel in righteousness", to the woman directly covenanting with God, attempts to change the original order of things established by God for the man and the woman and how they are to interact.

Genesis 3: 16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
This is the way God ordered things. It is the way it has been established in the church for over 170 years. Now we are changing it? Just how long should and everlasting covenant last?

Paul admonished us to keep the ordinances as they were delivered to us and for the man to be the head of the woman. So it appears that the order that God established has been in place from the beginning as evidenced in Genesis, reestablished in the meridian of time and ordered again in the restoration by Joseph Smith in the endowment and in the Lectures on Faith.

1 Cor 11: 1“Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. But I would have you know that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman, the man, and the head of Christ, God.”

LOF 2: 16 And again, the Lord said unto the woman, I will greatly multiply your sorrow, and your conception: in sorrow you shall bring forth children; and your desire shall be to your husband, and he shall rule over you.
Reason would hold that if you received a revelation to change the covenant and ordinance that has been established from the beginning of time, you would also receive a revelation to correct our errant scriptures.

It is obvious that Joseph didn't deem it necessary to change Genesis or Corinthians in the Joseph Smith Translation. Not only that, he added the same order of things in the endowment and the Lectures on Faith.

I recognize that men have failed to cherish their wives as Christ has cherished the Church. But the answer is not to change the order of things established by God. The answer is for husbands to repent.

The result of changing the ordinance is to break the everlasting covenant and to further defile the earth.

Isaiah 24:5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.

So do you consider this an apostate move on the church's part? Or would not accepting such a change by the Prophet and Apostles be considered an apostate move on the individual part?

That is for you to decide. Are the prophets who followed the order of things established by God in the scriptures and in the endowment for the last 6000 years right or are the current changes correct. Chose wisely.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 9:53 am**

Alaris wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 9:23 am
Sarah wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 8:09 am
Alaris wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 12:41 am
Sarah wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 10:33 pm Do you think Heavenly Father is concerned about Heavenly Mother obeying him? When Adam and Eve were married in the GofE, did HF tell Eve her role was to obey Adam?
May I answer this?

:->
Of course!
Thank you.

The first part of your question is an amazing perspective. The next question, imho, is, "Was there ever a time when Heavenly Mother made a covenant to obey her husband who would eventually become Heavenly Father?"

Then, "Did she later covenant to obey her God directly?"

That doesn't sound as straightforward as it is in my mind. The temple is highly symbolic. The new name we receive in the temple is not actually our new name but teaching us there is one and it is highly sacred.

We dress up like Adam and Eve and make covenants along with them. Why Adam and Eve? They are the stewards of this world and prime examples of who we should aspire to become.

Why are they the stewards of this world? Because they earned it the same way we earn it.

The temple endowment has been reflective of our time and season. Those of this time and season are neither priests & priestesses nor kings & queens but are anointed to become such. Adam is the chief prince.

Meaning they've already made these covenants step by step. As this season comes to a close, the change in language indicates the rewards to men and women who overcome together. This season has set up temples all over the world to enable mass sealings because those souls born into this season are ready for their first dominion and sealing. In order for a wife to overcome this step she must overcome by learning to submit to her husband. If she overcomes then this is not a lesson she must relearn as she becomes a priestess, then a princesses, then a queen. She's learned it already. As a priestess, she covenants directly with God. It's there in the title. Priestess. How does a women become a priestess if she's not dealing with God directly in her covenants?

Lots of deep questions and interesting points you bring up that I don't fully understand. But in regards to Eve overcoming, I think it is important that we all learn what unrighteous dominion means. That means having people rule over us. If Eve or women decided to dominate their husbands, they would be exercising unrighteous dominion themselves and never know what it felt like to receive unrighteous dominion. She must descend into that experience with her husband to ascend into her rightful place beside him later.

Men most often experience unrighteous dominion from other men in the workplace, or even the church hierarchy. There too, they have an awakening to what righteous leadership should really look like. President Eyring got teary eyed when remembering that the prophet during one of their councils, would not move forward on a decision because he sensed that someone on the council was still unsure. That is true love and unity!

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 10:04 am**

[email protected] wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 11:09 pm This is what I'm talking about with authority being undermined by having two co-equal individuals running a home, it makes no sense. Another way to look at it, can a company or business have two CEOs? Can a country have two Kings or two Presidents? No. The way that has always made sense to me is if the home were a company or corporation the mother would be the CEO and the father the Chairman of the Board of Directors. The CEO manages the day to day tasks and empoyees (children so to speak) of the organization but the highest authority is the Chairman of the Board. Just some of my thoughts.

