Are Lds Prophets Wrong On Same Sex Marriage?

[Boanerges]

Perhaps right for the church, wrong to push that view on others not of the church.  I think I read somewhere "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may."

[california boy]

Right and since the scriptures only define the marriage covenant to be a male/female relationship in either monogamy or polygamy, there is no reason to apply it in any other situation.  We can't assume that God would accept different ways that man can creatively change the relationship to something else. 

 

I agree completely.  We can't assume anything is the will of God that God has not told us.  If we just start assuming dogma that we want to be the will of God when He has not revealed it as such, then the doctrine becomes the doctrine of man and not of God.

[mfbukowski]

I personally haven't seen california boy try to misrepresent or pervert understanding of the LDS position on homosexuality (as opposed to other individuals, many members). He simply doesn't agree with it.

Of course I never said that.

[mfbukowski]

I am a little curious about this particular attack you made on my religious beliefs to follow the words of Christ as found in the New Testament.  Do you or the church believe that anything in the New Testament is not part of the gospel of Christ and was probably recorded inaccurately?  Is there anything in His teachings that are against the teachings of the church?  Are you suggesting that to follow the words of Christ as contained in the New Testament is a bad idea?

 

I would love to hear what your objections you have with me following the words of Christ as found in the New Testament.  And I would actually like to have you tell me what teachings in the church are more important than the gospel taught by Christ while He was here on earth.  I know that the church teaches dogma that are not found in the teachings of Christ that you and others believe come from God.  It would be of interest to me if you could list the additional dogma the church teaches you think are needed for my own salvation that Christ didn't teach while He was here on earth.

 

 You bring up a very interesting topic.  Perhaps it needs it's own thread.  But for now, could you tell me the most important teachings of the church not found in the words of Christ?  I would love that.  In answer to one of your other questions, this is the exact reason why I post on this board.  I want to hear what you and others have to say.  Thanks.

I encourage you to read other threads on this board that DO nothing else but respond to these questions.

Joseph Smith felt as you do that the other churches were wrong.

I have been discussing issues of historicity of scripture for years here, and do not want to rehash that here.

I suggest you study what Mormons believe, because your understanding is extremely elementary. I don't mean that in an insulating way, it is just that everyone's understanding of any topic they have not studied is elementary.

I could show you instances where you have said that premarital sex is "not wrong", right on this thread, but even when quoted side by side, you will ignore the reference. I have seen you do it before. It is pointless. I hope you find happiness.

[Scott Lloyd]

I have no interest the Bickertonite opinion on the matter. Doctrines of the Church of Jesus Christ or the doctrines of the LDS church are not necessarily synonymous with the will of God no matter the claims.

As you wish.

 

But I have answered ALarson's challenge. The scriptures clearly teach that God would cease to be God if he violated His own eternal laws.

Edited May 1, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Damien the Leper]

As you wish.

 

But I have answered ALarson's challenge. The scriptures clearly teach that God would cease to be God if he violated His own eternal laws.

This is a problematic claim. This is an hearsay argument. But I understand why you use it.

As the Prophet, President Stephen Veazey, has stated, scripture is an indispensable resource for drawing unto God. However, no scripture is to be worshipped or idolized or to be considered perfect or complete.

I'll maintain the standard that not all scripture or revelation is God breathed. God is so much more than these trivial matters. You are welcome to continue to trust in the flesh as you seem to love.

[Damien the Leper]

You would really have a God that has no rules, no law, does whatever he wants on a whim, can change the commandments whenever he wants, but never changes and has existed exactly as he is now forever and will exist exactly as he is now forever?

 

I could never worship such a being.

I'll take a lawless God over your Wizard of Oz parading as if he were God.

 

Be respectful.

[ALarson]

As you wish.

 

But I have answered ALarson's challenge. The scriptures clearly teach that God would cease to be God if he violated His own eternal laws.

Sorry, but I don't believe you have done this.  I know you believe it and it's in Mormon scripture, but this is nowhere else in scripture.  (I know we'll disagree on what scripture is for you vs. for me, so this may be pointless.)

 

A couple of questions:

 

Do you really believe that Jesus Christ could cease to be a God?  

 

And, you believe the promise that you can become a God is not an eternal promise?  That it is conditional?

Edited May 1, 2015 by ALarson

[Scott Lloyd]

Sorry, but I don't believe you have done this.  I know you believe it and it's in Mormon scripture, but this is nowhere else in scripture.  (I know we'll disagree on what scripture is for you vs. for me, so this may be pointless.)

