Do Our Ward And Stake Leaders Recognize The Room They Have To Include?

[DBMormon]

Yes, I know it for certain.

 

It is the only paradigm that is consistent with the great plan of happiness and with doctrines pertaining to the family and to eternal exaltation. And it is consistent with what prophets and apostles have taught through the years and with what they do now teach.

 

So, to sum it up, I am faced with the choice between what prophets and apostles have unitedly and consistently taught through many years and the ruminations of Bill Reel.

 

With all due respect, it is no contest for me. I cast my lot with the prophets.

No one asked you to side with me.  Feel free to hold your own view.  

[CV75]

Has Jesus taught this with his own voice?  Or is it the only way our leaders can make sense of the gay issue?  If Christ has not spoken, I won't be pushed into a corner by you or anyone else.  Do you know for certain?  I don't, and no leader has claimed Jesus has taught them this.  Am I clinging to fantasy?  perhaps, but then none of us have been into immortality and back with an answer to this question... so in reality we are all clinging to something that may or may not be fantasy whether individual beliefs or the whole kit and kaboodle.

The way I see it, the covenants of Christ are the same for everyone and extended to everyone irrespective of where they stand, including where they stand on “issues.” “The” issue du jour isn’t the same for everyone, and doesn’t impact everyone the same way, but the eternal doctrine and covenants of Christ are universal.

So often “issues” are allowed to take on a light and a life of their own and detract from the true life and light of the world, Who puts these matters into perspective. This is why He includes leaders with power to receive His word directly, teach His message and perform His covenants as part of the doctrine itself (3 Nephi 11). As the chapter demonstrates, they prevent the “issues” whose energy is derived from anger, disputation and contention from affecting the dissemination of the covenants.

When “issues” take on a life of their own, they tend to drown out the still, small voice that we all rely on to apply the covenants as they are designed, and in a way that is in harmony with all the other elements of the doctrine of Christ.

[DBMormon]

The way I see it, the covenants of Christ are the same for everyone and extended to everyone irrespective of where they stand, including where they stand on “issues.” “The” issue du jour isn’t the same for everyone, and doesn’t impact everyone the same way, but the eternal doctrine and covenants of Christ are universal.

So often “issues” are allowed to take on a light and a life of their own and detract from the true life and light of the world, Who puts these matters into perspective. This is why He includes leaders with power to receive His word directly, teach His message and perform His covenants as part of the doctrine itself (3 Nephi 11). As the chapter demonstrates, they prevent the “issues” whose energy is derived from anger, disputation and contention from affecting the dissemination of the covenants.

When “issues” take on a life of their own, they tend to drown out the still, small voice that we all rely on to apply the covenants as they are designed, and in a way that is in harmony with all the other elements of the doctrine of Christ.

agreed.  Christ is active in my life, I cling to his grace and mercy and I have hope in the restoration and all it's Doctrines where I have Christ's word or a prophet claiming Christs word.... I likely differ on everything after that with various people!  after that?  so what

Edited January 21, 2015 by DBMormon

[CV75]

agreed.  Christ is active in my life, I cling to his grace and mercy and I have hope in the restoration and all it's Doctrines where I have Christ's word or a prophet claiming Christs word.... I likely differ on everything after that!

I'm sorry I wasn't trying to talk about you...  At any rate I'm not understanding the last half of your post "it's Doctrines where I have Christ's word or a prophet claiming Christs word.... I likely differ on everything after that!"

[Bob Crockett]

agreed.  Christ is active in my life, I cling to his grace and mercy and I have hope in the restoration and all it's Doctrines where I have Christ's word or a prophet claiming Christs word.... I likely differ on everything after that!

Watch out for those prophets claiming Christ's word.   Run for the hills!

[DBMormon]

I'm sorry I wasn't trying to talk about you...  At any rate I'm not understanding the last half of your post "it's Doctrines where I have Christ's word or a prophet claiming Christs word.... I likely differ on everything after that!"

I mean I have trust that when the prophets claim they are sharing Christ's word that it is Christ's word.  Hence I trust scripture when Christ is speaking of when he speaks through his prophets.  Unlike Bob's comment it was not meant to mean how he took it.  

