Duncan Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 2 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Because they're sinning. Not sure how this is still being debated. ANY sexual activity not between husband and wife is a sin. Period. When did this become debatable in our religion? Outside it's always been a free for all. But the members of the Church of Jesus Christ should have better morals. This where some members go off into the deep end, they see all behaviour as sexual or have the potential for it-we see it posted pn here. Others like me don't see it that way. Do I think that, with the quotations I previously posted, that senior leaders saying they love the President of the Church as homosexual activity? No, that's way, way beyond crazy. Smac 1797 and others though see it as sexual. As I say they have taken a good thing and made it so beyond living or "doable" how they ever find love in a world I have no idea-everything is breaking the LofC. I cancelled the missionaries tonite for dinner because I might shake hands with the sisters and that would be an example as breaking the LoC. Now, I am not even going to attend church, physically on sunday because I might see a woman. Instead I am staying home and muting everything because looking at a woman is breaking the LoC. I have to go to the Dr. in two weeks, I will cancel because i'll be alone with her in a small room(with cameras) but that's inappropriate so to appease the twisted nonsense of some posters on here, having a checkup must be held in obeyance because keeping the LoC is paramount in importance. As long as I don't see a woman, hear one, contact one, physically touch one via a handshake then i'm good. I don't know how I should get married without having any literal thing to do with a woman. I don't know how these robot posters on here did it, maybe they wrote notes? never even saw who they are marrying until they go across the altar. 2 Link to comment
JLHPROF Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 18 minutes ago, Duncan said: This where some members go off into the deep end, they see all behaviour as sexual or have the potential for it-we see it posted pn here. Others like me don't see it that way. Do I think that, with the quotations I previously posted, that senior leaders saying they love the President of the Church as homosexual activity? No, that's way, way beyond crazy. Smac 1797 and others though see it as sexual. As I say they have taken a good thing and made it so beyond living or "doable" how they ever find love in a world I have no idea-everything is breaking the LofC. I cancelled the missionaries tonite for dinner because I might shake hands with the sisters and that would be an example as breaking the LoC. Now, I am not even going to attend church, physically on sunday because I might see a woman. Instead I am staying home and muting everything because looking at a woman is breaking the LoC. I have to go to the Dr. in two weeks, I will cancel because i'll be alone with her in a small room(with cameras) but that's inappropriate so to appease the twisted nonsense of some posters on here, having a checkup must be held in obeyance because keeping the LoC is paramount in importance. As long as I don't see a woman, hear one, contact one, physically touch one via a handshake then i'm good. I don't know how I should get married without having any literal thing to do with a woman. I don't know how these robot posters on here did it, maybe they wrote notes? never even saw who they are marrying until they go across the altar. I agree with you up to a point. Chastity refers to sexual activity. Christ's teachings extend this to learning to control our thoughts, hearts, and minds too. The concern of those who over extend the law is that we not allow or encourage people to be in a place where their thoughts and feelings become compromised. I don't think that's unreasonable. But we can't protect people from themselves. 2 Link to comment
JustAnAustralian Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, smac97 said: Drinking alcohol is a violation of the Word of Wisdom, but that doesn't require a membership council, either. Sure but the word of wisdom itself is specifically mentioned Quote Failure to Comply with Some Church Standards A membership council is not held for the actions listed below. However, note the exception in the last item. Inactivity in the Church Not fulfilling Church duties Not paying tithing Sins of omission Masturbation Not complying with the Word of Wisdom Using pornography, except for child pornography (as outlined in 38.6.6) or intensive or compulsive use of pornography that has caused significant harm to a member’s marriage or family (as outlined in 38.6.13). If porn and masturbation were explicitly part of the law of chastity (rather than other related behaviour) I doubt they would be in the "not needed" group, especially when other sex related things are quite clearly in the "may be necessary" bit Quote Adultery, fornication, and same-sex relations Cohabitation, civil unions and partnerships, and same-sex marriage Intensive or compulsive use of pornography that has caused significant harm to a member’s marriage or family 2 hours ago, smac97 said: I agree. But I've been having Matthew 5:28 in my mind. How do you account for that? To me it's the relations part that is important. Which links in with earlier comments here about what counts as adultery, and also that the membership not necessary for porn handbook bit has the exception for when it damages marriage and family relationships. Edited April 23, 2022 by JustAnAustralian 1 Link to comment
