No True Scotsman And Faithful Latter-Day Saints

[Russell C McGregor]

Too much sarcasm for this to be worth my time. Have a good evening.

Rockpond,

In any plausibly convincing "Mormon" forum, the one person who has the burden of proof in such a discussion would be the person advocating the radical departure from the Church's clear, long-maintained, doctrinally sound and largely uncontroversial moral standards.

 

And that person would appear to be you.

 

Although your footwork does get rather fancy whenever anyone tries to pin down your position, you continue to advocate and proselytize for your radically counter-orthodox notions.

 

So it seems to me that you really ought to extend to us at least as much patience as you seem to expect us to extend to you.

Just IMHO, of course.

 

[SeekingUnderstanding]

So it seems to me that you really ought to extend to us at least as much patience as you seem to expect us to extend to you.

Just IMHO, of course.

If Rockpond practiced this he would have been banned ages ago.

[Stargazer]

Here's a suggestion, Canard: next time you "respond" to something I post, how about you try reading it first?

Here, again, for your edification:

But what about a white man who wanted to marry a Polynesian woman? A Polynesian man and an Asian woman? An Asian man and a Native American woman? A Native American man and a white woman? Where was the "ban" on those "racially mixed" marriages, pre 1978?

I'm reminded of a book with the title "In the Lord's Due Time" by a certain Joseph Freeman. Br. Freeman claimed to be the first black to be ordained to the priesthood following the 1978 revelation. It's an autobiography and it describes how he and his Polynesian wife were married by an LDS bishop in Hawaii many years before the 1978 revelation. There was no mention of any "ban".

There was certainly "discouragement". But that is not banning.

[Senator]

If Rockpond practiced this he would have been banned ages ago.

 

But would he have been reinstated shortly thereafter?

[Gray]

Of course. All that stuff condemning homosexuality are clearly the "philosophies of men" reflecting the prejudices of the day. The prejudices of today are exempt from the philosophies of men and correct in every respect.

 

Both are of course the philosophies of men. But I'd like to think we've learned a thing or two of value since 800 BCE

Edited May 12, 2015 by Gray

[Gray]

Golly whillakers I guess you are right.  My bad.

 

I forgot about all those passages in the bible praising sodomy and the proclamation on the family which clearly states that it doesn't matter who you marry or how many and that homosexuality is a good thing.

 

Gosh and all those general authorities that are always telling us to just do what feels good and God will love us for it!!  After all God is love, right?   So make love not war!  Piece and freedom!

 

Silly me!!!

 

But wait a minute- why are we arguing about it then since the scriptures praise homosexuality?

 

The great sin of Sodom seems to have been inhospitality. Sodomy means something quite different today, but even so straight married couples in the church are allowed to partake without consequence. 

[ALarson]

The great sin of Sodom seems to have been inhospitality. Sodomy means something quite different today, but even so straight married couples in the church are allowed to partake without consequence. 

If you look up the definition for sodomy, you'll see that many married couples participate in this too.  I think the "oral" part was at one time discussed with married couples (from leaders), but I don't think it is anymore (?).  So, that alone is not enough to condemn only gay couples, IMO.

Edited May 12, 2015 by ALarson

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Too much sarcasm for this to be worth my time. Have a good evening.

Actually, I think you don't want to respond because you cant. You know that you are on the wrong side on this issue.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

The great sin of Sodom seems to have been inhospitality. Sodomy means something quite different today, but even so straight married couples in the church are allowed to partake without consequence. 

Are you speaking from experience?

[Gray]

Are you speaking from experience?

 

I'm referring to the FP letter in the early 80s on the topic of sodomy (modern definition), and its subsequent reversal. 

Edited May 12, 2015 by Gray

[ALarson]

Are you speaking from experience?

I agree with Gray.  I assume a great many of especially the younger generation partake of this type of sex.  Sodomy is not just limited to one act.

[Scott Lloyd]

That is not what I asked. I specifically asked you if you view the PotF as a "pattern of reading cultural norms & biases into scripture and believing that they reflect God's will".

 

 

IF you were to ask me my response is "No it absolutely does not represent "a pattern of reading cultural norms & biases into scripture and believing that they reflect God's will" and I can even explain why this is.

 

This is God's will and it is His plan. I see no evidence that it should or would or even could change. Quite the opposite in fact. I see that it cannot change as it goes against God and his plan.

 

 

Can you do the same with your position? 

 

 

Actually, you didn't specifically ask me if I viewed "the PotF as a "pattern of reading cultural norms & biases into scripture and believing that they reflect God's will".

 

But my answer to that question is yes, I think there is a little bit of cultural norms and biases built into it.

 

En route to looking up something else I found this video on lds.org.

