Exalting Gays (Thought Experiment)

[california boy]

'If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple'.

 

'And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name’s sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life'.

 

 

Yeah I guess I can not be a disciple of Christ if that is what it takes.  I personally don't hate my father, mother, former wife, my children and my brothers and sisters.  I am more of the love everyone and love one another kind of disciple.   

[Hamba Tuhan]

Have this discussion with your own wife.  Ask her if she is looking forward to a Celestial Kingdom where she is eternally pregnant.  Like I said, perhaps the only thing worse than being gay in the next life is being a woman if your theory is actually true.

 

I don't have a theory. Nor do I have a wife. What I do have is an angel mother who loved every facet of motherhood. She would not appreciate your assessment of 'being a woman'.

[Hamba Tuhan]

Yeah I guess I can not be a disciple of Christ if that is what it takes.

 

Your call, of course. But Christ never taught that the path to exaltation -- the specific topic of this thread -- was anything less than strait and narrow or required less than a complete submission of one's own will.

[Brian 2.0]

"I never said it would be easy, I only said it would be worth it"

- Matt 0:0

[mfbukowski]

If you are sincere in wanting the answers to your questions, please read the link that Rockpond posted.   Toward a Post-Heterosexual Mormon Theology

 

The author, Taylor Petrey, does a very complete job of answering the very questions you have asked.  I would love to hear your response to what he writes.  If you are unwilling or not interested enough in finding the answers to your questions, let me know, I will quote from the article enough to answer your theological concerns that you feel may preclude gay couples from also partaking of the blessings of Temple marriage.  

 

I may start with the very example you brought up about Adam and Eve.  Was Adam and Eve created by a sexual act?  Or were they organized by God from the dust of the earth as the scriptures state.  Even a physical body does not need to be created by a sexual act between a man and a woman let alone a spiritual body which the scriptures state God "organizes existing intelligences" not that God has a sexual relationship with His wife and out pop spiritual babies.

 

Read the article.  You will find how difficult it is to make most of the assertions you have made in your post.  If there is one statement that is not addressed in the article, let me know, I would be more than happy to answer it.  Sound fair?

I have not read the article yet- so I am just responding to your post.

 

Adam and Eve might have been organized through a sexual act, or not, it is none of my business.  Or Adam and Eve might be symbols for all of us and the fall, our personal falls from innocence.  For me it works either way.

 

The way God organizes intelligences or the bodies of Adam and Eve is totally irrelevant.  The whole idea that one would postulate an answer to that question is not "theology" it is storytelling.  It is myth, and on the level of stories about Zeus and his children.  And we would debate that??

 

For me Adam and Eve is about opposing forces in the universe of human experience becoming resolved and becoming unified by The Christ, the Perfect One, the Man of Holiness.

 

Living a perfect life is about resolving opposites and overcoming natural instincts through consciousness of what we make to be "laws" of perfection.  Put another way, it is about repenting and becoming what God wants us to become, not what we want to become.

 

Christ essentially had no will- he was a total reflection of his Father.  That is not compatible with "doing your own thing" and following your own instincts.

 

But I will read the article.  I hope it is better than your presentation of it.

[mfbukowski]

I am not discounting the miracle and joy of child birth.  I have children of my own.  I was present for every single one of them.  I am discounting the speculation that spirit children are conceived through a birthing process.  You will have a hard time finding a woman willing to give birth to 17 children let alone BILLIONS of spirit children through a birthing process.  Have this discussion with your own wife.  Ask her if she is looking forward to a Celestial Kingdom where she is eternally pregnant.  Like I said, perhaps the only thing worse than being gay in the next life is being a woman if your theory is actually true.

That presents an incredible level of literalism.  I do not see how you can be that fundamentalist and not believe the biblical prohibitions against homosexuality.  It's just not a consistent position.

[Hamba Tuhan]

"I never said it would be easy, I only said it would be worth it"

- Matt 0:0

 

I think you may have got the chapter and verse wrong. I think the actual reference you want is Matt. 16:24-26.

Edited December 23, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan

[webbles]

I am not discounting the miracle and joy of child birth.  I have children of my own.  I was present for every single one of them.  I am discounting the speculation that spirit children are conceived through a birthing process.  You will have a hard time finding a woman willing to give birth to 17 children let alone BILLIONS of spirit children through a birthing process.  Have this discussion with your own wife.  Ask her if she is looking forward to a Celestial Kingdom where she is eternally pregnant.  Like I said, perhaps the only thing worse than being gay in the next life is being a woman if your theory is actually true.

