Inclusiveness and Gay Children of God

[Ahab]

12 hours ago, Valentinus said:

If God is not the author of sin then what truly is sin?

Sin is to rebel against our Father by refusing to do "his will" or in other words what he would do if he were in your situation, the rebel thereby becoming an author of sin in his or her own life.

Rather than "the" or even another author of sin, our Father could correctly be referred to as an author of righteousness not only in his own life but also in the  life of anyone who subscribes to doing his will and thus becoming more like him.

So, nope, an author of sin is not really what our Father in heaven really is.

[USU78]

12 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I am not that kind of guy. I have standards. You have to buy me dinner first.

 

[Ahab]

16 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Here is a puzzler though. Adam and Eve got the knowledge of good and evil from eating some fruit.....so how did Lucifer get it?

He didn't forget what he knew before he came down here, so he still had the knowledge of good and evil that he already had before he was "thrust" down here by our Father, presumably with the help of others who were agents of our Father back then.  Or perhaps our Father did thrust him down here all by himself.  Don't really know about that little detail.  Anyway, Lucifer didn't lose his knowledge, however (little) much he had back then, so he still had however much he had accumulated in the presence of our Father, unlike Adam and Eve who had their memories wiped before they came down here and were then given the opportunity to regain their past prior knowledge of good and evil (remember how they recognized Lucifer after they ate some of the fruit) and then continue to gain even more knowledge of good and evil.

And yes, I know, some people might again refer to what I'm saying as only speculation but this is my version of the story as I know it and I am going to stick with it.

By the way, to someone who asked later if what they ate was really "fruit", what do you think fruit is, considering like begets like and all that?

[The Nehor]

14 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Sin is to rebel against our Father by refusing to do "his will" or in other words what he would do if he were in your situation, the rebel thereby becoming an author of sin in his or her own life.

Rather than "the" or even another author of sin, our Father could correctly be referred to as an author of righteousness not only in his own life but also in the  life of anyone who subscribes to doing his will and thus becoming more like him.

So, nope, an author of sin is not really what our Father in heaven really is.

But by your definition if the Father stopped wanting people to do things sin would vanish overnight.

I also do not believe the doctrine that doing the Father’s will exclusively involves doing what He would do. First of all because we almost never know what that is and we are unable to achieve it anyways because we lack His attributes. His will is what He wants us to do individually based on our own strengths and general weakness but there are also times that he is just not that concerned with what we do. His will is also not all consuming. I chose which of two books on my nightstand I would start last night to put me to sleep and chose to listen to Wagner while I read. Did God’s will desire me to make those choices or did I sin in doing so.

[The Nehor]

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

He didn't forget what he knew before he came down here, so he still had the knowledge of good and evil that he already had before he was "thrust" down here by our Father, presumably with the help of others who were agents of our Father back then.  Or perhaps our Father did thrust him down here all by himself.  Don't really know about that little detail.  Anyway, Lucifer didn't lose his knowledge, however (little) much he had back then, so he still had however much he had accumulated in the presence of our Father, unlike Adam and Eve who had their memories wiped before they came down here and were then given the opportunity to regain their past prior knowledge of good and evil (remember how they recognized Lucifer after they ate some of the fruit) and then continue to gain even more knowledge of good and evil.

And yes, I know, some people might again refer to what I'm saying as only speculation but this is my version of the story as I know it and I am going to stick with it.

By the way, to someone who asked later if what they ate was really "fruit", what do you think fruit is, considering like begets like and all that?

I am not so sure. I do not think Lucifer and his followers have that same knowledge of good and evil. Somehow they rebelled without it. Also explains why Satan’s temptations are so monotonous and unoriginal. Why would Adam and Eve need to get the knowledge of good and evil again if they already had it? Why wipe that as part of the veil?

Fruit is generally a seed surrounded by nutrients and/or protection. It would theoretically grow another tree. If you are suggesting Lucifer put the tree there......yeah, not buying it.

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

Did any of them expound on their sexual orientation? If so, why do you think that is; if not, why not?

That was in Moroni’s fourth visit when he told Joseph things that were not to be revealed yet.