Some companies do have two CEOs, and some governments are run by more than one head of state. I always get a kick out of how many Mormons automatically associate family life with corporate structure, though.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 10:04 am**

[email protected] wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 10:25 pm
justme wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 8:46 pm
[email protected] wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 8:06 pm I tired to make a previous post about this but it didn't show up so I thought I'd make this thread because I really would like to know how you feel.

So a little about me, I've been a member basically my whole life, am 35, married with two kids. Raised an active member, served a mission in Brazil from 2003-2005. Married in the Temple in 2008.

So let's cut to the chase. I am not enthusiastic about the recent endowment changes nor the manner in which the changes took place. The Proclamation of the Family which I always found to be an immensely important and divine document layed out clearly and reinforced centuries of scripture that established the father as the Patriarch of the home, in other words head of the household and presider. Women in the Temple were asked to harken to their husbands in order for this to be possible but now women are not required to make this promise. How can a man preside over his home and be the head of the household if his wife is no longer required to heed or "harken" to his council? You now have a situation where there are two heads of the household? It just doesn't make sense and I cannot reconcile this as it undermines a man's Preisthood authority and runs couter to so many key Gospel principles. It also suspicious coincides with the rise of feminism and cultural marxism (two things most certainly NOT of God).

Anyway is anyone else bothered by these changes?
Sorry I am not bothered at all. I in no way think that I somehow preside over my wife. I can't begin to fathom what that would even mean. I look forward to the day when we receive even further light and knowledge and reach an even deeper understanding of a women's role in the priesthood that we only get a glimpse of in the temple now.
Well think about it. If you are a father you are supposed to preside over your home/household specifically. Your wife is a member of your household is she not? How are you supposed to preside over your household if she is no longer required to "harken" to your council? Like I said you're (as a man and father) shouldering the responsibility and accountability of protecting and providing for your family but now you have someone else in the mix who's part of that family but doesn't fall under the umbrella of your authority but yet you are still responsible and accountable for what happens to that person. That is not right. I'm not saying you run roughshod over your wife but a household can have only one head and that is the father. This doctrinal change now essentially creates two heads of a household because it undermines the husband's Priesthood authority as the wife is no longer accountable to the husband.

Be practical, your reading way too much into this. A man is a man in his own right, he doesnt need his manhood given to him from someone else (requiring a wife to listen to him). The man has the priesthood, if you want to view it this way you can...your priesthood still makes you the head, the protector, the spiritual guide, and healer of your home so you trump your wife having that responsibility that she doesnt.

You have an immature attitude about the whole thing, as “noble” as you tried to make it sound. Your wife is an adult alongside you, shes not your child and she doesnt have to listen and follow every single word out of your mouth. Treat her like an adult and you will both be much happier.

If that last paragraph sounded like a mischaracterization of you and how your marriage is then check your post cause thats what it sounds like.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 10:07 am**

[email protected] wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 11:09 pm
Sarah wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 10:33 pm Do you think Heavenly Father is concerned about Heavenly Mother obeying him? When Adam and Eve were married in the GofE, did HF tell Eve her role was to obey Adam?
Well...yes? How can Heavenly Father BE Heavenly Father if his own spouse doesn't obey him and he doesn't care? This is what I'm talking about with authority being undermined by having two co-equal individuals running a home, it makes no sense. Another way to look at it, can a company or business have two CEOs? Can a country have two Kings or two Presidents? No. The way that has always made sense to me is if the home were a company or corporation the mother would be the CEO and the father the Chairman of the Board of Directors. The CEO manages the day to day tasks and empoyees (children so to speak) of the organization but the highest authority is the Chairman of the Board. Just some of my thoughts. Also I don't believe in a matriarcy (neither did Bruce R. McConkie) in fact a patriarchy and matriarchy are mutually exclusive. One of God the other is not. Equality as we understand it today is a modern 20th and 21st century notion derived from cultural marxism as taught in our western academic institutions and reinforced in western literature and media going back to roughly the 1930s. It is not of God but I am convinced this is source of much of the "hurtful feelings" with regard to the pre-2019 Temple Endowment ceremony.

My neighbor is in business with a partner - it's just him and another guy running the business together. As far as I know, one is not over the other.
My Dad and brothers went into business together and they didn't have a problem with each other - just failed because they couldn't make their idea work well enough. The important thing is that duties are divided up and each feel some independence and trust carrying out those duties.

