Seminarysnoozer

I don't see how those two reasons are not the same reason. If I say you can choose x or y but if you choose y, you cannot have access to x then by choosing y the person has also chosen to not have access to x and taken out of those circumstances that allow him access. Metaphorically, it would be like an 18 year old wanting to start to live on their own. If he says to his parents I want to be responsible on my own without you doing everything for me, even though I might want to get some advice from you every once in a while, then fine. The parent might say, thats your choice but then I am taking back the credit card, the key to the house and you are out on your own. You can't have both, responsibility and be taken care of completely. It is one or the other. In order to face life and death situations than the person can't be without the concequence of death. That only makes sense. Because they chose the tree of death (knowledge of good and evil) then they can't also have the tree of life. "Dad, I want to learn the responsibility of buying a house. But, could you pay for it?" "Well, what do you want? Do you want to learn responsibility and the concequences of being a free agent or do you want me to pay for it and I keep the responsibility?" It has to be one or the other. Not letting them have access to the tree of life is part of the deal they agree to by eating the fruit of the tree of death. In my mind, it should really be called, "the Tree of Death, with a potential for knowledge of good and evil".

Is this kind of love you are talking about (different than the love of Christ, or love our neighbor, etc.) still there for those in the Terrestrial and Telestial kingdoms? Will there be "attractions" there? I think part of the reason to discuss this is to "flesh out" (sorry bad joke) where attractions to a certain type of person or a single individual for that matter comes from. It doesn't seem to come from innate spiritual traits, although maybe and not yet developed in the pre-earthly life. ... and therefore, "attractions" does not really define who we truly are, our spirit self.

I realize our words are limited in this context but why would we "feel" an attraction towards the opposite gender and not more of a need to be around the opposite gender maybe, as Jayanna puts it a "oneness"?

You and I think a lot alike. Thanks.

If one is forgiven than there is no punishment sought. We've talked about this in other threads, I realize there are reasons to put people in jail etc. to protect society and maybe keep the person from committing more sin. With true forgiveness though there is no thought for "punishment" for the sake of justice. That's God's job.

I guess the question is, are any of those factors at play before we receive a body?

Even though the state of the Earth is in a Telestial state, I think the gift of procreation is an additional gift beyond the "state" we are in that God gives via our bodies. If that continues in the next life as such then one would have to say there is a drive for sex but no procreation in the Telestial kingdom. I don't see that happening. That is why I wonder if "sexual drives" and attractions, even in the state we are in now, come from the body.

Yes, but they are different bodies, one of Celestial glory as the sun, etc. Only one body type has the power to procreate.

Is "sexual attraction" an innate characteristic of the spirit or body or both? (not gender) We know that gender and sexual attraction are two different things. In the pre-earthly life we had gender. I don’t think there is anything specifically written or previously discussed by the Church authorities that says we had sexual attractions in the pre-earthly life, that would seem strange to me. Please let me know if I am wrong. We are told that our bodies are a gift in this life and allow us to participate in reproduction. It being a gift, meaning we did not have it before. And I think most would agree that procreation in the next life is given only to those with Celestial glorified bodies. From that, I am wondering how many would go as far as saying that ‘sexual attraction’ (of any kind) is not an innate characteristic of our spirits. It is not a spiritual, personality or spiritually ‘natural’ drive. I would think that if it was, all those that end up in the Terrestrial and Telestial Kingdoms would suffer forever. I am pondering the idea that spirits can have gender without sexual attractions, and that sexual attractions require a physical body. This is not to say that while we were in the pre-earthly existence we saw God and wanted to be like Him in every way and therefore could have desires to someday have sexual attractions and have what He has. But, I don’t think that necessarily means that ‘sexual attraction’ is an innate characteristic of the spirit being, even though gender is. This may be hard to comprehend because I think in this existence we equate gender with sexual attraction. I think it is possible though to have ‘gender’ characteristics, whatever they are, without sexual attractions in the spirit form without a body. I also think that the physical body of those that will not have procreation power in the next life may still have gender but likely will not have sexual attractions. I am curious if that fits with what you understand. Thanks.

When you meet the Great King David in the next life are you going to hold it against him? I don't think so. We have to be willing to forgive as much as Jesus forgives otherwise we won't receive the same treatment. As far as repenting later in life, don't you know the story of the prodigal son? or the lost sheep or the lost coin? Being on the same ground or different ground depends on a lot of variables that we have no ability to judge. Maybe for that person repenting is better than sinning and never repenting, as opposed to never sinning at all. Be careful, never sinning is the plan Lucifer presented.