[Ahab]

18 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

But by your definition if the Father stopped wanting people to do things sin would vanish overnight.

I also do not believe the doctrine that doing the Father’s will exclusively involves doing what He would do. First of all because we almost never know what that is and we are unable to achieve it anyways because we lack His attributes. His will is what He wants us to do individually based on our own strengths and general weakness but there are also times that he is just not that concerned with what we do. His will is also not all consuming. I chose which of two books on my nightstand I would start last night to put me to sleep and chose to listen to Wagner while I read. Did God’s will desire me to make those choices or did I sin in doing so.

It's not about our Father wanting us to do things. His "will" is "his" will.  What he would do, and will do, and already has done because of the kind of person he is now.  A good person.  The best person you could ever imagine.  So when we talk about doing his will, or at least when I talk about it, I'm talking about what his will really is and how it would carry over into my life if I chose to do the same things that he would do in whatever situation I'm in.  And at no time would his will ever be to sin or to do anything contrary to his own will to do and be good, always and forever.

I don't really know what God's will was concerning those books, or about listening to music at that time.  Maybe he just wanted you to roll over and go to sleep because you needed rest more than more information to work with at that time.  I dunno.  Ask him, and not me.

[HappyJackWagon]

Threads like this are sad to me. They're just reminders that I no longer fit in the church, and I'm not sure I want to.

There are so many comments that seem to extol the virtues of exclusion. I realize there is a fundamental difference in the way many of us view the world, and God, and I find I have little interest in a church of exclusion, even if you believe God is the author of the exclusion. It all feels very empty to me.

[The Nehor]

9 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Threads like this are sad to me. They're just reminders that I no longer fit in the church, and I'm not sure I want to.

There are so many comments that seem to extol the virtues of exclusion. I realize there is a fundamental difference in the way many of us view the world, and God, and I find I have little interest in a church of exclusion, even if you believe God is the author of the exclusion. It all feels very empty to me.

The idea that the Church or God should accept everyone on their terms is antithetical to our faith and to Christianity in general:

31 When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
32 And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

God wants to include everyone but most do not want to be included unless it is on their terms. God demands surrender from us.

[The Nehor]

26 minutes ago, Ahab said:

It's not about our Father wanting us to do things. His "will" is "his" will.  What he would do, and will do, and already has done because of the kind of person he is now.  A good person.  The best person you could ever imagine.  So when we talk about doing his will, or at least when I talk about it, I'm talking about what his will really is and how it would carry over into my life if I chose to do the same things that he would do in whatever situation I'm in.  And at no time would his will ever be to sin or to do anything contrary to his own will to do and be good, always and forever.

I don't really know what God's will was concerning those books, or about listening to music at that time.  Maybe he just wanted you to roll over and go to sleep because you needed rest more than more information to work with at that time.  I dunno.  Ask him, and not me.

I am asking if you think there was a moral element to my choice that would influence, for good or ill, my path to salvation. I am positing there is not. Do you disagree?

[Ahab]

26 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I am not so sure. I do not think Lucifer and his followers have that same knowledge of good and evil. Somehow they rebelled without it. Also explains why Satan’s temptations are so monotonous and unoriginal. Why would Adam and Eve need to get the knowledge of good and evil again if they already had it? Why wipe that as part of the veil?

Fruit is generally a seed surrounded by nutrients and/or protection. It would theoretically grow another tree. If you are suggesting Lucifer put the tree there......yeah, not buying it.

While Satan and his followers don't have as much knowledge of good things as some of us have I'm sure they had enough to know they were rebelling against God when they did and that they could stop rebelling if they had wanted to stop.  They knew which person was our Father and instead of following him they followed one of their/our brothers, and they didn't even choose a good brother to follow.   I mean, if anyone was going to follow a brother back then, then the right brother to follow would have been Jesus who only wanted to do what our Father wanted, which essentially made following him the same as following our Father in heaven.