[Scott Lloyd]

No one asked you to side with me.  Feel free to hold your own view.

Well thanks for that generous dispensation.

But what I'm really doing is defining the clear-cut choice not just for me, but for any interested individual.

And while we all recognize that each is free to make his own choice, you must be trying to persusde <someone>, or you wouldn't be posting here -- or elsewhere, for that matter.

[Kenngo1969]

[Redacted]

 

Do not refer to women as honey if you want to stay in threads.

It's interesting what gets the Mods' attention and what doesn't.

[DBMormon]

It's interesting what gets the Mods' attention and what doesn't.

I am thinking emoticons are safe

[california boy]

Well thanks for that generous dispensation.

But what I'm really doing is defining the clear-cut choice not just for me, but for any interested individual.

And while we all recognize that each is free to make his own choice, you must be trying to persusde <someone>, or you wouldn't be posting here -- or elsewhere, for that matter.

 

No you are stating your opinion, just like everyone else.  You are using Elder Oak's opinion to show that at least one person agrees with you.  But let's not pretend this is any kind of official doctrine or that God has stated to anyone what will happen to His gay children when they die.  Like most things when it comes to the Plan of Salvation, there is really only ONE opinion that matters, God's.

 

Unless of course, it is your belief that official doctrine of the church comes from man and not from God. If that is your belief, then I guess Elder Oaks has just as much of a right to come up with doctrine as any other general authority.

Edited January 22, 2015 by california boy

[Hamba Tuhan]

I am thinking emoticons are safe

 

It depends on the current moon phase and what house Venus is in.

[Tacenda]

It's interesting what gets the Mods' attention and what doesn't.

That's ok, I liked feeling like a child and not the old hag that I am haha!

[Kenngo1969]

That's ok, I liked feeling like a child and not the old hag that I am haha!

Take it however you like, Ma'am.  With due respect, you might recall the old saying: she who is offended when offense is intended is a fool; she who is offended when no offense is intended is an even bigger fool.

[DBMormon]

Well thanks for that generous dispensation.

But what I'm really doing is defining the clear-cut choice not just for me, but for any interested individual.

And while we all recognize that each is free to make his own choice, you must be trying to persusde <someone>, or you wouldn't be posting here -- or elsewhere, for that matter.

 May you have a great day tomorrow my brother.

Edited January 22, 2015 by DBMormon

[Tacenda]

Take it however you like, Ma'am. With due respect, you might recall the old saying: she who is offended when offense is intended is a fool; she who is offended when no offense is intended is an even bigger fool.

Well I'm glad I wasn't a fool because I was not offended, I might have been from anyone but you Ken. I guess I should have added a smiley the first time, because feeling like a child made me feel young for a second.

[Kenngo1969]

Well I'm glad I wasn't a fool because I was not offended, I might have been from anyone but you Ken. I guess I should have added a smiley the first time, because feeling like a child made me feel young for a second.

I'm relieved you weren't offended ... all the same, I sincerely apologize for using such blatantly sexist language.  That's me: other than being a blatant sexist and racist, I'm actually a pretty nice guy.

[CV75]

I mean I have trust that when the prophets claim they are sharing Christ's word that it is Christ's word.  Hence I trust scripture when Christ is speaking of when he speaks through his prophets.  Unlike Bob's comment it was not meant to mean how he took it.  

Thank you for clarifying. You are saying we take it on faith and testimony that the LDS scriptures teach that Christ speaks through His LDS prophets, and that we also take it on faith and testimony that the LDS prophets teach Christ’s word.

 

When talking about these things, I find the terminology “claim” a bit detrimental to inspiring faith and testimony—I don’t think of the scriptures or the prophets as “claiming” God’s word; they “proclaim” it. When I bear my testimony, I don’t “claim” such-as-such is true; I proclaim it as such. I might even say “I know" (not “I claim to know”). I don’t mean to digress, but to confess faith in something and refer to it as a claim seems a bit of an oxymoron because the spiritual evidence or proof of truth is inherent in the exercise of faith, whereas making a claim usually implies that there is no evidence or proof of any kind to be had.

