churchistrue Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 The Proclamation and its place in LGBT issues has been on my mind a lot the last few years. I guess I was coming from an ignorant place, but I didn't know the history of the Proclamation and it honestly never occurred to me that it had anything to do with homosexuality or gay marriage. It was important to me because it emphasized the importance of marriage and family. Especially pre-2008, I never really thought about LGBT issues much or how they affected me. When someone said marriage, the images that came to me were my marriage, Adam and Eve, love, commitment, fidelity, loyalty, learning to love and live together. I never thought about differentiating from gay marriage or opposing gay marriage so that my marriage was more special or whatever. It was a complete non-issue. When someone said family, likewise the images and thoughts that came to me were about my family, eternal families, my role as a father, teaching my children and other youth about how to prepare for a family, etc. Nothing to do with anything gay. I think our obsession with things gay is sad. I open up my lesson for teaching the 15 year olds a couple months ago, and the topic is marriage, and I'm thinking this will be a great lesson. I can teach about love and commitment, etc. Instead it's all about gay this gay that, defending marriage against gays. What the ....??!!! Who cares? I'm not gay. These kids aren't gay. Let's talk about something that's actually important. I see my fellow Progressives wishing to toss the Proclamation. Trying to bring up its questionable origins and claim it's not canon, not binding, and should be eliminated. I don't like that approach. I hope we can take back the Proclamation against the gay bashers and the anti-gay marriage folks and reclaim it for what it has meant to many for so many years. A testimony of the importance and power of marriage and family. I make that point further here: http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/dallin-h-oaks-the-plan-and-the-proclamation/ 3 Link to comment
RevTestament Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 On 10/4/2017 at 2:56 PM, theplains said: I had an observation and question about this specific talk. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2017/10/the-plan-and-the-proclamation?lang=eng God created this earth according to His plan to provide His spirit children a place to experience mortality as a necessary step toward the glories He desires for all His children. While there are various kingdoms and glories, our Heavenly Father’s ultimate desire for His children is what President Monson called “eternal life in the kingdom of God,” which is exaltation in families. This is more than salvation. President Russell M. Nelson has reminded us, “In God’s eternal plan, salvation is an individual matter; [but] exaltation is a family matter.” The Religion 430-431 - Doctrines of the Gospel Student Manual said Jesus became a god when he reached a pinnacle of intelligence and was ranked as a god - being married was not a pre-condition to exaltation. In LDS theology, did the Holy Spirit also become a god without being married? Thanks, Jim I don't think there is fully a LDS consensus on this point - probably because not really much is known about the Holy Spirit. So I am going to give my take on these matters for what it is worth. First the Holy Spirit is not a separate god from the Father. We aren't ever told in scripture that He is expressly YHWH. However, He is part of the family of God or the House of God, which is Elohim. So, I am comfortable with that title, although it too is not expressly given to the Holy Spirit by any present scripture. He is one with the Father and Yeshua even as a man and wife are one, echad, and the scriptures use this Hebrew word. However, when an absolute one is referenced the Hebrew word is yachid. The English word "one" does not carry the same idea as echad. To get that idea, you really need to add context or another word like "composite" one. So, do I believe Yeshua got married and became exalted. Yes, I do. I believe He was begotten on another world as the Son, and was temporally married on that world. The same goes for the Father as well, whom Yeshua followed by which He became the only begotten Son of the Father, and the first-born of this world. What happened to Yeshua's wife? Sorry, I don't know if she had to come to this world or not. Nevertheless, I disagree with the statement that being married was not a precondition to exaltation. I humbly proffer that whoever said this does not know the truth of the matter. Joseph Smith taught the truth - that whoever is to be like Yeshua, must live the same commandments and ordinances of the gospel as He did - even as He followed and showed us the Father. If we must be temporally married to receive this exaltation, it follows He did as well. Link to comment
