Ace – let me try to honor your questions by attempting to answer them for you from my perspective, since that is what you asked.


“How can the recovery board be restored to its original purpose as you've seen it?”

It takes two “main ingredients.” First, people who ARE past the affair stage and into the “we will try recovery” stage. Second, it takes people who are further along in the Recovery process and/or hopefully those who have reached Recovered who can impart some of the “hard learned lessons.”


“Can the moderators help?”

No, that is neither their purpose nor their role.


“Can it be renamed?”

It could be, but what better name than RECOVERY would fit those who are in the process of recovering a marriage that has been shattered by infidelity?


“Should the descriptions be more specific?”

They seem pretty specific to me.

Just Found Out….the devastation of nuclear shock from the bomb of adultery.

Emotional Needs….the understanding and application of the needs we all possess.

General Questions II….named for exactly what it means and for the fact that it is the second forum for questions (originally there was just the one forum for all questions).

Recovery….for those who have actually made into recovery and are working on restoring their marriage and/or for those who want to know what to expect on the “Roller Coaster Ride” that is Recovery.


“Or are there just less people recovering and willing to help?”

I don’t think there are less people who are willing. I think people have become distracted from the purpose of recovering marriages and have lost focus on the FACT that we are not counselors who know each marriage intimately and have, instead, tried to give “advice” to too many people. Think of it more like using a shotgun instead of a rifle when trying to help someone get some “wild game” for their sustenance. A shotgun will work in some specific cases, but a rifle focus’ on a specific target to provide what is needed for that person.


“Above all, how can more emphasis be place on Christian values over emotional entanglement?”

They can’t unless you were to turn MB into a “Christians only” site. Dr. Harley is a Christian who is taking the “Good Samaritan” approach, in my humble opinion.

If you look closely at the MB logo you will see the same “marriage triangle” for a marriage that is “in Christ” that I have spoken of and have used a more crude picture to describe.

Whether or not “Christian values” come into play is dependent upon the members of MB to shoulder that “burden” they might feel for others and not be afraid to stand for God, even in the face of strong opposition. You were perhaps not around for previous discussions, for example on evolution versus creation, to see just what I mean when I say “strong opposition.” Morals, in my opinion, come to us from God, whether we believe in God or not. Understanding the SOURCE of the morals is important because it leads to a set of Standards that is not subject to individual or societal “whims” and “changes.”


“What do you think needs to happen, FH to create (or recreate) what needs to be changed in order to meet the needs of our 'family' in our MB community?”

Nothing. The “community” is defined by the participants and specific advice or comment is either accepted or rejected by the recipient. No one can “force” anyone to do anything. If there is anything that might need to considered, it would be “am I offering advice or comment to help others or to help me?” That, too, is an individual issue for each person who is a member of the “MB community.”




I thank you for your prayers. The “issue” that I am specifically dealing with in respect to the “stay or go” question is that it can’t be about “me.” It needs to always be about God, from MY perspective as I see the “stay or go” question. The strong impression that I get is that I cannot allow my participation in MB to be about “me.” If it is, then the effectiveness of any witness for God’s purposes becomes cloudy, or even lost.

I fully understand the sometimes vehement opposition to “we should do it God’s way” from unbelievers and that sort of thing does not bother me. Each individual is responsible to God and my only responsibility is to “sow” for God, not to convert anyone. My responsibility in that arena is to “confront” (as lovingly as I can) opposition to God because others may also read who do not know what God has said or who have not yet reached a “conclusion” for themselves. I have no idea what individual “seed” that is sown is one that God may use to His glory in someone’s life, but I know that some have responded who I may never know about because it is not important that I know about it, only that God knows and works in the hearts of people He has chosen.

What I don’t understand is the opposition to God’s Word as the “yardstick” for believers, by professing believers. I understand that a normal human reaction is “protect myself” when what we currently hold as “truth” may be challenged by someone. Such situations are stressful and sometimes even scary to us. But for believers, God is in the “challenging business” in order to help us grow and mature in the faith that He has revealed to all of us. It is NOT to any church we might choose to affiliate with that we “owe our allegiance.” We each, as individual believers, owe our allegiance to God first and foremost.


God bless.

(((((notonlywords*)))))

Thank you. Heartfelt.