I went into that with a bit detail because in relation to the “issue” on the table in this thread (as with any “issue”), we take it on faith and testimony that Christ speaks through His LDS prophets to the end that all may receive the covenants. “Issues” being what they are (problems for debate or discussion), and 3 Nephi 11 pretty much outlining how the prophets and saints are to operate, debate and discussion (if the exchange of ideas can even be called that in the context of how doctrine and covenants are best understood) take on a very specific character.

[DBMormon]

 

Thank you for clarifying. You are saying we take it on faith and testimony that the LDS scriptures teach that Christ speaks through His LDS prophets, and that we also take it on faith and testimony that the LDS prophets teach Christ’s word.

 

When talking about these things, I find the terminology “claim” a bit detrimental to inspiring faith and testimony—I don’t think of the scriptures or the prophets as “claiming” God’s word; they “proclaim” it. When I bear my testimony, I don’t “claim” such-as-such is true; I proclaim it as such. I might even say “I know" (not “I claim to know”). I don’t mean to digress, but to confess faith in something and refer to it as a claim seems a bit of an oxymoron because the spiritual evidence or proof of truth is inherent in the exercise of faith, whereas making a claim usually implies that there is no evidence or proof of any kind to be had.

I went into that with a bit detail because in relation to the “issue” on the table in this thread (as with any “issue”), we take it on faith and testimony that Christ speaks through His LDS prophets to the end that all may receive the covenants. “Issues” being what they are (problems for debate or discussion), and 3 Nephi 11 pretty much outlining how the prophets and saints are to operate, debate and discussion (if the exchange of ideas can even be called that in the context of how doctrine and covenants are best understood) take on a very specific character.

 

But you don't know.  Prophets speak as prophets and they speak as man.  When they note they are speaking for Christ "Thus saith the Lord" is rare and hence we trust that they are speaking for him and recognize at times they don't.  Deciding when they are and are not is not as simple as we teach it.  I could get a 100 good faithful LDS and each would disagree on what is of God and what is not.  I Trust Christ words specifically (what is claimed in scripture that he said during his mortal ministry)  I trust prophets when they directly claim to be speaking on his behalf (Thus saith the Lord) and the rest is mixed as I hold much to be inspired and some not.  And only I have a right to discern for myself

 

When I say claim, I mean what the scriptures claim Christ is saying directly and when prophets are claiming to speak directly on his behalf

Edited January 22, 2015 by DBMormon

[CV75]

But you don't know.  Prophets speak as prophets and they speak as man.  When they note they are speaking for Christ "Thus saith the Lord" is rare and hence we trust that they are speaking for him and recognize at times they don't.  Deciding when they are and are not is not as simple as we teach it.  I could get a 100 good faithful LDS and each would disagree on what is of God and what is not.  I Trust Christ words specifically (what is claimed in scripture that he said during his mortal ministry)  I trust prophets when they directly claim to be speaking on his behalf (Thus saith the Lord) and the rest is mixed as I hold much to be inspired and some not.  And only I have a right to discern for myself

 

When I say claim, I mean what the scriptures claim Christ is saying directly and when prophets are claiming to speak directly on his behalf

Faith is a precursor to knowledge and testimony is its validation, so I don’t see how someone cannot know, having some faith (even a desire to believe) and testimony. As you pointed out, faith, knowledge and testimony manifest themselves in degrees. So yes, I do know.

 

Note that Jesus also speaks as a man (D&C 50:10-14, and the context of those verses with verses 1, 36 and 44-45):

 

1 Hearken, O ye elders of my church, and give ear to the voice of the living God; and attend to the words of wisdom which shall be given unto you, according as ye have asked and are agreed as touching the church, and the spirits which have gone abroad in the earth.

…

10 And now come, saith the Lord, by the Spirit, unto the elders of his church, and let us reason together, that ye may understand;

11 Let us reason even as a man reasoneth one with another face to face.

12 Now, when a man reasoneth he is understood of man, because he reasoneth as a man; even so will I, the Lord, reason with you that you may understand.

