Meridian Magazine: Can You Help Your Children Choose Heterosexuality? (Answer: Yes)

[Gray]

Since this is fundamental to my salvation and the eternal salvation of virtually every gay person who has ever lived, I would like to know if even you think that this is DOCTRINE?  Did this absolute knowledge as to what happens in the eternities to all gay people come from REVELATION?  Is this a clear statement from GOD?

 

If the statement is true, then does that mean that 99.9% of all gays who have ever lived in the world do not have to worry about overcoming their same sex attraction in this life because it will automatically disappear.  And their loving relationships on this earth will not be counted against them because they will be judged on the knowledge they have in mortality?

 

If this statement is true, then will only LDS gays be condemned for acting out in this life because they knew better?

 

If this statement is true, then being gay seems to be the LEAST thing to worry about in mortality since it is a single behavior that simply disappears when we die unless of course you are a member of the church. 

 

Since you believe the church has all the answers on this issue, I would love your thoughts and references to the questions I ask.  This is about personal salvation.  Not much interested in opinion here.

 

It's doctrine because the church teaches it. But there is no claim of revelation to go along with it. Essentially it's their best guess right now. 

[HappyJackWagon]

Why do you think race is eternal?

Why wouldn't I assume race is eternal?

Should I assume that everyone in eternity is white?

[HappyJackWagon]

 

Scott Lloyd, on 30 Sept 2015 - 5:43 PM, said:

I couldn't disagree more strongly that the passage you cite is "dated." Are you saying there are not many Latter-day Saints who, with persistent effort, faith and reliance on the Atonement, have overcome same-gender attraction in mortality? I think you would have a hard time proving that. Bear in mind it didn't say they had "change(d) their sexual orientation." It said they had "overcome" it. People can "overcome" in many respects the inclination to sin, even though the capacity to do so is still present. I imagine it's no different with the inclination to violate the law of chastity by engaging in homosexual behavior.

 

In any event, I could have cited the "Mormons and Gays" website. I chose the pamphlet, because it predates the website and it is among the manuals and instructional materials in the Church's curriculum, both online and in print.

 

I could also have cited this Q and A with Elders Dallin H. Oaks and Lance B. Wickman:

 

So there are mulitiple sources from the Church, all indicating that homosexuality is not forever.

 

Gray;

Well, it said they've overcome their attraction, not their behavior. There is no real evidence that it's even possible to do so. The pamphlet you linked didn't offer any evidence in support of that claim. So-called reparative therapy is a discredited practice for good reason. 

 

People don't change their orientation. I think the responsibility is on the person making the claim that it CAN be changed to show evidence that this is possible.

[Bobbieaware]

You need a much better understanding of scripture. That's part of the problem. Without a relationship with the language in which the text was written in, the historical context, audience, etc. not even revelation stands a chance. Tell me, are you familiar with these terms and their etymology?:

Malakoi

Arsenokoitai

To'ebah

Here's some help:

1. Malakoi comes from the Greek malakos which literally means soft. But Paul uses it in reference to a feminine male prostitute.

2. Arsenokoitai does not translate properly to "sodomite" (Latin Vulgate) or "offender of one's self". It is mostly speculation as to what the term means.

3. To'ebah, a Hebrew word, does not literally translate to abomination.

Therefore, if modern revelation is not informed but history, text, anthropology and linguistics then it's probably best to take the hard road and set said revelation on the back burner.

The words of the living prophets clear up any ambiguity. There have been many statements made in recent General Conferences that set the record straight.

Prior to the fall, at the time God created Adam, when the template for the proper earthly order of things was being established, the Lord said it is not good that man be alone. So he created a woman, not another man, to be Adam's eternal companion (there was no death) and commanded them to multiply. This is the proper order of things. Those who through the eternal Spirit resist the temptations of the fallen nature that beckon one to follow a path contrary to the will of God, whether that path be fornication, pornography, adultery, sexually acting out on same sex attraction, etc, will receive God's glory and honor and be exalted in the celestial kingdom of God.

The choice is clear: violate the will of God and enjoy the ephemeral pleasures of the natural man during this very brief lifetime (a flash in the pan when compared to eternity), or live a life of godly sacrifice and deny oneself the pleasures of the natural man, that exaltation and a life of eternal happiness may be assured. Surely the Lord spoke the truth when he said, "some are made eunuchs of men, and some make themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake." Those members who struggle with same sex attraction have been given a great blessing in disguise, for if against the inclinations of the flesh they choose to not violate the will of God, they will surely be numbered among the great heroes of faith in eternity and will be compensated beyond measure for their virtuous lives of godly sacrifice.

[Bobbieaware]

Be careful not to bruise your chest there.

So now you"re playing the role of Ammon's brother Aaron, who in Alma 26 said Ammon was carried away unto boasting. But Ammon corrected Aaron when he said he was not boasting of his own strength, for he knew he was weak and nothing, but he was boasting in his God. Read Ammon's words again:

12 Yea, I know that I am nothing; as to my strength I am weak; therefore I will not boast of myself, but I will boast of my God, for in his strength I can do all things...(Alma 26)

[Bobbieaware]

So which is the evil group, sexual reproducers or asexual reproducers?