I asked my wife that question.  She said yes.  So there's at least one woman who looks forward to that state.

[Robert F. Smith]

....................................................................   

I may start with the very example you brought up about Adam and Eve.  Was Adam and Eve created by a sexual act?  Or were they organized by God from the dust of the earth as the scriptures state.  Even a physical body does not need to be created by a sexual act between a man and a woman let alone a spiritual body which the scriptures state God "organizes existing intelligences" not that God has a sexual relationship with His wife and out pop spiritual babies.

...............................................................................  

I don't know what Petrey says about it, but Brigham Young argued that Adam & Eve were created the same way all humans are -- reproductively.  Other Brethren since his time have also said that the creation account we have is figurative (Eve was not actually created from Adam's rib).  The only way in which humans are created from the dust or clay is that we are all composed of the elements found on Earth.  That formative process occurs in the womb.

 

As for intelligences and how spirit bodies are created, I don't believe that we have adequate information on those questions, but eternal marriage has something to do with it.

[Robert F. Smith]

So what happens when a husband is faithful throughout this life, but his wife distains the gospel and won't be a part of it?  I thought we each had to work out our own salvation/

One naturally assumes that he will be made whole (receive a wife) in the Resurrection, or via proxy temple work, or his wife can still repent on the other side.  This is LDS theology we are discussing, is it not?  Moreover, is LDS theology universalist, as I frequently maintain?

 

Paul also said that it is better for men to be celibate.  How is that working out for you??

Non-Mormon scholars speculate that Paul chose not to take another wife after the death of his first wife.  And that he chose celibacy due to his belief in the imminence of the return of the Lord -- a common view in his time.  Either that, or he correctly assumed the imminence of his own death in Rome.

[Robert F. Smith]

See discussion on this board of the new LDS Church statement on Lesbian & Gay issues:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/64702-church-issues-statement-on-gay-and-lesbian-issues/ .

[mfbukowski]

If you are sincere in wanting the answers to your questions, please read the link that Rockpond posted.   Toward a Post-Heterosexual Mormon Theology

 

The author, Taylor Petrey, does a very complete job of answering the very questions you have asked.  I would love to hear your response to what he writes.  If you are unwilling or not interested enough in finding the answers to your questions, let me know, I will quote from the article enough to answer your theological concerns that you feel may preclude gay couples from also partaking of the blessings of Temple marriage.  

 

I may start with the very example you brought up about Adam and Eve.  Was Adam and Eve created by a sexual act?  Or were they organized by God from the dust of the earth as the scriptures state.  Even a physical body does not need to be created by a sexual act between a man and a woman let alone a spiritual body which the scriptures state God "organizes existing intelligences" not that God has a sexual relationship with His wife and out pop spiritual babies.

 

Read the article.  You will find how difficult it is to make most of the assertions you have made in your post.  If there is one statement that is not addressed in the article, let me know, I would be more than happy to answer it.  Sound fair?

Well I read it, and the only part I found relevant was the section on kinship.  It was an interesting and somewhat persuasive argument.

 

Most of it was based on anthropology which is irrelevant to religion.  Implying that "kinship" is somehow a stronger force than biological relationships totally begs the question however.  In fact the strength of "kinship" arises OUT OF biological necessity.

 

The experience of meeting a total stranger who is about to become one's son or daughter in law, is a truly unique experience.  Here is a total stranger who will soon be the father or mother of my grandchildren.  It is of incredible importance that I adopt this total stranger into my family, or I may never see my own grandchildren.

 

THAT is the basis for "kinship', It is a biological necessity.  After one has been through that, one can truly see virtually anyone as a member of one's family because in fact, that sort of thing happens all the time.  So the very notion of kinship arises from biological necessity, not the other way around, so when "Brother Jones" in the ward passes to his reward, yes I feel sorry.  But when one of my immediate family passes, I feel genuine pain.  One is called "brother" and in many ways he is.  But we have not shared life experiences the way I have with my "real" brother

 

Most of the other statements were based on political correctness, and the assertion of alternate opinions, without much support for accepting the alternate opinion.

 

"Women are different than men"  "No women are not different than men"  - that is the level of "argumentation"

 

I found many of the comments fairly disgusting, and marginally blasphemous, quite honestly.  I find talking about my God's Wife as being "eternally pregnant" or having menstrual periods, highly offensive.