I think "debates" I've had on this forum have opened my mind to new thoughts and ideas or resulted in reinforcing why I believe a certain way. I don't think any of those "debates" have resulted in tearing down my testimony at all and hopefully I haven't hurt anybody's testimony. I am by no means qualified to talk about any of these subjects any more than a person who simply goes to Sunday School, reads the scriptures and prays a lot. I believe most of my "debates" have been with people who do just that. ... As my name suggests, I slept through seminary. (haha)

I don't know if someone already said this (sorry skimmed over the post thus far) ... there are many over the age of 8 that have not sinned. There are many diseases that allow a person to live beyond the age of 8 and not be held accountable for their actions. As far as comparing sin + full repentance versus never sinned, I don't think we will be able to tell the difference 100,000 years from now. If we truly believe our sins can be fully paid for and they can be "as white as snow", then there is no mark or lingering negative effect. If anything there is a refiners fire effect of growth. Like Paul not wanting to get rid of the thorn in the flesh, the process of repentance and humility can catalyze growth. This is why I am surprised to read some people, in other threads, believe God could have never sinned before. To me that is an expression of how ineffective they think the Savior's atonement is in the end. Do we really believe in the Savior's atonement power or not? This is why faith comes before repentance.

Yikes! I'm glad I've never seen those pamphlets or heard those talks, my understanding of the gospel comes from study over the past 3 to 4 years even though I've been a member all my life. Thanks Soulsearcher.

I like how Elder Hafen of the quorum of the seventy puts it, better than I have been able to say it, talking about spiritual self versus physical self and our true identity; "You are not simply a child of God. You are a son or a daughter of God, with all the masculine or feminine connotations of those words," "That is your true, eternal identity," "I urge you to seek a testimony, even a personal vision, of that identity. I ask you to take every possible step, each day, to align your physical and emotional life with the spiritual reality of who you really are." "Sometimes that attraction may make you feel sinful, even though the attraction alone is not a sin if you do not act on it," he said. "Sometimes you may feel frustration or anger or simply a deep sadness about yourself. But as hard as same-gender attraction is ... it does not mean your nature is flawed. Whenever the adversary tries to convince you that you are hopelessly 'that way,' so that acting out your feelings is inevitable, he is lying." Jesus Christ's atonement offers two healing blessings to those challenged by same-gender attraction, Elder Hafen said: "First, Christ helps us draw on his strength to become more at one with God, even while overcoming the attraction. He helps us bear the burden of the affliction," he said. "As a second healing and compensating blessing," he later added, "the atonement enables the grace that assures this grand promise: No eternal blessing — including marriage and family life — will be withheld from those who suffer same-gender attraction, if they do 'all they can do' to remain faithful." I think that is what I was trying to say that when the adversary starts to tell a person that they are “hopelessly ‘that way’ … he is lying.” Unfortunately, I think some do turn "Born that way" into "hopelessly 'that way'" even though I now realize, thanks to soulsearcher, some do not interpret it that way, which is great.

I am not seeing what I am missing either. I think I am agreeing with you. I, frankly, don't know what the majority of members think, and I don't know if you could tell me that either. You could certainly tell me how people react to you. But, that isn't necessarily what most members think. I think most that have a true testimony of the gospel and live by the beatitudes of Christ would not do the things you are talking about. Do the majority of members live righteously? I don't know, maybe a topic for another thread. But, if that is what we are talking about, that is not a unique problem related to homosexuality. I am on the same page as you in wanting to change people's perception of this, if that is the case. I think, for me, I have always seen it that way, that this is a physical trait. None of my close friends or family, that I have had gospel discussions with would have a problem saying that homosexuality is made possible by physical traits. That it is part of their body's make up to drive them in that direction and it is something that cannot be erased in this life or "cured". I am not saying this to you, because I think you get this, but to all that read these posts who are not actively contributing to the posts; I think it is wrong to assume that just because it is a part of the physical traits doesn't make it right or desirable. There are genetic, physical traits that lead to all sorts of problems. If I am competitive I might want to play video games all day long. If I am anxious I might want to self medicate with alcohol. If my hormones are strong, I might be more prone to sexual drives than the average person. If I am obsessive I might be more prone to following the letter of the law than the spirit of the law, etc. etc. (Again, I am not saying this directly to you) I think it is good to let everyone know that homosexuality comes from the physical body make up. I am not against you in that message, and I don't think I am missing any associated problems with that idea such as the idea of "curing" the problem. I am just making sure the sentence isn't left with that alone, it should include the message that our goal in this life is to overcome carnal influences even though the influences may continue our whole life and that we are not carnal by nature. There is reason to believe that most people in the next life will not have any sexual drives (that we associate with physical attractions) whatsoever, unless they are part of that Celestial group. We are given this gift of sexual attraction in part as a way to participate and have a glimpse of God's endless nature (not everyone gets this in this life), to produce bodies for more spirits to come (not everyone gets this either and God knows that) but also as a test of our sense of responsibility over this marvelous feature of bodies. The majority of the time the test is in the form of abstinence, which we all face at some point in our lives.

