Gay Clergy- UMC Church Division

[california boy]

2 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

Californiaboy;

The context of this dialogue is in light of "passing through the eternities, not just the social aspects of being gay.

Well Darren, you are making huge assumptions that have no basis in anything God has actually revealed.  You don't think a gay person can be exalted.  Yet you have no basis to make such an assumption.  Right now, the church is operating SOLELY on ideas of fallible men.  No revelation has ever been received on what it will be like for a gay person after death.  

Personally I put my eternity in the hands of God.  We have no idea how spirit children are made.  We have no idea if it is a requirement for all gods to have children.  The scriptures record that the gods created this earth.  Yet none of them were married as far as we know.  None had eternal companions.  So how did this fit in with what you think is required by God?   You think you know everything about the eternities.  Somehow I doubt very much you  even know a thimble full of what God has in store for any of us.

The church may very well be guiding heterosexual couples towards exaltation.  But just as assuredly, the church is doing nothing but causing misery and a toxic environment for gay people.  Church leaders are fumbling around in a glass darkly without answers or direction from God. 

[RevTestament]

14 minutes ago, california boy said:

Quite honestly, there are so many misconceptions in what you think about gay people, it is apparent to me that you have decided to try and fit in what it must be like to be gay through your own eyes and certainly without much engagement with someone who is actually gay.  Your response is more like a cross your fingers, wish list of what it must be like to be gay.  

I would be more than happy to discuss this with you, but first you have to want to know something about this issue from someone who is actually gay and want to listen to gain some understanding.  I can certainly tell from what you wrote, that has not yet happened in your life.  

You are free to try, but my guess is unless I accept what you say, you will continue to believe I am just not open to "the truth." I do not consider myself to be a homophobic person, but there are only very limited ways for me to see something from a homosexual's POV - I admittedly said I can only speak from my own experience.  I grew up with someone who later announced he was gay tho, so I don't believe I am clueless about gays. I went on a double date to a gay bar when I was in college, and one of the members of the group was gay. This is probably more than most LDS heterosexual men can say.  Later in my life my wife roomed with a gay man, who was actually very active in the gay political cause, and although my interaction with him was admittedly limited, my wife talked quite a bit about him. She liked him a good deal.  None of this changes my perception that being gay is largely an environmental thing. The way gay men feel doesn't change that. There are also gay authors who have written about what it is like to be gay, and frankly some of what they admit belies gay beliefs they are born gay. I don't want to seem rude, but I just think talking about it isn't going to change my perceptions. If you are talking about the way gay men feel about celibacy, well, my  guess is they don't want that "imposed" upon them and don't like it. I didn't particularly like it either.

Quote

In any event, you haven't really explained your path to making a gay person straight.  Did you give up on that?  Or do they just have to wish hard enough to be straight?

I feel I have addressed that to the extent I can: "So there is no "path" I can lay out for gay men to help them learn heterosexual attraction. I believe most of that path has happened by the time they are going into puberty." I don't really enjoy debating the topic - it seems to go in endless circles on the board, and I know most gay men are not going to relate to what I have to say. However, I post sometimes anyway, in the hopes of something of what I say can provide some solace and peace to gays or those with SSA. 

[JulieM]

5 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

I do it, why can't a gay man?

You "do it"?  Are you a gay man married to a woman?

If not, then you are definitely not doing it.  To do something comparable would be for you, a straight man, to marry, love, and live with another man for your life.  That's what you doing it would look like.

Coukd you do that?

[Darren10]

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Obviously.  We're explaining why there is a different standard.

If we're explaining there's a different standard, you just agreed on the exact same standard I just proposed. I find that pleasantly quaint.  

[california boy]

16 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"I know you are not going to understand this." - Thanks for the condescension. The division continues!!!

"As you probably also know..." - Ah, a little hope for me and my ignorance. unity takes a small step forward!  

" Sometimes you don't need to be told by a church leader what is morally wrong." - Unless it is morally wrong.

How does being an active homosexual help you gain exaltation? (I know you are not a Mormon but that is the gist of this dialogue, not merely what a person "feels" but how a homosexual relation help people progress to "become God" in the LDS meaning of that term.

