eddie Posted May 17, 2014 Posted May 17, 2014 I look forward to the day the prophet says "All temple blessings including eternal marriage are now available to all worthy members of the church." Until that happens there is no reason for you to change your personal opinion on gay marriage. And until that happens, I will unfortunately not be able to be a part of the church. It may never happen. Only God knows. So far, He has not revealed His will on this subject.We already have that. Any worthy, baptized member can enter the House of the Lord, regardless of their political ideologies or even sexual orientation.I am married, love my wife dearly, but I still am tempted sometimes as even the Savior was. I simply seek to not act on those temptations, particularly those regarding fidelity with my spouse. Is it wrong for me to be tempted as nearly all men are? The answer is no, just avoid the behavior and the situations.Now the commandments against homosexual behavior exist for more than simply taboos. It is a dangerous lifestyle, and science backs this up. Some studies show a person is safer smoking a pack of cigarettes than living life as a gay individual. The human body simply is not built for these actions, and the health/life risks are enormous, as is promiscuity. These commandments exist as a loving warning, not as a punishment. Look at what this Ivy school tells its students that live the gay lifestyle. Just as with the Word of Wisdom, the commandment for heterosexual monogamy is designed to protect our bodies.http://brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/lgbtq_health/gay_men_and_msm_health/health_concerns_for_gay_men_and_msm.phphttp://brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/lgbtq_health/lesbian_&_wsw_health/health_concerns_for_lesbians_&_wsw.phpAs a final question about obedience to the first great commandment of multiplying and replenishing the earth, if all men and women decided to live the gay lifestyle (or even just Adam) how would that be possible?
Tsuzuki Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." Leviticus 18:22"Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard." - Leviticus 19:27
Mystery Meat Posted May 19, 2014 Author Posted May 19, 2014 "Ye shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shalt thou mar the corners of thy beard." - Leviticus 19:27 You fell for it and in so doing show your ignorance of the Law of Moses. Go read Leviticus 18:22-26, get some more context and then tell me how the above is different from the scriptures I provided. It should be obvious.
canard78 Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 You fell for it and in so doing show your ignorance of the Law of Moses. Go read Leviticus 18:22-26, get some more context and then tell me how the above is different from the scriptures I provided. It should be obvious. Given you started this thread as a question of race issues vs homosexuality, have you been able to explain yet how several generations of prophets could incorrectly interpret the scriptures to justify the race ban? The prophets claimed there was scriptural precedent for it. Can you find it? If not, how could they?
california boy Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 You fell for it and in so doing show your ignorance of the Law of Moses. Go read Leviticus 18:22-26, get some more context and then tell me how the above is different from the scriptures I provided. It should be obvious.You fell for it as well. To claim you follow all of the teachings of the Old Testament puts you in a difficult situation. I gave up Bible bashing years ago. But sometimes people who only know the "highlights" of the Old Testament, and think that puts them on sure footing, really don't know the Old Testament. Like I said, I spent 4 years teaching the Old Testament in seminary. So let me ask you just one question after you read in Judges 19.. Judges 19:22: Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him. 23: And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly. 24: Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing. 25: But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. 26: Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man's house where her lord was, till it was light. 27: And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and, behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold. 28: And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ***, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place. 29: And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel. This is a guy that thinks rape and murder of his wife and daughter is ok, but not lying with a man. Are you in agreement with that? Because if you are in agreement with his views on knowing a man, you have to be in agreement with his solution to the problem. Just wondering. 1