Popular Post JustAnAustralian Posted April 23, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted April 23, 2022 1 hour ago, JLHPROF said: I agree with you up to a point. Chastity refers to sexual activity. The handbook is now explicit about what the law of chastity is in relation to temple covenants (section 27.2) Quote Keep the law of chastity, which means that a member has sexual relations only with the person to whom he or she is legally and lawfully wedded according to God’s law. 5 Link to comment
Nemesis Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 Knock off the personal attacks. Link to comment
JLHPROF Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 17 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said: The handbook is now explicit about what the law of chastity is in relation to temple covenants (section 27.2) Keep the law of chastity, which means that a member has sexual relations only with the person to whom he or she is legally and lawfully wedded according to God’s law. So is civil marriage part of God's law? Link to comment
The Nehor Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 4 hours ago, teddyaware said: The permissive attitudes of many members of the Church toward serious sin brings to mind the following sobering prophecy. 24 Behold, vengeance cometh speedily upon the inhabitants of the earth, a day of wrath, a day of burning, a day of desolation, of weeping, of mourning, and of lamentation; and as a whirlwind it shall come upon all the face of the earth, saith the Lord. 25 And upon my house shall it begin, and from my house shall it go forth, saith the Lord; 26 First among those among you, saith the Lord, who have professed to know my name and have not known me, and have blasphemed against me in the midst of my house, saith the Lord. (Doctrine and Covenants 112) Finally! Some good news. In God’s mercy He will hopefully kill me amongst the first. Finally some relief. Link to comment
JustAnAustralian Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 20 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: So is civil marriage part of God's law? Well that gets into the thrust of the discussion. Is "God's law" the heterosexual part?, the sealing part?, if we go NT style is it the never married previously part? 2 Link to comment
Popular Post Peacefully Posted April 23, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted April 23, 2022 So the plan for our Heavenly Father’s gay children is no marriage, no children, no sex, no kissing, no hand holding, no living with a member of the same sex even platonically, really no human touch other than family unless they find it within themselves to have a mixed-orientation marriage? (Btw, I don’t believe that is His plan, but you get the gist) Tell me how their “home is a heaven on earth” when they aren’t even given the option to experience any of the above, and stay in good standing with the church. I can’t imagine what it does to a young kid who is just figuring out they are gay and to realize the church expects them to give up all of the above before their life has even started. I know some people make it in a mixed-orientation marriage and I respect that, but one size does not fit all. When my second husband died, I made up my mind that there were much worse things than being single, and if I didn’t find love again in this life, then I could wait until the next. But in the back of my mind I always knew if someone came along I could get married and enjoy all that has to offer, which eventually happened. There is a big difference between being a single heterosexual person in the church and a single gay person as far as what is allowed and even encouraged. Just because some straight people choose to be single, or can’t find the right person or have some other challenge that keeps them single, it does not equate with every gay person being told to either stay single or be in a mixed- orientation marriage. Can we just stop making those comparisons and support them in the difficult choices they must make? It can’t be easy, and I don’t think any of us who are straight should judge because we haven’t walked a mile in their shoes. 7 Link to comment
Metis_LDS Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 4 hours ago, Peacefully said: So the plan for our Heavenly Father’s gay children is no marriage, no children, no sex, no kissing, no hand holding, no living with a member of the same sex even platonically, really no human touch other than family unless they find it within themselves to have a mixed-orientation marriage? I enjoyed your post Thank You. I have a daughter that is same sex attraction. Now I do not want to contend with anyone about this it is simply an idea. There is an important mystery. You know the doctrine where intelligence cannot be created but just is somewhere out there. Then God organizes this intelligence into a spirit form and we are ushered into the pre existence with God. After learning of this process I made a joke in Sunday School and got nervous laughter. I said well now because part of me cannot be created. I will have to stop blaming God for all my issues. It could also be reversed. I will have to stop praising God for all my good attributes. What I want to state is that we do not know how much God knows or does not know about this process of organising spirits from intelligences occurs. It is like earthly parents not knowing what their conceived child will be like. There will always be anger directed towards the Church. I worry when people are angry with God without enough knowledge. 1 Link to comment
