BJ64
-
Posts
783 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by BJ64
-
-
-
49 minutes ago, Grunt said:
Who cares if it is a sin? We are to follow the Prophet, correct?
I have a follow-up question: Why do the bulk of your posts have to do with topics that suggest doing anything but striving to follow the Prophet and Church leaders?
Correct, we are to follow the prophet.
I never drink caffeinated soft drinks. However is drinking caffeine sinful behavior since several prophets have counseled against it?
I’m not suggesting that anyone not follow the prophet which is why in this example I’m suggesting that drinking caffeinated soft drinks is a sin because it is failure to follow the teachings of several prophets. Most recently President Hinckley.
-
1 hour ago, Fether said:
A better arguement is why does the temple cafeteria offer it
Do they? I’ve never paid attention.
-
1 hour ago, Fether said:
I think the biggest problem you are running into is comparing the words of the dead prophets to the words of the living prophets.
And even beyond that, you are taking apocryphal sources (non-Church owner sources like BYU, Deseret Book and Book Craft)
A standard I live by is that if I can’t find it on LDS.org then I don’t accept it as doctrine.
In my view if you can’t find it in the four standard works of scripture it isn’t doctrine or at least commandments must be found in the scriptures or added to the scriptures in order to be binding upon the church but I may be wrong.
-
1 hour ago, zil said:
I'm pretty sure it's not against Church teaching - rather, prophets have counseled against it.
Meanwhile, could someone who has ice cream in the freezer eat some for me? I have nothing dessert-like anywhere in the house, but would really like some dessert, so I need someone to be my proxy...
I don’t have ice cream but my wife made a layered pudding dessert so I’ll eat an extra serving for you.
-
18 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:
They have? Who?
Here is an article with several quotes.
http://www.ldsliving.com/What-the-Prophets-Have-Really-Said-About-Caffeine/s/86182
I don’t want to make this all about caffeine. I just wonder where the line is between commandments and prophetic admonitions. When is it okay to go against the prophets counsel?
Its no longer of concern since the church is leaving the Boy Scouts of America but in the past when I’ve said that I don’t support scouting because of their gay issues I would get a lecture from my father about how the prophet supports scouting therefore if you don’t support scouting then you are going against the prophet. I told him that we don’t believe in the infallibility of prophets but he didn’t agree with that either.
-
7 minutes ago, zil said:
If I still had that VCR > DVD recorder thing, I could rip a copy of my VHS that has President Hinckley on 60 Minutes saying that Mormons don't drink caffeinated soda. If you really need it, I could record that portion with my cell phone pointed at the TV. (Assuming the tape will still play - it was recorded when I was in Moscow and shipped to me - I think.)
Yes, I saw that interview when it first aired.
-
Is it a sin to go against the counsel of the prophet even if that which he counsels against is not a commandment?
For example caffeinated soft drinks are not against the word of wisdom but several prophets have counseled against their use.
Therefore are you sinning by drinking caffeinated soft drinks even if they aren’t against the word of wisdom since you are disobeying the prophet’s counsel?
-
5 hours ago, Fether said:
You have, they were just using euphemisms as you stated above.
It is so obvious that Packer spoke of it, Spencer W Kimball did, as did many others.
The issue I have with your question is that you are using what may or may not have been said against what IS being said today. Even if you don’t identify it as having been discussed in the past, the church does. One would have to separate themselves from the church to disagree
What I am looking for are the teachings of prophets throughout the ages not just those of the last few decades.
I’ll repeat that I’m not saying it’s not a sin I’m just saying that I think there are many who believe it to be a much more serious sin than it is and thus lay a lot more guilt on people than is deserved.
It’s perhaps less of a sin than pride, envy, jealousy, greed, anger, gossip, back biting, etc. and madturbation certainly causes less harm to others than many of these sins I list.
-
1 hour ago, zil said:
Have you never look up Packer's date of birth? He was old enough to be my grandfather (just barely) and I'm pretty sure I'm old enough to be your mother. Once upon a time, "civilized" people didn't use certain words, particularly in writing, and even more particularly in writing that might be seen by women (and perhaps children). Once upon a time, there was such a thing as "polite society" - but I'm pretty sure that's not only gone, but a foreign, confusing concept.
Do you know that the talk was given in general priesthood meeting October 1976. The talk was never printed in the Ensign likely for the very reason you state so it wouldn’t be seen by women and children. It was made int a pamphlet which was given to young men for many years.
Why, I wonder was an anti masturbation pamphlet never handed out to young women? It’s not like it’s just a guy thing.