So wife trusts her husband to provide for her and preside righteously in the home, giving her input, but allowing him to have some independence in how he provides and how he presides over spiritual matters. The husband should trust that his wife is taking care of their children, giving his input, but allowing her some independence in how she runs the household. They are equal partners, not one above the other.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 10:10 am**

Sarah wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 10:07 am
[email protected] wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 11:09 pm
Sarah wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 10:33 pm Do you think Heavenly Father is concerned about Heavenly Mother obeying him? When Adam and Eve were married in the GofE, did HF tell Eve her role was to obey Adam?
Well...yes? How can Heavenly Father BE Heavenly Father if his own spouse doesn't obey him and he doesn't care? This is what I'm talking about with authority being undermined by having two co-equal individuals running a home, it makes no sense. Another way to look at it, can a company or business have two CEOs? Can a country have two Kings or two Presidents? No. The way that has always made sense to me is if the home were a company or corporation the mother would be the CEO and the father the Chairman of the Board of Directors. The CEO manages the day to day tasks and empoyees (children so to speak) of the organization but the highest authority is the Chairman of the Board. Just some of my thoughts. Also I don't believe in a matriarcy (neither did Bruce R. McConkie) in fact a patriarchy and matriarchy are mutually exclusive. One of God the other is not. Equality as we understand it today is a modern 20th and 21st century notion derived from cultural marxism as taught in our western academic institutions and reinforced in western literature and media going back to roughly the 1930s. It is not of God but I am convinced this is source of much of the "hurtful feelings" with regard to the pre-2019 Temple Endowment ceremony.
My neighbor is in business with a partner - it's just him and another guy running the business together. As far as I know, one is not over the other.
My Dad and brothers went into business together and they didn't have a problem with each other - just failed because they couldn't make their idea work well enough. The important thing is that duties are divided up and each feel some independence and trust carrying out those duties.

So wife trusts her husband to provide for her and preside righteously in the home, giving her input, but allowing him to have some independence in how he provides and how he presides over spiritual matters. The husband should trust that his wife is taking care of their children, giving his input, but allowing her some independence in how she runs the household. They are equal partners, not one above the other.

I pretty much agree with Sarah, but what if the wife has superior spiritual skills, is not that part of her nurturing responsibilities?

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 10:19 am**

justme wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 10:10 am
Sarah wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 10:07 am
[email protected] wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 11:09 pm
Sarah wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 10:33 pm Do you think Heavenly Father is concerned about Heavenly Mother obeying him? When Adam and Eve were married in the GofE, did HF tell Eve her role was to obey Adam?
Well...yes? How can Heavenly Father BE Heavenly Father if his own spouse doesn't obey him and he doesn't care? This is what I'm talking about with authority being undermined by having two co-equal individuals running a home, it makes no sense. Another way to look at it, can a company or business have two CEOs? Can a country have two Kings or two Presidents? No. The way that has always made sense to me is if the home were a company or corporation the mother would be the CEO and the father the Chairman of the Board of Directors. The CEO manages the day to day tasks and empoyees (children so to speak) of the organization but the highest authority is the Chairman of the Board. Just some of my thoughts. Also I don't believe in a matriarcy (neither did Bruce R. McConkie) in fact a patriarchy and matriarchy are mutually exclusive. One of God the other is not. Equality as we understand it today is a modern 20th and 21st century notion derived from cultural marxism as taught in our western academic institutions and reinforced in western literature and media going back to roughly the 1930s. It is not of God but I am convinced this is source of much of the "hurtful feelings" with regard to the pre-2019 Temple Endowment ceremony.
My neighbor is in business with a partner - it's just him and another guy running the business together. As far as I know, one is not over the other.
My Dad and brothers went into business together and they didn't have a problem with each other - just failed because they couldn't make their idea work well enough. The important thing is that duties are divided up and each feel some independence and trust carrying out those duties.

So wife trusts her husband to provide for her and preside righteously in the home, giving her input, but allowing him to have some independence in how he provides and how he presides over spiritual matters. The husband should trust that his wife is taking care of their children, giving his input, but allowing her some independence in how she runs the household. They are equal partners, not one above the other.
I pretty much agree with Sarah, but what if the wife has superior spiritual skills, is not that part of her nurturing responsibilities?