You are right.  I am being VERY condescending towards you, BECAUSE you are making amazingly ridiculous suggestions for someone who is gay. The only conclusion I can come to is that you have no understanding what it means to be gay.  If you did, then you would never suggest some of the things you are suggesting in this thread.  And you would never make the statement that you know for a surety what kind of exaltation God may lead a gay person towards.

[Darren10]

10 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Watching Darren10 talk about what it's like to be gay to a gay person reminds me of Ahab telling women here what it's like to be women.  It's comical, painful, and sad at the same time.  Please, Darren, stop, for the sake of all that is sane.   

Except, stemelbow, Darren is NOT speaking "what it's like to be a gay person". Try to keep up.

[bluebell]

35 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"A heterosexual member of the church can kiss and cuddle with a person they are sexually attracted to and still be in good standing in the church.  A homosexual member cannot. " - That is100% correct.

"That is where the different standards comes into play." - I do not recall the standard being "to the person you are sexually attracted to" by the Church but in moral conduct. Gay relations directly contradict the doctrines to exaltation, do they not? Does not the Church admonish, teach, support, guide, and direct its members towards exaltation?  Thus, there is no difference in behavioral standards, correct?

If, by any chance the Church taught people to achieve something less than exaltation, then, yes, there would be lots of room for homosexual relations within the Church.

No, not correct, which has been explained multiple times now.  I can appreciate that you aren't able to see the difference, but i'm guessing if you were only allowed to kiss and cuddle men, the differences would suddenly be more obvious.

The road that each group is asked to travel down is different.  Homosexuals are asked to endure a celibate life and heterosexuals are not.

[california boy]

7 minutes ago, RevTestament said:

You are free to try, but my guess is unless I accept what you say, you will continue to believe I am just not open to "the truth." I do not consider myself to be a homophobic person, but there are only very limited ways for me to see something from a homosexual's POV - I admittedly said I can only speak from my own experience.  I grew up with someone who later announced he was gay tho, so I don't believe I am clueless about gays. I went on a double date to a gay bar when I was in college, and one of the members of the group was gay. This is probably more than most LDS heterosexual men can say.  Later in my life my wife roomed with a gay man, who was actually very active in the gay political cause, and although my interaction with him was admittedly limited, my wife talked quite a bit about him. She liked him a good deal.  None of this changes my perception that being gay is largely an environmental thing. The way gay men feel doesn't change that. There are also gay authors who have written about what it is like to be gay, and frankly some of what they admit belies gay beliefs they are born gay. I don't want to seem rude, but I just think talking about it isn't going to change my perceptions. If you are talking about the way gay men feel about celibacy, well, my  guess is they don't want that "imposed" upon them and don't like it. I didn't particularly like it either.

I feel I have addressed that to the extent I can: "So there is no "path" I can lay out for gay men to help them learn heterosexual attraction. I believe most of that path has happened by the time they are going into puberty." I don't really enjoy debating the topic - it seems to go in endless circles on the board, and I know most gay men are not going to relate to what I have to say. However, I post sometimes anyway, in the hopes of something of what I say can provide some solace and peace to gays or those with SSA. 

Ok,  well let's start with a few of your assumptions. The first time in my life I realized I was gay was actually on a scout outing.  We were staying at a members cabin in the snow and planned to go sledding/tubing.  It was a big deal for a kid from the Bay  Area.  We don't see snow.  One of my fellow scouters had snuck in a Playboy.  All the boys were going nuts, looking at the naked women.  I realized for the first time, I was not like the other guys.  Honestly, I had no interest in seeing a naked woman.

So your first idea of porn exposure at an early age should have actually made me straight.

We can go on to your next point any time you are ready. 

[california boy]

23 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"is this something you are so blinded by" - Thanks. more division! HappyJack is winning!  

"that you simply refuse to understand a gay person has no attraction to a woman?" - Oh, I fully realize that. When did I ever say anything to the contrary. Again, this dialogue is about how a homosexual relation helps you "pass through the eternities". I say it will eternally you. What's your take and why?

