Gender Identification - NO HATE!

[a mustard seed]

Well haven't we all been preordained to certain offices in the church? Wouldn't male spirits be preordained for priesthood positions and female ones would not? 

I'm sincerely asking because it has been a long time since I have looked into this concept and my memory is a bit fuzzy. Like we were all called and given authorities for certain tasks that we could then take part in sown here, like local positions and church authority positions. If this is true would there be anything preventing them from handing out these preordained callings to everyone if we were all blank slate spirits?

[Mike]

1 hour ago, a mustard seed said:

Well haven't we all been preordained to certain offices in the church? Wouldn't male spirits be preordained for priesthood positions and female ones would not? 

I'm sincerely asking because it has been a long time since I have looked into this concept and my memory is a bit fuzzy. Like we were all called and given authorities for certain tasks that we could then take part in sown here, like local positions and church authority positions. If this is true would there be anything preventing them from handing out these preordained callings to everyone if we were all blank slate spirits?

I am not sure whether you are responding to my post. If you *are* writing in response then I take your meaning to be that the difference between a male and female spirit is that the male spirit is preordained for priesthood and the female spirit is not. Do I understand you accurately? If I do understand you accurately, then I have some problems I would like you to address. 

[a mustard seed]

2 hours ago, Mike said:

I am not sure whether you are responding to my post. If you *are* writing in response then I take your meaning to be that the difference between a male and female spirit is that the male spirit is preordained for priesthood and the female spirit is not. Do I understand you accurately? If I do understand you accurately, then I have some problems I would like you to address. 

Sort of. Yes, it was a possible answer to your post but I didn't quote you because I'm asking generally for answers and insight others might have. Like I said, I am sincerely asking because this is something I am fuzzy about, so maybe address those problems to someone who knows more.

The way I heard it last, we are called to every calling we will have here on earth in premortal life. The attaining of those positions is based upon our worthiness and willingness to serve when called to them. It is still our choice whether to step up but those callings are given to us in preparation of us earning them here.

Yeah, here it is: https://www.lds.org/ensign/1990/12/i-have-a-question?lang=eng

Edited February 15, 2017 by a mustard seed

[anatess2]

7 minutes ago, a mustard seed said:

Sort of. Yes, it was a possible answer to your post but I didn't quote you because I'm asking generally for answers and insight others might have. Like I said, I am sincerely asking because this is something I am fuzzy about, so maybe address those problems to someone who knows more.

The way I heard it last, we are called to every calling we will have here on earth in premortal life. The attaining of those positions is based upon our worthiness and willingness to serve when called to them. It is still our choice whether to step up but those callings are given to us in preparation of us earning them here.

Preordained... not sure about that.

Ordained in mortality - the rule is transgenders are not ordained to the Priesthood so there wouldn't be confusion.  Those that stick with their mortal gender may be ordained to the priesthood yes.  So, if you're asking how would this not be a mockery of the priesthood if the spiritual gender is female?  Well, there's a reason this spirit is born male in mortality and qualify for the priesthood.  There's also a reason females are given priesthood duties in the temple.  Very specific reasons.

Of course, all those who have died may be ordained to the Priesthood (right?).

Yes, our calling in life is tied to our genders.  This is what I mean by mortal challenges.  A lot of people have challenges in fulfilling their callings due to all kinds of ailments.  A person with cerebral palsy, for example, will have a very limited capacity to fulfill any mortal calling... we each have our own mortality to face.

Edited February 15, 2017 by anatess2

[Mike]

33 minutes ago, a mustard seed said:

Sort of. Yes, it was a possible answer to your post but I didn't quote you because I'm asking generally for answers and insight others might have. Like I said, I am sincerely asking because this is something I am fuzzy about, so maybe address those problems to someone who knows more.

The way I heard it last, we are called to every calling we will have here on earth in premortal life. The attaining of those positions is based upon our worthiness and willingness to serve when called to them. It is still our choice whether to step up but those callings are given to us in preparation of us earning them here.

Yeah, here it is: https://www.lds.org/ensign/1990/12/i-have-a-question?lang=eng

Yeah. Looks like we are talking about two different topics.

[Eydis]

On 1/23/2017 at 7:47 PM, lostinwater said:

I have a dear friend who recently told me he considers himself a female.  He dresses like a man, does not demand the use of girl bathrooms, does not march in parades, or demand that people accept him as a female.  In fact, he avoids telling others generally, as he knows it causes them pain.

He just believes that in his spirit, he is female.  He doesn't think that God made a mistake - just that for some reason, God decided he could learn something - or help someone - in this life, with a male body in a way that he wouldn't or couldn't in a female body.  So he is waiting for the next life where he believes God will at last place his spirit in the correct body.  To him, it is a temporary learning experience.

I have to admit, I feel quite certain I wouldn't be the person I am today if he had been placed in a female body.

Regardless, this is all extremely confusing to me - and I feel intensely conflicted.  His humility is not consistent with the internal beliefs concerning transgender people that I am having to re-evaluate.  