Wiping their minds was necessary,  I believe, so that they would be able to learn the difference between good and evil.   They didn't even recognize who Satan was before they gained knowledge of good and evil from their source/access point (tree) of knowledge of good and evil in the garden of Eden, and I believe they didn't know which person was our Father in heaven, either.  I believe they just heard from 2 sources, without knowing which of them was good and which of them was evil.  What Lucifer said sounded good to them, though, and what our Father said might have sounded good to them too, but not until they gained (more) knowledge of good and evil from the source of it that was in that garden did they recognize which of them was Lucifer.  And by default, they could reasonably deduce, the other one had to be the good guy.

We have our own family tree, or trees, you know, so a tree doesn't necessary have bark on it like most of the other trees that we call trees.  I think of a tree as a source of other trees which by its fruit is able to produce more trees of the same kind..

[The Nehor]

19 minutes ago, Ahab said:

And by default, they could reasonably deduce, the other one had to be the good guy.

That is very bad reasoning. If two people are arguing and one is wrong it does not follow that the other is right. It is a good way to sum up a lot of our cultural, social, and political discourse though. If those people and their ideas are  bad the other side must be right and good. It happens a lot here too. I have taken stands against stuff and people assume I am on the side of their opponent. I have enough hate in my heart to despise more then one idea or person or group.

Edited August 7, 2019 by The Nehor

[Ahab]

18 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I am asking if you think there was a moral element to my choice that would influence, for good or ill, my path to salvation. I am positing there is not. Do you disagree?

I believe everything is either good or evil, or an influence toward either good or evil, including those books and that music.   Salvation is all about becoming as good as you can be with the help of our Savior, which is total perfection as our kind of being.

So, yeah, those 2 books and that music do or at least can have an influence on your salvation, one way or the other, depending on how and how much much they can influence you toward becoming either more good or more evil. 

I don't know which 2 books you're talking about so I don't know in what direction they could lead you, but any negative influence they may have can be overcome through the power of the atonement of Jesus Christ.

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I believe everything is either good or evil, or an influence toward either good or evil, including those books and that music.   Salvation is all about becoming as good as you can be with the help of our Savior, which is total perfection as our kind of being.

So, yeah, those 2 books and that music do or at least can have an influence on your salvation, one way or the other, depending on how and how much much they can influence you toward becoming either more good or more evil. 

I don't know which 2 books you're talking about so I don't know in what direction they could lead you, but any negative influence they may have can be overcome through the power of the atonement of Jesus Christ.

It was between the Necronomicon and Unaussprechlichen Kulten. Now can you provide advice?

[Ahab]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That is very bad reasoning. If two people are arguing and one is wrong it does not follow that the other is right. It is a good way to sum up a lot of our cultural, social, and political discourse though. If those people and their ideas are  bad the other side must be right and good. It happens a lot here too. I have taken stands against stuff and people assume I am on the side of their opponent. I have enough hate in my heart to despise more then one idea or person or group.

I wasn't talking about 2 random people, there, though.  One was our Father and the other one was Lucifer.  One good, and the other evil, from which they could gain (more) knowledge of good and evil.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

That was in Moroni’s fourth visit when he told Joseph things that were not to be revealed yet.

Oh now I remember! It's in Helaman 6:25.

[Ahab]

50 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Threads like this are sad to me. They're just reminders that I no longer fit in the church, and I'm not sure I want to.

There are so many comments that seem to extol the virtues of exclusion. I realize there is a fundamental difference in the way many of us view the world, and God, and I find I have little interest in a church of exclusion, even if you believe God is the author of the exclusion. It all feels very empty to me.

Just fixate on the fact that through the atonement of Jesus Christ you and everybody else has the opportunity to have everything good that our Lord has and will ever have in common with our Father in heaven.  The "opportunity" to have all of that, through them.

Offer void where prohibited.

[Storm Rider]

15 hours ago, Valentinus said:

It's probably because not only can I not make sense of what I believe but I'm not sure I know what I believe.

Perhaps I should ask nothing of God and simply let Him be Him whatever that means and exorcise myself of any expectations. 