Mystery Meat Posted May 19, 2014 Author Posted May 19, 2014 (edited) You fell for it as well. To claim you follow all of the teachings of the Old Testament puts you in a difficult situation. I gave up Bible bashing years ago. But sometimes people who only know the "highlights" of the Old Testament, and think that puts them on sure footing, really don't know the Old Testament. Like I said, I spent 4 years teaching the Old Testament in seminary. So let me ask you just one question after you read in Judges 19.. Judges 19:22: Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him. 23: And the man, the master of the house, went out unto them, Nay, my brethren, nay, I pray you, do not so wickedly; seeing that this man is come into mine house, do not this folly. 24: Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing. 25: But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. 26: Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man's house where her lord was, till it was light. 27: And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and, behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold. 28: And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ***, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place. 29: And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel. This is a guy that thinks rape and murder of his wife and daughter is ok, but not lying with a man. Are you in agreement with that? Because if you are in agreement with his views on knowing a man, you have to be in agreement with his solution to the problem. Just wondering. I will answer your question when you answer mine. Edit: see post 250 to see the question (more of a request) I am referring to. Edited May 19, 2014 by lvjd66
Mystery Meat Posted May 19, 2014 Author Posted May 19, 2014 (edited) Given you started this thread as a question of race issues vs homosexuality, have you been able to explain yet how several generations of prophets could incorrectly interpret the scriptures to justify the race ban? The prophets claimed there was scriptural precedent for it. Can you find it? If not, how could they? I have already answered this. The scriptural support (for a racial priesthood ban) is tenuous at best. That is why there is no comparison between the priesthood ban (and what some call racism) and the ban on homosexual intercourse (in or out of what is being called SSM), because there is tons of scriptural support for the proposition that homosexual relations are a sin no matter the circumstance. Edited to add: We don't know that God didn't institute the priesthood ban for whatever his reasons may have been. And while I don't see a lot of scriptural support for it, the ban in no way contradicts scripture. SSM does. Edited May 19, 2014 by lvjd66
Mystery Meat Posted May 19, 2014 Author Posted May 19, 2014 You fell for it as well. To claim you follow all of the teachings of the Old Testament puts you in a difficult situation. I gave up Bible bashing years ago. But sometimes people who only know the "highlights" of the Old Testament, and think that puts them on sure footing, really don't know the Old Testament. Like I said, I spent 4 years teaching the Old Testament in seminary. So let me ask you just one question after you read in Judges 19.. Of all the strawmen I have seen on this board this one takes the cake. When, pray tell, did I ever claim to "follow all of the teaching of the Old Testament?" Surely, it is gospel 101 that the Law of Moses has been fulfilled. Where you are ignorant, and what you seem to want to argue, is that all parts of the Mosaic Law are no longer followed. Yet clearly there are substantial parts of the Law of Moses that are still applicable to us today. If you read all of Leviticus 18 you will see that those verses (when read carefully in context) are talking about abominations that have always been abominations, and apply to covenant and non covenant people alike. That is to say, that just like the commandments not to steal or murder, the sexual prohibitions in Leviticus 18 are still applicable today, just as they were before. 1
california boy Posted May 19, 2014 Posted May 19, 2014 Of all the strawmen I have seen on this board this one takes the cake. When, pray tell, did I ever claim to "follow all of the teaching of the Old Testament?" Surely, it is gospel 101 that the Law of Moses has been fulfilled. Where you are ignorant, and what you seem to want to argue, is that all parts of the Mosaic Law are no longer followed. Yet clearly there are substantial parts of the Law of Moses that are still applicable to us today. If you read all of Leviticus 18 you will see that those verses (when read carefully in context) are talking about abominations that have always been abominations, and apply to covenant and non covenant people alike. That is to say, that just like the commandments not to steal or murder, the sexual prohibitions in Leviticus 18 are still applicable today, just as they were before. What strawman. I quoted you scripture specifically about gay sex from the Bible. If you believe the Old Testament should be followed completely in it's teachings of homosexuality, then you have to believe that rape and murder of your daughter and wife is acceptable over gay sex. I am just asking if you are willing to follow ALL of the scriptures concerning gay sexual relations outside the bonds of marriage. THAT is not a strawman's argument. Do we follow the law of Moses regarding gay sexual relations today, or do we not? You can't have it both ways. If the law of Moses has been fulfilled concerning homosexuality, then your quoted scripture has no more relevance to today than any of the other laws of Moses that we no longer follow. If the law of Moses regarding homosexual relations is still in force today, then you have to follow all the scriptures concerning homosexuality, including the murder and rape of your wife and daughter being ok over homosexual relations. I know you will not be able to answer this question any more than you have been able to find a single scripture prohibiting homosexual relations within the bonds of marriage. So I am not really expecting an answer that is nothing more than this one was, a deflection. I know perfectly well you will not be able to say Yes we follow ALL of the Old Testament teachings on homosexuality because you want to ignore the teachings found in Judges. You only like Leviticus. It is so much more easy when you can cherry pick the scriptures you like isn't it.