Peacefully Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 3 hours ago, Metis_LDS said: I enjoyed your post Thank You. I have a daughter that is same sex attraction. Now I do not want to contend with anyone about this it is simply an idea. There is an important mystery. You know the doctrine where intelligence cannot be created but just is somewhere out there. Then God organizes this intelligence into a spirit form and we are ushered into the pre existence with God. After learning of this process I made a joke in Sunday School and got nervous laughter. I said well now because part of me cannot be created. I will have to stop blaming God for all my issues. It could also be reversed. I will have to stop praising God for all my good attributes. What I want to state is that we do not know how much God knows or does not know about this process of organising spirits from intelligences occurs. It is like earthly parents not knowing what their conceived child will be like. There will always be anger directed towards the Church. I worry when people are angry with God without enough knowledge. Hello:) I am not angry with God. I believe God is good and God is fair. He loves all of his children. I believe we as mere mortals, seeing through a glass darkly, get it wrong sometimes. Peace to you and your daughter as you navigate this issue. 2 Link to comment
The Nehor Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 5 hours ago, Metis_LDS said: I enjoyed your post Thank You. I have a daughter that is same sex attraction. Now I do not want to contend with anyone about this it is simply an idea. There is an important mystery. You know the doctrine where intelligence cannot be created but just is somewhere out there. Then God organizes this intelligence into a spirit form and we are ushered into the pre existence with God. After learning of this process I made a joke in Sunday School and got nervous laughter. I said well now because part of me cannot be created. I will have to stop blaming God for all my issues. It could also be reversed. I will have to stop praising God for all my good attributes. What I want to state is that we do not know how much God knows or does not know about this process of organising spirits from intelligences occurs. It is like earthly parents not knowing what their conceived child will be like. There will always be anger directed towards the Church. I worry when people are angry with God without enough knowledge. Humanity: “God don’t make no junk” God creating child: “Oh boy, I hope this one doesn’t turn out to be another dud.” 1 Link to comment
rongo Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 Serious question I wonder about: what did Elder Bednar mean when he said that there are no homosexual Church members? Did he ever clarify or explain? 1 Link to comment
CV75 Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 14 hours ago, smac97 said: I agree. This is why I find the effort in this thread - to rationalize and justify incremental incursions into "homosexual behavior" (or its penumbras) - to be obnoxious and very wrong. We should not be looking at behaviors prohibited by God and thinking "Hmm. Just how close can I get to that and get away with it? What sort of technicalities can I point to? What sorts of equivocations and rationalizations can I use?" Thanks, -Smac I’m sure this is an internal conversation for some – I can’t think of anyone but the Lord who hasn’t had it on some ill-advised proclivity -- and in good faith the Lord will lead and correct them. External goading and pressured advocacy for youth on this point cross the line for me. Expressions of male friendship differ from place to place, but the Lord’s moral code does not. Boys know when their feelings change from brotherly affection to romantic signaling/stimulation. The gospel covenants offer a unique framework for acting with the marriage covenant in mind, no matter how unrealistic it may seem for them. 3 Link to comment
CV75 Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 5 minutes ago, rongo said: Serious question I wonder about: what did Elder Bednar mean when he said that there are no homosexual Church members? Did he ever clarify or explain? In the talk, he spoke of identity, that we are children of God first and foremost, and this is the basis upon which we become members, keep our membership/covenants and receive His blessings. 2 Link to comment