God bless.

this was my query
Schoolbus "bothered" to give me her take on this (my question was instigated by a discussion I had with my H about director Martin Scorcese)

and the question could be applied to anyone with a conflict between supposed values vs desires that grow outside the value system... how could a famous televangelist fake "healings" to creat profit, have an affair, get into male pornography???

same dynamic
human frailty
and the greatest sin of all

pridefulness

Pep

rs0522 - I don’t know. How “successful” have I been in preventing abortions, for example? Some things I will never know, but I do know that sin continues in sin-natured people.

The same thing applies to your question about ME having prevented affairs. I don’t know. But I DO know that there have been many who have considered a “revenge affair” as being justified by their spouse’s affair that MAY have chosen to not go that route in response to what I and others “advised” against such an action.



rs0522 – you are engaging in the same sort of “rewriting” of history that WS’ engage in.
Athanasius asked for CHRISTIAN and/or Catholic doctrinal comments. He obviously saw a difference between the two or wanted to equate “Christian” with ONLY Catholic doctrine. Either way, it was not me who “charged in,” I was invited in his blanket invitation to all.



And believe it or not, your conclusion is your opinion also, just as I have various opinions. You don’t seem to have any idea of what my “motives” are, or are willfully choosing to NOT consider Scripture in light of the teaching of the RCC to see if it truly IS “of God” or “of man.”



That is correct. There ARE several passages that speak of these things, but it is an incorrect conclusion to “believe that OSAS is wrong, based on the Bible.” It IS possible to reach that conclusion if you want to take passages out of the context of the entire Scripture, but then you are choosing to believe OSAS is wrong based on “personal preference” and not on the Word of God.

Something for you to consider….salvation is a “heart” condition, not solely a “mind” or “emotional” decision. Many have an “emotional response” to the message of God, but then the “cares of the world” come and snatch their joy away. Consider, if you will, the Parable of the Sower and the various responses to the seeds that were sown.

God is not in the “convincing” business, He is in the “changing” business. It is NOT up to us to be saved, it is up to God. If God saves us, who, in your opinion, is strong enough to separate from the omnipotent love of God? Who is “stronger than God?”
Who is more “effectual” than God?

Could it be that those “examples” you cite were NEVER saved to begin with and merely tried to blend in with the “sheep” to appear as a sheep themselves?




With all due respect, rs0522, if I were merely "storming off in a huf when it is questioned," I would have left MB a very long time ago.

Consider these two things as you "pass judgment."

One - I was asked to NOT post on Athansius's thread when the Catholic posters insisted that it was a "Catholics only" thread and that their opinion "trumped" any other opinion.

Two, even Jesus frequently left the crowds to be by Himself to commune with God. Should I not also consider following His example?

God bless.

Absolutely, Pep.

Sin is not limited and no one is secure from "using God" to their own purposes. The motivation is key in the "works" that are done.

Schoolbus "bothered" to give me her take on this

Sorry, Pep, I missed that and stand corrected.

God bless.

Mr. W - I personally stand in awe of both you and Mrs. W, that you have recovered your marriage and that you BOTH are comfortable with posting and sharing with others.

May God continue to bless you both and to enable you to be used for His glory and honor!

God bless.

aside:

Mr Pep played Judas Iscariot for 6 weeks in the stage play Jesus Christ Superstar

We were talking about that experience the other day ... Mr Pep said : "The rest of the cast took a strong dislike to me and I was always eating by myself ... and it took me awhile to realize they were reacting to me as Judas."

Pep

Confused about this post, Pep. Are you trying to say that the opposition was because I am a "Judas"? Or is it that people can make unfair "judgments" because they want to "protect" their beliefs from something or someone who they think is "wrong" even if it(what they want to avoid) might actually be true and not as it "appears" to their senses and emotions?

Perhaps that's why so few, none that I know of, name their children "Judas" today? There is nothing inherent in the name itself, just in the "belief" that is attached to that "name."

I just thought you (and others) might find it interesting/amusing that MY husband was Judas !!!

know what... I'm saying God Bless
and leave it at that

Pep

Got it. Thank you.



And thank you for that too. God bless you too and your work with trying to help people in their struggles with infidelity.