Mystery Meat Posted May 19, 2014 Author Posted May 19, 2014 What strawman. I quoted you scripture specifically about gay sex from the Bible. If you believe the Old Testament should be followed completely in it's teachings of homosexuality, then you have to believe that rape and murder of your daughter and wife is acceptable over gay sex. I am just asking if you are willing to follow ALL of the scriptures concerning gay sexual relations outside the bonds of marriage. THAT is not a strawman's argument. Do we follow the law of Moses regarding gay sexual relations today, or do we not? You can't have it both ways. If the law of Moses has been fulfilled concerning homosexuality, then your quoted scripture has no more relevance to today than any of the other laws of Moses that we no longer follow. If the law of Moses regarding homosexual relations is still in force today, then you have to follow all the scriptures concerning homosexuality, including the murder and rape of your wife and daughter being ok over homosexual relations. I know you will not be able to answer this question any more than you have been able to find a single scripture prohibiting homosexual relations within the bonds of marriage. So I am not really expecting an answer that is nothing more than this one was, a deflection. I know perfectly well you will not be able to say Yes we follow ALL of the Old Testament teachings on homosexuality because you want to ignore the teachings found in Judges. You only like Leviticus. It is so much more easy when you can cherry pick the scriptures you like isn't it. Wow. Did you even read Leviticus 18 and respond to the posts I made above? I am trying to give you an opportunity to convince me I am wrong, but you have yet to deal with any of my points. Please answer my questions. First, you said: I quoted you scripture specifically about gay sex from the Bible. If you believe the Old Testament should be followed completely in it's teachings of homosexuality, then you have to believe that rape and murder of your daughter and wife is acceptable over gay sex. No, I don't. Holy mother of Moses. Where is your logic here? The law of Moses also says in Leviticus 19: "Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbour, neither rob him: the wages of him that is hired shall not abide with thee all night until the morning." So in your logic, we either believe everything in the Law of Moses or none of it. But to the point you are making in this scripture you quoted above, you tell me where the Bible gives an endorsement of what this man did. Lot did something very similar and I never got the impression that it was counted as righteousness. You would have me say that because the guy did something wrong, everything he did was wrong. I don't think that because a person does one thing wrong that everything else he does is wrong too. The logic you try and force on me is astounding and...illogical. Do we follow the law of Moses regarding gay sexual relations today, or do we not? You can't have it both ways. You astound me. Are you implying that it was part of the Law of Moses that when a people tried to have homsexual sex with a man a person was supposed to offer his daughter and any other woman? If so CFR on that. If not I am amazed at how you came to the conclusion you did. Additionally, homosexual relations were outlawed well before the Law of Moses came into play (and you would know that if you actually read Leviticus 18). If the law of Moses has been fulfilled concerning homosexuality, then your quoted scripture has no more relevance to today than any of the other laws of Moses that we no longer follow. So we shouldn't follow anything else in the Law of Moses either? Such as no stealing, love your neighbor, and do not commit adultery? If the law of Moses regarding homosexual relations is still in force today, then you have to follow all the scriptures concerning homosexuality, including the murder and rape of your wife and daughter being ok over homosexual relations. You are wresting the scriptures...again. How is this part of the Law of Moses? I want you to show me where the Lord condoned what this man did, despite the fact that everywhere else in scripture (even in the Law of Moses) that such actions are an abomination to the Lord. I know you will not be able to answer this question I did and it was easy. any more than you have been able to find a single scripture prohibiting homosexual relations within the bonds of marriage. So I am not really expecting an answer that is nothing more than this one was, a deflection Haha. Haha. Haha. I will give you one just as soon as you give me one that encourages and endorses homosexual relations within the bonds of marriage. No scripture concerning the abominable nature of homosexual relations. No where is there a "unless youre married" qualification. There is no couples of the same sex in scripture. I think it is evident which side has more (cough, cough...ALL) the scriptural support on their side. I know perfectly well you will not be able to say Yes we follow ALL of the Old Testament teachings on homosexuality because you want to ignore the teachings found in Judges. Yes, we follow ALL of the Old Testament teachings on homosexuality. There I said it. What this man did in Judges to his poor daughter and concubine have no basis as part of the Law of Moses. The fact that you think it does and that God would have given such a law tells me more about you and the type of God you believe in. Unless of course you don't think the Law of Moses was inspired...which also tells me a whole lot. It is so much more easy when you can cherry pick the scriptures you like isn't it. Fortunately, I don't have to cherry pick the scriptures. They are very consistent on the issue of homosexuality. 1