 

This is the first indication I have had up to now of your wholesale rejection of what you call "Mormon scripture." I had taken you to be at least a professing Latter-day Saint. If this is not the case, then I'm uncertain whether you and I have much further to discuss on this matter.

 

But for future reference, when you ask if something is "recorded in scripture," I am apt to take you to mean any scripture, not just the Protestant Bible.

 

A couple of questions:

 

Do you really believe that Jesus Christ could cease to be a God?

 

Suppose I were to answer in the negative. Would that be denying His omnipotence?

 

But to answer your question, from the scriptural (Book of Mormon) passages I cited, yes, by violating eternal laws He could cease to be a God. That he would do so is unthinkable.

 

 

And, you believe the promise that you can become a God is not an eternal promise?  That it is conditional?

 

Not sure I get your meaning here. Are you asking whether I believe that one could attain godhood regardless of his behavior? If so, I would have to say no.

[ALarson]

Not sure I get your meaning here. Are you asking whether I believe that one could attain godhood regardless of his behavior? If so, I would have to say no.

I was asking if the promise that you can become a God is not a promise to be an eternal God.  

 

Are there conditions to being a God for eternity once you've become a God?  (Conditional)

[Scott Lloyd]

I was asking if the promise that you can become a God is not a promise to be an eternal God.  

 

Are there conditions to being a God for eternity once you've become a God?  (Conditional)

I think your problem might be your misunderstanding of the meaning of the word eternal. It is a descriptor of all things pertaining to God. It does not necessarily mean "never-ending."

 

See Doctrine and Covenants 19:6-12 on this.

 

Also, see this from a Gospel Topics essay on lds.org:

 

Eternal life is the phrase used in scripture to define the quality of life that our Eternal Father lives. The Lord declared, “This is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39). Immortality is to live forever as a resurrected being. Through the Atonement of Jesus Christ, everyone will receive this gift. Eternal life, or exaltation, is to live in God's presence and to continue as families (see D&C 131:1–4). Like immortality, this gift is made possible through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. However, to inherit eternal life requires our “obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel” (Articles of Faith 1:3).

 

 

I realize (as I am only now finding out) that you don't accept "Mormon scripture." But I do. And thus, whey you ask what I believe, I am apt to couch it terms of any of the Standard Works, including the Doctrine and Covenants.

[ALarson]

I won't play this game with you, Scott Lloyd.  I've seen you do this repeatedly on here.  When you're asked a question that you don't want to answer, you either act like you just cannot understand the question (even when it's obvious what you're being asked), or you insult the person who is asking the question.

 

Let's try just one more time and if you still don't want to answer the question, that's fine.

 

1. You state that a God can cease to be God.

 

2. You believe in the promise that you can someday become a God.

 

3. Does that mean you believe if you become a God that remaining a God for eternity is conditional?

 

And as far as my beliefs regarding scripture, I believe that the Mormon church is a man-made organization.   So, I believe their scriptures are written by man.  I believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ and have not seen this teaching from him (that God can cease to be God).  Maybe I'm wrong and would love to read any scripture from the Bible on that.

[Damien the Leper]

God cannot cease to be God because God is the first and the last. It's very simple. No need for a nonsensical divine pedigree.

[JLHPROF]

God cannot cease to be God because God is the first and the last. It's very simple. No need for a nonsensical divine pedigree.

 

That's your belief, not Mormon belief.  We are different religions after all.  You wouldn't expect a Buddhist or a Hindu to agree with you.  Why would you expect a Mormon to agree with you.

[JLHPROF]

I won't play this game with you, Scott Lloyd.  I've seen you do this repeatedly on here.  When you're asked a question that you don't want to answer, you either act like you just cannot understand the question (even when it's obvious what you're being asked), or you insult the person who is asking the question.

 

Let's try just one more time and if you still don't want to answer the question, that's fine.

 

1. You state that a God can cease to be God.

 

I agree.

 

2. You believe in the promise that you can someday become a God.

 

I agree.

 

3. Does that mean you believe if you become a God that remaining a God for eternity is conditional?

 

As long as agency exists, then yes, Godhood would be conditional upon maintaining its requirements.

 

And as far as my beliefs regarding scripture, I believe that the Mormon church is a man-made organization.   So, I believe their scriptures are written by man.  I believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ and have not seen this teaching from him (that God can cease to be God).  Maybe I'm wrong and would love to read any scripture from the Bible on that.

It is in the Mormon scripture.  Mormons believe it.  Why does it have to be in the Bible too?  We are not evangelicals.

[Scott Lloyd]

I won't play this game with you, Scott Lloyd.  I've seen you do this repeatedly on here.  When you're asked a question that you don't want to answer, you either act like you just cannot understand the question (even when it's obvious what you're being asked), or you insult the person who is asking the question.