I am wondering if you have any similar experiences or thoughts on this subject?  

That said, I request that anyone thinking mean or judgmental thoughts not post them here.  I view no response at all as being preferable to ones that are  devoid of compassion and filled with judgments about the character of my friend.

I have similar friends.

The problem is with the assumption that any one of us can really know what our spirits were like in the pre-mortal life.  Unless God has transfigured the body like what happened to Moses or taken out of the body to see the pre-mortal existence and to see the beginning and the end then I think it would be difficult to comment on the character of one's own spirit.

There is a veil that is placed over our eyes that does not allow us to see the nature of our spirits.

We know the human brain is corrupted, fallen and not yet perfected.  We know the human brain makes up information and conditions us to assume it is true and real. We know the human brain is conflicted.  There are parts of the brain that tell us, for example, that we might be hungry and therefore we should get some food.  But there are other parts of the brain that tell us what is socially acceptable and that we can't just steal our neighbors food just because we are hungry.  So, the brain is conflicted. One or the other part wins out.  This is just a simple example but there are many more complex examples of this process.

It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that the conflict of gender identity can be solely within the brain and does not have to be between spirit and body.  Over time when one tells their self it is between the spirit and body, it becomes and easy thing to accept and be okay with the conflict.  It is a way to deal with the conflict.  But just because they believe their spirit is one way or another does not make it true.  We are all in a fallen state in which is would be extremely overwhelming to understand the nature of our spirits.  Our fallen, corrupted, human body could not contain all that the spirit has developed in the pre-mortal life. It is not capable of it.   It is only upon resurrection that there will be a coming together of the two for everybody.  Right now, every one of us has a carnal body that conflicts with the spirit.  This is not a unique condition to those that struggle with gender identity.

When Christ allows us to finally come into Him and He will give us rest, it is the "rest" from having to struggle with corrupted and conflicting carnality that He is talking about. Everyone's test is different and hard to comprehend for someone not going through it.  But your friend should realize that everyone faces that same test.  I think a spiritually "healthier" way to deal with that conflict is to not assume it is between differences between spiritual self and physical self but solely from the state of confusion derived from the corrupted brain alone. All of us have corrupted brains through which Satan has his influence, according to Elder Bednar.

[Rob Osborn]

Gender idenity problems have arisen out of the breakdown in society in the areas of morals and family. 

[NeuroTypical]

@Rob Osborn, sorry, could you identify a date range in American history, prior to which, there were no gender identity problems at all?

[lostinwater]

Thank-you.  I am curious.  What do you think is the most valid?  Or if none apply, what do you feel would be a correct one to add?

Option 1 - The body is 100% of the time an accurate representation of the spirit and a person feeling conflicted is evidence of a fallen/corrupted mind.  
Option 2 - The body is not always an accurate representation of the spirit and a person feeling conflicted is correct and evidence of a fallen/corrupted body.
Option 3 - Option 1 applies to almost everyone.  Option 2 applies only when we can perceive a physical manifestation of the conflict.
Option 4 - Option 1 applies to most people, but in some instances, option 2 may apply, regardless of whether we perceive a physical manifestation of that conflict or not.

My understanding is that there are millions of medically documented instances of bodies whose gender is not clear - and so I have a hard time accepting option 1.

I think most people who've commented are either not aware of these medically documented cases and so choose option 1, or they are aware and go for option 3.

I personally believe in option 4 and am aware of nothing in scripture (I'm no longer active LDS, so keep this in mind) that disqualifies it.

Again, I am not advocating for a breakdown of gender roles.  Nor I think are the majority of the transgender community - which are the ones no one knows about, like my friend.  What I find bothersome is that people judge the entire community as sinful because some of the community act in a way that is not good for society.  Most of my friend's pain is not because he can't be a girl scout leader or use the women's bathroom - in fact, they wouldn't if even if they could.  

It's their knowledge that if they told people how they felt inside - and that it felt right - that they would be labeled either as willful sinners - or as having a mental disorder.  

[Guest]

lost, I admire the respectful and peaceful way you're approaching this discussion.

[Guest MormonGator]

2 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

lost, I admire the respectful and peaceful way you're approaching this discussion.

co-signed. Lost, I hope you stay around here and jump into conversations on other threads. 

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

Thank-you.  I am curious.  What do you think is the most valid?  Or if none apply, what do you feel would be a correct one to add?

Option 1 - The body is 100% of the time an accurate representation of the spirit and a person feeling conflicted is evidence of a fallen/corrupted mind.  
Option 2 - The body is not always an accurate representation of the spirit and a person feeling conflicted is correct and evidence of a fallen/corrupted body.
Option 3 - Option 1 applies to almost everyone.  Option 2 applies only when we can perceive a physical manifestation of the conflict.
Option 4 - Option 1 applies to most people, but in some instances, option 2 may apply, regardless of whether we perceive a physical manifestation of that conflict or not.