"How would a gay man use a woman to love, support, protect and have a family with?" - I do it, why can't a gay man? Why do you underestimate gay people. Besides, I was not saying that they *should do it* or *have to do it*, only live a good moral life outside of homosexual activity and the eternities are theirs just as much as any heterosexual who does*the exact same thing*. That's eternal equality is it not?

" Ask my wife if she thinks this is a good path for someone who is gay to follow." - That's not what this thread is about unless she's a prophet and can speak authoritatively as to how this will help you "pass through the eternities" and to exaltation.

Honestly Darren, I can tell you, there is a lot I like about the church.  But there is nothing that makes me more angry with the church than those church leaders that promised me if I only married a woman, then I would become straight.  I was so desperate to be like everyone else, and do anything that God asked me to do, that I put my faith in that promise that they told me came from God.  That was a big lie.  Being married to a woman will not make you straight.  This promise set me on a path that I should never have gone down.  If you want me to elaborate on what a horrible misplaced of trust has been in my life, I will gladly tell you.  But I can also tell you, that you will not like what I have to say.  Church leaders should NEVER make promises in the name of God when no such promise was ever given by God.  

For you to sit here on this thread and tell me to marry a woman is insulting and offensive.  I can't tell you how angry your little flippant advice makes me.  You haven't given decades of your life to following a horrible promise that should have never been given.  The church has since backed off on this idea.  A little late for how it screwed up my life and the life of many others around me.

[Darren10]

8 minutes ago, california boy said:

Well Darren, you are making huge assumptions that have no basis in anything God has actually revealed.  You don't think a gay person can be exalted.  Yet you have no basis to make such an assumption.  Right now, the church is operating SOLELY on ideas of fallible men.  No revelation has ever been received on what it will be like for a gay person after death.  Personally I put my eternity in the hands of God.  We have no idea how spirit children are made.  We have no idea if it is a requirement for all gods to have children.  The scriptures record that the gods created this earth.  Yet none of them were married as far as we know.  None had eternal companions.  So how did this fit in with what you think is required by God?   You think you know everything about the eternities.  Somehow I doubt very much you  even know a thimble full of what God has in store for any of us.

The church may very well be guiding heterosexual couples towards exaltation.  But just as assuredly

The church may very well be guiding heterosexual couples towards exaltation.  But just as assuredly, the church is doing nothing but causing misery and a toxic environment for gay people.  Church leaders are fumbling around in a glass darkly without answers or direction from God. 

"Well Darren, you are making huge assumptions that have no basis in anything God has actually revealed." - Who's making a huge assumption?

"You don't think a gay person can be exalted.  Yet you have no basis to make such an assumption." -

D&C 132:

Quote

4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.

Being "damned" is the contradiction to being exalted. Even those who make it to the Celestial Kingdom are damned if they are not exalted.

Quote

5 For all who will have a blessing at my hands shall abide the law which was appointed for that blessing, and the conditions thereof, as were instituted from before the foundation of the world.

6 And as pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant, it was instituted for the fulness of my glory; and he that receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God.

7 And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred), are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead.

8 Behold, mine house is a house of order, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion.

9 Will I accept of an offering, saith the Lord, that is not made in my name?

10 Or will I receive at your hands that which I have not appointed?

When has the Lord's anointed authorized homosexual relations? Any anointed at anytime? Keep in mind that this dialogue is in view of exaltation therefore if a duly anointed priest of any church does not even believe in the LDS view of exaltation than that would pretty much nullify using that person as an authorized person of the Lord as per the content of this dialogue.

Quote

12 I am the Lord thy God; and I give unto you this commandment—that no man shall come unto the Father but by me or by my word, which is my law, saith the Lord.

13 And everything that is in the world, whether it be ordained of men, by thrones, or principalities, or powers, or things of name, whatsoever they may be, that are not by me or by my word, saith the Lord, shall be thrown down, and shall not remain after men are dead, neither in nor after the resurrection, saith the Lord your God.

14 For whatsoever things remain are by me; and whatsoever things are not by me shall be shaken and destroyed.

When has homosexual relations been authorized by the Lord? Anytime? Any place?