ForeverHers:

I will also be sorry to see you leave, however I do understand. I wanted to let you know that you have helped me in more ways than I can say. Whenever I would take my eyes off of Jesus you would redirect me. Sometimes I would stomp my feet and say but wait and you would continue to direct me back. For that I cannot Thank You enough. I am now resting in Jesus while HE works on my fwh and marriage. I wanted to push and have it all done with in my time. I understand now a lot of what you were saying.

Your discussions with others has also helped. I have used some of the discussions here with my kids and in helping them figure out where they stand. I Thank God that HE used you in my life, to point me back to HIM.

I just wanted to say Thank You.

Dear FH,

Over the years, I too have had some issues with your delivery... I am a jaded Christian, as you and I have discussed, having been harmed by dogma and people espousing the "love of Christ" (read: abusive hypocrites). Because of this, I am very distrustful of people who I feel use the Bible, and Christ, as a 2x4.

That said, I have been reading you for many years, and along with the posts that I have disagreed with have come the posts that bring tears to my eyes because of their love, generosity, beauty and Godliness.

You never know what nugget of truth will touch someone...

The one thing that can NEVER be said of you is that you're disingenuous. You obviously believe what you say and say what you mean. That counts for something. Whether you stay or go, your time here has been valuable.

The issue is how long can one remain in a church that teaches and believes contrary to what God has revealed without becoming "infected" with, or in propagating "untruth" to others and giving them "false hope."

this is the crux of your posts...

anyone who does not think as you...

propagates untruth and gives false hope...

this is your motivation...
this is your mission....

foreverhers..what you miss is that while I have NO problem with what you believe...

have great interest and sometimes respect towards what others believe.....

you see only your mission...

people can certainly defend their faith equal to your defense

scripturally...

my question is WHY do they HAVE to here...


is not possible for someone to post about their Catholic experience and NOT have to defend...

is it possible...

there is no devalueing on my parts of your beliefs, advice, and posts.....


ARK^^

perhaps it is I the infected... Catholic untruth propagator....who should leave...

these are your words...

amen to that ARKIE

ark^^ - I will say one more time, YES, it possible for anyone to discuss anything about any subject they wish by simple STATING that they want to restrict all posting on that thread to folks of "like mind" or who support whatever is they want to discuss.

THAT has never been "at issue."

This particular incident to which you are alluding was NOT of that category. It was opened by purpose and invitation of the thread originator to ALL who wanted to post regarding what the thread author saw as BOTH Christian and RCC doctrine as it applied to the concept of confession, elimination of the "fog" (willful sin) and repentance.

What I am certainly guilty of is not understanding that apparently in his mind he equated "Christian" with only Roman Catholic doctrine. Perhaps I misunderstood his "and/or" to be INCLUSIVE and not exclusive, but I'm not a mindreader and can only go with what is posted.




ark, with all due respect, one believer to another, is it not the "mission" of all who believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior to do, to the best of their ability, to share the "good news" of the gospel with others?

If I am "wrong" in my belief, is it not your "duty" to God to at least mention that I might be in error in my interpretation of the Scripture, because it, not any of us, is the authoritative Word of God? Does this not provide an answer to God's question to Cain and Cain's response, "Am I my brother's keeper?" As fellow believers, are we not responsible to God, as in accountable to God, to "hold each other accountable" in the Lord?

WHERE does one make the distinction between beliefs that are "of God" and beliefs that are "of Man?" I would simply submit that the SOURCE for answering that question is the Scripture itself. The "accountability" part comes in because Man is capable of taking the truth of God and misapplying it or even twisting it in order to support their own desires. If we want to "toss out" the authority of Scripture, then of course anyone can believe whatever they want, but ultimately the "truth" is determined by God, not by any of us.

We are commanded to be careful to "rightly divide the Word" so as to NOT allow error to "creep in," because error is what can lead people to a "false sense of security." That very issue is at the heart of things like people who want to take Eternal Security and turn it into a license to sin with impunity because they think they have some "get out of jail free card," as well as those who want to deny Eternal Security and keep people from ever knowing with certainty that they have "done enough" to merit Justification before God on their own.




ark, the simple answer is that they don't have to if they don't want to.