 

When someone starts putting questions to me that I have already answered, I begin to suspect attempted entrapment, and I react accordingly. I'm funny that way.

 

Let's try just one more time and if you still don't want to answer the question, that's fine.

 

1. You state that a God can cease to be God.

 

 

 

I believe what is stated in the Book of Mormon passages I have quoted to you.

 

2. You believe in the promise that you can someday become a God.

 

3. Does that mean you believe if you become a God that remaining a God for eternity is conditional?

 

 

My position on this is consistent with what is taught in said Book of Mormon passages; that is to say, if God by violating eternal laws would cease to be God, then presumably anyone attaining exaltation and divinity could in like manner lose that status. But remember: The scripture goes on to declare that God would not do such a thing. Nor, in my view, would any such a being violate eternal laws. So this discussion is really just an empty exercise.

 

And as far as my beliefs regarding scripture, I believe that the Mormon church is a man-made organization.   So, I believe their scriptures are written by man.  I believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ and have not seen this teaching from him (that God can cease to be God).  Maybe I'm wrong and would love to read any scripture from the Bible on that.

 

 

You are entitled to your views.

 

But bear in mind any endeavor to dismiss the teachings of Christ or prophetic pronouncement inspired by Him on the pretext that they are contained in what you call "Mormon scripture" is not apt to get any traction with me, because I wholeheartedly embrace the Standard Works as the Word of God.

 

Furthermore, in the future, if you ask me to point out where something is "recorded in scripture," you need to bear in mind my frame of reference for the word scripture and not assume that I understand you to mean the Bible only. Otherwise, I'm apt to tell you what I would tell any sectarian anti-Mormon: The notion that all communication from God (sola scriptura) is contained exclusively in the Bible is, in itself, unbiblical dogma, since the Bible does not make that claim for itself.

Edited May 1, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

This is a problematic claim. This is an hearsay argument. But I understand why you use it.

As the Prophet, President Stephen Veazey, has stated, scripture is an indispensable resource for drawing unto God. However, no scripture is to be worshipped or idolized or to be considered perfect or complete.

I'll maintain the standard that not all scripture or revelation is God breathed. God is so much more than these trivial matters. You are welcome to continue to trust in the flesh as you seem to love.

As much as I respect the president of Community of Christ, I don't regard him as a prophet in the sense that Thomas S. Monson and the other 14 men who hold the apostolic office in this latter-day dispensation are prophets.

 

And I hold with the definition of scripture given in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 - 

 

 

16 ^aAll ^bscripture is given by ^cinspiration of God, and is ^dprofitable for ^edoctrine, for ^freproof, for correction, for ^ginstruction in ^hrighteousness:

 17 That the man of God may be ^aperfect, throughly furnished unto all ^bgood works.

 

In so doing, I reject your accusation either that I am guilty of idol worship or of "trusting in the arm of flesh."

 

By the way, thanks for the rep point, accidental though it must have been.

[JLHPROF]

I'll take a lawless God over your Wizard of Oz parading as if he were God.

 

 

That's because we are differing religions.  Why is this so complicated?

I don't want to believe in your "God" and I don't expect you to believe in mine.

I'm not asking you to worship Buddha either.  And I refuse to believe in Shiva as I refuse to believe in your God.

 

We have our right to our own religion.

Edited May 1, 2015 by JLHPROF

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I won't play this game with you, Scott Lloyd.  I've seen you do this repeatedly on here.  When you're asked a question that you don't want to answer, you either act like you just cannot understand the question (even when it's obvious what you're being asked), or you insult the person who is asking the question.

 

Let's try just one more time and if you still don't want to answer the question, that's fine.

 

1. You state that a God can cease to be God.

 

2. You believe in the promise that you can someday become a God.

 

3. Does that mean you believe if you become a God that remaining a God for eternity is conditional?

 

And as far as my beliefs regarding scripture, I believe that the Mormon church is a man-made organization.   So, I believe their scriptures are written by man.  I believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ and have not seen this teaching from him (that God can cease to be God).  Maybe I'm wrong and would love to read any scripture from the Bible on that.

So you want him to engage in a hypothetical. What if God made something so heavy he couldn't lift it.

 

Saying that God cannot go against eternal laws or he would cease being God is not the same thing as saying "there is condition on God hood after you are a God".

 

What this passage is saying, in essence, is that God is God because he obeys eternal laws, his very nature makes it impossible for him to go against them. Hence he would cease being God if he did.

