JLHPROF Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 16 minutes ago, Ahab said: Rephrase the question like this if it makes it easier for you to understand: Do you support any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints I would have to say I do. But I don't promote them to anyone but myself. 13 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: How, then, do you define supporting? Or could you give some examples to illustrate it? One that springs readily to my mind is enabling such promotion, perhaps by giving money or time or skills or influence. And yes, I think that would be objectionable and would warrant consideration by a priesthood leader from whom one is seeking a recommend. I support Brigham Young's teachings on Adam. I support Joseph F. Smith's teachings on the garment. I support Joseph Smith's teachings on unchanging ordinances, etc. I support the idea that the OT Jehovah and Jesus Christ are not the same person. All of these are contrary to current Church teachings and doctrine. But I don't promote them. I don't publish or protest. I don't advertise. And I don't attempt to teach them in the ward. I just quietly support these contrary doctrines.
rockpond Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 13 minutes ago, etana said: As written i would have to answer no given that i attended my niece's wedding and said (and meant) congrats to her and her wife. I don’t think that congratulating your niece and her wife on their marriage is supporting something contrary to what the church teaches. President Oaks just told us that we need to love and respect everyone, including LGBT persons.
rockpond Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 22 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: What makes you think you get to rephrase temple recommend interview questions? Isn’t that what this Facebook post does? 51 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: With permission, I quote the following Facebook post from Cassandra Showell Hedelius, because it is germane to this thread topic: ”This is a big deal. In the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, you have enormous freedom to question, doubt, and believe differently than other members or even from official church teachings. And I love it that way; come be my friend and we'll enjoy discussing important things, or just be friends who are cool with being different! “However. When it comes to the most sacred aspects and practices of our faith, there are and must be limits. Those limits have just been clarified. Before, the question was if you affiliated with groups that opposed the church. Now, the question is: “ ‘Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?’ “Promoting opposition to church teachings, distrust and condemnation of church leaders, and self-righteousness about one's morality or spiritual insight being superior to the church's is not good. It may mean you shouldn't have a temple recommend. It may mean you shouldn't teach or serve in certain ways in church.” There’s some irony here in her promoting her interpretation of the question and using it to condemn the temple worthiness of others. 1
Ahab Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 1 minute ago, JLHPROF said: I would have to say I do. But I don't promote them to anyone but myself. I support Brigham Young's teachings on Adam. I support Joseph F. Smith's teachings on the garment. I support Joseph Smith's teachings on unchanging ordinances, etc. I support the idea that the OT Jehovah and Jesus Christ are not the same person. All of these are contrary to current Church teachings and doctrine. I don't agree with your conclusion that those teachings are teachings contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I know not all members of the Church accept those as teachings of the Church, or true teachings of the Church, or official doctrine of the Church, but I do not agree that those things that those men taught are contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. So I would be saying No to that temple interview question, regardless of what you or any other member of the Church I know may think.
Scott Lloyd Posted October 8, 2019 Author Posted October 8, 2019 12 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: I would have to say I do. But I don't promote them to anyone but myself. I support Brigham Young's teachings on Adam. I support Joseph F. Smith's teachings on the garment. I support Joseph Smith's teachings on unchanging ordinances, etc. I support the idea that the OT Jehovah and Jesus Christ are not the same person. All of these are contrary to current Church teachings and doctrine. But I don't promote them. I don't publish or protest. I don't advertise. And I don't attempt to teach them in the ward. I just quietly support these contrary doctrines. If, to you, agreeing with them privately (which is not what I said) is tantamount to supporting them, I suppose that would render you ineligible.
stemelbow Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 (edited) 11 minutes ago, rockpond said: Isn’t that what this Facebook post does? There’s some irony here in her promoting her interpretation of the question and using it to condemn the temple worthiness of others. Excellent point. And may I add, she is dead wrong about enormous freedom. That simply is not true, and she says as much here, "It may mean you shouldn't have a temple recommend. It may mean you shouldn't teach or serve in certain ways in church." if she thinks that there is enormous freedom to question, and explore thoughts and then suggest that if you do you aren't worthy of a temple recommend or shouldn't teach or serve in the Church, then she is contradicting herself. I know she's hiding it in some category of stuff that's sacred, but I don't see how that gives freedom at all. Edited October 8, 2019 by stemelbow
Scott Lloyd Posted October 8, 2019 Author Posted October 8, 2019 11 minutes ago, rockpond said: Isn’t that what this Facebook post does? There’s some irony here in her promoting her interpretation of the question and using it to condemn the temple worthiness of others. I didn’t understand what Ahab was getting at, because he wasn’t clear in his post. I think I get it better now that he has clarified.