This is my point, that either; 1.) You disagree with, which is fine please clarify, or 2.) You didn't get that out of what I have been saying, or 3.) Don't think the point is important or relevant. or 4.) .... I don't know, put in your reason. ... A person's body may be gay. ... the body. Your body is not who you really are. Judging the body to be "evil" and full of corruption is not a judgment against you or who the person really is. Unless, that person can't get through to their spirit that their body isn't really their spirit. It is just the testing situation we find ourselves in. Yes it is part of your situation. But I don't think members "have to" accept it as who you really are (your spirit), only accept it as part of the challenge you find yourself in for a very brief period of time, relatively speaking. Unless you can show to me that homosexuality is more than a carnal existence (and I already said I accept that as true) that it is an eternal principle or condition, I have every right as a member to think that that individual's spirit is not homosexual.

If this really is about how members treat those that struggle with homosexuality, please inform me how, when I look over the congregation 'every week' would I know who struggles with that and who doesn't? If the persecution is that strong, how are all the members of the church that discerning? I can tell you, I don't have that ability. I can't tell you what a person desires. I don't think many of us can. Some are given keys to assist in that regard, but the general members do not have that ability. If the general members of the church do not have that ability, how then are they purposely "punishing" you? How are they "beating you down" without even knowing who you are? If they say from the pulpit "follow the word of wisdom" are they purposely beating down all the members who are over weight? At least that, I can look around the congregation and pick those out a little easier. If members were that harsh, I think it would be a lot easier for them to pick on that problem than one that is not seen. If the law is strict and the guidelines are strict go ahead and murmur against that, but I really am not seeing how the "members" are causing the problem. I can understand what you are claiming, I just don't see it in my congregation and really wouldn't know how I could see it. What specifically would you have changed from the members that are already supposed to show love and understanding and not be judgmental in their approach? It is hard to fix a problem that I don't see. I know that is going to be a frustrating statement to you, I am sorry, even reading all your statements I don't see this as a fixable problem from the "members". Can we all do better, yes!, in every area.

I think the biggest misunderstanding is the notion that our physical bodies are not infallible without thought. I disagree with that. I agree with the statement "the natural man is an enemy to God". In other words, if all one does is just give in to 'natural' instincts, we can list several, those traits are in direct opposition to God. This life is a struggle against the natural man, our natural tendencies. All of us face that battle for our whole life. That is not a unique characteristic of sexual desires of one kind or another. The problem exists when a person does not see it as a problem, when they tell themselves, I will follow the carnal (the way I was born) master over the spiritual master. Is there a difference between committing sin and sins of omission? To not fight off the natural man is a sin. All of us to some degree do it, I do it. Nobody is perfect but lets not fool ourselves. To not fight off what some call "natural drives" that can even come from genetic make-up can be a sin. To not call it a sin, is not helping them or anyone with their burden. I disagree with that. To do nothing can be a sin. To fight, even if it is a losing battle could mean the way to pass the test. It is in the desires of the heart that we are judged not whether we are successful in taking away all the carnal influences from our lives. Like I said before, the test is not to see how we can get rid of the test. If people say that about homosexuality, I think they are ignorant about the test, and that is sad. And, to point fingers and call someone a sinner is a sin without having the authority to do so. I am certainly not condoning that from members of the church, that makes me cry if members are doing that. If I have pointed fingers, I apologize, my intention is to point at the idea, I just have a hard time doing nothing when people are saying that following natural desires is not a sin. That message is false. The natural man in all of our corrupted forms, whatever they may be is an enemy to God unless one overcomes that state of control with Christ driven gospel principles.