But it would seem a little facitious to state something as a biblically based "truth" and then not be willing to say why they believe that if anyone, another believer or an unbeliever should "challenge" their position with a "why do you believe that?" It's sort of like the former proponents of a "flat earth" who dogmatically took a stance because others had said, who had perhaps traveled further than they had, that the earth was flat and if you went "too far" you would fall of the earth. Against all "accepted" belief to the contrary, people like Christopher Columbus had the temerity to challenge that belief and were willing to put themselves in potential harms way to prove or disprove the "belief." Truth will out, as the saying goes. None of us should be afraid of the truth, unless we have an agenda to deceive others, and I don't think that is the case when believers discuss areas of disagreement or uncertainty. They are both looking to understand God's truth, not to "win an argument at all costs."

ark, I would submit that none of this current issue would be going on if someone was not "baited" into a discussion of "Christian Doctrine" and then set up to be hammered because he disagreed with "Catholic" doctrine.

That may be "protecting turf" but it's not discussion or examination of the underlying doctrines.

If anyone wants to discuss the "doctrines" that I believe are true, I will discuss it with them. If I make the mistake of assuming they would do the same when offering to discuss the doctrines of Christian and Catholic beliefs, then it is my error for making that assumption and I withdraw from the discussion when it becomes clear that they don't want to actually discuss "doctrines."

Ark, how is this possible, when there is only ONE truth?

My trouble of late is, how does one discern THE truth?

So many arguments SOUND good, so many conflicting beliefs SEEM to be able to find scriptural support....there is a way that SEEMS right to a man, etc.

They can't ALL be right.

no one has to defend... the choose to do so. Anyone that responds to FH is choosing to engage in the discussion. If they do no like what he is saying and they don't want to defend their position, they could choose to not do so.



When I first came to these boards, I butted heads with FH very frequently and called him to the carpet for his manner. It was my short coming, not his. We had an airing of our differences and while I still will disagree with him at times, I lok at his posts as an attempt to educate others. If someone does not like what he has to say or his approach... why continue to debate with him? I find him helpful...and I struggle with Catholicism and Christianity... his views are valuable to me... and quite obviously to others... his style obviously reaches some and rubs some others the wrong way... as does yours, mine and everyone elses.
I think this is all much ado about nothing since we have the ability to tune those out when we don't care for their meassge or delivery.

sorry foreverhers you are no victim here...

the original Catholic topic related was directly questioned to CATHOLICS and their personal experience....with confession

I would never want a post that said
men only
female only
Born again seven day advantist only
Catholics..only.

but there is a big difference between stating here's what "I" believe.....because of blah blah blah...

NOT
if you say this then defend it scripturally to me...
allll the time...
THAT'S YOUR demand foreverhers..over and over...

defend what anyone says to YOU
and in the way YOU want it...

you can have your say about alllll your beliefs....

have at it...
I read some it...

and I am sure it helps many...

but YOUR position is debate me debate me...


If I am "wrong" in my belief, is it not your "duty" to God to at least mention that I might be in error in my interpretation of the Scripture, because it, not any of us, is the authoritative Word of God?

Don't worry foreverhers...I pray for divine intervention for you every day.....


see there it is again..

the clearly stated belief of yours that Catholics are wrong in their beliefs...

YOU disagree with ALL Catholic doctrine
period....

this is your mission

set the Catholics straight....

or at least quiet them


but here's what you want so bad..
the tit for tat
the he says she says


Protestantism started when Martin Luther declared that we are justified (made righteous) by faith alone. At the time I was leading Catholics out of the Church, I wasn't aware that Martin Luther had added the word alone to his translation of Romans 3:28 in order to prove his doctrine. (The word alone is not found in any contemporary Protestant English translation of Romans 3:28.) I didn't realize that the only place the bible mentions "faith alone" in the context of salvation is in James 2:24, where the idea of faith alone is explicitly refuted: "You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone." This verse was troubling, but I either ignored it, or twisted it to mean something other that what the verse and its context clearly taught.


ARK

and here we go... CHOOSING to debate.

FH,

You and I have sort of crossed swords over the years on a few things. However, I suspect you don't understand my feelings about you. I think you ARE AN ASSET to this site. I think you are very much on target to encourage people to look to their faith and beliefs at a time of very difficult emotions and decisions. I find your own recovery to be one of the best examples of what ones faith and determination can acheive.

However, I also understand that you are tired. This place tires one out, and you are right it has changed. Actually it has changed many times as different waves of people wash up on the shores of this site. I would strongly encourage you to step back recharge your batteries, and come back when you are ready. You are needed here, you really are.

God Bless,

JL