Mormon and gay. Where are we going?


Fether
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Why would physical sex be requisite in the eternities? 

How else do you expect to have a “continuation of the seeds” forever or sexual pleasure? We are created in the image of our father. Why would a resurrected and perfected being be without functional genitals? The scriptures say that not one hair of the head will be lost. 

How will you populate your own worlds without sexual relations with your spouse?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

How else do you expect to have a “continuation of the seeds” forever or sexual pleasure? We are created in the image of our father. Why would a resurrected and perfected being be without functional genitals? The scriptures say that not one hair of the head will be lost. 

How will you populate your own worlds without sexual relations with your spouse?

So how does this work in your mind? The procreation of spirit children is done with physical sex? So are the egg and sperm physical...or spiritual? And if spiritual...how does the physical makeup of the sex organs contain them and execute the sexual process in the same way as it does physically? How are they even created? Do the male testes create spirit sperm? Does the female have a monthly cycle? The eggs in a mortal female are finite? Are the spiritual ones infinite in an exalted being or does the body somehow create new ones?  Does a spirit zygote split and divide cells to become the spirit embryo, etc... And how long until the spirit comes to term? After 9 months, or whatever it is, does the spirit baby have to push through the physical birth canal in the same manner as the physical...or does it just float out of the mother?

And do you really believe that God -- a perfect, all-powerful, all-knowing, exalted being with a fullness of joy, and complete and perfect love -- desires or needs a physical chemical reaction in His brain to sustain loyalty or commitment, or to drive Him to do anything?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Why? 

From the teachings of Harold B. Lee

“Now let me read from the 132nd section of the Doctrine and Covenants. … “And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise,” and I shall skip a few words in order to give you the meaning, “it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory.” Now listen to this: and shall have “a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.” [D&C 132:19.]

The Prophet Joseph Smith said this meant that those who were married in the new and everlasting covenant and were true to their covenants, that after they passed through the resurrection they would be able to live together again as husband and wife and have what he calls here, a continuation of the seeds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

So how does this work in your mind? The procreation of spirit children is done with physical sex? So are the egg and sperm physical...or spiritual? And if spiritual...how does the physical makeup of the sex organs contain them and execute the sexual process in the same way as it does physically? How are they even created? Do the male testes create spirit sperm? Does the female have a monthly cycle? The eggs in a mortal female are finite? Are the spiritual ones infinite in an exalted being or does the body somehow create new ones?  Does a spirit zygote split and divide cells to become the spirit embryo, etc... And how long until the spirit comes to term? After 9 months, or whatever it is, does the spirit baby have to push through the physical birth canal in the same manner as the physical...or does it just float out of the mother?

And do you really believe that God -- a perfect, all-powerful, all-knowing, exalted being with a fullness of joy, and complete and perfect love -- desires or needs a physical chemical reaction in His brain to sustain loyalty or commitment, or to drive Him to do anything?

First, a teaching from Joseph Smith. 

“I have another subject to dwell upon, which is calculated to exalt man; but it is impossible for me to say much on this subject. I shall therefore just touch upon it, for time will not permit me to say all. It is associated with the subject of the resurrection of the dead—namely, the soul—the mind of man —the immortal spirit. Where did it come from? All learned men and doctors of divinity say that God created it in the beginning; but it is not so: the very idea lessens man in my estimation. I do not believe the doctrine; I know better. Hear it, all ye ends of the world; for God has told me so; and if you don’t believe me, it will not make the truth without effect. I will make a man appear a fool before I get through; if he does not believe it. I am going to tell of things more noble.

We say that God Himself is a self-existing being. Who told you so? It is correct enough; but how did it get into your heads? Who told you that man did not exist in like manner upon the same principles? Man does exist upon the same principles. God made a tabernacle and put a spirit into it, and it became a living soul. (Refers to the Bible.) How does it read in the Hebrew? It does not say in the Hebrew that God created the spirit of man. It says, “God made man out of the earth and put into him Adam’s spirit, and so became a living body.”

The mind or the intelligence which man possesses is co-equal [co-eternal] with God himself. I know that my testimony is true; hence, when I talk to these mourners, what have they lost? Their relatives and friends are only separated from their bodies for a short season: their spirits which existed with God have left the tabernacle of clay only for a little moment, as it were; and they now exist in a place where they converse together the same as we do on the earth.

I am dwelling on the immortality of the spirit of man. Is it logical to say that the intelligence of spirits is immortal, and yet that it has a beginning? The intelligence of spirits had no beginning, neither will it have an end. That is good logic. That which has a beginning may have an end. There never was a time when there were not spirits; for they are co-equal [co-eternal] with our Father in heaven.