Well, I believe that you can't answer this question until you answer the one I've already asked several times that no one seems to have an answer for.  If you don't know what is actually meant by "spiritual gender" then you can't possibly answer the question you just posed above.

So, what is your take on "spiritual gender"?

[lostinwater]

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Well, I believe that you can't answer this question until you answer the one I've already asked several times that no one seems to have an answer for.  If you don't know what is actually meant by "spiritual gender" then you can't possibly answer the question you just posed above.

So, what is your take on "spiritual gender"?

Thank-you.  Well, if i were to be honest, i'd have to admit i am not sure.  I guess i think most of the things we say make up a female or a male are just outward expressions of whatever it actually is that does.  Or perhaps more accurately, gender is a way in which our essence expresses itself - in the same way that the musician's music or the artist's art are an expression of who they are.  And maybe that is why it is so personal and why i feel so deeply for my friend.  What more terrible or conflicting thing is there than to feel that you are unable to express who you feel yourself to be?  Perhaps that is why 60% of the transgender community attempts to take their own life at some point.

i wish i could give you a better answer - but i lack the wisdom to do so.

@Eowyn and @MormonGator - you say things far kinder than i deserve to hear.  But - those kind words are an expression of who you are! And i thank-you for being who you are!

 

[yjacket]

On 2/14/2017 at 11:19 AM, anatess2 said:

Hey hey hey... I got a mention! 

Okay, yjacket... I agree with you and I understand your stalwart staking of your ensign.  When I read your posts here the image that goes on my head is Captain Moroni, ensign on one hand, sword on the other.

That said, your statement that a person with mortal boy parts will always be - 100% and in all cases - a spiritual boy is something that I don't quite subscribe to.  I don't necessarily disagree with it because it could possibly be that it is the truth. 

Of course anatess.  Thank you.

To you last sentence. I quite frankly really don't get it.  As I've said time and time again, there is absolutely nothing in scriptures or in words of the prophets that indicate this and in fact it is the opposite.  What is so mind-boggling to me is that members of the church believe this new-age insidious doctrine. Do people honestly not read the words of the prophets and apostles?  No they'd rather turn on the TV, watch Will and Grace and then say, yeah that's cool-no it's not.  

When he was an Apostle Kimball wrote the following:

As we read the scriptures quoted or referred to above, we observe that they list virtually all the modern 
transgressions, though sometimes under ancient names. Let us review the lengthy list: 
Murder, adultery, theft, cursing, unholiness in masters, disobedience in servants, unfaithfulness, 
improvidence, hatred of God, disobedience to husbands, lack of natural affection, high-mindedness, 
flattery, lustfulness, infidelity, indiscretion, backbiting, whispering, lack of truth, striking, brawling, 
quarrelsomeness, unthankfulness, inhospitality, deceitfulness, irreverence, boasting, arrogance, pride, 
double-tongued talk, profanity, slander, corruptness, thievery, embezzlement, despoiling, covenant- 
breaking, incontinence, filthiness, ignobleness, filthy communications, impurity, foolishness, 
slothfulness, impatience, lack of understanding, unmercifulness, idolatry, blasphemy, denial of the Holy 
Ghost, Sabbath breaking, envy, jealousy, malice, maligning, vengefulness, implacability, bitterness, 
clamor, spite, defiling, reviling, evil speaking, provoking, greediness for filthy lucre, disobedience to 
parents, anger, hate, covetousness, bearing false witness, inventing evil things, fleshliness, heresy, 
presumptuousness, abomination, insatiable appetite, instability, ignorance, self-will, speaking evil of 
dignitaries, becoming a stumbling block; and in our modern language, masturbation, petting, fornication, 
adultery, homosexuality; and every sex perversion, every hidden and secret sin and all unholy and 
impure practices. 

These are transgressions the Lord has condemned through his servants. Let no one rationalize his sins 
on the excuse that a particular sin of his is not mentioned nor forbidden in scripture. 

How much more plain can it get?  

If it were true that we had mis-assignments of gender, do you not think the prophets would say so?  And in addition, let's just play this out here.  We know 100% for a fact that God does not do things by force, i.e. each Spirit that comes down to this earth comes here by choice.  If that is the case, isn't it just as plausible (since we are venturing into the realm of speculation) that the so-called female spirit actually choose to be in a male body?  We have no idea at what point the spirit enters the infants body-but we should all be able to agree that a the spirit enters after the body is determined to be male or female.  So isn't it just as likely that the individual choose to come to earth as a male?  That they accepted the roles and responsibilities of being male?  Shoot, since God does not take away our agency, isn't it just as likely that the individual knew prior to coming to this earth that they would be a male and accepted that responsibility?

Again, this is absolute insanity-we are speculating in a realm that doesn't need to be speculated in.  Has the world gone mad?  Do people truly not see with their spiritual eyes what is happening?  There is no way one can read the scriptures and words of the prophets and accept this philosophy.