What is to become of these damned souls who did not abide by God's law?

Quote

15 Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word, and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead, and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world.

16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.

17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are angels of God forever and ever.

18 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife, and make a covenant with her for time and for all eternity, if that covenant is not by me or by my word, which is my law, and is not sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, through him whom I have anointed and appointed unto this power, then it is not valid neither of force when they are out of the world, because they are not joined by me, saith the Lord, neither by my word; when they are out of the world it cannot be received there, because the angels and the gods are appointed there, by whom they cannot pass; they cannot, therefore, inherit my glory; for my house is a house of order, saith the Lord God.

Those who are not exalted "cannot be enlarged", are "not gods" in the sense of "being God" or inheriting the glory of God.

Here's what the covenant is for exaltation (the only non damned position in the eternities) is as well as to what exaltation is:

Quote

19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, that he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.

20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them.

Note that I always emboldened "man marrying a wife". Where is there a doctrine of a "man marrying a man" or "woman marrying a woman'? Marital relations required for exaltation have always been between man and woman .

"Personally I put my eternity in the hands of God." - Me too but how would it affect your exaltation in the LDS view? While no explicit doctrine has been taught as to gay marriage and the eternities there is explicit doctrine taught about not abiding by the "new and everlasting covenant" and damnation resulting upon those who do not. Where is there room for homosexual relations which has always been condemned within Christianity?

"We have no idea if it is a requirement for all gods to have children." - Implicitly they are.

"None had eternal companions." - 100% incorrect in the LDS view.

"You think you know everything about the eternities." - I do? Should I CFR that?

"Somehow I doubt very much you  even know a thimble full of what God has in store for any of us." - That is correct.

"the church is doing nothing but causing misery and a toxic environment for gay people" - Again, who is assuming too much?

"Church leaders are fumbling around in a glass darkly without answers or direction from God." - True enough when there is no revelation but we do have enough revelation to know what we are to do to "pass through the eternities". You fail to answer what place does a homosexual relationship have in that sojourn.

[rockpond]

34 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

If we're explaining there's a different standard, you just agreed on the exact same standard I just proposed. I find that pleasantly quaint.  

You've misunderstood.  Because I see, quite clearly, the different standards in the church for gay vs straight people.  And I think that anyone who doesn't see those different standards has simply found a way to rationalize them away in their mind.

[Darren10]

25 minutes ago, bluebell said:

No, not correct, which has been explained multiple times now.  I can appreciate that you aren't able to see the difference, but i'm guessing if you were only allowed to kiss and cuddle men, the differences would suddenly be more obvious.

The road that each group is asked to travel down is different.  Homosexuals are asked to endure a celibate life and heterosexuals are not.

"I can appreciate that you aren't able to see the difference" - Thanks. More division.

"The road that each group is asked to travel down is different." - Their challenges are indeed different but what are they supposed to do to "pass through the eternities"?

"Homosexuals are asked to endure a celibate life and heterosexuals are not." - With people of their same gender, yes. With people opposite of their gender, no. The exact same standard applies to heterosexuals, does it not?

"but i'm guessing if you were only allowed to kiss and cuddle men, the differences would suddenly be more obvious" - That the challenges are immense is not in dispute. If you arguing I need to show more empathy I think there is room for agreement.

The issue I am taking up is what is needed to "pass through the eternities". Any ideas from you?

[Darren10]

3 minutes ago, rockpond said:

You've misunderstood.  Because I see, quite clearly, the different standards in the church for gay vs straight people.  And I think that anyone who doesn't see those different standards has simply found a way to rationalize them away in their mind.

There's different challenges to live those standards, not different standards.

[rockpond]

3 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

There's different challenges to live those standards, not different standards.

That's your point of view.  I disagree and see them as different standards.  If one of my children came out as gay, I would immediately give them the opportunity to step away from activity in the Church as it does not have a good path to offer them and is, in some ways, not a safe place for them.