I want to reason more on the spirit of man; for I am dwelling on the body and spirit of man—on the subject of the dead. I take my ring from my finger and liken it unto the mind of man—the immortal part, because it had no beginning. Suppose you cut it in two; then it has a beginning and an end; but join it again, and it continues one eternal round. So with the spirit of man. As the Lord liveth, if it had a beginning, it will have an end. All the fools and learned and wise men from the beginning of creation, who say that the spirit of man had a beginning, prove that it must have an end; and if that doctrine is true, then the doctrine of annihilation would be true. But if I am right, I might with boldness proclaim from the housetops that God never had the power to create the spirit of man at all. God himself could not create himself.

Intelligence is eternal and exists upon a self-existent principle. It is a spirit from age to age and there is no creation about it. All the minds and spirits that God ever sent into the world are susceptible of enlargement.

The first principles of man are self-existent with God. God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with Himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits.”

 

From what Joseph Smith taught I would say no, resurrected couples do not give birth to spirits. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/22/2018 at 2:49 PM, The Folk Prophet said:

So how does this work in your mind? The procreation of spirit children is done with physical sex? So are the egg and sperm physical...or spiritual? And if spiritual...how does the physical makeup of the sex organs contain them and execute the sexual process in the same way as it does physically? How are they even created? Do the male testes create spirit sperm? Does the female have a monthly cycle? The eggs in a mortal female are finite? Are the spiritual ones infinite in an exalted being or does the body somehow create new ones?  Does a spirit zygote split and divide cells to become the spirit embryo, etc... And how long until the spirit comes to term? After 9 months, or whatever it is, does the spirit baby have to push through the physical birth canal in the same manner as the physical...or does it just float out of the mother?

And do you really believe that God -- a perfect, all-powerful, all-knowing, exalted being with a fullness of joy, and complete and perfect love -- desires or needs a physical chemical reaction in His brain to sustain loyalty or commitment, or to drive Him to do anything?

I am not sure the purpose behind all these questions, or how they would negate or confirm anything as these are questions that are unknown and won't be known until a person receives all the Father hath. In light of your questions though, let's see how this works in your mind in correlation with what has been taught by prophets and apostles:

Brigham Young and others taught that the Father was intimate with Mary in order to conceive Christ. If this teaching is correct, then obviously the Father produced something to conceive Christ with Mary. So the following questions provided regarding spiritual sperm, physical makeup of sex organs, the process, how they are created, spirit testes, spiritual PMS, finite or infinite eggs, spiritual zygote splitting and dividing to become a spiritual embryo, etc... become moot. If the Father is able to produce, then surely Heavenly Mother also has a similar ability as a female.

If earthly conception is patterned after spiritual conception, the length of term, birth canal delivery, really doesn't matter if the baby floats or needs to be shoved out. Do you believe in this teaching, and if so, then why all these questions because obviously the Father has some sexual process to create offspring? Which would mean Heavenly Mother spiritual body is working just fine also.

And do you really believe that God -- a perfect, all-powerful, all-knowing, exalted being with a fullness of joy, and complete and perfect love -- desires or needs a physical chemical reaction in His brain to sustain loyalty or commitment, or to drive Him to do anything?

I believe in a perfect God (in every sense), but not sure why spiritual intimacy would be a need to release physical chemical reaction. God has a spiritual body that is quickened -- flesh and bone. There would be no physical chemical reaction, he is spiritual. If offspring are conceived, thus creating a spirit, then they obviously are intimate to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of their offspring.

Intimacy is a great way to show love, and if God is perfect in love, and is able to be intimate why wouldn't he? Has nothing to do with a desire to release physical chemical reactions.

I feel like these questions are similar to questions given by atheist to try to prove their is no God. If there is a God, how was he created? How is something not created. How is something always God and never created? How does he live forever, or does he really just live longer than you and I? How old is God then? Why does a perfect God need to have children come to an imperfect world? Surely a perfect being could have come up with a better way, etc...

None of these questions matter, as there is a God.

Edited by Anddenex
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/14/2018 at 7:40 AM, Fether said:

Whenever the church has interactions with the LGBTQ+ community, it stirs a series of thoughts and questions.

What is the ultimate vision? Obviously it is rooted in charity and acceptance but not quite reaching into adoption of standards. Do we see some day in the future where homosexual couples are freely marrying each other outside of the church yet attending church faithfully? Even holding “minor” callings like a Sunday school teacher? 

Will the LGBTQ community ever stop seeing the church as a religion of bigotry if We never change our view of marriage, but still put as much efforts into strengthening our ties with them?