Ahab Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 11 minutes ago, rockpond said: I don’t think that congratulating your niece and her wife on their marriage is supporting something contrary to what the church teaches. President Oaks just told us that we need to love and respect everyone, including LGBT persons. We can support and show love to people without supporting things they do which we believe to be wrong or sinful. If when etana said Congratulations she felt like she was supporting their same sex marriage, which the Church does not support, and if she feels a Yes to that temple interview question is an honest answer when she answers it, then she should say Yes to the question. Being honest in all of our acts includes being honest with ourselves so she should answer with what she believes to be an honest answer.
Scott Lloyd Posted October 8, 2019 Author Posted October 8, 2019 11 minutes ago, Ahab said: I don't agree with your conclusion that those teachings are teachings contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I know not all members of the Church accept those as teachings of the Church, or true teachings of the Church, or official doctrine of the Church, but I do not agree that those things that those men taught are contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. So I would be saying No to that temple interview question, regardless of what you or any other member of the Church I know may think. President Spencer W. Kimball, authoritatively in general conference, officially disavowed the Adam-God doctrine, for one.
Scott Lloyd Posted October 8, 2019 Author Posted October 8, 2019 19 minutes ago, rockpond said: I don’t think that congratulating your niece and her wife on their marriage is supporting something contrary to what the church teaches. President Oaks just told us that we need to love and respect everyone, including LGBT persons. What other sinful behavior do you think it proper to congratulate someone for?
etana Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: What other sinful behavior do you think it proper to congratulate someone for? Divorce would be a good example given what Jesus said in Matt 19. congratulating oneself on being a self-righteous bigot also comes to mind 1
Scott Lloyd Posted October 8, 2019 Author Posted October 8, 2019 (edited) 22 minutes ago, etana said: Divorce would be a good example given what Jesus said in Matt 19. congratulating oneself on being a self-righteous bigot also comes to mind Did you read my question clearly? Are you saying you think it proper to give congratulations for those things? That’s the sense of tryout response to my question, whether or not you intended it to mean that. Edited October 8, 2019 by Scott Lloyd
rockpond Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 15 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: What other sinful behavior do you think it proper to congratulate someone for? We were just taught by President Oaks to show love and respect to all, including LGBT persons. When a family or close friend invites me to their wedding, I make every effort to attend. Afterward, I give them a hug and congratulate them. To do otherwise because the family member is marrying someone of their own sex would not be showing love and respect. What would you do if your niece was marrying a woman and invited you? Attend but not congratulate them? Not attend?
rockpond Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 22 minutes ago, Ahab said: We can support and show love to people without supporting things they do which we believe to be wrong or sinful. If when etana said Congratulations she felt like she was supporting their same sex marriage, which the Church does not support, and if she feels a Yes to that temple interview question is an honest answer when she answers it, then she should say Yes to the question. Being honest in all of our acts includes being honest with ourselves so she should answer with what she believes to be an honest answer. I'll pose the same question to you that I just asked Scott: What would you do if your niece was marrying a woman and invited you to attend the wedding? Would you attend but not congratulate them? Would you not attend?
Ahab Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 20 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: President Spencer W. Kimball, authoritatively in general conference, officially disavowed the Adam-God doctrine, for one. That is your perception, not mine. I've done research on this and I know what both men were talking about. President Kimball disavowed other people's misrepresentations of what Brigham actually taught, not what Brigham actually taught.
Ahab Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 1 minute ago, rockpond said: I'll pose the same question to you that I just asked Scott: What would you do if your niece was marrying a woman and invited you to attend the wedding? Would you attend but not congratulate them? Would you not attend? I probably would not attend or if I did attend I would only be there to witness what they had done. I happen to have a sister in law who "identifies" as a lesbian and I did not go to her wedding to another woman. It is sinful and I do not support that.