 

It is aimed at youth, and some, no doubt, will regard its message as simplistic and unsophisticated. I found it striking, impactful and wise. It is just as applicable to adults as to youth.

 

And yes, I see it as having specific application to those who think they know better than the prophets and apostles on matters such as the current redefinition of marriage and the permanent efficacy of the law of chastity as it is taught and practiced in the Church of Jesus Christ.

 

He who has ears to hear, let him hear.

Edited May 12, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[mfbukowski]

The great sin of Sodom seems to have been inhospitality.

ROFL!!

But they so much LIKED to meet new people!

You need to take this routine on the road. You have a future in stand up comedy

[rockpond]

Actually, I think you don't want to respond because you cant. You know that you are on the wrong side on this issue.

 

As you may have noticed, I'm quite comfortable with the position and belief I have regarding this issue.  But I won't wade through sarcasm in search of a nugget of productive conversation.

[Gray]

ROFL!!

But they so much LIKED to meet new people!

You need to take this routine on the road. You have a future in stand up comedy

 

I'm shamelessly stealing all my material from the Bible. I'm a hack at best!

 

Ezekiel 16:49-50, “This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy.” 

Edited May 12, 2015 by Gray

[CV75]

Some cultural norms and biases cross national boundaries.

 

And to answer your question, no.  But is it possible that we can see things in scripture regarding limitations to the covenant of marriage that aren't really there?  Sure.  We did it with respect to the priesthood and race.   I'm not sure why it couldn't happen with respect to sexual orientation.

Now you’re just conflating marriage with sexual orientation, and scripture with who-knows-what; let’s stick with marriage and scripture.

 

Certainly God’s will also crosses cultural norms and biases and national boundaries. Yet it is regularly challenged on various fronts, so even in consideration of all the evidences that reflect His original intent for marriage, and His will, mind, word, voice and power concerning it among the peoples of the earth (and the LDS), I suppose marriage could still be misconstrued as a bond between people of the same sex. That is the kind of thing that happens when people conflate things and call it a new idea.

 

And you are still left with the challenge to God's norm for marriage on its own merits, and there aren't any!

[rockpond]

Now you’re just conflating marriage with sexual orientation, and scripture with who-knows-what; let’s stick with marriage and scripture.

 

Certainly God’s will also crosses cultural norms and biases and national boundaries. Yet it is regularly challenged on various fronts, so even in consideration of all the evidences that reflect His original intent for marriage, and His will, mind, word, voice and power concerning it among the peoples of the earth (and the LDS), I suppose marriage could still be misconstrued as a bond between people of the same sex. That is the kind of thing that happens when people conflate things and call it a new idea.

 

And you are still left with the challenge to God's norm for marriage on its own merits, and there aren't any!

 

Okay... so let's take a look at it:  Where did God reflect his original intent for marriage?

[Buckeye]

If you look up the definition for sodomy, you'll see that many married couples participate in this too.  I think the "oral" part was at one time discussed with married couples (from leaders), but I don't think it is anymore (?).  So, that alone is not enough to condemn only gay couples, IMO.

 

I don't have a source, but I have heard it enough to believe that in the early 1980s bishops were instructed to ask couples in TR interviews if they engaged in oral sex and to work with them on this problem, including denying a recommend if needed. Sufficiet to say, there were problems and pushback and the questioning stopped after a few years. Still, when I was a student at BYU in the late 1990s I had professors who openly taught that oral sex is a sin even for a married couple.

[mfbukowski]

I'm shamelessly stealing all my material from the Bible. I'm a hack at best!

 

Ezekiel 16:49-50, “This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy.”

Well maybe you need to do a little less SELECTIVE stealing

 

Leviticus 20:13 - If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood [shall be] upon them.

Leviticus 18:22 - Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination.

1 Corinthians 6:9 - Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

Romans 1:26-27 - For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: (Read More...)

Jude 1:7 - Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Genesis 19:1-38 - And there came two angels to Sodom at even; and Lot sat in the gate of Sodom: and Lot seeing [them] rose up to meet them; and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground; (Read More...)

I would recommend looking up each verse for the context. 

I don't think they were talking about "hospitality".

And by the way, you didn't quote that text in its fullness

49 Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.

50 And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.

 

I think you kind of missed that "abomination" part

Edited May 12, 2015 by mfbukowski

[Gray]

Well maybe you need to do a little less SELECTIVE stealing

 

I would recommend looking up each verse for the context. 

I don't think they were talking about "hospitality".

 

The vast majority of your citations have nothing to do with Sodom and Gomorrah specifically. I agree with you there are a few passages that restrict certain behaviors as they were encountered at the time. But I was specifically referring to the Sodom and Gomorrah story. 

 

More copy/paste. 

 

Ezekiel 16:49-50, “This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy.”