[RevTestament]

49 minutes ago, california boy said:

Ok,  well let's start with a few of your assumptions. The first time in my life I realized I was gay was actually on a scout outing.  We were staying at a members cabin in the snow and planned to go sledding/tubing.  It was a big deal for a kid from the Bay  Area.  We don't see snow.  One of my fellow scouters had snuck in a Playboy.  All the boys were going nuts, looking at the naked women.  I realized for the first time, I was not like the other guys.  Honestly, I had no interest in seeing a naked woman.

So your first idea of porn exposure at an early age should have actually made me straight.

We can go on to your next point any time you are ready. 

Well, I am not just talking about naked women. A lot of pornography has men too. I generally don't consider nudes to be pornographic, which I am sure some will disagree with me on. I consider sexually suggestive poses usually to be pornographic and depictions of sex acts to be pornographic. When I was a teenager I probably found some nudes to be arousing, but generally not. Just looking at a beautiful naked woman, generally doesn't have much impact on me. I do enjoy beauty tho. I own a picture of a naked breasted woman - unless my wife managed to scrap it - but it is in storage because she thinks it pornographic. I thought it strikingly beautiful. Anyway, perhaps you don't feel a woman is a thing of beauty. However, just because one doesn't want to jump in bed with a naked lady I don't think means one is necessarily gay. There are actually some women I ran from - some I didn't enjoy kissing - some who just did nothing for me. In fact it seemed sometimes to me that I was destined to be a bachelor forever. If I liked them, they didn't particularly care for me and vice versa. What I am saying is that I feel initial reactions can be misinterpreted - they go into the brain and get processed - and I believe sometimes the brain's conclusion is "I must be __________. This is what my environment is telling me." This starts at a very young age. People process their environment differently. Some are sensitive - some are not, etc.

CB, I am not trying to tell you you are not gay. I am not trying to tell you why you are gay, and definitely not trying to tell you how you can stop being gay. I am suggesting tho, once a mind gets imprinted a certain way, it is difficult or nigh impossible to change. There are many stories which bear this out. Young men abused who think of themselves as gay when all the sex hormones in their brains get released due to the cravings of older men. It is just a very complicated thing, and there is no single, pat rule I think that can be applied to gay men.

Edited May 2, 2017 by RevTestament

[Darren10]

20 minutes ago, california boy said:

Honestly Darren, I can tell you, there is a lot I like about the church.  But there is nothing that makes me more angry with the church than those church leaders that promised me if I only married a woman, then I would become straight.  I was so desperate to be like everyone else, and do anything that God asked me to do, that I put my faith in that promise that they told me came from God.  That was a big lie.  Being married to a woman will not make you straight.  This promise set me on a path that I should never have gone down.  If you want me to elaborate on what a horrible misplaced of trust has been in my life, I will gladly tell you.  But I can also tell you, that you will not like what I have to say.  Church leaders should NEVER make promises in the name of God when no such promise was ever given by God.  

For you to sit here on this thread and tell me to marry a woman is insulting and offensive.  I can't tell you how angry your little flippant advice makes me.  You haven't given decades of your life to following a horrible promise that should have never been given.  The church has since backed off on this idea.  A little late for how it screwed up my life and the life of many others around me.

"But there is nothing that makes me more angry with the church than those church leaders that promised me if I only married a woman, then I would become straight." - AGREED! I would be angry with them too. but, this is not a dialogue on vain promises made by local leaders (I honestly am unaware this was from top leadership though I could be wrong) .

"that I put my faith in that promise that they told me came from God" - Did they tell you that or was that assumed since they were your priesthood leaders? If the latter is true I find that problematic in and of itself. I do not follow along the line of serve and obey *just because* someone is your priesthood leader. I strongly believe in seeking and receiving personal spiritual confirmation as to what they say is true. I your case, hypothetically, you could have received confirmation as to the importance of living a life as God wants you to live but that your church leader's directions were a little off. There would have been nothing wrong with receiving that spiritual prompting and telling them as much. my own local bishop was very into obey someone simply because they are your priesthood leaders. After some, umm, friendly feedback from your truly, and my very vulgar and psychotic wife (I love her lots  ) he actually altered that a bit and relied more on direction from the Holy spirit and became more charitable in the end. He even confessed as much in a testimony meeting. Good man. 