CV75 Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 11 hours ago, Peacefully said: So the plan for our Heavenly Father’s gay children is no marriage, no children, no sex, no kissing, no hand holding, no living with a member of the same sex even platonically, really no human touch other than family unless they find it within themselves to have a mixed-orientation marriage? (Btw, I don’t believe that is His plan, but you get the gist) Tell me how their “home is a heaven on earth” when they aren’t even given the option to experience any of the above, and stay in good standing with the church. I can’t imagine what it does to a young kid who is just figuring out they are gay and to realize the church expects them to give up all of the above before their life has even started. I know some people make it in a mixed-orientation marriage and I respect that, but one size does not fit all. When my second husband died, I made up my mind that there were much worse things than being single, and if I didn’t find love again in this life, then I could wait until the next. But in the back of my mind I always knew if someone came along I could get married and enjoy all that has to offer, which eventually happened. There is a big difference between being a single heterosexual person in the church and a single gay person as far as what is allowed and even encouraged. Just because some straight people choose to be single, or can’t find the right person or have some other challenge that keeps them single, it does not equate with every gay person being told to either stay single or be in a mixed- orientation marriage. Can we just stop making those comparisons and support them in the difficult choices they must make? It can’t be easy, and I don’t think any of us who are straight should judge because we haven’t walked a mile in their shoes. Thank heavens there is no comparison in the light of Christ inviting everyone into one set of covenants for all God's children. The Gift of the Holy Ghost does amazing things for people in their various troubles. Link to comment
rongo Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 6 minutes ago, CV75 said: In the talk, he spoke of identity, that we are children of God first and foremost, and this is the basis upon which we become members, keep our membership/covenants and receive His blessings. If I understand your explanation, he meant that we should identify ourselves as sons and daughters of God, not as x, y, or z as the world focuses on. Do I have that right? Link to comment
Popular Post The Nehor Posted April 23, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted April 23, 2022 14 hours ago, smac97 said: I agree. This is why I find the effort in this thread - to rationalize and justify incremental incursions into "homosexual behavior" (or its penumbras) - to be obnoxious and very wrong. We should not be looking at behaviors prohibited by God and thinking "Hmm. Just how close can I get to that and get away with it? What sort of technicalities can I point to? What sorts of equivocations and rationalizations can I use?" So any extra safeguards that can be put in place to protect against getting near breaking the actual rules are a good idea? And we should systematically generalize these for the protection of all and use social controls to ensure compliance with these safeguards. Seems reasonable. I wonder if anyone has ever tried a system like this before. Hey, I found this group called the Pharisees. Anyone ever heard of them? Turns out they added rules to prevent people from coming close to breaking the real rules. At least we aren’t going off half-cocked. Looks like this system has worked in the past. 7 Link to comment
Popular Post JLHPROF Posted April 23, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted April 23, 2022 32 minutes ago, The Nehor said: So any extra safeguards that can be put in place to protect against getting near breaking the actual rules are a good idea? And we should systematically generalize these for the protection of all and use social controls to ensure compliance with these safeguards. Seems reasonable. I wonder if anyone has ever tried a system like this before. Hey, I found this group called the Pharisees. Anyone ever heard of them? Turns out they added rules to prevent people from coming close to breaking the real rules. At least we aren’t going off half-cocked. Looks like this system has worked in the past. There was this other guy who wanted to guarantee nobody ever broke the rules and everyone made it to heaven. Oddly enough God had an issue with his methodology. Something to do with agency. I'm good with everyone exercising their personal agency. Just don't ask me to accept their bad choices as valid or give them venue to continue. 5 Link to comment
longview Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 (edited) 48 minutes ago, The Nehor said: So any extra safeguards that can be put in place to protect against getting near breaking the actual rules are a good idea? And we should systematically generalize these for the protection of all and use social controls to ensure compliance with these safeguards. Seems reasonable. I wonder if anyone has ever tried a system like this before. Hey, I found this group called the Pharisees. Anyone ever heard of them? Turns out they added rules to prevent people from coming close to breaking the real rules. At least we aren’t going off half-cocked. Looks like this system has worked in the past. This has already been covered earlier by someone (I forget who) that quoted scripture where God should NOT have to command in all things. Not only should we search the scriptures and try to understand the "relatively few letters of the Law" but also be seeking to "KEEP the spirit of the Law". If the Pharisees had tried to have the spirit, they would not have come up with weird rationalizations in making compromises with the Law. Such as declaring their property as "Corban" and free themselves from their obligation to supporting their aged parents. See Mark 7:11. But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. 12. And ye suffer him no more to do ought for his father or his mother; 13. Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye. It should be obvious that homosexuals and trans cannot have it both ways: [1] believe in and sustain the revelations contained in the Proclamation on the Family; [2] engage in flirtatious or romantic behaviors with same sex people; [3] trans modifying/mutilating/drugging their bodies. Edited April 23, 2022 by longview 2 Link to comment