california boy Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 Wow. Did you even read Leviticus 18 and respond to the posts I made above? I am trying to give you an opportunity to convince me I am wrong, but you have yet to deal with any of my points. Please answer my questions. First, you said: No, I don't. Holy mother of Moses. Where is your logic here? The law of Moses also says in Leviticus 19: "Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbour, neither rob him: the wages of him that is hired shall not abide with thee all night until the morning." So in your logic, we either believe everything in the Law of Moses or none of it. But to the point you are making in this scripture you quoted above, you tell me where the Bible gives an endorsement of what this man did. Lot did something very similar and I never got the impression that it was counted as righteousness. You would have me say that because the guy did something wrong, everything he did was wrong. I don't think that because a person does one thing wrong that everything else he does is wrong too. The logic you try and force on me is astounding and...illogical. You astound me. Are you implying that it was part of the Law of Moses that when a people tried to have homsexual sex with a man a person was supposed to offer his daughter and any other woman? If so CFR on that. If not I am amazed at how you came to the conclusion you did. Additionally, homosexual relations were outlawed well before the Law of Moses came into play (and you would know that if you actually read Leviticus 18). So we shouldn't follow anything else in the Law of Moses either? Such as no stealing, love your neighbor, and do not commit adultery? You are wresting the scriptures...again. How is this part of the Law of Moses? I want you to show me where the Lord condoned what this man did, despite the fact that everywhere else in scripture (even in the Law of Moses) that such actions are an abomination to the Lord. I did and it was easy. Haha. Haha. Haha. I will give you one just as soon as you give me one that encourages and endorses homosexual relations within the bonds of marriage. No scripture concerning the abominable nature of homosexual relations. No where is there a "unless youre married" qualification. There is no couples of the same sex in scripture. I think it is evident which side has more (cough, cough...ALL) the scriptural support on their side. Yes, we follow ALL of the Old Testament teachings on homosexuality. There I said it. What this man did in Judges to his poor daughter and concubine have no basis as part of the Law of Moses. The fact that you think it does and that God would have given such a law tells me more about you and the type of God you believe in. Unless of course you don't think the Law of Moses was inspired...which also tells me a whole lot. Fortunately, I don't have to cherry pick the scriptures. They are very consistent on the issue of homosexuality. So reading your current post, you do believe in following all of the Law of Moses. But you want to ignore the teachings of the rest of the Old Testament concerning homosexuality. You follow the parts of the Old Testament that you want to believe in, and then call the other teachings as being wrong. You desperately try to include the 10 commandments with all of the laws found in Leviticus, somehow giving them equal weight unless you don't agree with the laws found in Leviticus. Got it. Carry on. 1
Mystery Meat Posted May 20, 2014 Author Posted May 20, 2014 (edited) So reading your current post, you do believe in following all of the Law of Moses. But you want to ignore the teachings of the rest of the Old Testament concerning homosexuality. You follow the parts of the Old Testament that you want to believe in, and then call the other teachings as being wrong. You desperately try to include the 10 commandments with all of the laws found in Leviticus, somehow giving them equal weight unless you don't agree with the laws found in Leviticus. Got it. Carry on. Wow. Good for you. I don't desperately try and include the 10 commandments with all of the Laws found in Leviticus...God did that for me. And there is not a single law in Leviticus that I don't agree with. But as soon as you are ready to deal with the points above, not to mention my question that you have yet to answer from days ago I will be willing to engage you again. As of now, it seems that the only reason why you won't is because you don't have answers to them. And that is okay. I maintain that the hard truth is if you are going to justify homosexual behavior you have to do it without scripture and without modern day revelation. Best of luck to you. Edited May 20, 2014 by lvjd66 1
Gray Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 Wow. Good for you. I don't desperately try and include the 10 commandments with all of the Laws found in Leviticus...God did that for me. And there is not a single law in Leviticus that I don't agree with. But as soon as you are ready to deal with the points above, not to mention my question that you have yet to answer from days ago I will be willing to engage you again. As of now, it seems that the only reason why you won't is because you don't have answers to them. And that is okay. I maintain that the hard truth is if you are going to justify homosexual behavior you have to do it without scripture and without modern day revelation. Best of luck to you. Leviticus 19: 27 Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard. 19 Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.