 

But if that passes for theology for you, there is nothing much I have to say about it.

Edited December 23, 2014 by mfbukowski

[Rain]

I really didn't like pregnancy. I passed out a few times because of low blood sugar. Had 911 called for me. Had all three children early. Was on bed rest for 2 weeks with each, with 4 of the 6 weeks being in the hospital. Had 3 c-sections that didn't heal well. After my last child I wanted to run through the halls shouting, "I'm done! I'm done!"

Pregnancy for eternity? Meh. Doesn't phase me. 1. I'll have a perfect body. 2. I was never one to think my only importance was as a place to grow babies so why would I get stuck on the idea that it is my only importance in the eternities? Being a biological mom was a great, wonderful thing, but anyone who thinks that is all there is to being a pregnant woman has a very limited view of both pregnant women and eternity.

Whatever the plan for me, I'm not worried. God has a lot more knowledge and wisdom than I do.

Edited December 23, 2014 by Rain

[Coreyb]

Just read the article. Thanks for the link Rockpond, but to be honest it was not all that persuasive. I have to agree that his use of Genesis was a little silly and duplicitous. Much of his argument was just semantic, and the caricature he draws of what a Heavenly Mother might do shows that he either has no imagination or he just likes to use sexist rhetoric to prove a point, which he failed to prove. I dunno, this just can't be the best answers there are

[Avatar4321]

I've seen two theories argued here that make no sense.

first the idea that women would not want mow children in eternity. Do you think being pregnant, if that's how its done in eternity, is going to be difficult with an immortal celestial body? Sure in a telestial body it would likely not be as pleasant, but celestial bodies are completely different.

second, there is this theory that homosexual attraction means you can never be married. There is absolutely nothing stopping someone who has homosexual attractions from meeting someone of the opposite gender and getting married. The only limit for anyone is the one we place on ourselves.

the atonement of Jesus Christ can change human nature. I know this because I've experienced it myself. If you believe this anything is possible

[Flyonthewall]

I've seen two theories argued here that make no sense.

first the idea that women would not want mow children in eternity. Do you think being pregnant, if that's how its done in eternity, is going to be difficult with an immortal celestial body? Sure in a telestial body it would likely not be as pleasant, but celestial bodies are completely different.

second, there is this theory that homosexual attraction means you can never be married. There is absolutely nothing stopping someone who has homosexual attractions from meeting someone of the opposite gender and getting married. The only limit for anyone is the one we place on ourselves.

the atonement of Jesus Christ can change human nature. I know this because I've experienced it myself. If you believe this anything is possible

Since God said "...I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception.", I imagine the birthing process would be a lot less sorrowful/painful/uncomfortable with a Celestial body.

[Buckeye]

I've seen two theories argued here that make no sense.

first the idea that women would not want mow children in eternity. Do you think being pregnant, if that's how its done in eternity, is going to be difficult with an immortal celestial body? Sure in a telestial body it would likely not be as pleasant, but celestial bodies are completely different.

second, there is this theory that homosexual attraction means you can never be married. There is absolutely nothing stopping someone who has homosexual attractions from meeting someone of the opposite gender and getting married. The only limit for anyone is the one we place on ourselves.

the atonement of Jesus Christ can change human nature. I know this because I've experienced it myself. If you believe this anything is possible

 

I rather think that eternal parenthood will be harder and more painful than mortal parenthood. With more knowledge and power comes more experience with reality - both the pain and the joy. If celestial childbearing is not painful, inconvenient, tiresome, etc. (all the challenges with mortal childbearing) then I have to ask "what is the point?" If there is no real sacrifice, would there really be anything gained from the experience?

 

To use an analogy, consider the "treks" that church youth groups will sometimes perform. Modern treks involve some challenges and tired muscles, but they are nothing compared the real thing - no deaths, loss of toes, endless horizons and leaving family members you will never see again. I think there is some value in modern treks, but its foolhardy to say that a 12-hour experience that begins with a reminder from the stake young women's president to "drink lots of water" can somehow build the same amount of faith as the pioneers' experience.

 

As for changing sexual orientation, the church seems to be stepping away from that teaching. We just haven't had much success getting people to change their orientations. Yes, there is still hope that people's orientations will change in the next life, but you still have to wonder why God would grant such a "blessing" then, but not during mortality. For most gay members of the church I know, the years between (I) acknowledging that they are gay and (ii) death, prove too long a space. In most all cases, eventually they choose companionship over a promised change that never materializes.