The Church does not allow individuals who have physically acted out their transgender fantasies to go to the Temple? Yet we are indulging their philosophical fantasies? And we don't need to be a leader in the Church, a prophet, apostle, etc. to stand up to this.  We've been given true doctrine-it's plain as day. 

Yes people who are deviant certainly need help-but we do them no favors by catering to their wants and feeding their speculations. Obviously, people who believe in transgender, etc. can do what they want and live their life as they see fit, but we still need to understand what is right and what is wrong.  

We don't need to be a Church leader to say adultery is wrong, or most other sins, yet the popular culture has become one that if one stands up and says this philosophy of transgender is wrong, one is excoriated and labeled a "bigot"-and heaven forbid someone ever be called a "bigot".

[Guest]

6 hours ago, lostinwater said:

Thank-you.  Well, if i were to be honest, i'd have to admit i am not sure.  I guess i think most of the things we say make up a female or a male are just outward expressions of whatever it actually is that does.  Or perhaps more accurately, gender is a way in which our essence expresses itself - in the same way that the musician's music or the artist's art are an expression of who they are.  And maybe that is why it is so personal and why i feel so deeply for my friend.  What more terrible or conflicting thing is there than to feel that you are unable to express who you feel yourself to be?  Perhaps that is why 60% of the transgender community attempts to take their own life at some point.

i wish i could give you a better answer - but i lack the wisdom to do so.

It appears that we're all in the same boat.  No one really has an answer to that question.  And without it, any discussion of male/female spirits is pointless.  Not that there is no distinction, but the discussion of it is impossible because we have no defining terms.  And without defining terms how can we possibly begin to have definite opinions on what it means to "be a female spirit in a man's body"?  

[CV75]

On 2/15/2017 at 9:59 AM, a mustard seed said:

Well haven't we all been preordained to certain offices in the church? Wouldn't male spirits be preordained for priesthood positions and female ones would not? 

I'm sincerely asking because it has been a long time since I have looked into this concept and my memory is a bit fuzzy. Like we were all called and given authorities for certain tasks that we could then take part in sown here, like local positions and church authority positions. If this is true would there be anything preventing them from handing out these preordained callings to everyone if we were all blank slate spirits?

It is Alma 13. The holy calling and ordination refers to priesthood ordination ("order of his Son"), but the ordinances of the holy order would include the bigger priesthood picture (eternal families), and all are foreordained for that.

[CV75]

On 2/15/2017 at 8:45 AM, Mike said:

I'm thinking about gender being an essential characteristic of premortal and eternal identity; and I'm thinking about male or female spirits. Aside from the traditional roles in so many mortal cultures, the ways males and females are traditionally supposed to behave, (and of course the mortal gender biological and physiological contrasts common to so many other organisms on the planet) I'm having difficulty picturing what it means to be a male or a female spirit. I'm having even more difficulty picturing what it means to be a male or female "intelligence". (If what I'm wondering about has already been asked and answered I overlooked it.)

I think the meaning of spirit gender is found in the exercise of the will in observing, doing and experiencing. I think that that male and female spirits or intelligences, while doing most of the same things in common, also do a few things unique to their gender. Alma 13 focuses on the males. But the spirit daughters likewise learn to aspire to become like the Mother, as the spirit sons aspire to become like the Father. In doing that, I imagine there is both instruction and practical application involved  (i.e. perhaps different roles in the creation, for example). The spirit's will should be aligned with the Father's of course, otherwise we have a war in heaven! Or at least as lack of progress.

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, yjacket said:

Of course anatess.  Thank you.

To you last sentence. I quite frankly really don't get it.  As I've said time and time again, there is absolutely nothing in scriptures or in words of the prophets that indicate this and in fact it is the opposite.  What is so mind-boggling to me is that members of the church believe this new-age insidious doctrine. Do people honestly not read the words of the prophets and apostles?  No they'd rather turn on the TV, watch Will and Grace and then say, yeah that's cool-no it's not.  

When he was an Apostle Kimball wrote the following:

As we read the scriptures quoted or referred to above, we observe that they list virtually all the modern 
transgressions, though sometimes under ancient names. Let us review the lengthy list: 
Murder, adultery, theft, cursing, unholiness in masters, disobedience in servants, unfaithfulness, 
improvidence, hatred of God, disobedience to husbands, lack of natural affection, high-mindedness, 
flattery, lustfulness, infidelity, indiscretion, backbiting, whispering, lack of truth, striking, brawling, 
quarrelsomeness, unthankfulness, inhospitality, deceitfulness, irreverence, boasting, arrogance, pride, 
double-tongued talk, profanity, slander, corruptness, thievery, embezzlement, despoiling, covenant- 
breaking, incontinence, filthiness, ignobleness, filthy communications, impurity, foolishness, 
slothfulness, impatience, lack of understanding, unmercifulness, idolatry, blasphemy, denial of the Holy 
Ghost, Sabbath breaking, envy, jealousy, malice, maligning, vengefulness, implacability, bitterness, 
clamor, spite, defiling, reviling, evil speaking, provoking, greediness for filthy lucre, disobedience to 
parents, anger, hate, covetousness, bearing false witness, inventing evil things, fleshliness, heresy, 
presumptuousness, abomination, insatiable appetite, instability, ignorance, self-will, speaking evil of 
dignitaries, becoming a stumbling block; and in our modern language, masturbation, petting, fornication, 
adultery, homosexuality; and every sex perversion, every hidden and secret sin and all unholy and 
impure practices. 

