rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 How can you agree? Are you backing off from everything you've been saying? If so, then you can agree. If not, then I think you don't even understand what CV said.... I agree that we should not presume to define what the greater light should offer. Meaning, we should not presume that it will allow sealings for homosexual couples nor should we presume that it won't.
rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 The more this topic is discussed ad nauseum on this Board and the more I see certain participants discuss their "logic" the more I am forced to acknowledge how strong the hold of the evil one is over us mortals. How anyone can conclude in any fashion that "priesthood power" will be the saving method for homosexual couples in the afterlife is.......straining on gnats to swallow camels. This is not a gray area; this is black and white. There is no middle ground; there is no, "let's wait and see how God handles this" type of issue. Man is made for the woman just as woman is made for man. That is all there is. The entire Plan of Salvation is built on this overriding principle. It does not matter how many shows you watch on television about the fun, loving homosexual couple, or the every so fun gay guy; it does not matter how many movies are made that bow down and kiss the agenda of perversion out of Hollywood; there is only one answer. No, that is perversion and God does not, will not, not now, now ever, condone homosexuality. This is an area of extreme opposites; there is no middle ground of any kind. There is no waiting for further light and knowledge; there is hell fire and damnation on one side and salvation on the other. You get to choose. The very elect will fall; nothing is so jarring as to see it run rampant through the saints as it is on this Board. It scares me. Are we that easy to deceive? How does one read the scriptures; any scriptures, and come away with this kind of twisted, incomprehensible position? There is no room for perversion and to still claim to sincerely follow the Savior. There is no problem with an individual dealing with controlling his/her passions, failing, and striving to maintain a penitent heart; this is the very definition of a disciple of Christ. However, to wrap one's self in the gospel and maintain this deception of the evil one is to be lost to the most fundamental understanding of God's relationship with his children. We can either repent or we can be damned. Choose. The very elect will fall. And that of course must be interpreted to mean those who disagree with current church policies regarding homosexuality. It couldn't be the other way around.
Questing Beast Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 ... Why does the idea that the Lord could reveal a sealing ordinance for a loving homosexual couple even need to be shot down?That is a disingenuous question and you know it. The reasons are always the same, repeated like beating that dead horse. You said "nowhere". So you have nothing to base your "wait and see" upon. Whereas all the scriptures, especially for LDS D&C 132, point to "man and woman" in the hereafter and nothing more or different from "man and woman". You perceive a lack of details and create your own wiggle room. Everyone else but those who think like you do ("novelty" is what it is) accepts what has been revealed as the basis for what will yet be revealed. You expect a complete revision to include relationships that are founded on nothing more than the imperfections of the mortal body....
CV75 Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 Again, there is no revealed scripture that explains how spirits are formed. Even if you and CV keep claiming that there is. I view the “how” in “how spirits are formed” from a covenantal and not mechanical perspective, which of course are not described in scripture. A word search for “their,” “they,” and “them” in D&C 132 makes it clear that these pronouns refer to a man and the woman in the covenant of the fullness of the priesthood. The partners in a same-sex relationship would still be considered to be “single” as far as the fullness of the priesthood is concerned, or the covenant. Why is it necessary to detail the mechanics of procreation, whether spiritual or physical, in the scriptures—and if not physically, then why spiritually? Just as revealed scripture didn't provide the ordinance that sealed BY & John D. Lee. I take the wording of temple ordinances to be scripture. It's interesting to me why this is so offensive to some people. Why does the idea that the Lord could reveal a sealing ordinance for a loving homosexual couple even need to be shot down? It is not offensive. The idea that the Lord could reveal a sealing ordinace for homosexual couples simply isn't indicated by the sriptures and therefore cannot be successfully encouraged. 1
rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 That is a disingenuous question and you know it. The reasons are always the same, repeated like beating that dead horse. You said "nowhere". So you have nothing to base your "wait and see" upon. Whereas all the scriptures, especially for LDS D&C 132, point to "man and woman" in the hereafter and nothing more or different from "man and woman". You perceive a lack of details and create your own wiggle room. Everyone else but those who think like you do ("novelty" is what it is) accepts what has been revealed as the basis for what will yet be revealed. You expect a complete revision to include relationships that are founded on nothing more than the imperfections of the mortal body.... Well, I don't believe homosexuality to be an imperfection of the mortal body. So that tends to impact how I view this issue.
rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 I view the “how” in “how spirits are formed” from a covenantal and not mechanical perspective, which of course are not described in scripture. A word search for “their,” “they,” and “them” in D&C 132 makes it clear that these pronouns refer to a man and the woman in the covenant of the fullness of the priesthood. Why is it necessary to detail the mechanics of procreation, whether spiritual or physical, in the scriptures—and if not physically, then why spiritually? If you view the "how" in "how spirits are formed" from a covenantal perspective than at least we see eye to eye on that. I don't think it is necessary to detail the mechanics of physical or spiritual procreation. We seem to have figured out the mechanics of physical procreation on our own. And, we don't need to know the mechanics of spiritual procreation in this life.