She has plenty of time to impart those spiritual skills or gifts on her children when her husband is not around. And even when he is around, she can add to the discussion.

When my husband starts talking about something spiritual, I love to let him do his best to teach our children and not try to interject my perspective until I know he is done, and my perspective also supports his. It is a great learning experience for him to do that - because that is his role for eternity.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 10:21 am**

[email protected] wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 11:09 pm
Sarah wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 10:33 pm Do you think Heavenly Father is concerned about Heavenly Mother obeying him? When Adam and Eve were married in the GofE, did HF tell Eve her role was to obey Adam?
Well...yes? How can Heavenly Father BE Heavenly Father if his own spouse doesn't obey him and he doesn't care? This is what I'm talking about with authority being undermined by having two co-equal individuals running a home, it makes no sense. Another way to look at it, can a company or business have two CEOs? Can a country have two Kings or two Presidents? No. The way that has always made sense to me is if the home were a company or corporation the mother would be the CEO and the father the Chairman of the Board of Directors. The CEO manages the day to day tasks and empoyees (children so to speak) of the organization but the highest authority is the Chairman of the Board. Just some of my thoughts. Also I don't believe in a matriarcy (neither did Bruce R. McConkie) in fact a patriarchy and matriarchy are mutually exclusive. One of God the other is not. Equality as we understand it today is a modern 20th and 21st century notion derived from cultural marxism as taught in our western academic institutions and reinforced in western literature and media going back to roughly the 1930s. It is not of God but I am convinced this is source of much of the "hurtful feelings" with regard to the pre-2019 Temple Endowment ceremony.

Your viewing this whole thing as power. Sorry, but your way off.
FYI, there is no patriarch without a matriarch.

Heavenly father and Heavenly mother are Gods together, he is no God without her ALSO being a God. He is not a God over her, she already has one of those and will not have 2 Gods. What your not seeing is that once people become truly one and perfected and exalted there is zero need to rule OVER someone else who has obtained this WITH you, not despite of you or because of you.

To insinuate that women are to be eternally ruled over and never be free to think or be or act on her own merit then your asking for a host of problems. Its as bad as saying women are perpetually pregnant for eternity placed in Harems of the “gods”.

I suggest you stop thinking you have an ounce of power over your wife. You are to serve her if you want to be more accurate about it, not rule over her as her father.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 10:59 am**

Enlightening posts in this thread. It is becoming clearer to me why the change was made. It seems that many sisters posting in this thread are not interested in true doctrine, but want instead a version that is more palatable to their modern sensibilities. I expect this from the feminists, but am sad to see it from the mainstream.

It seems that the propensity for Eve to be soothed by the tongue of the serpent is no less true today than it was in the garden.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 11:09 am**

Serragon wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 10:59 am Enlightening posts in this thread. It is becoming clearer to me why the change was made. It seems that many sisters posting in this thread are not interested in true doctrine, but want instead a version that is more palatable to their modern sensibilities. I expect this from the feminists, but am sad to see it from the mainstream.

It seems that the propensity for Eve to be soothed by the tongue of the serpent is no less true today than it was in the garden.

Unless the scriptures were biased by male patriarchy & not by God. The story was written by the victors/men. Women have been subjugated for thousands of years - doesn’t mean that originated with God. I think equal is truer & more reflective, not less, of eternity. I’m male, just to be clear.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 11:17 am**

MMbelieve wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 10:21 am
[email protected] wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 11:09 pm
Sarah wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 10:33 pm Do you think Heavenly Father is concerned about Heavenly Mother obeying him? When Adam and Eve were married in the GofE, did HF tell Eve her role was to obey Adam?
Well...yes? How can Heavenly Father BE Heavenly Father if his own spouse doesn't obey him and he doesn't care? This is what I'm talking about with authority being undermined by having two co-equal individuals running a home, it makes no sense. Another way to look at it, can a company or business have two CEOs? Can a country have two Kings or two Presidents? No. The way that has always made sense to me is if the home were a company or corporation the mother would be the CEO and the father the Chairman of the Board of Directors. The CEO manages the day to day tasks and empoyees (children so to speak) of the organization but the highest authority is the Chairman of the Board. Just some of my thoughts. Also I don't believe in a matriarcy (neither did Bruce R. McConkie) in fact a patriarchy and matriarchy are mutually exclusive. One of God the other is not. Equality as we understand it today is a modern 20th and 21st century notion derived from cultural marxism as taught in our western academic institutions and reinforced in western literature and media going back to roughly the 1930s. It is not of God but I am convinced this is source of much of the "hurtful feelings" with regard to the pre-2019 Temple Endowment ceremony.
Your viewing this whole thing as power. Sorry, but your way off.
FYI, there is no patriarch without a matriarch.