2. Isaiah 1 “The specific sins mentioned are greed, rebellion against God, empty religious ritual without true devotion to God, failure to plead the cause of orphans and widows, failure to pursue justice, and failure to champion the oppressed” .

3. Jeremiah 23:9-15 “[The] focus is on adultery, lying, and cooperating with evildoers…” .

4. Luke 10:10-12, “But whenever you enter a town and they do not welcome you, go out into its streets and say, ‘Even the dust of your town that clings to our feet, we wipe off in protest against you. Yet know this: the kingdom of God has come near.’ I tell you, on that day it will be more tolerable for Sodom than for that town.”

5. Jude 7, “…Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which, in the same matter as they, indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural lust (or “strange flesh”), serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.” This “unnatural lust” does not refer to same-sex attraction but rather to the desire to have sex with heavenly beings (angels).

6. 2 Peter 2: Sins listed are adultery, greed, and idolatry (62) 

Edited May 12, 2015 by Gray

[mfbukowski]

The vast majority of your citations have nothing to do with Sodom and Gomorrah specifically. I agree with you there are a few passages that restrict certain behaviors as they were encountered at the time. But I was specifically referring to the Sodom and Gomorrah story. 

 

More copy/paste. 

 

Ezekiel 16:49-50, “This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy.”

2. Isaiah 1 “The specific sins mentioned are greed, rebellion against God, empty religious ritual without true devotion to God, failure to plead the cause of orphans and widows, failure to pursue justice, and failure to champion the oppressed” .

3. Jeremiah 23:9-15 “[The] focus is on adultery, lying, and cooperating with evildoers…” .

4. Luke 10:10-12, “But whenever you enter a town and they do not welcome you, go out into its streets and say, ‘Even the dust of your town that clings to our feet, we wipe off in protest against you. Yet know this: the kingdom of God has come near.’ I tell you, on that day it will be more tolerable for Sodom than for that town.”

5. Jude 7, “…Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which, in the same matter as they, indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural lust (or “strange flesh”), serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.” This “unnatural lust” does not refer to same-sex attraction but rather to the desire to have sex with heavenly beings (angels).

6. 2 Peter 2: Sins listed are adultery, greed, and idolatry (62) 

Uh, that's nice.

 

By the way, this thread has become about homosexuality, and oddly that is what I was talking about.

 

I didn't realize suddenly we were talking about being nice to the poor.

 

Cheesh.  Smoke and mirrors don't help your cause.  The point is that the bible clearly condemns homosexual behavior.

 

Do what you will with that- I can't stop you, but to say that it doesn't condemn homosexuality is....  disingenuous at best.

[Gray]

Uh, that's nice.

 

By the way, this thread has become about homosexuality, and oddly that is what I was talking about.

 

I didn't realize suddenly we were talking about being nice to the poor.

 

Cheesh.  Smoke and mirrors don't help your cause.  The point is that the bible clearly condemns homosexual behavior.

 

Do what you will with that- I can't stop you, but to say that it doesn't condemn homosexuality is....  disingenuous at best.

 

Yes, at least a couple of Bible writers condemned some expressions of homosexuality. The point was that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah, as at least Biblical writers described it, was principally about the mistreatment of strangers. "Sodomy" as we think of it today isn't derived from the Biblical concept. A minor point, sure. 

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

As you may have noticed, I'm quite comfortable with the position and belief I have regarding this issue.  But I won't wade through sarcasm in search of a nugget of productive conversation.

That is fine to be comfortable. That is actually the problem. 

 

My position is right not because I am comfortable with it but because that is what has been  talked about in church and backed up by scripture.

 

Lets consider the belief in reincarnation. Several of the points you bring up for same sex marriage apply to this belief. It is not really talked about in the scripture. Some could argue that "it is not in there specifically saying that "reincarnation is false" so I believe it."

 

Well, there is nothing really in the scriptures condemning it . How ever the prophets have made statements that it is a false belief and not compatible with the gospel of Christ. 

 

Should I wish for a revelation that will spell out that reincarnation is true, conference talks wont do? Why would I? So far it has been condemned by church authorities and the bible is largely silent. 

 

It makes no sense to then start advocating for that position. And that one day in 40 years there will probably be a revelation once the GA's figure it out.

 

This is essentially what you are doing with your position.

Edited May 12, 2015 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

Yes, at least a couple of Bible writers condemned some expressions of homosexuality. The point was that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah, as at least Biblical writers described it, was principally about the mistreatment of strangers. "Sodomy" as we think of it today isn't derived from the Biblical concept. A minor point, sure. 

I wonder what that mistreatment was.

[Gray]

I wonder what that mistreatment was.

 

Among other things, the desire to rape the angelic beings that were guests in Lot's house. 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodom_and_Gomorrah#Jewish

Edited May 12, 2015 by Gray