These are transgressions the Lord has condemned through his servants. Let no one rationalize his sins 
on the excuse that a particular sin of his is not mentioned nor forbidden in scripture. 

How much more plain can it get?

Where in any of the things I said in my post does it say that homosexuality is not a sin?

[NeuroTypical]

2 hours ago, yjacket said:

If it were true that we had mis-assignments of gender, do you not think the prophets would say so?  

 

Absolutely, without a shadow of a doubt, do I believe with total certainty that our prophets are not given perfect knowledge of all things just because they're prophets.  It is totally obvious that God does not tell people everything.  Christ Himself lived much of His life without a fullness of knowledge.  Plus, our prophets themselves are on record speaking quite plainly about how they must still walk in faith, not having all things revealed to them.  

"A prophet didn't talk about it, therefore it doesn't exist" - that's a really, really problematic thing to think about our church leadership.  By that measure, spousal rape didn't exist before the late 1970's.  That line of thinking is what kept child sex abusers holding the priesthood and callings with stewardship over children until the '90's.  

"If it were true that [X], do you not think the prophets would say so?"  I denounce this notion.  It's false, a lie from the pit of hell itself.  People believing the notion have advanced great evil in the world.  It's the basis for rejection of scientific advancement.  It's a reason people have given for not getting their children medical care, or believing them when they say they were abused by their sunday school teacher. 

It's pretty dang obvious that God leaves his children to figure out some things for themselves.  

Anyway, yjacket asked an honest question, I figured I'd start my day with a vigorous answer.

Edited February 17, 2017 by NeuroTypical

[estradling75]

2 hours ago, Carborendum said:

It appears that we're all in the same boat.  No one really has an answer to that question.  And without it, any discussion of male/female spirits is pointless.  Not that there is no distinction, but the discussion of it is impossible because we have no defining terms.  And without defining terms how can we possibly begin to have definite opinions on what it means to "be a female spirit in a man's body"?  

We might not be sure what it means on the spiritual side... but we can understand the physical well enough.  Our physical sexual characteristics are defined by a flood of sex hormones as embryos (and pushed farther along in puberty).  If our mix of sex hormones is primarily male we get boy parts physically.  If our mix if sex hormones is primarily female we get girl parts. This also effect brain formation (desires etc).  All this is as God designed it, including being part of the natural man and subject to flaws because of the fall.

While most of the time this works correctly, but because of the fall we can expect there to be error and mistakes in the physical mortal process. When the sex hormones are out of balance then we get thing like inter sexed and hermaphrodites.. Because there is no clear winner in the hormone war.  However the idea that the hormones can be so far out of balance as to be reversed is hard to tell...  Because then you have what would have been a boy(if not for the fall) showing all signs that they are a girl (and vice versa)..

Such case would simply be a difference in degree from the inter sexed and hermaphrodites condition, not a wholly difference in kind. 

Now let talk choices.  We have agency we can choose.  But we don't know how much detail we were given in the preexistence.

If could be that we were told.

You are going get a physical body with all kinds of flaws and issues because of the fall, but if you remain true and faithful God will consecrate your suffering for your good.

That is more then enough for agency and choices to be made in all cases... but maybe we got more detail like.

You are going to be physically crippled and dependent on others your entire life because of the fall, but if you remain true and faithful God will consecrate your suffering for your good.

Or maybe

You are going to get cancer and die young because of the fall, but if you remain true and faithful God will consecrate your suffering for your good.

Or maybe

 You are going to get MS and slowly die in agony because of the fall, but if you remain true and faithful God will consecrate your suffering for your good. 

If we accept those as possible choices its not hard to see the following as well

You are going to have sexual identity issues because of the fall, but if you remain true and faithful God will consecrate your suffering for your good.

As being right inline with the other kinds of things we might have chosen.  Why would anyone choose any of that?  Because of their faith in the promises and purposes of God.

So lets create an example  We have a male spirit (whatever male means to a spirit).  He accepts the sexual identity issue either directly (or in general depending on how things went) because of his faith.  The sperm and egg that create his physical body combine and begin the creation process.  When the time comes the sex hormones are all messed up and his physical body gets girl parts.

Clearly this is going to be a huge challenge for him, the more he puts off the natural man and lives by the spirit the more he feels his body is out of place and wrong... Certain options like priesthood and marriage while in mortally are simply not an option unless he sins and cuts himself off of the Lord.  these are big challenges.  Eventually he will die and be resurrected and the resurrection will fix the mistakes caused by the fall.