"That was a big lie." - Sorry to hear that.

"This promise set me on a path that I should never have gone down." - I agree.

"This promise set me on a path that I should never have gone down.  If you want me to elaborate on what a horrible misplaced of trust has been in my life, I will gladly tell you.' - Private Message me and Ill give you my email. We'll chat there my brother.

"Church leaders should NEVER make promises in the name of God when no such promise was ever given by God. " - EXACTLY!!! And that is precisely what I am saying regarding homosexual relations and exaltations. No one here should be saying that entering into a homosexual relation is fine and that those who do are just as much on the path to exaltation as those who are in heterosexual relations so long as they are good people. That is promising Celestial blessing based on Terrestrial requirements.

"For you to sit here on this thread and tell me to marry a woman is insulting and offensive. " - Well, then stop being insulted and offended for I made no such demand upon you or anyone else here. I merely shared what is required for exaltation. How was I incorrect?

By the way, did you even live in the Houston area? A man in my ward went through exactly what you are describing, divorced his wife and left to California with his boy friend. Though his wife was initially grieved, like... severely, she came to accept him and his new lifestyle knowing it was better for everyone that way.

Now, what is required for exaltation? Can those in homosexual relations gain it without exiting such a relation?

[Darren10]

17 minutes ago, rockpond said:

That's your point of view.  I disagree and see them as different standards.  If one of my children came out as gay, I would immediately give them the opportunity to step away from activity in the Church as it does not have a good path to offer them and is, in some ways, not a safe place for them.

I know gay people who left the Church feeling the same way. At the same time I can tell you that they would never find a more loving and supportive group for them outside the Church. Yes, they may receive acceptance for the life they want to live but not love and support as a person. This is my anecdotal response to yours.

Now, would living a homosexual life allow them to be exalted? I am not questioning your parental decision and especially not your love for your child, only if you think they are bound for the same eternal blessings as anyone else without eventually needing to leaving having homosexual relations.

[Darren10]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

You are right.  I am being VERY condescending towards you, BECAUSE you are making amazingly ridiculous suggestions for someone who is gay. The only conclusion I can come to is that you have no understanding what it means to be gay.  If you did, then you would never suggest some of the things you are suggesting in this thread.  And you would never make the statement that you know for a surety what kind of exaltation God may lead a gay person towards.

"I am being VERY condescending towards you, BECAUSE you are making amazingly ridiculous suggestions for someone who is gay.' - Typical for those who want to create an alternative path towards exaltation. Condescend the opposition and accuse them of things they don't do. By doing so, you control and manipulate the argument into something which is not part of the argument. . Outside of answering direct questions regarding what I think, I have not made the case as to what gays should do except only how being gay would affect one "passing through the eternities". My posts are along a hypothetical and theological line of reasoning, not personal to what you should do now and how and with whom.

[rockpond]

3 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

I know gay people who left the Church feeling the same way. At the same time I can tell you that they would never find a more loving and supportive group for them outside the Church. Yes, they may receive acceptance for the life they want to live but not love and support as a person. This is my anecdotal response to yours.

Now, would living a homosexual life allow them to be exalted? I am not questioning your parental decision and especially not your love for your child, only if you think they are bound for the same eternal blessings as anyone else without eventually needing to leaving having homosexual relations.

 

There is most certainly love and support for gay people outside of the church.  There are wonderful communities both faith-based and secular.

Elder Christofferson reportedly told Meg and Jake Abhau that the church may not be a safe place for their gay teenage son.  If an apostle is saying that the church isn't a safe place for gay people I find it hard to believe that there aren't "more loving and supportive" groups outside the Church.

My testimony of the eternities includes exaltation for gay couples.  So I don't have any concerns about those I love who are in gay marriages.

[Darren10]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

You are right.  I am being VERY condescending towards you, BECAUSE you are making amazingly ridiculous suggestions for someone who is gay. The only conclusion I can come to is that you have no understanding what it means to be gay.  If you did, then you would never suggest some of the things you are suggesting in this thread.  And you would never make the statement that you know for a surety what kind of exaltation God may lead a gay person towards.