JLHPROF Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 40 minutes ago, RevTestament said: I don't think there is fully a LDS consensus on this point - probably because not really much is known about the Holy Spirit. So I am going to give my take on these matters for what it is worth. First the Holy Spirit is not a separate god from the Father. We aren't ever told in scripture that He is expressly YHWH. However, He is part of the family of God or the House of God, which is Elohim. So, I am comfortable with that title, although it too is not expressly given to the Holy Spirit by any present scripture. He is one with the Father and Yeshua even as a man and wife are one, echad, and the scriptures use this Hebrew word. However, when an absolute one is referenced the Hebrew word is yachid. The English word "one" does not carry the same idea as echad. To get that idea, you really need to add context or another word like "composite" one. So, do I believe Yeshua got married and became exalted. Yes, I do. I believe He was begotten on another world as the Son, and was temporally married on that world. The same goes for the Father as well, whom Yeshua followed by which He became the only begotten Son of the Father, and the first-born of this world. What happened to Yeshua's wife? Sorry, I don't know if she had to come to this world or not. Nevertheless, I disagree with the statement that being married was not a precondition to exaltation. I humbly proffer that whoever said this does not know the truth of the matter. Joseph Smith taught the truth - that whoever is to be like Yeshua, must live the same commandments and ordinances of the gospel as He did - even as He followed and showed us the Father. If we must be temporally married to receive this exaltation, it follows He did as well. Sorry, not sure I read you correctly here? Are you saying you believe Christ was born, married, died, and resurrected on an earth previous to this one? Much as Brigham Young taught concerning Adam? I'd love to know your scriptural backing for this. Mormonism has taught repeatedly that Christ is of the same spiritual generation as we are - that is that this was his first mortal probation. Are you perhaps teaching the idea of multiple mortal probations for all of us (beyond the Adam-God idea)? Link to comment
RevTestament Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 (edited) 34 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Sorry, not sure I read you correctly here? Are you saying you believe Christ was born, married, died, and resurrected on an earth previous to this one? Much as Brigham Young taught concerning Adam? I'd love to know your scriptural backing for this. Mormonism has taught repeatedly that Christ is of the same spiritual generation as we are - that is that this was his first mortal probation. Are you perhaps teaching the idea of multiple mortal probations for all of us (beyond the Adam-God idea)? The probations start at "the beginning" or our first estate. However, before the beginning, there were other worlds, so yes there are multiple mortal probations. As for scriptural backing, there are many. The Holy Spirit is also a son of God - He is just not the first begotten or "only begotten" of the Father. In LDS parlance, He is the second counselor in the Presidency. Yeshua said the Father would send the Holy Spirit who would show all things. D&C says when the Lord comes he will show all things - things not seen nor known. How the earth was created, and the purpose thereof. This is not the return of Yeshua, who will return in the clouds. D&C also says that "in the world to come" those who do wickedly shall worship the desolation of abomination. See D&C 88:85. You cannot do this in the heavenly kingdoms. It is speaking of the new earth God will create after this one. Isa 65 says JHWH will create a new heavens and a new earth, and the former [this world] will not be remembered nor come into mind. D&C talks about inheriting eternal lives. the list goes on. All one must do is interpret the scriptures correctly. However, Yeshua has no more mortal probations. He is being promoted through this probation to the office of eternal Father, Isa 9:6 - never to return to corruption. He inherits the holy mountains of the Father per Isa 65:9 Matthew 19:28 28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the aregeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, bjudging the twelve tribes of Israel. Edited October 6, 2017 by RevTestament Link to comment
blueglass Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 On 10/4/2017 at 5:30 PM, JLHPROF said: Maybe he was just a god, not a God to begin with. Isn't that how it works? Seriously though, we know the requirements for exaltation and godhood. Christ either met them some how in the premortal existence or was not fully God until after his resurrection. Kind of like the first counselor is not the Bishop/President even though they are part of the Bishopric/Presidency. Which would also apply to the Holy Ghost if he has yet to receive a body. sounds like arian heresy to me - and one of the reasons christians claim mormons are not christians. King Follett appears to contradict Isaiah 43:10 and Mosiah 3:5, Moroni 8:18. Link to comment