None of this is contrary to any doctrine or teaching of the church (although there is plenty of speculation).  None of this is directly or inherently sinful.  It simply setup the trials that can lead to sin, or to following God to the best of ones ability.  

 

Edited February 17, 2017 by estradling75

[Traveler]

On ‎2‎/‎15‎/‎2017 at 7:59 AM, a mustard seed said:

Well haven't we all been preordained to certain offices in the church? Wouldn't male spirits be preordained for priesthood positions and female ones would not? 

I'm sincerely asking because it has been a long time since I have looked into this concept and my memory is a bit fuzzy. Like we were all called and given authorities for certain tasks that we could then take part in sown here, like local positions and church authority positions. If this is true would there be anything preventing them from handing out these preordained callings to everyone if we were all blank slate spirits?

 

I have come to some rather different ideas about this life than most (even LDS).  I believe we were all pre-called and pre-ordained to our positions, challenges, callings and opportunities we face in this life.  I believe that over billions of years we carefully prepared for and planned our mortal existence with the help and encouragement of our Father in Heaven (and many others).  If fact I believe that anything will or can happen during our mortality that was known of before we were born.   Not only do I believe that it was known of – I believe we carefully planned out all things that we would do.

It may be possible to change the course of things that were well planned but I have not conceived of a way this is possible without that specific course known by the Father to be what would happen.  And if he knew; my understanding and belief in the doctrine of agency is that G-d would warn us and because of our love and faith in him – we would believe his warning to be true.   

I believe we are working through our plan of our mortality that was approved by both G-d and ourselves.

 

The Traveler

[Eydis]

13 hours ago, lostinwater said:

Thank-you.  I am curious.  What do you think is the most valid?  Or if none apply, what do you feel would be a correct one to add?

Option 1 - The body is 100% of the time an accurate representation of the spirit and a person feeling conflicted is evidence of a fallen/corrupted mind.  
Option 2 - The body is not always an accurate representation of the spirit and a person feeling conflicted is correct and evidence of a fallen/corrupted body.
Option 3 - Option 1 applies to almost everyone.  Option 2 applies only when we can perceive a physical manifestation of the conflict.
Option 4 - Option 1 applies to most people, but in some instances, option 2 may apply, regardless of whether we perceive a physical manifestation of that conflict or not.

My understanding is that there are millions of medically documented instances of bodies whose gender is not clear - and so I have a hard time accepting option 1.

I think most people who've commented are either not aware of these medically documented cases and so choose option 1, or they are aware and go for option 3.

I personally believe in option 4 and am aware of nothing in scripture (I'm no longer active LDS, so keep this in mind) that disqualifies it.

Again, I am not advocating for a breakdown of gender roles.  Nor I think are the majority of the transgender community - which are the ones no one knows about, like my friend.  What I find bothersome is that people judge the entire community as sinful because some of the community act in a way that is not good for society.  Most of my friend's pain is not because he can't be a girl scout leader or use the women's bathroom - in fact, they wouldn't if even if they could.  

It's their knowledge that if they told people how they felt inside - and that it felt right - that they would be labeled either as willful sinners - or as having a mental disorder.  

Option 2 is most correct.

1.) If this body matched the spirit body, how would this test be any different from the first estate test?  We would just be repeating the same test but starting all over again.

2.) Every person has fallen, meaning there is no match from previous state.  How far do you think we fell?  A lot or a little? The distance we fell is equal to the saving grace Christ has offered us. If one does not think we fell very far from our previous state then one would also have to believe that the benefit of Christ' saving sacrifice is not very much either. I believe our Heavenly Father's sacrifice of his Son was a large one and therefore the quantity of our fall from our previous existence is large as well.

3.) Looking at your option # 3, what qualifies for a "physical manifestation of the conflict"?  How about the fact that we die?  Is that not a physical manifestation of the conflict? The carnal body is not eternal but the spirit is.  Or how about the fact that because we can no longer be in the presence of our Heavenly Father, whereas before we could, is that not a physical manifestation of the conflict?  In order for us to be in the presence of our Heavenly Father at this moment, there would have to be a transfiguration of the body.  This is discussed in several cases in the scriptures, even during the story of the First Vision.

4.) The body plus the spirit make up the soul of man.  This means the body adds to the experience of man.  There are certain things that the spirit alone could not experience and that the body is needed to be more like our Heavenly Father. We do not know all the things that the body adds that the spirit could not provide alone.  The body is not a shell or just a covering, it adds to the soul, the character of a person. If it adds to our character then it must provide characteristics that the spirit alone does not have.  David O. McKay and others including Elder Bednar have discussed the dual nature of our being.  They describe our dual nature as TWO distinct natures together. The body has its nature and the spirit has its nature.  This is what makes up the test that we face today.  Will we follow the nature of the spirit or will we yield to the enticings of the nature of the body. To we choose to be spiritually minded or do we choose to be carnally minded?  This is the second estate test. To know which nature is which requires faith and guidance from our Savior.  If the two natures were the same there would be no choice and that would defeat the purpose of this life.  All of us, after the age of 8, and save a few cases were this is not possible such as in Down's syndrome (for example), are in the test between TWO different natures within us. If they were the same there would be no agency or test.