Does anyone believe that one day the church will allow homosexuals to receive temple recommends?? I definitely don’t.

I still am not always clear on what people mean when they use the term "homosexual".  Does it mean 1. one with homosexual feelings, or 2. one who engages in homosexual activity?  I always wish people took the time to make that clear.

It's already been stated that definition #1 is not considered wrong or sinful, in and of itself.  But when it leads to definition #2 then it becomes wrong.

What I want to address is the a different kind of activity one might engage in, which might be just as serious, or close to it- which is, the active promoting of the LGBTQ agenda.  This type of sin is the harder kind for a bishop to make good judgments about.  It's similar to trying to judge a person's level of fighting against the church in other ways - or leading people away from the church.  A person might not be a practicing LGBTQ themselves, but if they are actively leading others away from the Church and the Gospel of Christ, the way I understand it, that could possibly be a serious enough offense to disqualify them from a temple recommend.  But like I said, it is the harder thing to judge.  It might also be the thing that makes us more often appear to some people as being hateful.  I sure wish it were not so.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ztodd said:

I still am not always clear on what people mean when they use the term "homosexual".  Does it mean 1. one with homosexual feelings, or 2. one who engages in homosexual activity?  I always wish people took the time to make that clear.

It's already been stated that definition #1 is not considered wrong or sinful, in and of itself.  But when it leads to definition #2 then it becomes wrong.

What I want to address is the a different kind of activity one might engage in, which might be just as serious, or close to it- which is, the active promoting of the LGBTQ agenda.  This type of sin is the harder kind for a bishop to make good judgments about.  It's similar to trying to judge a person's level of fighting against the church in other ways - or leading people away from the church.  A person might not be a practicing LGBTQ themselves, but if they are actively leading others away from the Church and the Gospel of Christ, the way I understand it, that could possibly be a serious enough offense to disqualify them from a temple recommend.  But like I said, it is the harder thing to judge.  It might also be the thing that makes us more often appear to some people as being hateful.  I sure wish it were not so.

 

Maybe I should clarify the difference between being homosexual and practicing. I have always felt like the difference was clear and that others would automatically understand I mean those that practice it.

Practicing homosexual behavior and leading others away from the church are both acts worthy of removal of temple blessings. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott
On 7/22/2018 at 2:01 PM, BJ64 said:

How else do you expect to have a “continuation of the seeds” forever or sexual pleasure? We are created in the image of our father. Why would a resurrected and perfected being be without functional genitals? The scriptures say that not one hair of the head will be lost. 

How will you populate your own worlds without sexual relations with your spouse?

That's an interesting question and it seems that there have been a lot of conflicting statements and ideas over the years.  I don't think that there is any official doctrine on the matter.

I do know that it is accepted (both in statements by Church leaders and in LDS scriptures) that there was some form of pre-pre existence before spirits were created known as intelligences.  I never thought of such (and still don't) as a sperm and egg.  I have heard of it explained as light/knowledge or something to that effect.  The scriptures at least say that intelligences can't be created, but have always existed.

 

 

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Scott said:

That's an interesting question and it seems that there have been a lot of conflicting statements and ideas over the years.  I don't think that there is any official doctrine on the matter.

I do know that it is accepted (both in statements by Church leaders and in LDS scriptures) that there was some form of pre-pre existence before spirits were created known as intelligences.  I never thought of such (and still don't) as a sperm and egg.  I have heard of it explained as light/knowledge or something to that effect.  The scriptures at least say that intelligences can't be created, but have always existed.

 

 

Joseph Smith did not differentiate between intelligence and spirit. He said that spirits were not created but that they have always existed. Since spirits are immortal and have no end they also have no beginning.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott
13 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

Joseph Smith did not differentiate between intelligence and spirit. He said that spirits were not created but that they have always existed. Since spirits are immortal and have no end they also have no beginning.   

The Book of Abraham alludes to this as well in 3:18:     

18 Howbeit that he made the greater star; as, also, if there be two spirits, and one shall be more intelligent than the other, yet these two spirits, notwithstanding one is more intelligent than the other, have no beginning; they existed before, they shall have no end, they shall exist after, for they are gnolaum, or eternal.

Many other scriptures and teachings through say that God (the Father) is the father of our Spirits and that Jesus was the firstborn of those spirits. 

For example, the Bible Dictionary says the following while giving a scripture reference: 

Jesus is the firstborn of the spirit children of our Heavenly Father, the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh, and the first to rise from the dead in the Resurrection, “that in all things he might have the preeminence” (Col. 1:13–18).