Heavenly father and Heavenly mother are Gods together, he is no God without her ALSO being a God. He is not a God over her, she already has one of those and will not have 2 Gods. What your not seeing is that once people become truly one and perfected and exalted there is zero need to rule OVER someone else who has obtained this WITH you, not despite of you or because of you.

To insinuate that women are to be eternally ruled over and never be free to think or be or act on her own merit then your asking for a host of problems. Its as bad as saying women are perpetually pregnant for eternity placed in Harems of the “gods”.

I suggest you stop thinking you have an ounce of power over your wife. You are to serve her if you want to be more accurate about it, not rule over her as her father.

I regret that I have but one like to give to this post. I would give it a thousand.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 11:20 am**

Serragon wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 10:59 am Enlightening posts in this thread. It is becoming clearer to me why the change was made. It seems that many sisters posting in this thread are not interested in true doctrine, but want instead a version that is more palatable to their modern sensibilities. I expect this from the feminists, but am sad to see it from the mainstream.

It seems that the propensity for Eve to be soothed by the tongue of the serpent is no less true today than it was in the garden.

I completely disagree. Dangerous post. These changes were made by those who hold the priesthood keys. It represents a new line upon our old line and takes us closer to an understanding of true doctrine. I am grateful for it and look forward to more light and knowledge.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 11:32 am**

justme wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 11:20 am
Serragon wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 10:59 am Enlightening posts in this thread. It is becoming clearer to me why the change was made. It seems that many sisters posting in this thread are not interested in true doctrine, but want instead a version that is more palatable to their modern sensibilities. I expect this from the feminists, but am sad to see it from the mainstream.

It seems that the propensity for Eve to be soothed by the tongue of the serpent is no less true today than it was in the garden.
I completely disagree. Dangerous post. These changes were made by those who hold the priesthood keys. It represents a new line upon our old line and takes us closer to an understanding of true doctrine. I am grateful for it and look forward to more light and knowledge.

*shrug* I simply see it as yet another policy change. It has little doctrinal implications in my book, beyond a possible loss of additional symbolism.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 11:59 am**

Sarah wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 10:33 pm Do you think Heavenly Father is concerned about Heavenly Mother obeying him? When Adam and Eve were married in the GofE, did HF tell Eve her role was to obey Adam?

Well that assume one Heavenly Father and one Heavenly Mother. According to Prophets there are many more than one Heavenly Mother. Brigham professed that he himself would have millions of wives in the eternities. This likely makes meaningful collaboration difficult.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 12:26 pm**

Hie'ing to Kolob wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 11:59 am
Sarah wrote: ↑February 10th, 2019, 10:33 pm Do you think Heavenly Father is concerned about Heavenly Mother obeying him? When Adam and Eve were married in the GofE, did HF tell Eve her role was to obey Adam?
Well that assume one Heavenly Father and one Heavenly Mother. According to Prophets there are many more than one Heavenly Mother. Brigham professed that he himself would have millions of wives in the eternities. This likely makes meaningful collaboration difficult.

Do you have a source for Brigham professing that? Hadn’t heard that one before.

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 12:36 pm**

Jesef wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 12:26 pm
Do you have a source for Brigham professing that? Hadn’t heard that one before.

“Brother Cannon remarked that people wondered how many wives and children I had. He may inform them that I shall have wives and children by the million, and glory, and riches, and power, and dominion, and Kingdom after Kingdom, and reign triumphantly.”

- Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, v. 8, pp. 178-179

Sounds like something Jesus would say...

Posted: **February 11th, 2019, 12:38 pm**

Serragon wrote: ↑February 11th, 2019, 10:59 am Enlightening posts in this thread. It is becoming clearer to me why the change was made. It seems that many sisters posting in this thread are not interested in true doctrine, but want instead a version that is more palatable to their modern sensibilities. I expect this from the feminists, but am sad to see it from the mainstream.

It seems that the propensity for Eve to be soothed by the tongue of the serpent is no less true today than it was in the garden.

The adversary has been laying the pc foundation since the last temple change in 1990 to this very end.

LDS Freedom Forum

I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.

Re: I am bothered by recent Temple Endowment changes.