Elder Bednar April 2013;

"As sons and daughters of God, we have inherited divine capacities from Him. But we presently live in a fallen world. The very elements out of which our bodies were created are by nature fallen and ever subject to the pull of sin, corruption, and death. Consequently, the Fall of Adam and its spiritual and temporal consequences affect us most directly through our physical bodies. And yet we are dual beings, for our spirit that is the eternal part of us is tabernacled in a physical body that is subject to the Fall. As Jesus emphasized to the Apostle Peter, “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41).

The precise nature of the test of mortality, then, can be summarized in the following question: Will I respond to the inclinations of the natural man, or will I yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit and put off the natural man and become a saint through the Atonement of Christ the Lord (see Mosiah 3:19)? That is the test. Every appetite, desire, propensity, and impulse of the natural man may be overcome by and through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. We are here on the earth to develop godlike qualities and to bridle all of the passions of the flesh."

[JohnsonJones]

Quote

As we read the scriptures quoted or referred to above, we observe that they list virtually all the modern
transgressions, though sometimes under ancient names. Let us review the lengthy list....

...incontinence,....
....becoming a stumbling block; and in our modern language, masturbation, petting, fornication,
adultery, homosexuality; and every sex perversion, every hidden and secret sin and all unholy and impure practices.

 

A little off the topic, but relavant to the post of SWK above...do you have the rest, or the scriptures he quoted.  At times when prophets say something, if it is not as the official Prophet, it may be their opinion or thoughts.  It does not make it bad guidance, and in fact may be very GOOD guidance, but on a few of those I had my eyebrows raised in questioning.

I ask for the following reason...

I was a little surprised to see incontinence listed.  Utilized in the lesser known and not as often used lack of self restraint...it MAY be.   However, in the common usage, there is no way I'd ever consider that a sin.  I'd want to see the scripture reference to that to determine what it exactly is referring to, as condemning little old men and little old woman for the failure of their bodies to operate correctly seems a tad harsh when they have no control over what old age does to them.  I'm almost positive as I know most of them would prefer NOT to suffer from incontinence if they had any control at all over it, so if it is listed as a sin on top of that...count me...puzzled?

The next part is much harder to discuss due to forum rules.  Due to this, I am not going to go into explicit detail in the WHY some of the verses in the Bible that are used to explain some things are actually misused, as I feel that is against the forum rules (and in some ways I think this could be right on the edge of that as well, though I am trying to stick to historical legacy and scriptural interpretations on this).  I am purposefully trying to stay in the forum rules, though that makes explaining it a tad more difficult. 

In the bible, it doesn't utilize our modern language, adultery and fornication are blatantly listed.  Homosexuality, despite many excuses that some try to make (stating it refers to male prostitution and other fallacies in their interpretation) is also pretty blatantly listed as a sin.  In fact, some would ascribe some of those same verses which talk about Homosexuality also referring to Transgender, though in that instance it is normally directly discussing transgendered ideas in regards to prostitution rather than those simply choosing transgendered ideas due to life choices and choosing to live their lives in that fashion.

However, masturbation and petting are not listed in the Bible, Book of Mormon or any other scripture either as these words or in other terms.  Petting is questionable in some ways, even if it is not listed blatantly, it could be included as inferred in some scriptures that refer to impurity and fornication.  Masturbation on the other hand has had two different areas of accusation, the first as it was lumped into sexual impurity or perversion as utilized as an explanation by the Catholic Church (which I believe Mormons are not part of) and though talked about in multiple texts in regards to celibacy among priests (again, which Mormons do not believe in) and that practice, is not something that is found in older documents or texts at all.  The second reference in in the 1830s (or thereabouts) where a craze occurred where a story from the Bible took a story completely out of context and created something that many in the medical profession called Onanism based off the Old Testament story.  However, by doing this, they misinterpreted what occurred (as in, the story where we get the term Onanism from includes FAR more than self gratification) and the story itself includes TWO individuals where the one is sinning when doing a specific act with another person involved (where as masturbation/Onanism as it became known is only ONE person involved which is actually a pretty key difference).  With that misinterpretation, it misses the entire point of the story and the reason for the person's punishment from the Lord.

Due to this, Bible scholars have pointed out the inaccuracy of this (even though the term stuck) idea since then and that this story  has NO relevance to masturbation that many try to attribute it to.  Bar this, there is NO reference that I know of that condemns masturbation in the scriptures.  This does not preclude the Catholic Church's interpretation and how it applied it to it's Celibacy ideas with Priests (and as I stated, last I checked the LDS church does not ascribe to that ages old idea from the Catholics) as well as the ensuing diseases resulting from it (which I believe a slang term even called it Priest Disease due to how common it was among Priests due to the policy that resulted in it).