blueglass Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 (edited) If we look at the history for Jesus, (1)First Jesus was an Essene-like, peripatetic, Luke 20:35, most definitely single, social revolutionary. (2)Then with Joseph Smith (1832) Jesus was the Lord who appeared to him in his first vision, (3)then he became a distinct and separate glorified social trinitarian person, after which (4) he became the literal son of an anthropomorphic super evolved now exalted former man/Christ 1.0 who was married to a goddess wife. (5)Then Jesus became the son of glorified Adam who is our real God and one of his wives Eve. (6) Then Jesus became a polygamist married to both Mary and Martha according to Wilford Woodruff in 1883. (7) President Newsroom (Dale Bills) when speaking for the church said on May 17, 2006 that the doctrine had changed and declared that “LDS doctrine does not endorse claims made in a popular book and movie that Jesus Christ was married.” Dale Bills then reversed the requirement of D&Cov 131:4 for the godhead, when he said, “the belief that Christ was married has never been official church doctrine”. I think it's really sad, as the jesus I knew growing up was exalted and definitely inherited the highest glory. Someone needs to hurry and go to the temple and perform the proxy sealing for Jesus and Mary Magdalene. Edited October 6, 2017 by blueglass Link to comment
JLHPROF Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 17 minutes ago, blueglass said: sounds like arian heresy to me - and one of the reasons christians claim mormons are not christians. King Follett appears to contradict Isaiah 43:10 and Mosiah 3:5, Moroni 8:18. King Follett doesn't contradict them if we use other prophet's understanding of both eternity and Lord/Jehovah. However making it fit with current Church teachings is a bit trickier. Probably why I have seen many members on this board reject the KFD. Link to comment
ksfisher Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 25 minutes ago, blueglass said: sounds like arian heresy to me - and one of the reasons christians claim mormons are not christians. King Follett appears to contradict Isaiah 43:10 and Mosiah 3:5, Moroni 8:18. Moroni 8:18 is speaking of God's love for His children, not His physical state. I don't see the contradiction with the other two verses. Link to comment
blueglass Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 55 minutes ago, ksfisher said: Moroni 8:18 is speaking of God's love for His children, not His physical state. I don't see the contradiction with the other two verses. "the Lord Omnipotent who reigneth, who was, and is from all eternity to all eternity, shall come down from heaven among the children of men, and shall dwell in a tabernacle of clay," Mosiah 3:5 "18 For I know that God is not a partial God, neither a changeable being; but he is unchangeable from all eternity to all eternity." Moroni 8:18 "We have imagined and supposed that God was God from all eternity. I will refute that idea, and take away the veil, so that you may see." KFD In my view when Joseph says "we have imagined" he is including all past prophets as well as himself earlier in life. Link to comment
Avatar4321 Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 3 hours ago, mfbukowski said: You know we are in for a tough time on this issue. Tougher than now even. What's your prediction on the future? I don't know. when I was younger I worked in juvenile court. I can honestly say that about 95% of my cases came from families not living the principles of the proclamation. more of those families exist now. 2 Link to comment
Avatar4321 Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 4 hours ago, churchistrue said: The Proclamation and its place in LGBT issues has been on my mind a lot the last few years. I guess I was coming from an ignorant place, but I didn't know the history of the Proclamation and it honestly never occurred to me that it had anything to do with homosexuality or gay marriage. It was important to me because it emphasized the importance of marriage and family. Especially pre-2008, I never really thought about LGBT issues much or how they affected me. When someone said marriage, the images that came to me were my marriage, Adam and Eve, love, commitment, fidelity, loyalty, learning to love and live together. I never thought about differentiating from gay marriage or opposing gay marriage so that my marriage was more special or whatever. It was a complete non-issue. When someone said family, likewise the images and thoughts that came to me were about my family, eternal families, my role as a father, teaching my children and other youth about how to prepare for a family, etc. Nothing to do with anything gay. I think our obsession