-
55 minutes ago, Fether said:
But what I personally don’t get is this. Packer has an entire booklet focused on masturbation, the evils of it, how to not get trapped in it and so on. He does not once use the word masturbation but rather uses words like manipulation, self stimulating and other euphemisms. I first read it when I was 18 and on my mission. By this point I had overcome such sins and knewnof their evils. Even with my background it took me probably a dayb after reading it to finally be 100% sure about what it was he was talking about. I was so confused by the terminology, and afterwards I was pondering on “what the heck does x euphemism’ even mean!?!? I assumed it meant masturbation, but I couldn’t 100% say for sure. It would be SO easy to just say the word and I am still confused as to why he didn’t... not even once.
This is the sort of thing that I was referring to which can cause confusion for some.
However do you know that the printed copy has been unavailable for many years and the online PDF version was removed from lds.org within a very short time after his death? It was never printed in the Ensign and I just noticed recently that the video of the conference talk is not on the lds gospel library. To my knowledge this talk can only be found on lds.org.
-
15 minutes ago, Fether said:
here is a page of links to Church approved articles including the word ‘M’ in it.
I didn’t read them all, but here are some
“ masturbation is considered by many in the world to be the harmless expression of an instinctive sex drive. Teach your children that the prophets have condemned it as a sin throughout the ages and that they can choose not to do it...The sin of masturbation occurs when a person stimulates his or her own sex organs for the purpose of sexual arousal. It is a perversion of the body’s passions. When we pervert these passions and intentionally use them for selfish, immoral purposes, we become carnal.”
“it is far too common a tragedy for young people to cultivate a strong sexual appetite even before they begin to date. One cause of this serious problem can be the sin of masturbation.... Masturbation can be described as manipulating one’s own sexual organs to produce sexual excitement. Such practice “is not approved of the Lord nor of his church,” said President Kimball”
That’s enough for me.
Yes of course I’ve read that passage. It’s found in part in chapter 5 of A Parent’s Guide.
Here’s a question for you. I asked before and no one has answered.
Who were the prophets who throughout the ages have condemned masturbation? I can’t find them.
-
5 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:
Except that you know it exists, I know it exists, God knows it exists, and God knows you know it exists. So . . . good luck with that excuse at the last day.
Excuse for what? I don’t M, I’m merely stating that M is not as great a sin as many make it out to be. Compare the 413 references to pornography to the handful of direct references to M and a few vague references to it in general conference. It seems clear which is a greater concern.
5 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:You mean to tell me that over seven or eight years, you never once saw either of Benson's sermons to which I linked earlier?
As I said, I didn’t hyphenate self abuse when I searched. It’s also hard to do searches of vague euphemisms.
-
55 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:
Your posts here have had none of the spirit of sincere curiosity as to the Lord’s thoughts and warnings on the matter, but reek of a legalistic mentality of “what can I get away with, and how can I justify indulging in something the Church has clearly and unambiguously warned against?”
My sincere curiosity has led me over the past seven or eight years to study everything I can find on the subject as far as it has been presented both in and out of the church historically and modern. There’s not much that has been written on the matter that I haven’t read.
-
51 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:
But, to show the rank dishonesty of your claim that no other Church president has condemned masturbation (or used the term “self abuse” in a Conference setting, I give you . . .
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1983/10/what-manner-of-men-ought-we-to-be?lang=eng
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1986/10/godly-characteristics-of-the-master?lang=eng
When I did my search I did not hyphenate self abuse. Self-abuse has been said four times in general conference.
-
33 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:
First you say “a prophet must have said it”, so I offer several prophets who have said it (and in hindsight could actually offer two more), and in response you change the goalposts by prescribing which kind of prophet, the circumstances under which the statement was made, the precise vocabulary that must be used, and the means by which that statement must still be available for modern consumption.
You know very well that in the church when we refer to “the prophet” we are referring to the president and senior apostle. I didn’t change any goal post.
Mas far as being currently available, if it can’t be accessed it’s the same as no longer existing. I know that the Elder Packer address video is still available on lds.org but it has been removed from the lds gospel library.
-
3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:
Just a note, though some Mormons HAVE used this with a different definition that they associate with sexual items...self abuse in the Bible and traditionally is talking about something else and something FAR darker.
It is literally abuse of the body. It is the desecration of one's body typically, normally by cutting or other measures. Today it is associated in many instances with depression.