13 Wherefore, I the Lord ask you this question—unto what were ye ordained?

14 To preach my gospel by the Spirit, even the Comforter which was sent forth to teach the truth.

…

36 And behold, verily I say unto you, blessed are you who are now hearing these words of mine from the mouth of my servant…

…

44 Wherefore, I am in your midst, and I am the good shepherd, and the stone of Israel. He that buildeth upon this rock shall never fall.

45 And the day cometh that you shall hear my voice and see me, and know that I am.

46 Watch, therefore, that ye may be ready. Even so. Amen.

 

But my remarks aren’t about the degree to which we have faith, knowledge and testimony (or exercise them), they are about disputing over what Christ’s servants have to say, which is not consistent with the doctrine of Christ.

 

The use of the term “claim” is problematic when it comes to the characterization of scripture as a “claim” and prophets as “claiming” to speak directly on the Lord’s behalf. They clearly testify (and rightly so; 3 Nephi 11 and D&C 50 are just two examples).

 

Accusations of the leaders to be claiming such-and-such are exemplified in the extreme by the spirit of Korihor (Alma 30), where he took great pains to preach against that which had been spoken by the prophets, and accused them as follows--all very familiar language for those disputing the servants of God and the legitimacy of their teachings.

• ye yoke yourselves with such foolish things
• no man can know of anything which is to come.
• these things which ye call prophecies, which ye say are handed down by holy prophets, behold, they are foolish traditions of your fathers
• ye cannot know of things which ye do not see
• it is the effect of a frenzied mind; and this derangement of your minds comes because of the traditions of your fathers, which lead you away into a belief of things which are not so
• ye lead away this people after the foolish traditions of your fathers, and according to your own desires …that they durst not enjoy their rights and privileges
• their priests …have brought them to believe, by their traditions and their dreams and their whims and their visions and their pretended mysteries
• he did …revile against the priests and teachers, accusing them of leading away the people after the silly traditions of their fathers
• I do not teach the foolish traditions of your fathers
• I do not teach this people to bind themselves down under the foolish ordinances and performances
• I do not believe…; and I say also, that ye do not know
• they have all gone astray after an unknown God

 

Again, among the most fundamental principles of the doctrine of Christ is not to dispute what His servants have to say, especially to argue an “issue” over “rights and privileges.” Remembering the words of D&C 50:44-46 helps us to understand and uphold that teaching.

[DBMormon]

Faith is a precursor to knowledge and testimony is its validation, so I don’t see how someone cannot know, having some faith (even a desire to believe) and testimony. As you pointed out, faith, knowledge and testimony manifest themselves in degrees. So yes, I do know.

 

Note that Jesus also speaks as a man (D&C 50:10-14, and the context of those verses with verses 1, 36 and 44-45):

 

1 Hearken, O ye elders of my church, and give ear to the voice of the living God; and attend to the words of wisdom which shall be given unto you, according as ye have asked and are agreed as touching the church, and the spirits which have gone abroad in the earth.

…

10 And now come, saith the Lord, by the Spirit, unto the elders of his church, and let us reason together, that ye may understand;

11 Let us reason even as a man reasoneth one with another face to face.

12 Now, when a man reasoneth he is understood of man, because he reasoneth as a man; even so will I, the Lord, reason with you that you may understand.

13 Wherefore, I the Lord ask you this question—unto what were ye ordained?

14 To preach my gospel by the Spirit, even the Comforter which was sent forth to teach the truth.

…

36 And behold, verily I say unto you, blessed are you who are now hearing these words of mine from the mouth of my servant…

…

44 Wherefore, I am in your midst, and I am the good shepherd, and the stone of Israel. He that buildeth upon this rock shall never fall.

45 And the day cometh that you shall hear my voice and see me, and know that I am.

46 Watch, therefore, that ye may be ready. Even so. Amen.

 

But my remarks aren’t about the degree to which we have faith, knowledge and testimony (or exercise them), they are about disputing over what Christ’s servants have to say, which is not consistent with the doctrine of Christ.