with things gay is sad. I open up my lesson for teaching the 15 year olds a couple months ago, and the topic is marriage, and I'm thinking this will be a great lesson. I can teach about love and commitment, etc. Instead it's all about gay this gay that, defending marriage against gays. What the ....??!!! Who cares? I'm not gay. These kids aren't gay. Let's talk about something that's actually important. I see my fellow Progressives wishing to toss the Proclamation. Trying to bring up its questionable origins and claim it's not canon, not binding, and should be eliminated. I don't like that approach. I hope we can take back the Proclamation against the gay bashers and the anti-gay marriage folks and reclaim it for what it has meant to many for so many years. A testimony of the importance and power of marriage and family. I make that point further here: http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/dallin-h-oaks-the-plan-and-the-proclamation/ I've honestly never seen gay bashers in the church, let alone any that use the proclamation for that. It seems completely contrary to the gospel 4 Link to comment
Avatar4321 Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 2 hours ago, JLHPROF said: King Follett doesn't contradict them if we use other prophet's understanding of both eternity and Lord/Jehovah. However making it fit with current Church teachings is a bit trickier. Probably why I have seen many members on this board reject the KFD. who rejects the kfd? Link to comment
theplains Posted October 6, 2017 Author Share Posted October 6, 2017 On 04/10/2017 at 5:07 PM, ksfisher said: Could you provide a link or the exact quote from the Religion 430-431 manual? "As far as man is concerned, all things center in Christ. He is the Firstborn of the Father. By obedience and devotion to the truth he attained that pinnacle of intelligence which ranked him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in his pre-existent state." Jim Link to comment
ksfisher Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 1 minute ago, theplains said: "As far as man is concerned, all things center in Christ. He is the Firstborn of the Father. By obedience and devotion to the truth he attained that pinnacle of intelligence which ranked him as a God, as the Lord Omnipotent, while yet in his pre-existent state." Jim There is a distinction between being a god and being a glorified, exalted being. We believe that the Holy Ghost is a god, a member of the godhead. We do not, however, believe that the Holy Ghost has achieved exaltation. The same would apply to Christ. Link to comment
JLHPROF Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 6 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said: who rejects the kfd? Several on this board have expressed a disbelief, despite being members. Don't remember specific names (and not really interested in searching history to find it). I'll let people answer for themselves in case I falsely attribute. Link to comment
theplains Posted October 6, 2017 Author Share Posted October 6, 2017 12 minutes ago, ksfisher said: There is a distinction between being a god and being a glorified, exalted being. We believe that the Holy Ghost is a god, a member of the godhead. We do not, however, believe that the Holy Ghost has achieved exaltation. The same would apply to Christ. Are you saying that Heavenly Father is a God whereas Jesus and the Holy Ghost are only gods? The 1997 Gospel Principles says, "All good things come from God. Everything that he does is to help his children become like him—a god." How is Heavenly Father a god? Thanks, Jim Link to comment
ksfisher Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 (edited) 33 minutes ago, theplains said: Are you saying that Heavenly Father is a God whereas Jesus and the Holy Ghost are only gods? The 1997 Gospel Principles says, "All good things come from God. Everything that he does is to help his children become like him—a god." How is Heavenly Father a god? Thanks, Jim The differentiation in God and god in the quote above is the same as when you'd write Father as opposed to father. That's just grammar. We believe that the godhead is comprised of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. All three are gods. We believe that the Father is an exalted man who has a body of flesh and bone. The Son also now has a body of flesh and bone. However, before his mortality, he was a spirit as is the Holy Ghost currently. Christ was God before his mortality as well as after. After his resurrection and accent to the Father he became a gloried and exalted being, still God. One day we believe the Holy Ghost will also take part in this process. All three are, were, and will continue to be gods. They are one God united in heart, might, mind, and purpose irregardless of whether they have spirit bodies or bodies of flesh and bone. Edited October 6, 2017 by ksfisher sp and clarity 1 Link to comment