Mystery Meat Posted May 20, 2014 Author Posted May 20, 2014 Leviticus 19: 27 Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard. 19 Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material. Sigh. I don't disagree with any of the Law of Moses. I think every part of it was a command of God. I think there were things that were fulfilled (like the scriptures you quoted above), but there are clearly things that were not such as the 10 commandments and homosexuality. I don't see why this is such a hard concept to grasp.
CV75 Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 find a single scripture prohibiting homosexual relations within the bonds of marriageSince all Biblical references to marriage are invariably between a man and a woman (husband/wife; bride/groom; etc.), and we have no Biblical record of same-sex “marriages,” we can conclude that SS“M” is not in the divine design of things. You cannot find a single example of SS"M" OR of allowing homosexual relations within the bonds of such a "marriage," OR of condoning homosexual relations at all. His covenants for us are created in His image that we may become perfect as he is. His perfect image is found in marriage and is represented in His relation with Israel (Isaiah 54:5; Jeremiah 31:32; Ezekiel 16:8-14; Hosea 2:14-20) and with the Church (Ephesians 5:21-33; cf. 1 Corinthians 11:1-3; 2 Corinthians 11:2; Revelation 19:7-9). Likewise, Israel is portrayed as His “wife”, and her idolatry, unfaithfulness and disobedience are depicted as "adultery" (Numbers 25:1-4; Judges 2:17; Jeremiah 3:20; Ezekiel 16:15-59; 23:1-48; Hosea 1:2; 2:2-13; 3:3). “Divorce” is also used as an image (Isaiah 50:1; Jeremiah 3:8; Hosea 2:2), as is their reconciliation (Isaiah 54; 62:4-5; Ezekiel 16:53-63; Hosea 2:14-3:1). 2
stemelbow Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 Since all Biblical references to marriage are invariably between a man and a woman (husband/wife; bride/groom; etc.), and we have no Biblical record of same-sex “marriages,” we can conclude that SS“M” is not in the divine design of things. You cannot find a single example of SS"M" OR of allowing homosexual relations within the bonds of such a "marriage," OR of condoning homosexual relations at all. His covenants for us are created in His image that we may become perfect as he is. His perfect image is found in marriage and is represented in His relation with Israel (Isaiah 54:5; Jeremiah 31:32; Ezekiel 16:8-14; Hosea 2:14-20) and with the Church (Ephesians 5:21-33; cf. 1 Corinthians 11:1-3; 2 Corinthians 11:2; Revelation 19:7-9). Likewise, Israel is portrayed as His “wife”, and her idolatry, unfaithfulness and disobedience are depicted as "adultery" (Numbers 25:1-4; Judges 2:17; Jeremiah 3:20; Ezekiel 16:15-59; 23:1-48; Hosea 1:2; 2:2-13; 3:3). “Divorce” is also used as an image (Isaiah 50:1; Jeremiah 3:8; Hosea 2:2), as is their reconciliation (Isaiah 54; 62:4-5; Ezekiel 16:53-63; Hosea 2:14-3:1). Is going with the "if it's not found in the Bible then it must not be God's preference" really the way an LDS person should approach this? 1
Gray Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 (edited) Sigh. I don't disagree with any of the Law of Moses. I think every part of it was a command of God. I think there were things that were fulfilled (like the scriptures you quoted above), but there are clearly things that were not such as the 10 commandments and homosexuality. I don't see why this is such a hard concept to grasp. I disagree. The 10 commandments and homosexuality were fulfilled, but the part about wearing mixed fabrics and cutting your beard are not! Sidebar: fulfill doesn't actually mean do away with. Edited May 20, 2014 by Gray
changed Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 I do think that the Bible is very clear, in both the old and the new testament, that homosexuality is considered a sin. No one is perfect, everyone has issues with at least one thing that is wrong, but that does not mean don't recognize what is right and what is wrong, and strive for what is right. Christianity is a religion of sacrifice, of trusting God and giving some things up (weather we understand it or not) in order to demonstrate our faith. Each person has something different that they struggle to give up -a mother might struggle with giving up her career to be a nurturer,a man might struggle to give up the freedom of being single to take on the responsibility of providing for a family,someone with