Scott Lloyd Posted October 8, 2019 Author Posted October 8, 2019 3 minutes ago, Ahab said: That is your perception, not mine. I've done research on this and I know what both men were talking about. President Kimball disavowed other people's misrepresentations of what Brigham actually taught, not what Brigham actually taught. Whatever. I’m not going to follow you down this rabbit hole.
Scott Lloyd Posted October 8, 2019 Author Posted October 8, 2019 (edited) 15 minutes ago, rockpond said: We were just taught by President Oaks to show love and respect to all, including LGBT persons. When a family or close friend invites me to their wedding, I make every effort to attend. Afterward, I give them a hug and congratulate them. To do otherwise because the family member is marrying someone of their own sex would not be showing love and respect. What would you do if your niece was marrying a woman and invited you? Attend but not congratulate them? Not attend? Express my love and respect in some other way than by giving insincere congratulations for behavior I see as morally wrong and, in the long run, fraught with harm. President Oaks did not teach that we must condone homosexual behavior or pretend we do by congratulating people for it. Edited October 8, 2019 by Scott Lloyd 1
Ahab Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 7 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Whatever. I’m not going to follow you down this rabbit hole. Oh come on! It's a perfectly good little rabbit hole!
Scott Lloyd Posted October 8, 2019 Author Posted October 8, 2019 Just now, Ahab said: Oh come on! It's a perfectly good little rabbit hole! Start your own thread. I probably won’t contribute, but others might.
Ahab Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Start your own thread. I probably won’t contribute, but others might. No, that's okay. I was just being playful with you. I still like you a lot. Great Scott!
rockpond Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 18 minutes ago, Ahab said: I probably would not attend or if I did attend I would only be there to witness what they had done. I happen to have a sister in law who "identifies" as a lesbian and I did not go to her wedding to another woman. It is sinful and I do not support that. And do you think your absence would make her feel loved and respected?
Scott Lloyd Posted October 8, 2019 Author Posted October 8, 2019 2 minutes ago, rockpond said: And do you think your absence would make her feel loved and respected? Some other expression might. It is a false dichotomy and emotional blackmail to insist that the only way to show love and respect is to condone behavior one finds morally repugnant. 2
Teancum Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 4 hours ago, CV75 said: So it went well for you, right? I think this has to do with subordinating one's dictates of conscience to obedience within the religious society. When the dictates of one's conscience translates into corresponding behavior (as in the free exercise of religion), D&C 134:4, 10 and Articles of Faith 11 come into play. I agree. For me though it made me realize that practice in the LDS Church is more important than belief as long as you are not vocal about the unorthodox belief. For example at that time I said I did not know whether God,Jesus and the Holy Ghost were real. I had doubts but I hoped they were real and I hoped that the atonement was real because it is a wonderful message. For the restoration I said I doubted the BoM was historical but I loved the message. As for Joseph Smith I said I did not view him as a prophet in the traditional sense and I think he got a lot of things wrong but he started off on the right track. I viewed him as a religious leader with no more or no less inspiration than any other historical prophet or religous leader. For the current LDS leaders I said I sustained them in their role to lead and run the LDS church but that was it. I said I view the pope as having as much authority for Catholics as President Monson did for the Latter-day Saints. Even if I did not agree with them I accepted that it was their place to lead the church and not mine. I was shocked really that two times I was granted a temple recommend. Late last year my recommend expired. I have not tried to have an interview with our current bishop. I would likely answer very much the same with a few modifications. But on the obedience side I no longer do a full tithe. I do some tithing and I give a generous fast offering and to the humanitarian aid fund. But I figure I cannot say yes to the tithing question. Oh and I drink green tea now.
Ahab Posted October 8, 2019 Posted October 8, 2019 2 minutes ago, rockpond said: And do you think your absence would make her feel loved and respected? Who? This hypothetical person you are just making up? If I had a niece who wanted to marry another woman and she wanted me to attend, she would know why I didn't attend and didn't show my approval for her "marriage" to another woman. She might think (who knows what a hypothetical person might think?) that means I do not love her or have a high regard for her as a person (respect in that sense) but I would, anyway, even if she did not think so.
Recommended Posts