The Guide to the Scriptures (Study aid rather than official doctrine) says the following and makes a distinction between different ways:

Intelligence has several meanings, three of which are: (1) It is the light of truth that gives life and light to all things in the universe. It has always existed. (2) The word intelligences may also refer to spirit children of God. (3) The scriptures also may speak of intelligence as referring to the spirit element that existed before we were begotten as spirit children.

It does say that there intelligences were are spirit element before we were begotten as spirit children.

The word spirit does seem to be used in different ways.

In some ways spirit = spirit children

In other ways spirit = intellengences = a spirit element that existed before we were created as spirit children.

I guess neither term contradicts each other, but it based on context.

Does this make sense and do you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s these seeming contractions that make things confusing. 

In my mind spirits have always existed. That being the intelligence  along with any sort of spirit body. I think the idea of father of spirits or begetting spirits is figurative. I think that God is the father of our spirits in that He gathered us up and organized us into a family of which he is the head. I also believe that He is the literal father of our physical bodies in that I believe He and our Heavenly Mother gave birth to Adam and Eve. Them being immortal beings until the fall. In other words I believe we are His literal physical children and figuratively His spirit children. This of course is my opinion but I didn’t make it up. It is based on the teachings of prophets as well as scripture. Why the church is not more clear on this is a mystery to me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/29/2018 at 2:36 PM, Anddenex said:

I am not sure the purpose behind all these questions, or how they would negate or confirm anything as these are questions that are unknown and won't be known until a person receives all the Father hath. In light of your questions though, let's see how this works in your mind in correlation with what has been taught by prophets and apostles:

Brigham Young and others taught that the Father was intimate with Mary in order to conceive Christ. If this teaching is correct, then obviously the Father produced something to conceive Christ with Mary. So the following questions provided regarding spiritual sperm, physical makeup of sex organs, the process, how they are created, spirit testes, spiritual PMS, finite or infinite eggs, spiritual zygote splitting and dividing to become a spiritual embryo, etc... become moot. If the Father is able to produce, then surely Heavenly Mother also has a similar ability as a female.

If earthly conception is patterned after spiritual conception, the length of term, birth canal delivery, really doesn't matter if the baby floats or needs to be shoved out. Do you believe in this teaching, and if so, then why all these questions because obviously the Father has some sexual process to create offspring? Which would mean Heavenly Mother spiritual body is working just fine also.

And do you really believe that God -- a perfect, all-powerful, all-knowing, exalted being with a fullness of joy, and complete and perfect love -- desires or needs a physical chemical reaction in His brain to sustain loyalty or commitment, or to drive Him to do anything?

I believe in a perfect God (in every sense), but not sure why spiritual intimacy would be a need to release physical chemical reaction. God has a spiritual body that is quickened -- flesh and bone. There would be no physical chemical reaction, he is spiritual. If offspring are conceived, thus creating a spirit, then they obviously are intimate to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of their offspring.

Intimacy is a great way to show love, and if God is perfect in love, and is able to be intimate why wouldn't he? Has nothing to do with a desire to release physical chemical reactions.

I feel like these questions are similar to questions given by atheist to try to prove their is no God. If there is a God, how was he created? How is something not created. How is something always God and never created? How does he live forever, or does he really just live longer than you and I? How old is God then? Why does a perfect God need to have children come to an imperfect world? Surely a perfect being could have come up with a better way, etc...

None of these questions matter, as there is a God.

Whereas I think we typically see eye to eye, every once in a while you seem to miss the point of what I'm getting at.

BJ64 is proposing that because homosexuality exists in this life, it must therefore follow that it will exist in the next. He bases this on the fact that heterosexuality as we know it in this life must exist in the same manner in the next life. I'm asking the questions I am by way of pointing out how someone who has drawn such a conclusion as BJ64 has, has clearly never bothered to ask themselves such questions -- not to mention a myriad of other considerations and the facing of the blatant logical fallacies at play here. I am not proposing that I have answers to the questions. I am pointing out how little we know about the next life, and how stupid it is to presume that we know about the next life because we think we know some small thing about this life.

Edited by The Folk Prophet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Whereas I think we typically see eye to eye, every once in a while you seem to miss the point of what I'm getting at.

BJ64 is proposing that because homosexuality exists in this life, it must therefore follow that it will exist in the next. He bases this on the fact that heterosexuality as we know it in this life must exist in the same manner in the next life. I'm asking the questions I am by way of pointing out how someone who has drawn such a conclusion as BJ64 has, has clearly never bothered to ask themselves such questions -- not to mention a myriad of other considerations and the facing of the blatant logical fallacies at play here. I am not proposing that I have answers to the questions. I am pointing out how little we know about the next life, and how stupid it is to presume that we know about the next life because we think we know some small thing about this life.