Edited December 23, 2014 by Buckeye

[mfbukowski]

I've seen two theories argued here that make no sense.

first the idea that women would not want mow children in eternity. Do you think being pregnant, if that's how its done in eternity, is going to be difficult with an immortal celestial body? Sure in a telestial body it would likely not be as pleasant, but celestial bodies are completely different.

second, there is this theory that homosexual attraction means you can never be married. There is absolutely nothing stopping someone who has homosexual attractions from meeting someone of the opposite gender and getting married. The only limit for anyone is the one we place on ourselves.

the atonement of Jesus Christ can change human nature. I know this because I've experienced it myself. If you believe this anything is possible

:clapping:

 

[california boy]

Well I read it, and the only part I found relevant was the section on kinship.  It was an interesting and somewhat persuasive argument.

 

Most of it was based on anthropology which is irrelevant to religion.  Implying that "kinship" is somehow a stronger force than biological relationships totally begs the question however.  In fact the strength of "kinship" arises OUT OF biological necessity.

 

The experience of meeting a total stranger who is about to become one's son or daughter in law, is a truly unique experience.  Here is a total stranger who will soon be the father or mother of my grandchildren.  It is of incredible importance that I adopt this total stranger into my family, or I may never see my own grandchildren.

 

THAT is the basis for "kinship', It is a biological necessity.  After one has been through that, one can truly see virtually anyone as a member of one's family because in fact, that sort of thing happens all the time.  So the very notion of kinship arises from biological necessity, not the other way around, so when "Brother Jones" in the ward passes to his reward, yes I feel sorry.  But when one of my immediate family passes, I feel genuine pain.  One is called "brother" and in many ways he is.  But we have not shared life experiences the way I have with my "real" brother

 

Most of the other statements were based on political correctness, and the assertion of alternate opinions, without much support for accepting the alternate opinion.

 

"Women are different than men"  "No women are not different than men"  - that is the level of "argumentation"

 

I found many of the comments fairly disgusting, and marginally blasphemous, quite honestly.  I find talking about my God's Wife as being "eternally pregnant" or having menstrual periods, highly offensive.

 

But if that passes for theology for you, there is nothing much I have to say about it.

 

I don't think that either one of us have an answer to how God's gay children will be taken care of in the afterlife.  You speculate that there will be a magical transformation and they will become straight, attracted to a woman, be united in producing offspring through eternal birthing.  I speculate that God will keep a gay couple together.  They will have all the power of God to create worlds and to organize spirits as the scriptures (in my reading of them) the same way that God tells us intelligences were organized for this earth.  Since there is no revelation on any of what we speculate on, I dismiss the support that you feel provides you with your truth.  You do the same with the support that strengthens my position.  There will never be a consensus because there is no revelation from God.

 

I think the bottom line for me personally is I don't believe that celibacy in this life is part of the plan of salvation.  It never has been.  It is a doctrine that was so widely scorned in my youth by another church that required it of it's priesthood.  Now that scorn has changed to embrace for the Mormon churches own priesthood.  The joy and companionship I have with my boyfriend is too important to my life experience.  I would guess that most people who are married feel the same way. I still believe that "it is not good for man to be alone."  If God is going to damn me from the Celestial Kingdom for the very human decision to be with someone in this life, then the Celestial Kingdom is probably not the kingdom I want or belong in.  I know fully well that the church does not support the decision I have made.  And so, like most gay members, I have left the church.  The church seems to be ok with most gay members leaving (weeding out the wheat from the tares thing)  and most gay members seem to be willing to accept their separation from the church.  So life will continue on.  Perhaps this wound will never be sewn up.  This gap will continue to widen.  

 

So what will be the long term game plan?  What will happen after a generation of gay marriage.  What will happen when most religions change their position towards gay couples in their congregations revert back to the law of chastity that sex within the bounds of marriage is right in the site of God.  What will happen when most churches open their arms of love to their gay members.  Just as the civil right laws changed a lot of the discrimination against blacks, so will the upholding of the civil rights of gay citizens will change a lot of the discrimination habits towards gays in this country.  Will the church continue on it's present day course?  Will the church now become the marginalized group now instead of the gays they so willingly marginalize from temple marriage?  Will this issue become a major stumbling block for many of it's members?  Will fewer and fewer people accept a gospel of Jesus Christ that excludes loving gay couples as possibly being the gospel of inclusiveness that Jesus Christ taught?  The next decade will be an interesting time for the church.  This issue that is a small problem today will only become a bigger one for the church.  I have no doubt that the church will weather the storm, but at what cost  and more importantly for what reason when this position is based completely on speculation and not the rock of revelation,   The fascinating thing about life is that it will unfold before us, whether we like it or not.