We believe in all those as sins and transgressions BECAUSE of our modern prophets, not because they are listed in the scriptures.  We treat it as suggested in the Handbook of instructions as per obedience to our leaders rather than anything I know of directly from the scriptures in some cases.  This is inspired guidance.  I believe SWK was inspired and was an apostle and prophet.  These things in the quote ARE things you should not do as you should avoid sin, as we know by our leaders today, past and present. 

I am not questioning that.

However, that does not mean he was always exactly accurate on all things, which is why I'd want to see exactly what his scriptural reference was in regards to his statement above.  He is correct, obviously, and divinely guided in his instructions, but I don't see the scriptures he was referring to in the case of a few of the sins that were listed.

Edited February 17, 2017 by JohnsonJones
trying to make what I was saying more clear

[Guest]

"ALL HUMAN BEINGS—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose."

It's beyond me that anyone can read these words and still not get that gender is both important and has a divine purpose  both in heaven and on earth. It says it so plainly said that to see people dance around it like it can be interpreted differently is painful. 

[lostinwater]

9 hours ago, Eydis said:

Option 2 is most correct.

1.) If this body matched the spirit body, how would this test be any different from the first estate test?  We would just be repeating the same test but starting all over again.

2.) Every person has fallen, meaning there is no match from previous state.  How far do you think we fell?  A lot or a little? The distance we fell is equal to the saving grace Christ has offered us. If one does not think we fell very far from our previous state then one would also have to believe that the benefit of Christ' saving sacrifice is not very much either. I believe our Heavenly Father's sacrifice of his Son was a large one and therefore the quantity of our fall from our previous existence is large as well.

3.) Looking at your option # 3, what qualifies for a "physical manifestation of the conflict"?  How about the fact that we die?  Is that not a physical manifestation of the conflict? The carnal body is not eternal but the spirit is.  Or how about the fact that because we can no longer be in the presence of our Heavenly Father, whereas before we could, is that not a physical manifestation of the conflict?  In order for us to be in the presence of our Heavenly Father at this moment, there would have to be a transfiguration of the body.  This is discussed in several cases in the scriptures, even during the story of the First Vision.

4.) The body plus the spirit make up the soul of man.  This means the body adds to the experience of man.  There are certain things that the spirit alone could not experience and that the body is needed to be more like our Heavenly Father. We do not know all the things that the body adds that the spirit could not provide alone.  The body is not a shell or just a covering, it adds to the soul, the character of a person. If it adds to our character then it must provide characteristics that the spirit alone does not have.  David O. McKay and others including Elder Bednar have discussed the dual nature of our being.  They describe our dual nature as TWO distinct natures together. The body has its nature and the spirit has its nature.  This is what makes up the test that we face today.  Will we follow the nature of the spirit or will we yield to the enticings of the nature of the body. To we choose to be spiritually minded or do we choose to be carnally minded?  This is the second estate test. To know which nature is which requires faith and guidance from our Savior.  If the two natures were the same there would be no choice and that would defeat the purpose of this life.  All of us, after the age of 8, and save a few cases were this is not possible such as in Down's syndrome (for example), are in the test between TWO different natures within us. If they were the same there would be no agency or test.

Elder Bednar April 2013;

"As sons and daughters of God, we have inherited divine capacities from Him. But we presently live in a fallen world. The very elements out of which our bodies were created are by nature fallen and ever subject to the pull of sin, corruption, and death. Consequently, the Fall of Adam and its spiritual and temporal consequences affect us most directly through our physical bodies. And yet we are dual beings, for our spirit that is the eternal part of us is tabernacled in a physical body that is subject to the Fall. As Jesus emphasized to the Apostle Peter, “The spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Matthew 26:41).

The precise nature of the test of mortality, then, can be summarized in the following question: Will I respond to the inclinations of the natural man, or will I yield to the enticings of the Holy Spirit and put off the natural man and become a saint through the Atonement of Christ the Lord (see Mosiah 3:19)? That is the test. Every appetite, desire, propensity, and impulse of the natural man may be overcome by and through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. We are here on the earth to develop godlike qualities and to bridle all of the passions of the flesh."

@Eydis - Thank-you for you detailed response.  

I apologize if I was not clear.  When i talk about conflict, i am not referring to the conflict between our physical desires and our spiritual ones.  i am referring to the conflict one senses when there is a difference between who we feel ourselves to be, and how we are made manifest in this earthly realm.

When i say physical manifestation of the conflict, i mean that there are millions of bodies whose gender is not clear-cut.  

i guess i don't see how knowing that our body is not an accurate expression of who we are (and maintaining a hope that one day it will be) is equivalent to yielding to our carnal nature.  or am i misinterpreting?