So you are being deliberately obtuse. Either that or you didn't read and understand CV's post.

[CV75]

Here's a great article that addresses the underlying principles of handling such challenges, especially from the subheading, "Applying the Plan of Salvation in Our Daily Lives" onward:

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2015/10/the-plan-of-salvation-a-sacred-treasure-of-knowledge-to-guide-us?lang=eng

 

As the article points out, some of the themes discussed in this thread are examples of problems that are especially relevant in -- or pertains to -- our time.

[The Nehor]

So now you"re playing the role of Ammon's brother Aaron, who in Alma 26 said Ammon was carried away unto boasting. But Ammon corrected Aaron when he said he was not boasting of his own strength, for he knew he was weak and nothing, but he was boasting in his God. Read Ammon's words again:

12 Yea, I know that I am nothing; as to my strength I am weak; therefore I will not boast of myself, but I will boast of my God, for in his strength I can do all things...(Alma 26)

Well, then I win. You only converted one of the client kings. I converted the head honcho. Slacker.

[Gray]

So you are being deliberately obtuse. Either that or you didn't read and understand CV's post.

 

I'm going off of the original Lehi concept about opposition in all things. It's always about good vs bad. He didn't present it as Coke vs Pepsi or hot vs cold. There was always a good and a bad in the concept. 

[CV75]

I'm going off of the original Lehi concept about opposition in all things. It's always about good vs bad. He didn't present it as Coke vs Pepsi or hot vs cold. There was always a good and a bad in the concept. 

You grossly misunderstand. Look at the following opposing elements from Lehi's lesson:

 

The forbidden fruit and the tree of life are not good vs. evil.

 

“One body” and “a compound in one” are not good vs. evil.

 

Punishment and happiness are not good vs. evil.

 

Male and female (our first parents) are not good vs. evil.

 

Mercy and justice are not good vs. evil.

 

Wisdom (or knowledge) and power (or faith) are not good vs. evil.

 

Lehi applied the principle to all these while perhaps focusing on one particular lesson (there's A LOT in there). President Hunter applied the same principle to teach another lesson. There are many lessons.

[HappyJackWagon]

You grossly misunderstand. Look at the following opposing elements from Lehi's lesson:

 

The forbidden fruit and the tree of life are not good vs. evil.

 

“One body” and “a compound in one” are not good vs. evil.

 

Punishment and happiness are not good vs. evil.

 

Male and female (our first parents) are not good vs. evil.

 

Mercy and justice are not good vs. evil.

 

Wisdom (or knowledge) and power (or faith) are not good vs. evil.

 

Lehi applied the principle to all these while perhaps focusing on one particular lesson (there's A LOT in there). President Hunter applied the same principle to teach another lesson. There are many lessons.

Nooooooo!!!! Not this "compound in one" stuff again.

In what verses do we find the concept of the "compound in one" being an opposite of "one body"?

[The Nehor]

Why wouldn't I assume race is eternal?

Should I assume that everyone in eternity is white?

You should assume they are all neon pink with lavender polka dots.

[HappyJackWagon]

You should assume they are all neon pink with lavender polka dots.

Actually, I'll stick with the assumption that our mortal appearance is just an imperfected version of our immortal appearance and we will look very similar to what we do now.

 

Besides skin color, there are other physical features dominant in different races. Hair color, eye color, facial features etc. By saying race, and therefore many of those features, don't exist in eternity, many people I know and love will be unrecognizeable. Since I don't see why that kind of transformation would be necessary to God's plan, I'm going to assume that there is variety in the eternities just like there is variety in mortality.

[Scott Lloyd]

Yes, in previous pamphlets the concept of homosexuality in the hereafter was not discussed. As you seem to imply, it didn't really need to be addressed because homosexuality had not yet been clearly identified as an immutable trait.

By the way, Scott, before you open your thread, I'll just note that being the 20 year anniversary of the Proclamation I do expect more references to man-woman marriage in conference. This is the pattern that we'd expect and doest represent a hindrance to Dehlin's 40 yr prediction.

It hadn't occurred to me to open a thread, but now that you mention it, it's maybe not a bad idea.

 

I'll hold off, though, until I see what, if anything, materializes.

[ALarson]

So you are being deliberately obtuse. Either that or you didn't read and understand CV's post.

It seems to me that you are the one being obtuse here.  I do not see myself and my wife being in opposition to each other.  To say that "opposition in all things" pertains to a heterosexual relationship is false IMO.  We are one and united (at lease in my relationship) and we are definitely not opposed to each other. 

 

I know that it's said that "opposites attract", but that can be true regarding same sex marriages and relationships too.

[Danzo]

Actually, I'll stick with the assumption that our mortal appearance is just an imperfected version of our immortal appearance and we will look very similar to what we do now.