[california boy]

I've seen two theories argued here that make no sense.

first the idea that women would not want mow children in eternity. Do you think being pregnant, if that's how its done in eternity, is going to be difficult with an immortal celestial body? Sure in a telestial body it would likely not be as pleasant, but celestial bodies are completely different.

second, there is this theory that homosexual attraction means you can never be married. There is absolutely nothing stopping someone who has homosexual attractions from meeting someone of the opposite gender and getting married. The only limit for anyone is the one we place on ourselves.

the atonement of Jesus Christ can change human nature. I know this because I've experienced it myself. If you believe this anything is possible

 

This same promise was given to me by church leaders when I came back from my mission many years ago.  It proved to be a false promise, one that the church has now withdrawn.  I would never let one of my children marry a gay member.  But then I have had over 25 years of testing this idea.  No one can say I didn't try the counsel that was given me.  Fortunately others will not feel compelled to trust that dead end.  The church no longer recommends the course you have suggested.  

 

For those that it works for, I say bravo.  But I would never advise a gay member to take that route.  And I would certainly do all I could do to prevent my children from marrying a gay member.  Though I doubt they would ever consider such a path.

[Buckeye]

 

 

So what will be the long term game plan?  What will happen after a generation of gay marriage.  What will happen when most religions change their position towards gay couples in their congregations revert back to the law of chastity that sex within the bounds of marriage is right in the site of God.  What will happen when most churches open their arms of love to their gay members.  Just as the civil right laws changed a lot of the discrimination against blacks, so will the upholding of the civil rights of gay citizens will change a lot of the discrimination habits towards gays in this country.  Will the church continue on it's present day course?  Will the church now become the marginalized group now instead of the gays they so willingly marginalize from temple marriage?  Will this issue become a major stumbling block for many of it's members?  Will fewer and fewer people accept a gospel of Jesus Christ that excludes loving gay couples as possibly being the gospel of inclusiveness that Jesus Christ taught?  The next decade will be an interesting time for the church.  This issue that is a small problem today will only become a bigger one for the church.  I have no doubt that the church will weather the storm, but at what cost  and more importantly for what reason when this position is based completely on speculation and not the rock of revelation,   The fascinating thing about life is that it will unfold before us, whether we like it or not.

 

Very good points. I agree that over time knowledge will supplant speculation as we gain experience with the fruit of gay marriage and families presided over by gay parents. Hopefully the answer to how everything shakes out is "a large dose of the atonement."

[Robert F. Smith]

.........................................................................................  

...................................................I believe gays and lesbians who choose remain members of the LDS faith have sold all that they have and follow him. What lack they yet? A husband? a wife? This confuses me.

If proxy ordinances did not exist, and if there were no reassessment possible hereafter, I'd be confused too.

[thesometimesaint]

I try to leave questions of a particular persons exaltation and/or damnation to God.

[Robert F. Smith]

I..........................................................   

. . . , there is this theory that homosexual attraction means you can never be married. There is absolutely nothing stopping someone who has homosexual attractions from meeting someone of the opposite gender and getting married. The only limit for anyone is the one we place on ourselves.

the atonement of Jesus Christ can change human nature. I know this because I've experienced it myself. If you believe this anything is possible

That may all be true in theory, and there was a time in the past when maybe 80% of gay men married and had children, but as a practical matter that may be burying a problem rather than dealing with it.  Rather than facing reality.

 

For example, we may all recall Carol Lynn Pearson's marriage with a gay man.  She knew he was gay, and he promised not to pursue that lifestyle.  Naturally, he was unable to keep his word, and he pursued his gay lifestyle in the San Francisco Bay area.  Thus, after several children, they divorced.  Later, while afflicted with HIV/AIDS, he came home and died.  Were either of them being honest and realistic?  Was the challenge too great?  Did they each get bad advice?  Can pure compassion make up for bad decisions?  Will all this be corrected in the hereafter?

[VideoGameJunkie]

My patriarchal blessing says I will never have to apologize for my children so I wonder if that means they will turn out gay........or criminals.