Val, the comprehension of God is beyond us. Too often we feel like we hang on to the smallest, thinnest shred of faith with the expectation that we will recognize God's hand in our lives and/or open our minds so that we might understand why. Yet, at other times our hearts fill with faith and see God's hand in all things.  I have long admired you and your searching for God. Don't stop, he is there. It is not in how many times that we don't feel his presence, but in the constant effort to follow him. His peace upon you alway.

[alter idem]

On 8/5/2019 at 12:22 PM, kllindley said:

I actually disagree that the two statements are similar in weight.  

Elder Hafen's statement was made in 2008. A year earlier the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve had published the booklet "God Loveth His Children."  This booklet contained the extended quote I shared earlier about the doctrine of eternal marriage between man and woman, the incompatibility of same-sex relationships with God's plan, and the promise that all feelings and desires would be refined in the resurrection so that those who desire will fend a fullness of joy in a heterosexual relationship.  His statement was reaffirming their unified teaching. 

Was there any comparable published statement about space travel that had the endorsement of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve at the time Joseph Fielding Smith spoke on Hawaii?

My parents lived in Hawaii at the time and actually heard Elder Joseph Fielding Smith say that about landing on the Moon. They did not interpret it as some kind of prophetic statement, but that he was dismissing the need to land on the moon and giving his own opinion that therefore it wasn't going to happen.  I think critics have been misrepresenting an innocent comment of his for almost 60 years.

[CV75]

22 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Threads like this are sad to me. They're just reminders that I no longer fit in the church, and I'm not sure I want to.

There are so many comments that seem to extol the virtues of exclusion. I realize there is a fundamental difference in the way many of us view the world, and God, and I find I have little interest in a church of exclusion, even if you believe God is the author of the exclusion. It all feels very empty to me.

I see Him as the author of invitation (2 Nephi 26:33), and we are individually our own authors of inclusion or exclusion in relation to that (Joshua 24;15). I think it a miracle that we will each have a "proper and perfect frame," "perfect form" and "proper frame" (Alma 11) regardless of our choice.

[california boy]

23 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Threads like this are sad to me. They're just reminders that I no longer fit in the church, and I'm not sure I want to.

There are so many comments that seem to extol the virtues of exclusion. I realize there is a fundamental difference in the way many of us view the world, and God, and I find I have little interest in a church of exclusion, even if you believe God is the author of the exclusion. It all feels very empty to me.

I think this thread kind of answers the question.  Can the church be more inclusive to gay couples.  It is pretty clear the answer is no.  The only way a gay person feels welcomed in the church is if they are willing to be celibate in hopes they will "become straight" after they die.  Other than that, we have 18 pages of reasons why gay couples will not be a part of the Church.

That is ok.  In some ways, it encourages gay's to find God on their own and rely on Him rather than others.  I know we are not the only ones that don't fit in.  The Church works perfectly if you are aligned with everything the correlation department approves.  Any deviation from that starts to tear at the fabric of that relationship. 

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, california boy said:

I think this thread kind of answers the question.  Can the church be more inclusive to gay couples.  It is pretty clear the answer is no.  The only way a gay person feels welcomed in the church is if they are willing to be celibate in hopes they will "become straight" after they die.  Other than that, we have 18 pages of reasons why gay couples will not be a part of the Church.

That is ok.  In some ways, it encourages gay's to find God on their own and rely on Him rather than others.  I know we are not the only ones that don't fit in.  The Church works perfectly if you are aligned with everything the correlation department approves.  Any deviation from that starts to tear at the fabric of that relationship. 

Yeah, not without revelation.

[california boy]

48 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Yeah, not without revelation.

I don't think it is a revelation Church leaders would be anxious to receive.

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, california boy said:

I don't think it is a revelation Church leaders would be anxious to receive.

That does not preclude it. I do not think Peter wanted the revelation to take the gospel to the Gentiles.

[Ahab]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

The Church works perfectly if you are aligned with everything the correlation department approves.  Any deviation from that starts to tear at the fabric of that relationship. 

Which is the way it should work.  Whether its the correlation department or some other higher level department that sanctions living standards for members, there must be standards of what is considered right and what is considered wrong behavior.