 

The use of the term “claim” is problematic when it comes to the characterization of scripture as a “claim” and prophets as “claiming” to speak directly on the Lord’s behalf. They clearly testify (and rightly so; 3 Nephi 11 and D&C 50 are just two examples).

 

Accusations of the leaders to be claiming such-and-such are exemplified in the extreme by the spirit of Korihor (Alma 30), where he took great pains to preach against that which had been spoken by the prophets, and accused them as follows--all very familiar language for those disputing the servants of God and the legitimacy of their teachings.

• ye yoke yourselves with such foolish things
• no man can know of anything which is to come.
• these things which ye call prophecies, which ye say are handed down by holy prophets, behold, they are foolish traditions of your fathers
• ye cannot know of things which ye do not see
• it is the effect of a frenzied mind; and this derangement of your minds comes because of the traditions of your fathers, which lead you away into a belief of things which are not so
• ye lead away this people after the foolish traditions of your fathers, and according to your own desires …that they durst not enjoy their rights and privileges
• their priests …have brought them to believe, by their traditions and their dreams and their whims and their visions and their pretended mysteries
• he did …revile against the priests and teachers, accusing them of leading away the people after the silly traditions of their fathers
• I do not teach the foolish traditions of your fathers
• I do not teach this people to bind themselves down under the foolish ordinances and performances
• I do not believe…; and I say also, that ye do not know
• they have all gone astray after an unknown God

 

Again, among the most fundamental principles of the doctrine of Christ is not to dispute what His servants have to say, especially to argue an “issue” over “rights and privileges.” Remembering the words of D&C 50:44-46 helps us to understand and uphold that teaching.

Unless one has been visited by an angelic messenger, and even that has its problems (Is he a messenger of satan in disguise, Am I mentally ill and hallucinating), I can have no certainity.  you can call it knowing and we are likely splitting hairs, but it seems your are defining Knowing as an awareness of something that proves true to you though granting it is not absolute truth as in the stop sign is red.  

 

For instance no matter how strongly I "know" the stop sign is purple, no one is going to take seriously my use of the word as it is a untruth regardless of how real it is to you. 

 

No offense meant, words are tricky and we all derive meaning from them differently... just my 2 cents and I recognize this is not unanimous.

[mnn727]

Its not about gay participation, its about embracing their lifestyle choices. Its about embracing sin.

 please realize that the Church is not a monastery for perfect people, though all of us ought to be striving on the road to godliness. No, at least one aspect of the Church is more like a hospital or an aid station, provided for those who are ill and want to get well, where one can get an infusion of spiritual nutrition and a supply of sustaining water in order to keep on climbing. -- Jeffrey R Holland, Conference Oct 1997

[CV75]

Unless one has been visited by an angelic messenger, and even that has its problems (Is he a messenger of satan in disguise, Am I mentally ill and hallucinating), I can have no certainity.  you can call it knowing and we are likely splitting hairs, but it seems your are defining Knowing as an awareness of something that proves true to you though granting it is not absolute truth as in the stop sign is red.  

 

For instance no matter how strongly I "know" the stop sign is purple, no one is going to take seriously my use of the word as it is a untruth regardless of how real it is to you. 

 

No offense meant, words are tricky and we all derive meaning from them differently... just my 2 cents and I recognize this is not unanimous.

Certainly no offense taken. My comments on faith, knowledge and testimony are only to recognize that we are on equal ground as far as the Lord’s grace is concerned when it comes to reaching out to Him, simply by possessing them. However well He thinks we may understand them at this moment needn’t be a barrier to coming unto Him. He accepts and leverages what we have, not what we don’t have.

 

I say this to remind you that the real thrust of my comments is about the doctrine of Christ as it pertains to disputing the words of His servants, and not about judging how well they know or represent His words, which is only a technique of disputation. He explains why we dispute the words of His servants, and points out the source of contention with them; any number of justifications and rationalizations for the dispute follow that.

 

It doesn’t matter how well they do their job; such a discussion is, as you described above, splitting hairs because the weightier matter is the primary role their installation has with the other points of His doctrine, and which He contrasts with a clear description of what is not His doctrine.