USU78 Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 Well, I don't believe homosexuality to be an imperfection of the mortal body. DNA that chooses not to replicate itself and broadcast itself into the future via offspring, either through mitosis or otherwise, is a failed DNA. How can homosexuality, being a condition that discourages DNA replication, not be an imperfection? 1
CV75 Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 I agree that we should not presume to define what the greater light should offer. Meaning, we should not presume that it will allow sealings for homosexual couples nor should we presume that it won't.But you are using the argument of greater light to encourage and promote the idea that homosexual couples will be sealed and produce spiritual children, contrary to all the increasing light over the years that has been offered to the contrary. Inherent in encouraging and promoting is a presumption of greater light than other options.
rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 That is a disingenuous question and you know it. The reasons are always the same, repeated like beating that dead horse. And by the way, it was not a disingenuous question. It was sincere. In a church that believes we are in the midst of a restoration and that revelation is on going, I don't understand the need for fellow saints here on this board to say "no, it can NEVER happen" whenever someone mentions that possibility that the void of revelation on homosexuality could someday be filled. And filled in a way that might surprise us.
rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 DNA that chooses not to replicate itself and broadcast itself into the future via offspring, either through mitosis or otherwise, is a failed DNA. How can homosexuality, being a condition that discourages DNA replication, not be an imperfection? I'm not sure that being gay is part of one's DNA. I believe that our sexual orientation could very well be a part of our eternal identity.
USU78 Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 I'm not sure that being gay is part of one's DNA. I believe that our sexual orientation could very well be a part of our eternal identity. And I'm sure you have rock-solid evidence therefor.
rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 But you are using the argument of greater light to encourage and promote the idea that homosexual couples will be sealed and produce spiritual children, contrary to all the increasing light over the years that has been offered to the contrary. Inherent in encouraging and promoting is a presumption of greater light than other options. I'm saying that we lack the revelation to conclude that it can't happen. I am not saying that homosexual couples WILL be sealed... just that we don't know that such a revelation can't come in the future. And my personal hope that it will if it is consistent with our Heavenly Father's will.
CV75 Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 If you view the "how" in "how spirits are formed" from a covenantal perspective than at least we see eye to eye on that.Yes I do, and the covenant is between men and women; the fulness of the priesthood can exist only as shared by a man and a woman. A man with a man is still a single "united man" and a woman with woman is still likewise a single "united woman." Only when the complimentary souls (and gender of the inseparably connected spirit and body is an eternal attribute) become one do they become a united god. 1
rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 And I'm sure you have rock-solid evidence therefor. Nope. Just my belief... as I clearly stated.
CV75 Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 I'm saying that we lack the revelation to conclude that it can't happen. I am not saying that homosexual couples WILL be sealed... just that we don't know that such a revelation can't come in the future. And my personal hope that it will if it is consistent with our Heavenly Father's will.A personal hope for what God will do that is not based on revelation is a false hope. A hope based on what we don't know (and faith and knowledge work hand in hand) is likewise a false hope, and obviously without faith or knowledge.
rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 (edited) A personal hope for what God will do that is not based on revelation is a false hope. A hope based on what we don't know (and faith and knowledge work hand in hand) is likewise a false hope, and obviously without faith or knowledge. My hope is based on personal revelation and my very best understanding of the gospel and our loving and compassionate Savior and Father. Edited August 27, 2013 by rockpond
CV75 Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 My hope is based on personal revelation and my very best understanding of the gospel and our loving and compassionate Savior and Father.Would you describe your personal revelation with regards to the Lord revealing same-gender sealings as part of the Plan of Salvation?
rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 Would you describe your personal revelation with regards to the Lord revealing same-gender sealings as part of the Plan of Salvation? I have no personal revelation that the Lord is going to reveal same-gender sealings.
CV75 Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 I have no personal revelation that the Lord is going to reveal same-gender sealings.I understand--but you said that your hope for a new revelation that same-sex couples can be sealed (if it is consistent with God's will) is based on personal revelation, along with your best understanding. I am wondering what that personal revelation is.
rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 I understand--but you said that your hope for a new revelation that same-sex couples can be sealed (if it is consistent with God's will) is based on personal revelation, along with your best understanding. I am wondering what that personal revelation is. Not something that I am willing to share with you in a forum like this. Sorry, but you don't get to question my faith and then turn around and ask me to share deeply personal spiritual experiences with you.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 I'm not sure that being gay is part of one's DNA. I believe that our sexual orientation could very well be a part of our eternal identity.There is 0 evidence for this. You can believe it of you want but I see no evidence and even contrary evidence for this from scripture.
rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 There is 0 evidence for this. You can believe it of you want but I see no evidence and even contrary evidence for this from scripture. What is the scriptural evidence that sexual orientation is not part of our eternal identity?
Ahab Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 What is the scriptural evidence that sexual orientation is not part of our eternal identity?We are either male or female. Your sex isn't defined by the sex of the person you have sex with. Sexual relations is something you do, not something you are, as if the sex of the person you have sex with is makes you one sex or the other.
rockpond Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 We are either male or female. Your sex isn't defined by the sex of the person you have sex with. Sexual relations is something you do, not something you are, as if the sex of the person you have sex with is makes you one sex or the other. Correct, sexual relations are something you do. But that wasn't the question... The question was about Mola Ram's claim that there was scriptural evidence showing that sexual orientation is not part of our eternal identity. Note: Sexual orientation is different and independent of gender as well as sexual relations.
Questing Beast Posted August 27, 2013 Posted August 27, 2013 (edited) @ rockpond: If SSA is something dependent on our immortal or eternal identity, shouldn't there be some evidence at some point that God approves of it in mortality? And some evidence that doctrine allows for it? It seems so obviously false that it is no wonder that very few scriptures even reference homosexuality, but when they do it is an abomination. Your "personal revelation", if it allows homosexuality equal place with heterosexuality, is a personal delusion instead. Why you are so intent on making this false hope into a reality is the poser. Does a dear loved one in your life follow SSA? If so, I can see the motivation to look for an answer that lets all of us off the hook of taking a hard stand on this one. But then what else is new? It's always something to test us and make us stand firm or move, searching for some relief to our discomfort and sorrow.... Edited August 27, 2013 by Questing Beast
Recommended Posts