Damien the Leper Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 This is a wonderful post. I'm glad the couple's experience was positive. I will say that Natasha's "toxic" cheap shot could have ruined it for me. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/mormontherapist/2016/08/a-wards-embrace-to-a-gay-lds-couple.html 1
rpn Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 I don't see why any gay couple could not be in any ward. Excommunicated people are urged to continue attending. They can't pray or have a VT/HT route or give a talk (which isn't exactly the end of the world for most). But they can sing in the choir and volunteer with service projects and the like. So I would wonder how any ward could act in ways that shut out gay couples or gay people who wish to attend, and be consistent with their faith. 3
Popular Post Damien the Leper Posted August 31, 2016 Author Popular Post Posted August 31, 2016 I agree. Participating in the life of the ward is not mandated by membership. The ward is a community and a mixed bag of people from varying walks of life. I like to think of wards in this way: 5
Atheist Mormon Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 59 minutes ago, Valentinus said: I agree. Participating in the life of the ward is not mandated by membership. The ward is a community and a mixed bag of people from varying walks of life. I like to think of wards in this way: Thank you, Never seen a better description.... 1
Damien the Leper Posted August 31, 2016 Author Posted August 31, 2016 1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said: Thank you, Never seen a better description.... You're welcome. 1
cinepro Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 3 hours ago, Valentinus said: I agree. Participating in the life of the ward is not mandated by membership. The ward is a community and a mixed bag of people from varying walks of life. I like to think of wards in this way: Sadly, my reaction to the pictures was "Wow...sweet looking lawn!" 3
Popular Post halconero Posted August 31, 2016 Popular Post Posted August 31, 2016 I was recently called as the Ward Mission Leader in my ward, and while reviewing the Handbook started making a (rather short) list of callings which can be extended to "non-conforming" individuals, be they less-active members, the non-member, or whatever. So far a lot of them involve activities and music. I've floated the idea past the Bishop of having my gay musical theater (I know I know...he fulfills the stereotype) friend be the music director for the ward. Success! Obispo is on board. Sure, it's a missionary opportunity, but I also like to remind members that our own doctrine teaches that we'll be sharing the earth with a whole bunch of people who don't conform to the conservative Utah cultural paradigm during the Millennium. 5
rongo Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 11 minutes ago, halconero said: I also like to remind members that our own doctrine teaches that we'll be sharing the earth with a whole bunch of people who don't conform to the conservative Utah cultural paradigm during the Millennium. Yeah, but they all will be terrestrial people, though. Terrestrial, only. So, while it might look like a Jehovah's Witnesses painting with multicultural people petting tigers and gathering fruit, they will all keep the commandments as understood by Mormon doctrine. At least in the LDS view of the Millennium . . . 1
Jeanne Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 18 hours ago, Valentinus said: This is a wonderful post. I'm glad the couple's experience was positive. I will say that Natasha's "toxic" cheap shot could have ruined it for me. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/mormontherapist/2016/08/a-wards-embrace-to-a-gay-lds-couple.html Wow..I am so impressed. I think I actually felt a spirit there in this story. How hard can this be to love one another? It can be so contagious. I hope these two guys find another ward that will embrace, love and appreciate them.
halconero Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 39 minutes ago, rongo said: Yeah, but they all will be terrestrial people, though. Terrestrial, only. So, while it might look like a Jehovah's Witnesses painting with multicultural people petting tigers and gathering fruit, they will all keep the commandments as understood by Mormon doctrine. At least in the LDS view of the Millennium . . . I wouldn't necessarily agree with them keeping all the Latter-day Saint commandments, as some commandments Latter-day Saint specific only (i.e. only for those who have entered into the covenant). We know that idolatry will exist during the Millennium in the Old Testament sense, and that while non-members will submit to governmental laws they do not have to submit fully to Gospel ones during that period (there is a difference, even if the government is the Kingdom of God on earth).