Why would one say, "because you were born human with the inclination to sin, you aren't temple worthy"? Whoever says this does not really have a testimony of the true gospel. Peace does not fully come until after this life. Then we have rest from this struggle.

Here, you are responding to my post to 'Sensibility' who said this; " We can't stop being gay. Almost without exception, we will be gay for the rest of our lives. And if that means we can never be sufficiently faithful, then what is the point of staying in the Church?" Yes, that is the message I am hearing and I am posting responses to that.

The reason I came back with those statements is your reluctance to see this issue similar to any genetic predisposition driven by carnal, physical wiring. You don't like the idea of comparing it to diabetes, alcoholism etc. Yes, there are several differences but I think it is more similar than you are wanting it to be. In those examples, there are genetic predispositions, it is not just behavior driven. ... and, they will always be there in that person's life. Why is that such a distant example for you?

Behaviors, though, can make the test impossible to pass. I tend to agree with the first part of this statement but I think it is spiritually irresponsible to give the message that is isn't spiritually marring by behaviors. We are all fallen beings by our physical state, this is true. Some are fallen in different ways. We know this as a truth of the gospel. Each is given a different test. Our test is not to figure out how to get rid of the test. The sooner one understands that this is a test, the sooner one will understand the importance of passing the test. Passing the test is not trying to find a way to beat the test or getting around it but by realizing there is only one name in which the test is passed, through Jesus Christ. Behaviors can make the test harder though. Why make it harder for yourself? If someone has a predisposition to alcoholism, it is a physical state, you would probably agree that it is not a good idea for that person to work at a bar. I truly do not understand how making homosexuality more of an accepted practice is somehow making the burden lighter and the test easier. Yes, we should all see it as a test that the person had no part in bringing it on themselves, they were born with the test. I agree that that is where there is prejudice amongst the members of the church even. Some don't see that. Even then, once it is understood, it is like taking the pack of cigarettes away from the smoker, that may seem cruel but with the right perspective, that is an act of love. Of course, we all need to work on the approach better than labeling and blaming and demanding an immediate change. For all I know, homosexuality is the toughest test there is, but even if it is, we shouldn't come close to preaching that it is okay to give into it and make it more accessible and accepted. I realize that might seem harsh. But if one wants to preach "give into it" then that person should be partially responsible for all those affected by that preaching who would have otherwise passed the test but then made the test insurmountable by their behaviors thinking it was acceptable behaviors. Behaviors can make the test impossible to pass. ............ How could one do a study on all the individuals who would have been "homosexual" and genetically have a predisposition for it, but never called themselves that because they never gave themselves the opportunity to participate in such behavior that would label them that way? You would probably say, there is no such thing, that all who have a predisposition to it are by definition homosexual. How could you know that, you wouldn't. Maybe one could say those are all those that have same sex attraction, but even then you wouldn't for certain find all those people unless they volunteered that information themselves. How could one find all the SSA who don't express that outwardly? That would be like asking, how could I do a study on all those that have a genetic predisposition for alcoholism, or would love to have a drink if they could but lived by their faith that said never to be around alcohol and therefore never touched the stuff and never became alcoholics. How would find those people, you couldn't. How could you find all the people that would have developed diabetes because it is in their genetic predisposition to get diabetes but didn't because they lived a very healthy lifestyle of diet and exercise their whole lives and never suffered from the outward problems from it. You couldn't find those people and label them that way. Likewise, until science finds the genetic marker for such (which I believe exists) we are not going to be able to find the factors that make it easier to battle against such influences other than the faith based guidelines which we have to avoid carnal influences of all kind. So, for now, the best we have is to follow those faith based guidelines. Please do not encourage people away from those guidelines, you or anyone who does that will have to answer why they encouraged people to give up before they tried. .... that is worse than being ignorantly prejudice.