health issues might struggle with keeping the fast,converts might struggle with the word of wisdom (that goes against their family heritage) -etc. etc. each of these cases could be argued against, people can choose to either excuse their behavior - site studies why tea is great, why women should not be the primary caregivers, why fasting is dangerous for your health, etc. etc. and reinterpret the scriptures to suit their own purpose.... generally, you know it's the right thing to do if it is the hard thing to do though, and the right thing to do takes faith - ie - not relying on your own understanding, but having faith in things you cannot yet see. I teach a volunteer science lab, and we were talking about parents - I corrected a classroom of children to let them know that everyone has a mom and a dad, they might not live with their mom or dad, they might live with two moms instead, or just one mom, but their genetic makeup was created from a mother and a father, that there are two parts to them etc. etc. I think some people frowned on me sharing this with the kids, but facts are facts, I will not hide science because it goes against someone's philosophy. All of us really do have two parts to us, two sides to our family tree... to me, there is something incomplete when these two sides of ourselves cannot be recognized, and united with one another. 2
changed Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 I disagree. The 10 commandments and homosexuality were fulfilled, but the part about wearing mixed fabrics and cutting your beard are not! Sidebar: fulfill doesn't actually mean do away with. So we don't have to follow the 10 commandments anymore? We can lie, murder, and hate one another if we want? ... sorry Gray, you're hiding from the truth. 1
Gray Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 (edited) So we don't have to follow the 10 commandments anymore? We can lie, murder, and hate one another if we want? ... sorry Gray, you're hiding from the truth. I was saying that tongue in cheek (obviously not very well, though!). I suppose my point was, a cafeteria approach to the Law of Moses can work both ways. Edited May 20, 2014 by Gray 1
Mystery Meat Posted May 20, 2014 Author Posted May 20, 2014 (edited) I was saying that tongue in cheek (obviously not very well, though!). I suppose my point was, a cafeteria approach to the Law of Moses can work both ways. I don't use a cafeteria approach. In fact, it is quite easy to see what parts are still in force and which parts have been fulfilled. Look for post Law of Moses references in scripture and it should give you a pretty good idea. For example, homosexuality is condemned following the Law of Moses not only by Paul but also by modern day prophets. Murder, adultery, lying, stealing, coveting, loving your neighbor are other such examples. Again, not a terribly hard concept to grasp if you aren't trying to be difficult or are at least somewhat open minded. Edited May 20, 2014 by lvjd66
CV75 Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 Is going with the "if it's not found in the Bible then it must not be God's preference" really the way an LDS person should approach this?That's not how I'm approaching it. I answered the question as asked and at a level that could (hopefully) be understood. All scriptural references to marriage in any of our standard works are invariably between a man and a woman (husband/wife; bride/groom; etc.), and the LDS Church has no canonical or historical record of same-sex “marriages” either (there is no "if" about it!), so we can still safely conclude that SS“M” is not in the divine design of things. You cannot find a single example of SS"M" OR of allowing homosexual relations within the bonds of such a "marriage," OR of condoning homosexual relations at all, anywhere in our scriptures. No scriptural reference to marriage mentions the sexuality of the man or the woman, only that it involve a man and a woman, and where the Lord provides, offspring. 1