Duncan Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 4 minutes ago, longview said: This has already been covered earlier by someone (I forget who) that quoted scripture where God should NOT have to command in all things. Not only should we search the scriptures and try to understand the "relatively few letters of the Law" but also be seeking to "KEEP the spirit of the Law". If the Pharisees had tried to have the spirit, they would not have come up with weird rationalizations in making compromises with the Law. Such as declaring their property as "Corban" and free themselves from their obligation to supporting their aged parents. See Mark 7:11. But ye say, If a man shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; he shall be free. It should be obvious that homosexuals and trans cannot have it both ways: [1] believe in and sustain the revelations contained in the Proclamation on the Family; [2] engage in flirtatious or romantic behaviors with same sex people. The Pof doesn't mention a word about homosexuals or trans people. As I said earlier are senior leaders of the church guilty of "flirtatious or romantic behaviors" when they publicly express their love for the President of the Church at the time. One man telling another man he loves him is homosexual behaviour is it not? They are "chipping" away standards in front of our eyes and before we know it something bad happens! -3 Link to comment
JLHPROF Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 13 minutes ago, Duncan said: The Pof doesn't mention a word about homosexuals or trans people. As I said earlier are senior leaders of the church guilty of "flirtatious or romantic behaviors" when they publicly express their love for the President of the Church at the time. One man telling another man he loves him is homosexual behaviour is it not? They are "chipping" away standards in front of our eyes and before we know it something bad happens! This reductio ad absurdum approach isn't doing you any favors. There is zero comparison between expressions of brotherly love and homosexual flirting. 2 Link to comment
longview Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Duncan said: The Pof doesn't mention a word about homosexuals or trans people. As I said earlier are senior leaders of the church guilty of "flirtatious or romantic behaviors" when they publicly express their love for the President of the Church at the time. One man telling another man he loves him is homosexual behaviour is it not? They are "chipping" away standards in front of our eyes and before we know it something bad happens! Apparently you are choosing to blur the distinctions between: [1] demonstrating brotherly love, gratitude, admiration (the respectful kind); [2] sexual stimulation, romantic dancing, dating (as opposed to just being friends). Yes, I would have to say that you are trying to "chip away" the standards using all kinds of rationalizations and get around "keeping the spirit of the Law". You are mistaken about the PoF. There are plenty said about Heavenly Father wanting EVERYBODY (that includes you) to reach the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom where a man and a woman must enter into mutally dependent COVENANT to do the work that God is doing and DESIRES us to do the SAME! Edited April 23, 2022 by longview 3 Link to comment
Duncan Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 14 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: This reductio ad absurdum approach isn't doing you any favors. There is zero comparison between expressions of brotherly love and homosexual flirting. tell that to Longview Link to comment
Duncan Posted April 23, 2022 Share Posted April 23, 2022 13 minutes ago, longview said: Apparently you are choosing to blur the distinctions between: [1] demonstrating brotherly love, gratitude, admiration (the respectful kind); [2] sexual stimulation, romantic dancing, dating (as opposed to just being friends). Yes, I would have to say that you are trying to "chip away" the standards using all kinds of rationalizations and get around "keeping the spirit of the Law". You are mistaken about the PoF. There are plenty said about Heavenly Father wanting EVERYBODY (that includes you) to reach the highest degree of the Celestial Kingdom where a man and a woman must enter into mutally dependent COVENANT to do the work that God is doing and DESIRES us to do the SAME! nope, you are blurring the lines and normal people are calling you out on it. It's ridiculous how you and others manipulate the LoC into something it was never meant to be and I am SO glad I wasn't ever taught by you. As I said before if you get too close to the fire you burn but if you move too far away you freeze to death and I wonder how you like breakfast with the polar bears? Praise God above I am NOT going to church tomorrow because of you and Smac1797 because I might accidentally see a woman. I am so,so done with ilk like you people Link to comment
Recommended Posts