What blatant logical fallacies?

We know about the next life because the course of The Lord is one eternal round. What has happened before will happen again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Whereas I think we typically see eye to eye, every once in a while you seem to miss the point of what I'm getting at.

BJ64 is proposing that because homosexuality exists in this life, it must therefore follow that it will exist in the next. He bases this on the fact that heterosexuality as we know it in this life must exist in the same manner in the next life. I'm asking the questions I am by way of pointing out how someone who has drawn such a conclusion as BJ64 has, has clearly never bothered to ask themselves such questions -- not to mention a myriad of other considerations and the facing of the blatant logical fallacies at play here. I am not proposing that I have answers to the questions. I am pointing out how little we know about the next life, and how stupid it is to presume that we know about the next life because we think we know some small thing about this life.

Yep, it appears I missed this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/14/2018 at 7:40 AM, Fether said:

Does anyone believe that one day the church will allow homosexuals to receive temple recommends?? I definitely don’t.

Sure. One day it will be accepted that sexual gratification beyond procreation is sinful. Since homosexuals cannot procreate, and assuming that copulation is beyond their lifestyle, a homosexual could indeed receive a temple recommend. Why not? 

It seems you generalize all homosexuals as being sexually ravenous. Which they are not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Seek said:

It seems you generalize all homosexuals as being sexually ravenous. Which they are not.

No, I just make the assumption that we all understand they are not all sexually ravenous so I make no attempt to clarify. I only referring to those living the life style. That misunderstanding probably comes from me not knowing a single homosexual that isn’t living a homosexual life style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

14 hours ago, Seek said:

Sure. One day it will be accepted that sexual gratification beyond procreation is sinful. Since homosexuals cannot procreate, and assuming that copulation is beyond their lifestyle, a homosexual could indeed receive a temple recommend. Why not? 

It seems you generalize all homosexuals as being sexually ravenous. Which they are not.

I don't think it has anything to do with generalization and I don't think homosexual couples will ever have a temple recommend.  Law of Chastity and all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/31/2018 at 3:47 PM, BJ64 said:

It’s these seeming contractions that make things confusing. 

In my mind spirits have always existed. That being the intelligence  along with any sort of spirit body. I think the idea of father of spirits or begetting spirits is figurative. I think that God is the father of our spirits in that He gathered us up and organized us into a family of which he is the head. I also believe that He is the literal father of our physical bodies in that I believe He and our Heavenly Mother gave birth to Adam and Eve. Them being immortal beings until the fall. In other words I believe we are His literal physical children and figuratively His spirit children. This of course is my opinion but I didn’t make it up. It is based on the teachings of prophets as well as scripture. Why the church is not more clear on this is a mystery to me. 

I find it helpful to distinguish between the body and the material comprising the body. Both may rightly be referred to as "spirit" and "intelligence". The material exists for eternity (having no beginning or end), whereas the body, while eternal (i.e. without end), may have had a beginning when it was "organized"--however that may have taken place. The same seems to apply to our physical bodies and the material of which it is comprised. I some respects, we may understand the spiritual by understanding the physical.

For what it is worth.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, wenglund said:

I am of the opinion that homosexuality wont exist beyond the grave. How could it?

IMO, a lot depends on exactly what our sexuality will look like beyond the grave. Most Christians would say that we will become some form of asexual -- sexuality (hetero or homo) does not continue beyond the grave.

I think most who say that homosexuality won't exist are assuming some kind of male + female is required to create spirit children. I have not seen anything (beyond speculation) of what that process actually looks like, so I don't find it difficult to dream up a process that doesn't require male + female.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, wenglund said:

I am of the opinion that homosexuality wont exist beyond the grave. How could it?

Thanks, -Wade Enlgund-

In my thinking our desires will stay with us after death. Therefore if one has a same sex desire in this life I don’t see why that would change. 

I presume we will still love and desire our spouse after this life so why would it be different for a same sex couple. Except that same sex couples will not be married for eternity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

In my thinking our desires will stay with us after death. Therefore if one has a same sex desire in this life I don’t see why that would change. 

I presume we will still love and desire our spouse after this life so why would it be different for a same sex couple. Except that same sex couples will not be married for eternity. 

The creepy subway dude in the movie Ghost always intrigued me—continually jonesing for a cigarette; but no longer physically able to enjoy one.  Makes me wonder about the degree to which we construct our own hells through our unrighteous desires.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • pam featured this topic
  • pam unfeatured this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share