california boy Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 Wow. Good for you. I don't desperately try and include the 10 commandments with all of the Laws found in Leviticus...God did that for me. And there is not a single law in Leviticus that I don't agree with. But as soon as you are ready to deal with the points above, not to mention my question that you have yet to answer from days ago I will be willing to engage you again. As of now, it seems that the only reason why you won't is because you don't have answers to them. And that is okay. I maintain that the hard truth is if you are going to justify homosexual behavior you have to do it without scripture and without modern day revelation. Best of luck to you. Maybe this will help me understand your position just a little bit better. I think that everyone will agree that the 10 commandments hold a unique place in God's commandments. And I think everyone will agree that the 10 commandments are here to say. The problem seems to be ALL the other laws laid out in Leviticus. I get that you are firmly convinced that homosexuality is still a part of the law of Moses that you want to see continue on. Perhaps you can tell us about all the other laws of Moses. Are you ok with selling your daughter into slavery (Exodus 21:7,Owning slaves as long as they come from a neighboring country? Leviticus 25:44? Stoning someone who works on the sabbath? (Exodus 35:2) Eating shellfish is an abomination? (Leviticus 11:10)Not cutting your hair? (Leviticus 19:23) I of course could go on and on concerning what the law of Moses consisted of. If you are only saying that the 10 commandments and the one law against homosexuality remain, I think you are on pretty thin ice. So perhaps if you listed ALL of the law of Moses that you think should still be followed not related to the 10 commandments (since we both agree those stay.) I will have a better idea where you stand. Because at this point you seem to be only cherry picking the one law concerning homosexuality lumping it with the 10 commandments and dismissing ALL the others as no longer being relevant. In regards to your question, I have made it perfectly clear countless times that I do not believe every thing that is in the Bible came from God. I think there are many ideas and teachings put in there that never originated from God, the scripture in Leviticus being one of them. You yourself admit that not everything in the scriptures came from God. (See teachings quoted in Judges that I referred to and you dismissed as being from a bad person) This is my position to make myself COMPLETELY clear. I believe that Christ Himself came to earth and for 3 years taught us the important teachings that HE wanted us to follow. He had 3 years to talk to us humans directly. He showed us how He wants us to live. He taught us how to treat others. He told us that it was not our place to judge others, but to worry about our own salvation and let God do the judging. 3 years of constant teaching seem to be more reliable than relying on some letter an apostle wrote or thinking that EVERYTHING Moses wrote came from God. Prophets have included their own opinions since the very beginning of time. Certainly the church in these latter days has had plenty of teachings from prophets that were not from God. So me defending any scripture in the Old Testament is not something I am willing to do because I don't believe ALL of the verses in the Old Testament. And I don't believe all of the stories told in the Old Testament as being true. I don't think donkeys can talk. I don't think that God stopped the earth from spinning. I don't think that the flood covered the entire earth and kangaroos hopped from Australia to board the ark and then hopped back after the ark landed. I hope that clears things up for you concerning my personal beliefs. 1
Gray Posted May 20, 2014 Posted May 20, 2014 (edited) I don't use a cafeteria approach. In fact, it is quite easy to see what parts are still in force and which parts have been fulfilled. Look for post Law of Moses references in scripture and it should give you a pretty good idea. For example, homosexuality is condemned following the Law of Moses not only by Paul but also by modern day prophets. Murder, adultery, lying, stealing, coveting, loving your neighbor are other such examples. Again, not a terribly hard concept to grasp if you aren't trying to be difficult or are at least somewhat open minded. The only mention of homosexuality in the NT is from Paul, who also taught that celibacy is preferable to marriage. There is no mention of homosexuality in any verse of restoration scripture. And while modern leaders have taught against homosexuality, what they have not done is claim any kind of special revelation on the matter. It seems we have inherited our position as a church on the subject more from the milieu of western Christianity than from anything else. Edited May 20, 2014 by Gray 1
Recommended Posts