[Tacenda]

http://mormonstories.org/mormon-stories-a-tribute-from-past-podcast-participants/

 

It looks like many supporters are out there and some are even true believing members.  Claudia Bushman & Maxine Hanks to name a few.  They are all taking a moment to talk about the Mormon Stories podcast.  One of them mentions that before MS there were message boards and maybe even podcasts doing the same things.  Some who spoke on this podcast credit John for saving their life and others' lives.  Maybe it's true John's podcast may have kept many in and those who left would have left anyway.  Maybe we just want to blame John for our loved ones leaving, lessens the pain possibly.

[Daniel2]

This thread seemed the most appropriate in which to post this article I came across on the main page of Yahoo News today:

Breaking the Silence: What It Means to be Gay—and Mormon

http://news.yahoo.com/breaking-silence-means-gay-mormon-224134966.html

Takepart.com By | Takepart.com 3 hours ago

This past Tuesday was my birthday, and I received an unexpected gift from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, better known as theMormon church: The formal announcement that it would support nondiscrimination laws in employment and housing for LGBT people like me. The clarity of the church’s message of support for LGBT people was diluted, though, by the conditional statements about religious liberty protections. Nevertheless, this is a powerful moment on what has often felt like a slow road of progress for LGBT Mormons.

To fully understand the implications of Tuesday’s announcement, we must look at it from local and global perspectives. First, the announcement will help Utah’s legislature engage in a civil debate and hopefully pass a nondiscrimination ordinance that’s failed to gain traction for years. Second, the bulk of the Mormon church’s growth is in the developing world, particularly in places such asAfrica, where in recent years governments have vigorously supported legislation that would criminalize homosexual behavior. The strong language in Tuesday’s announcement—that persecution and violence against LGBT people is “simply wrong” and inconsistent with the teachings of Jesus Christ—will empower LGBT Mormons in these countries. It will also help their families come to a new level of acceptance—and turn them into pioneers motivated by their faith to fight discrimination and create safe spaces for all people. 

So what about the conditions of religious freedom and reconciling them with gay rights? It’s simple: Live and legislate by the Bible’s golden rule of “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” It’s ironic that religious freedom has given gay rights the opportunity to flourish. People of faith—including a fair number of heterosexual Mormons I know—say their faith is what compels them to open their arms equally to their LGBT sisters and brothers. 

Growing up in Mormon in Utah in the 1980s, I often worried how others at church would react if I told them I was gay. I didn’t come out until I was 27, after thousands of dollars and many hours in self-imposed individual and group reparative therapy on the recommendation of Mormon bishops. Within three years, I was in a relationship with a gay man, and I stopped going to church out of fear I would be excommunicated. I spent almost nine years away from Mormonism, exploring other faiths, until I decided, in 2011, to return as an out gay man in a relationship. I was welcomed, with open arms, into a wonderful Washington, D.C., Mormon congregation.

It’s unconscionable that so many LGBT Mormons have suffered so much—family rejection, homelessness, excommunication, despair, and even suicide—because of either the silence or the uniformed advice given by the Mormon church for much of the past half century. I mourn these enormous losses. This is what keeps me up late at night working to provide warmth, community, and resources to LGBT Mormons, their families, and friends around the world.

I envision a future where as LGBT Mormons, we no longer have to choose between our faith and our sexual orientation or gender identity. This will require humility, openness, and willingness from Mormon church leaders and members to create the environment where LGBT people feel fully accepted and spiritually uplifted. LGBT Mormons must also be willing to engage our faith and become the change we want to see within it.

[Scott Lloyd]

This thread seemed the most appropriate in which to post this article I came across on the main page of Yahoo News today:

 

In other words, nothing less on the part of the Church will suffice short of utter and total capitulation. Until that happens, any expression of tolerance on the part of the Church will be dismissed or minimized as "diluted" or "conditional."

 

Edited to add:

 

This link was provided on another thread, but I think it applicable here.

Edited February 2, 2015 by Scott Lloyd