 

Besides skin color, there are other physical features dominant in different races. Hair color, eye color, facial features etc. By saying race, and therefore many of those features, don't exist in eternity, many people I know and love will be unrecognizeable. Since I don't see why that kind of transformation would be necessary to God's plan, I'm going to assume that there is variety in the eternities just like there is variety in mortality.

 

Which just means you don't know what race is.

 

Race isn't people looking different from each other.  Race is the artificial classification and/ or segregation into groups based on peoples looks or supposed ancestry.

 

It is this classification that will be gone in the next life, and hopefully in this life as well.  

 

 

Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

[Danzo]

Why wouldn't I assume race is eternal?

Should I assume that everyone in eternity is white?

 

 

You think that people will be grouped together by their looks?

[Danzo]

Yes, in previous pamphlets the concept of homosexuality in the hereafter was not discussed. As you seem to imply, it didn't really need to be addressed because homosexuality had not yet been clearly identified as an immutable trait.

 

 

It still hasn't been clearly identified as an immutable trait.

[rockpond]

It hadn't occurred to me to open a thread, but now that you mention it, it's maybe not a bad idea.

 

I'll hold off, though, until I see what, if anything, materializes.

 

What I imagine will materialize is multiple references to the 20 year milestone and how visionary the proclamation was.  As with last conference, we'll have more than one speaker preach the value of one man, one woman marriage.  Millennials and Gen Z'ers will tune out while some of us wonder exactly who doesn't believe in the value of man-woman marriage.  But I hope to be proven wrong.

[Gray]

You grossly misunderstand. Look at the following opposing elements from Lehi's lesson:

 

The forbidden fruit and the tree of life are not good vs. evil.

 

“One body” and “a compound in one” are not good vs. evil.

 

Punishment and happiness are not good vs. evil.

 

Male and female (our first parents) are not good vs. evil.

 

Mercy and justice are not good vs. evil.

 

Wisdom (or knowledge) and power (or faith) are not good vs. evil.

 

Lehi applied the principle to all these while perhaps focusing on one particular lesson (there's A LOT in there). President Hunter applied the same principle to teach another lesson. There are many lessons.

 

The ones that aren't good or bad are not presented as "opposition". Lehi never says that wisdom and power are opposites - ditto for mercy and justice. But even forbidden fruit is presented as "bad" or bitter, compared to the tree of life which is "good" or sweet. 

[rockpond]

It still hasn't been clearly identified as an immutable trait.

 

"Through the exercise of faith, individual effort, and reliance upon the power of the Atonement, some may overcome same-gender attraction in mortality and marry. Others, however, may never be free of same-gender attraction in this life."  --Elder Holland

 

IMO, there is enough scientific evidence to show that for many (not all) sexual orientation is immutable.

[jkwilliams]

"Through the exercise of faith, individual effort, and reliance upon the power of the Atonement, some may overcome same-gender attraction in mortality and marry. Others, however, may never be free of same-gender attraction in this life." --Elder Holland

IMO, there is enough scientific evidence to show that for many (not all) sexual orientation is immutable.

I have never seen any evidence of anyone who used to be attracted to the same gender who is now solely attracted to the opposite gender. The ex-gay movement is about suppressing same-sex attraction, and even they claim a very low success rate.

[HappyJackWagon]

You think that people will be grouped together by their looks?

You're playing semantic games again.

 

There's is no need to group or segregate by race. That is not a necessary requirement of race. If it is, please provide a reference so I can understand why it is.

 

But the way we recognize and understand differences is according to race. Those differences will continue to exist.

 

If you're arguing that blacks, and asians, and caucasians, and hispanics etc will still look in eternity as they look now but we won't "Call them" a race, I'm good with that. If you're saying we will all be white, then I'm not good with that at all.

Edited October 1, 2015 by HappyJackWagon

[Danzo]

"Through the exercise of faith, individual effort, and reliance upon the power of the Atonement, some may overcome same-gender attraction in mortality and marry. Others, however, may never be free of same-gender attraction in this life."  --Elder Holland

 

IMO, there is enough scientific evidence to show that for many (not all) sexual orientation is immutable.

 

What do you think of this study?

 

http://midus.wisc.edu/findings/pdfs/1153.pdf

 

"Among women, 1.36% with a heterosexual identity changed, 63.63% with a homosexual identity changed, and 64.71% with a bisexual identity changed. Among men, 0.78% with a heterosexual identity changed, 9.52% with a homosexual identity changed, and 47.06% with a bisexual identity changed."

[jkwilliams]

What do you think of this study?

http://midus.wisc.edu/findings/pdfs/1153.pdf

"Among women, 1.36% with a heterosexual identity changed, 63.63% with a homosexual identity changed, and 64.71% with a bisexual identity changed. Among men, 0.78% with a heterosexual identity changed, 9.52% with a homosexual identity changed, and 47.06% with a bisexual identity changed."

"Identity" is what changed.