I wish you could understand better!!!!! I never said cut it out. If anything, I have been agreeing with you that you can't cut it out. This is why I have been saying that is the wrong focus. It is not to cut it out, it is to control it, just like all carnal passions that pull away from spiritual influences. You keep saying that you have tried to cut it out and you can't, I believe you, I support that idea for most. It is to me, the way for me to understand it, is to liken it to things that we understand a little better. It is like someone who has diabetes, there is rarely a complete reversal of the problem, at best a person is left to try to control it the rest of their life. Here, I am trying to put it into terms that are understandable by most and you fire back with "I wish people could understand it better". ... this is the way to understand it better is to liken it to other carnal drives that pull away from spiritual influences. But, here is something for you to understand, a person with carnal drives that pulls away from spiritual influences is EVERYONE IN THIS WORLD!!!!!!! ... not just you, or anyone who suffers with homosexuality. You talk as if nobody could possibly understand that unless they have the same problem. That is false. Jesus understands it all without having to live it all. How do you know that suffering from type 2 diabetes is any less of a struggle than homosexuality. It may very well be more. I have had patients that have committed suicide with type 2 diabetes after his kidneys failed from the diabetes and he couldn't go on any longer with one more complication. "Nothing worked", just because nothing stopped the diabetes is not a reason to stop trying to control it. I would be irresponsible if I had one or many patients kill themselves over diabetes and then with every new diabetes case tell them, "forget about trying to control it, that is the way you were born and you can never stop it, don't even put up a fight." The focus should be controlling it, not stopping it, I agree with that.

That view is one of not wanting "support". If one has type 2 diabetes because of a genetic predisposition on top of decades of choosing sugar loaded foods, now they have a craving for sugar foods. If they are told to immediately stop (I know for personal reasons and as a nurse counseling people to do just that) they would say the same thing; "I can't" "I am a basket case". I have seen many of my patients even die because of their unwillingness to put an effort into avoiding their passions for sugary food. They suffer a great deal, financially, socially and physically. They do the best when they are not exposed to those options of sugary foods and they don't surround themselves with people who eat that way. Is it fair, no! I don't know why God gave them that challenge. I don't know why, half the time, why God gave me certain challenges in this life. To give into it though and say that this is what my brain is telling me to do so I will just give into it, is not the right direction. Are people in the church willing and able to support those that have type 2 diabetes? No. Why would I expect the church and any member to approach any other specific physical challenge any differently. It can be supported in general but with skill and expertise, I don't think that would be fair of any specific ailment or condition that anyone faces in this life. Are we to show love and support in general for anyone who is willing to take on the yoke of Christ, yes! Here is where you and I might differ in our beliefs ... I believe that sexual orientation from the body may not be in alignment with the sexual orientation of the spirit in this life. That sexual orientation could be a challenge and part of this life's test. And it may not really be "who 'you' are" or who any individual thinks they are. It may be that a person is "born that way" but not who they really are "spiritually" as is many physical attributes in this life. I wouldn't and couldn't judge that in any individual any more than I could judge any of their physical challenges. I am just saying that it is possible. Just like my spirit is not diabetic, or may not love chocolate or tobacco or like the aggressiveness of sporting events, etc. We are fallen creatures and have many short comings and carnal drives that are not in any way reflective of our spiritual drives. I believe that about most of our "personality" and "character" or "talents" in this life. I believe people think that their "tastes" and "drives" and "talents" in this life reflect their spirits personal taste and character, but I think that is wrong. So, this is why I think in general it is good to not allow any carnal or physical passion control you spiritually. We can't have two masters, we can choose a carnal master or a spiritual master. By saying "I was born this way" and don't want to fight that fight any more, then one is saying that they choose to follow the carnal master. ... whatever the passion is. I would imagine that most who give into that passion believe that their spirit is oriented that way. My honest feeling is that that is not true, it is just their body, their carnal state, not the spiritual state. I am sorry if that offends you or is not compassionate but I would say the same for someone who loves food or any other spiritually controling carnal passion.

Yes, we are wired towards many primitive drives. That was my point. We are wired for self protection which can elicit anger and violence. We are wired for hunger and thirst which can lead to selling of one's inheritance, that is how strong that influence can be. We are wired to sleep every night, even though the Lord wished the apostles would stay awake for a little longer in the Garden, these influences are strong and difficult to overcome. That was my point, that we can't "stop" it but we can control it and we are told to control it in many ways. If the argument is to "stop it", I agree, that is a lost argument. But that isn't what we are asked to do, we are asked to control our passions. ... to be the master of our passions. When a person says, "I was born this way" that is a step in the direction of saying, "I cannot control these drives". That is why I think it is dangerous to say that to self. The spirit can be stronger than the body but it is not easy. It was never intended to be a non-issue a non-challenge, it is a challenge, a life long challenge for some. Also, if the goal is to control it, the last thing a person should do is surround themselves with people, voices and ideas of giving into it and promoting it.