waveslider Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 I don't see why anyone would be treating the people of LGBTQ, and whatever extra letters get added to the growing list of those clamoring for justification against God's laws gets tacked on, any different than a heterosexual couple who lives together without being married. If this story were of a boy friend and girl friend, who didn't want to marry yet still wanted to be as intimate as if they were, no one would even blink an eye at it. The sinful lifestyles aren't any different than each other, in the fact that they are both disobeying the law of chastity. I think it is only ignorance, fear and prejudice that cause something like this to even be an issue. Any true Christ like follower would recognize this and not be prejudiced towards either of these two types of couples. We are supposed to love each other, just as this ward did, and hope and pray that they will someday come back into full compliance with God's laws, as we ourselves get on our knees and beg for our own forgiveness from our own set of sins. It isn't about ousting people, but bringing people in so we can all help each other in our own set of weaknesses. Just my 2 cents worth anyway. 1
carbon dioxide Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 23 minutes ago, halconero said: I wouldn't necessarily agree with them keeping all the Latter-day Saint commandments, as some commandments Latter-day Saint specific only (i.e. only for those who have entered into the covenant). We know that idolatry will exist during the Millennium in the Old Testament sense, and that while non-members will submit to governmental laws they do not have to submit fully to Gospel ones during that period (there is a difference, even if the government is the Kingdom of God on earth). They will be submitting to the basic gospel principles of morality if it can be said that Satan is truly bound.
cinepro Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 5 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said: They will be submitting to the basic gospel principles of morality if it can be said that Satan is truly bound. I'm really not convinced that Satan is needed for people to desire having sex. From what I can tell, the desire is pretty well programmed into us, and even if God changed everything today and made it impossible for Satan to tempt people to have sex outside of marriage, people would still wake up tomorrow, see attractive people of the opposite sex, and have a desire to "know" them. The idea that a disembodied spirit must somehow reach into a brain and change peoples' thoughts to such a desire seems to be kind of a... stretch.
halconero Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 (edited) I wouldn't disagree with that. One question I would raise is whether or not someone committing sins against "basic" morality would be given a temporary reprieve to learn them. What we call basic can in fact be very Euroamerican in scope, with different groups applying different standards to issues of gender, sexuality, marriage, etc. For example, Tibetan Polyandry, Indigenous North American Two-Spirit individuals, etc. Maybe I'm wrong on this, but somehow I think it's probable that many people living "Telestial" lives yet striving as best as they can according to their standards will have be present during the Millennium. Edited August 31, 2016 by halconero
waveslider Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 2 minutes ago, cinepro said: I'm really not convinced that Satan is needed for people to desire having sex. From what I can tell, the desire is pretty well programmed into us, and even if God changed everything today and made it impossible for Satan to tempt people to have sex outside of marriage, people would still wake up tomorrow, see attractive people of the opposite sex, and have a desire to "know" them. The idea that a disembodied spirit must somehow reach into a brain and change peoples' thoughts to such a desire seems to be kind of a... stretch. It will be the pure in heart who are left to live during the millennium. This means that they will be obedient to their conscience, or in other words obedient to the light of Christ. Although there will be desires of the flesh, people will also know that it is inherently wrong to sleep with another person's spouse, and obey that feeling that it is wrong instead of just falling for the sinful desire.
rockpond Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 1 hour ago, waveslider said: I don't see why anyone would be treating the people of LGBTQ, and whatever extra letters get added to the growing list of those clamoring for justification against God's laws gets tacked on, any different than a heterosexual couple who lives together without being married. If this story were of a boy friend and girl friend, who didn't want to marry yet still wanted to be as intimate as if they were, no one would even blink an eye at it. The sinful lifestyles aren't any different than each other, in the fact that they are both disobeying the law of chastity. I think it is only ignorance, fear and prejudice that cause something like this to even be an issue. Any true Christ like follower would recognize this and not be prejudiced towards either of these two types of couples. We are supposed to love each other, just as this ward did, and hope and pray that they will someday come back into full compliance with God's laws, as we ourselves get on our knees and beg for our own forgiveness from our own set of sins. It isn't about ousting people, but bringing people in so we can all help each other in our own set of weaknesses. Just my 2 cents worth anyway. I wonder if you see the irony in your first sentence. One thing to note, in response, is that Nick & Spencer are deemed apostate and excommunication is required by their priesthood leaders. The other (hetero) situations that you described do not fall under that same definition and requirement. 1
bluebell Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 2 hours ago, rongo said: Yeah, but they all will be terrestrial people, though. Terrestrial, only. So, while it might look like a Jehovah's Witnesses painting with multicultural people petting tigers and gathering fruit, they will all keep the commandments as understood by Mormon doctrine. At least in the LDS view of the Millennium . . . My friend and I were talking about this subject a few weeks ago and neither of us (and she's more conservative TBM than I am) believe this about the millennium.