The ideas around it have changed over the years. In some times it was not just those that cut and intentionally broke bones and other things, but also those that actually modified their body (for example, those ear plugs that are popular these days in some eras would have fallen under this, tattoos have fallen under this in some societies, various piercings of the body, etc, and obviously self flagellation, but when we refer to that we mean people literally whipping themselves, at times with small pieces of metal in a whip or otherwise).
Self Flagellates and those who did these things were many times associated with idolatry and the worship of the Pagan Idols of the nations that surrounded Israel. They would cut themselves and desecrate their (and others) bodies. This was a direct practice associated directly with Pagan religions and idolatry. Self abuse (self injury and self multilation) were practiced regularly in these religions.
Obviously much of the ideas of what went with this changed in the Middle Ages and Rennaissance but normally one could tell if someone was self abusing if the individual was cutting themselves or abusing their own bodies.
It is interesting that we, as Mormons, who hold that our bodies are a temple, do not normally recognize the various things about self abuse. Self Harm has become much more popular in today's society.
Part of that is because of the later change to what the word meant, especially in the past hundred years, to where it can also be a euphemism for self-arousal...etc. Typically though, self harm or self inflicted wounds and injuries and self mutilation are something rather serious. Which leads to the other reason we may not see it as it was originally intended. Self Harm and Self inflicted injuries are now associated with Mental illness and the church has avoided this subject as bringing on sinful behavior. In addition, Self-Mutilation is more acceptable these days than it was, even a mere 40 years ago.
Thank you. I agree with your assessment of self abuse. However, self abuse is the euphemism currently used in the English language version of the general handbook of instructions when referring to masturbation. Other languages use the word masturbation.
Tadd R. Callister also used the term self abuse when speaking about masturbation in a talk given at BYU Idaho a few years ago. A version of this talk was also printed in the Ensign magazine with the same self abuse wording.
I don’t know why the church/ church leaders are so into using euphemisms to avoid saying masturbation. (Elder Packer”s “little factory” talk) Elder Scott and FTSOY carefully word their advice with terms like “avoid arousing sexual feelings in your own body”. If the church doesn’t want you to masturbate then why don’t they just say don’t masturbate instead of beating around the bush? (No pun intended)
I may be totally wrong here, and I probably am but I wonder if the reason is because masturbation has become completely socially acceptable and those who condemn it are viewed as old fashioned and foolish. So rather than risking looking old fashioned and foolish they use other words to get their point across.
This however to me just confuses things. When you can honestly say that there is no mention of masturbation in the handbook or FTSOY or any general conference talk in the past 38 years it makes it appear that it is no longer thought of as much to be concerned with. Combine that with a statement by Elder Kim B. Clark saying that “masturbation is a behavior that, if continued, could over time could lead to things that are sinful...” certainly can lead one to believe it’s not much of a sin anymore in the eyes of the church. Yet there are local leaders who still treat it as a sin next to murder.
Ibasked my current bishop why it is that there is so much inconsistency in how it it treated. His reply was that it’s not like bishops are trained on how to handle it so it’s up to each do decide what to do on an individual basis. If it was a great sin then it would seem that there would be a clearly written policy on how to address it rather than simply saying that self abuse is not a reason for disciplinary action.
-
Duplicate post
-
47 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:
What did Kimball say about lying?
Kimball was not the “only prophet” to speak out against masturbation. Elders Petersen, Packer, and McConkie all addressed the topic of masturbation; and church materials released under the imprimatur of the First Presidency over the past forty years have consistently warned against it.
My definition for prophet in this case is the senior apostle. The only man on earth authorized to receive revelation for the entire church.
Materials published by the church May have mentioned it but most have been quoting President Kimball or have no direct link to who said it. I challenge you to find a direct quote on the subject by any prophet (president) of the church in recorded history other than President Kimball. I also challenge you to find a direct quote from a current church source from Elders Peterson, Packer or McConkie.
I know that all print and digital versions of Elder Packers masturbation talk have been removed from church sources and I have never found Elder Peterson’s guide to overcoming masturbation from any official church source. I have never been aware of statements on masturbation by Elder McConkie from any official church source.
For those interested, the word masturbation has been said seven times in general conference in the entire church history. Self pollution zero times, self abuse zero times, pornography 413 times.
The seven times masturbation has been said were in two talks. One by President Kimball and the other by Elder Featherstone. Elder Packer’s talk was completely metaphorical and therefore never said the word. Elder Scott also had a way of addressing masturbation without ever actually mentioning it.
-
2 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:
The point I was trying to make is that you. do. not. care. what. Kimball. really. said.