Edited May 1, 2015 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[california boy]

I encourage you to read other threads on this board that DO nothing else but respond to these questions.

Joseph Smith felt as you do that the other churches were wrong.

I have been discussing issues of historicity of scripture for years here, and do not want to rehash that here.

I suggest you study what Mormons believe, because your understanding is extremely elementary. I don't mean that in an insulating way, it is just that everyone's understanding of any topic they have not studied is elementary.

I could show you instances where you have said that premarital sex is "not wrong", right on this thread, but even when quoted side by side, you will ignore the reference. I have seen you do it before. It is pointless. I hope you find happiness

 

Well for someone who taught seminary for 6 years, gospel doctrine class for several, as well as serving in the bishopric, high counsel and young mens president for many years, I am kinda surprised that you think I have an elementary understanding of Mormon doctrine.  But hey, I am sure you are so superior, that you find my little religious "triads" as you are fond of calling them, bothersome.  What I don't understand is why you bother to respond to any of my posts since my understanding of the gospel is so inferior to yours.  This post says absolutely nothing.  Too bad.  Maybe I will start a thread on the question I asked and get others opinions.  Why did you even bother to write anything?  

 

 

 

And the CFR still stands.  Where in this thread or any other thread have I EVER said that premarital sex is "not wrong"????

 

Answer the CFR or withdraw the accusation.  

 

Of course I predicted that you would not have the integrity to admit you were wrong.  What a surprise.  

[Jeanne]

I encourage you to read other threads on this board that DO nothing else but respond to these questions.

Joseph Smith felt as you do that the other churches were wrong.

I have been discussing issues of historicity of scripture for years here, and do not want to rehash that here.

I suggest you study what Mormons believe, because your understanding is extremely elementary. I don't mean that in an insulating way, it is just that everyone's understanding of any topic they have not studied is elementary.

I could show you instances where you have said that premarital sex is "not wrong", right on this thread, but even when quoted side by side, you will ignore the reference. I have seen you do it before. It is pointless. I hope you find happiness.

When I was a twenty year old, I dated a RM that gave Bible scriptures that said it was okay to fool around...(no..I did not) but was siimply amazed and even disappointed then in the non-scriptualral or scriptural l ways that are NOT definitely defined.  It was then that I wondered why all the study in scriptures in church and seminary when it could be interpreted or molded into any convenient theory.

[HappyJackWagon]

 

When I was a twenty year old, I dated a RM that gave Bible scriptures that said it was okay to fool around...(no..I did not) but was siimply amazed and even disappointed then in the non-scriptualral or scriptural l ways that are NOT definitely defined.  It was then that I wondered why all the study in scriptures in church and seminary when it could be interpreted or molded into any convenient theory.

 

“The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.

An evil soul producing holy witness

Is like a villain with a smiling cheek,

A goodly apple rotten at the heart.

O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!”

― William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice

[Damien the Leper]

As much as I respect the president of Community of Christ, I don't regard him as a prophet in the sense that Thomas S. Monson and the other 14 men who hold the apostolic office in this latter-day dispensation are prophets.

 

And I hold with the definition of scripture given in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 - 

 

In so doing, I reject your accusation either that I am guilty of idol worship or of "trusting in the arm of flesh."

 

By the way, thanks for the rep point, accidental though it must have been.

It was intentional. Your post got me to think differently.

[Scott Lloyd]

Well for someone who taught seminary for 6 years, gospel doctrine class for several, as well as serving in the bishopric, high counsel and young mens president for many years, I am kinda surprised that you think I have an elementary understanding of Mormon doctrine.  But hey, I am sure you are so superior, that you find my little religious "triads" as you are fond of calling them, bothersome.  What I don't understand is why you bother to respond to any of my posts since my understanding of the gospel is so inferior to yours.  This post says absolutely nothing.  Too bad.  Maybe I will start a thread on the question I asked and get others opinions.  Why did you even bother to write anything?  

 

 

 

And the CFR still stands.  Where in this thread or any other thread have I EVER said that premarital sex is "not wrong"????

 

Answer the CFR or withdraw the accusation.  

 

Of course I predicted that you would not have the integrity to admit you were wrong.  What a surprise.

california boy has shown up; can a thread closure be far behind?

[mfbukowski]

When I was a twenty year old, I dated a RM that gave Bible scriptures that said it was okay to fool around...(no..I did not) but was siimply amazed and even disappointed then in the non-scriptualral or scriptural l ways that are NOT definitely defined.  It was then that I wondered why all the study in scriptures in church and seminary when it could be interpreted or molded into any convenient theory.

There are no facts, only interpretations