"And you would never make the statement that you know for a surety what kind of exaltation God may lead a gay person towards." - Then, by all means, how is being gay leading one to exaltation? Where does gay relations fit into the scheme of exaltation? What revealed doctrines do we have that say it is fine and compatible?

[Darren10]

1 minute ago, rockpond said:

 

There is most certainly love and support for gay people outside of the church.  There are wonderful communities both faith-based and secular.

Elder Christofferson reportedly told Meg and Jake Abhau that the church may not be a safe place for their gay teenage son.  If an apostle is saying that the church isn't a safe place for gay people I find it hard to believe that there aren't "more loving and supportive" groups outside the Church.

My testimony of the eternities includes exaltation for gay couples.  So I don't have any concerns about those I love who are in gay marriages.

"There is most certainly love and support for gay people outside of the church." - You cannot say that without citation. Mine was anecdotal referring only to those I personally knew who left the church because they were gay and those I personally knew they left behind by leaving the church. And to me, accepting one's lifestyle is not necessarily the same thing as rendering love and support. My daughter has lots of gay, bisexual, pansexual friends outside of church as it's a big trend in the school she attends. . She makes clear that she does not accept that lifestyle but they are good friends.

"Elder Christofferson reportedly told Meg and Jake Abhau that the church may not be a safe place for their gay teenage son." - That I DO call for reference soplease, CFR that.

"My testimony of the eternities includes exaltation for gay couples." - OK. Based off of what exactly?

[Darren10]

1 hour ago, JulieM said:

You "do it"?  Are you a gay man married to a woman?

If not, then you are definitely not doing it.  To do something comparable would be for you, a straight man, to marry, love, and live with another man for your life.  That's what you doing it would look like.

Coukd you do that?

I do love and protect and care for my wife, yes. So, why not a gay man? Why do you demean their capabilities?

"Coukd you do that?" - Could I do what?

[bluebell]

41 minutes ago, Darren10 said:

"I can appreciate that you aren't able to see the difference" - Thanks. More division.

"The road that each group is asked to travel down is different." - Their challenges are indeed different but what are they supposed to do to "pass through the eternities"?

"Homosexuals are asked to endure a celibate life and heterosexuals are not." - With people of their same gender, yes. With people opposite of their gender, no. The exact same standard applies to heterosexuals, does it not?

"but i'm guessing if you were only allowed to kiss and cuddle men, the differences would suddenly be more obvious" - That the challenges are immense is not in dispute. If you arguing I need to show more empathy I think there is room for agreement.

The issue I am taking up is what is needed to "pass through the eternities". Any ideas from you?

I think you are conflating a couple of things and making arguments (and asking questions) that aren't relevant to my posts.  

Just because i can recognize that being commanded to live a celibate life is much more difficult than being allowed the opportunity for romantic love and companionship, does not mean that I believe homosexual relationships should be accepted or that such proves that God wants both groups to be treated the same.

 

[Darren10]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

It's hard to respond to something like this but I will try  within the text.

Also, a bit of friendly advice. You said in a previous post...

No need to yell. Your exclamation is bordering on homophobia.  Your disgust at the possibility is duly noted.

"Homophobia"? - You? The one not dividing others? The deep contempt is not from me but from Californiaboy who admittedly condescends me. But I have a phobia for opposing your point of view? The division continues.

Edited May 2, 2017 by Darren10

[Darren10]

2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I think you are conflating a couple of things and making arguments (and asking questions) that aren't relevant to my posts.  

Just because i can recognize that being commanded to live a celibate life is much more difficult than being allowed the opportunity for romantic love and companionship, does not mean that I believe homosexual relationships should be accepted or that such proves that God wants both groups to be treated the same.

 

Umm, bluebell, I never said whatyou believe. That goes to those who label me "boarderline homophobic" and condescend my arguments. in fact I think I expressly asked for your ideas, let me check....., oh yeah, "Any ideas from you?" I think that means I asked for your ideas.