If you had, perhaps you’d have also added the rest of his quotation:
Anyone fettered by this weakness should abandon the habit before he goes on a mission or receives the holy priesthood or goes in the temple for his blessings.
Sometimes masturbation is the introduction to the more serious sins of exhibitionism and the gross sin of homosexuality. We would avoid mentioning these unholy terms and these reprehensible practices were it not for the fact that we have a responsibility to the youth of Zion that they be not deceived by those who would call bad good, and black white.
”Bad”. “Unholy”. “Reprehensible”. Quite strategic omissions on your part, no?
And you’ve alleged in this thread that yet your stake president had no business asking you about it before you were ordained as a high priest, even though Kimball is quite clear that the practice—until abandoned— disqualifies one from advancement in the Melchizedek Priesthood.
I get not wanting people—especially youth—to become overly neurotic and debilitated by past behaviors, @BJ64; but the tenor of your rhetoric and mis-selection of quotes whose authors you obviously don’t consider to be truly authoritative, suggest that you are subtly trying to advance a much more libertine agenda here.
I could post the entire article here but it would consume a lot of space.
You will also remember that he said that those practicing oral sex should not enter the temple. Something that is not asked about, talked about nor do I think anyone even thinks about these days.
I believe he was just as much opposed to oral sex as he was masturbation. However instead of calling it a rather common indiscretion he called it an unholy and impure practice.
-
1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:
I’m sure you do believe that, BJ. I’m sure you do.
And since when do you care a fig about what Spencer Kimball ever said about matters of sexual propriety? Changed your mind about his First Presidency’s warning against oral copulation, have you?
My point is that the only prophet in recorded history to speak out against masturbation called it a rather common indiscretion. He was opposed to it but he called it an indiscretion.
in·dis·cre·tion
ˌindəˈskreSH(ə)n/noun-
behavior or speech that is indiscreet or displays a lack of good judgment."he knew himself all too prone to indiscretion"
synonyms: imprudence, injudiciousness, incaution, irresponsibility; carelessness, rashness, recklessness, impulsiveness, foolhardiness, foolishness, folly;tactlessness, thoughtlessness, insensitivity;humorousfoot-in-mouth disease"he was prone to indiscretion"blunder, lapse, gaffe, mistake, faux pas, error, slip, impropriety;misdemeanor, transgression, peccadillo, solecism, misdeed;informalslip-up"his past indiscretions"
-
-
53 minutes ago, Iggy said:
so is mine. @lostinwater have you read all of his posts? He is saying all of that, not others using him to their own ends.
Common indiscretion does NOT mean, oh well - since so MANY do it, it is okay. It means, It is a rather common (meaning many are doing it), indiscretion (meaning that in Pres. Kimball day, rather than say Masturbation/ Sexual stimulation - the polite term was indiscretion.
Just like the polite term in his day for a pregnant woman was: With Child.
Need to get the language usages correct.
🤔
The point I was trying to make is that he called it a rather common indrescretion not a horrendous sin. He didn’t say it was okay.
in·dis·cre·lion
ˌindəˈskreSH(ə)n/noun-
behavior or speech that is indiscreet or displays a lack of good judgment."he knew himself all too prone to indiscretion"
synonyms: imprudence, injudiciousness, incaution, irresponsibility; carelessness, rashness, recklessness, impulsiveness, foolhardiness, foolishness, folly;tactlessness, thoughtlessness, insensitivity;humorousfoot-in-mouth disease"he was prone to indiscretion"blunder, lapse, gaffe, mistake, faux pas, error, slip, impropriety;misdemeanor, transgression, peccadillo, solecism, misdeed;informalslip-up"his past indiscretions"
He did not say indiscretion to avoid the use of the word masturbation. Here is the complete sentence.
“Masturbation, a rather common indiscretion, is not approved of the Lord nor of his church, regardless of what may have been said by others whose “norms” are lower. Latter-day Saints are urged to avoid this practice.”
-
-
1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:
I think @FoolsMock is absolutely right that there are many *members* in the Church who treat masturbation far too lightly (and frankly, are generally more interested in defending some presupposed right to sexual pleasure than they are interested in knowing the Lord may have to say on the matter).
I believe there are too many members who blow the seriousness of masturbation way out of proportion to the actual seriousness of the matter. Even President Kimball, one of its most outspoken critics called it a “rather common indiscretion”.
-
11 minutes ago, lostinwater said:
TCOJCOLDS
I like that.
Is it a sin to go against the cousel of the Prophet?
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
No, because new revelations can always be added to the Doctrine and Covenants as was done with sections 137 & 138 and official declarations 1 & 2.