rongo Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, halconero said: I wouldn't necessarily agree with them keeping all the Latter-day Saint commandments, as some commandments Latter-day Saint specific only (i.e. only for those who have entered into the covenant). Agreed on this point. Word of Wisdom, for instance. Quote We know that idolatry will exist during the Millennium in the Old Testament sense, and that while non-members will submit to governmental laws they do not have to submit fully to Gospel ones during that period (there is a difference, even if the government is the Kingdom of God on earth). CFR that idolatry "in the Old Testament sense" will exist during the Millenium? As stated above, there are certain laws and commandments that covenant Mormons follow that, outside of that covenant, aren't a sin on their face (coffee drinking, not paying tithing or consecration, etc.). But the subject that emerged in this thread is homosexual behavior, specifically, and the same would apply to fornication or adultery in any form. It has been clearly taught in the Church that all people, LDS and otherwise (and there will be non-LDS people) during the Millennium will be terrestrial. Telestial people (blatant sinners, which includes sexual sins) won't be on the earth during the Millennium, be definition. Quote and that while non-members will submit to governmental laws they do not have to submit fully to Gospel ones during that period True in some cases, but not in others. It depends on which "Gospel ones" we're talking about. Edited August 31, 2016 by rongo
rongo Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 10 minutes ago, bluebell said: My friend and I were talking about this subject a few weeks ago and neither of us (and she's more conservative TBM than I am) believe this about the millennium [that only terrestrial people will be on the earth, whether Mormon or not]. I will see what documentation I can find for this belief, so no CFR from anyone necessary. I'll CFR myself . . . I am surprised that this is a controversial subject among Mormons who actually believe that there will really be a Millennium. Good discussion! 2
carbon dioxide Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 1 hour ago, cinepro said: I'm really not convinced that Satan is needed for people to desire having sex. From what I can tell, the desire is pretty well programmed into us, and even if God changed everything today and made it impossible for Satan to tempt people to have sex outside of marriage, people would still wake up tomorrow, see attractive people of the opposite sex, and have a desire to "know" them. The idea that a disembodied spirit must somehow reach into a brain and change peoples' thoughts to such a desire seems to be kind of a... stretch. I have many desires that are natural but should I give into those desires because they are "natural". I guess the question is do those who live under "terrestrial kingdom" laws or standards engage in gross wickedness. Sure they might make some mistakes here and there but the honorable do have basic standards of right and wrong and they avoid the wrong.
rongo Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 1 hour ago, cinepro said: I'm really not convinced that Satan is needed for people to desire having sex. I think that God and Satan are both blamed for things that aren't their fault . . . For example, I don't believe that the devil or his followers whisper every bad thought that enters a person's mind. Some/many of them occur on their own because of the Fall, I think. 1
bluebell Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 18 minutes ago, rongo said: I will see what documentation I can find for this belief, so no CFR from anyone necessary. I'll CFR myself . . . I am surprised that this is a controversial subject among Mormons who actually believe that there will really be a Millennium. Good discussion! It's a Mormon teaching that no one can sin in ignorance and in my understanding there are many who break the law of chastity because they sincerely don't know they are doing anything wrong.
rongo Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 1 minute ago, bluebell said: It's a Mormon teaching that no one can sin in ignorance and in my understanding there are many who break the law of chastity because they sincerely don't know they are doing anything wrong. Aside from what the light of Christ teaches to all men about the law of chastity, don't you think that will be different in the Millennium, though? Christ will reign personally over the earth, and the 2nd Coming will have happened, there will be a new political/governmental order, etc. I don't think ignorance of the underpinnings behind the LoC will be an issue then. Can you think of other areas besides chastity that may include serious sin during the Millennium?
Jude2 Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 Mmmmm This is just a thought but right about the time the ancient church went into apostasy Jude wrote; 3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. 4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. 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. 12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; Do we learn from the past or not?
Bobbieaware Posted August 31, 2016 Posted August 31, 2016 9 minutes ago, bluebell said: It's a Mormon teaching that no one can sin in ignorance and in my understanding there are many who break the law of chastity because they sincerely don't know they are doing anything wrong. 14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of THE LAW WRITTEN IN THEIR HEARTS, THEIR CONSCIENCE ALSO BEARING WITNESS, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) (Romans 2)
Recommended Posts