Duncan Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 1 hour ago, Avatar4321 said: I've honestly never seen gay bashers in the church, let alone any that use the proclamation for that. It seems completely contrary to the gospel I have several times 1 Link to comment
california boy Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 6 hours ago, churchistrue said: The Proclamation and its place in LGBT issues has been on my mind a lot the last few years. I guess I was coming from an ignorant place, but I didn't know the history of the Proclamation and it honestly never occurred to me that it had anything to do with homosexuality or gay marriage. It was important to me because it emphasized the importance of marriage and family. Especially pre-2008, I never really thought about LGBT issues much or how they affected me. When someone said marriage, the images that came to me were my marriage, Adam and Eve, love, commitment, fidelity, loyalty, learning to love and live together. I never thought about differentiating from gay marriage or opposing gay marriage so that my marriage was more special or whatever. It was a complete non-issue. When someone said family, likewise the images and thoughts that came to me were about my family, eternal families, my role as a father, teaching my children and other youth about how to prepare for a family, etc. Nothing to do with anything gay. I think our obsession with things gay is sad. I open up my lesson for teaching the 15 year olds a couple months ago, and the topic is marriage, and I'm thinking this will be a great lesson. I can teach about love and commitment, etc. Instead it's all about gay this gay that, defending marriage against gays. What the ....??!!! Who cares? I'm not gay. These kids aren't gay. Let's talk about something that's actually important. I see my fellow Progressives wishing to toss the Proclamation. Trying to bring up its questionable origins and claim it's not canon, not binding, and should be eliminated. I don't like that approach. I hope we can take back the Proclamation against the gay bashers and the anti-gay marriage folks and reclaim it for what it has meant to many for so many years. A testimony of the importance and power of marriage and family. I make that point further here: http://www.churchistrue.com/blog/dallin-h-oaks-the-plan-and-the-proclamation/ How could you possibly know that "these kids are not gay"? I also taught the teachers quorum. I had no idea any of the boys were gay. As it turns out, two of them were in fact gay. One of them was the son of a Area President. He ended up finding a partner after graduating from BYU and moving to NYC. Not sure what happened to him since. I lost contact with the family. 1 Link to comment
mfbukowski Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 6 hours ago, RevTestament said: All one must do is interpret the scriptures correctly. Uh, yeah, that says it all doesn't it? But like you, I am the only one who does that. 1 Link to comment
churchistrue Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 1 hour ago, california boy said: How could you possibly know that "these kids are not gay"? I also taught the teachers quorum. I had no idea any of the boys were gay. As it turns out, two of them were in fact gay. One of them was the son of a Area President. He ended up finding a partner after graduating from BYU and moving to NYC. Not sure what happened to him since. I lost contact with the family. I don't. Out of 8 kids, it's likely none are gay but possible one or two. The point is, at best an anti-gay marriage lesson is irrelevant. At worst it's damaging to a gay kid. 1 Link to comment
Kenngo1969 Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 1 minute ago, churchistrue said: I don't. Out of 8 kids, it's likely none are gay but possible one or two. The point is, at best an anti-gay marriage lesson is irrelevant. At worst it's damaging to a gay kid. If you present a lesson, isn't whether that lesson is (a) "irrelevant" or (b) "damaging" almost entirely up to you? Just wonderin'! Link to comment
RevTestament Posted October 6, 2017 Share Posted October 6, 2017 1 hour ago, mfbukowski said: Uh, yeah, that says it all doesn't it? But like you, I am the only one who does that. Hey Mark, I am so glad! Finally, someone besides myself! Welcome to the rare air - but don't faint P.S. Just a word of caution - with rare air comes rare responsibility... Cheers. 1 Link to comment
churchistrue Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said: If you present a lesson, isn't whether that lesson is (a) "irrelevant" or (b) "damaging" almost entirely up to you? Just wonderin'! Not following you. Link to comment
Kenngo1969 Posted October 7, 2017 Share Posted October 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said: If you present a lesson, isn't whether that lesson is (a) "irrelevant" or (b) "damaging" almost entirely up to you? Just wonderin'! 27 minutes ago, churchistrue said: Not following you. OK. 1 Link to comment
Recommended Posts