Church responds to man on hunger strike

[FoolsMock]

49 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

Are you inferring that a stake president deviating from the standard of list of ordination questions stems from a problem higher up in the leadership chain?    

I'm inferring too many members of the church are addicts to masturbation and this has been a case for decades and the body of the church has been weakened by this "wink, wink, nudge, nudge, everyone does this, it isn't a big deal" attitude perpetuated quietly/secretly (the Book of Mormon has some wonderful lessons on what evilness done in darkness does to organizations and to God's church in times past) by misguided leaders and members and it has caused bleeding in the Lord's church.  In response, leaders are being more clear and bold in fighting back against this error and are trying to really identify if men are worthy of priesthood advancements and callings.  I spent 13 years of my life an addict to this behavior. I know the withdrawals, I know the hopelessness of feeling like change is literally impossible, I know the sleepless nights stemming from the cravings/addiction.  It changes.  It isn't that way forever.  The healing power of the atonement is real.  The church needs to be healed.  We can't go on and press forward in the work the Lord would have us do being hypocrites and unfaithful to such a high law God has given us and operates by,

When I was 18, I was told by a peer that his bishop said masturbation is a reality you have to live with and all you can do is feel sorry when you do it.  That was a lie.  I will spend my life testifying of the life-changing, life-saving, healing power of Christ's atonement in the face of sexual addiction.  Too many are deceived and held back by people settling on a terrestrial lifestyle and attitude and understanding of how Christ can impact their life.

Edited August 31, 2018 by FoolsMock

[BJ64]

1 hour ago, JohnsonJones said:

PS: I want to add I have NEVER been a Stake President, so I am not privy to what they may ask or not ask in their own personal interviews unless it is with a Temple Interview typically.  They do PPR's with Ward Leadership, but other than how they do it in my Stake, I cannot say how they would do them in other Stakes.

The list of interview questions for Melchizedek Priesthood ordinations prints up along with the recommendation form the same way the baptism questions print up with the baptism recommendation form. The ordination questions are essentially the same as the temple recommend questions. I know the guidelines say that the interviewer should not deviate from the temple interview questions. 

I can only imagine how our stake president must grill young men preparing for missions. Perhaps there is a connection here as to why there are fewer than two missionaries out per ward/branch in our stake. 

[FoolsMock]

25 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

 

I can only imagine how our stake president must grill young men preparing for missions. Perhaps there is a connection here as to why there are fewer than two missionaries out per ward/branch in our stake. 

Are you suggesting we send out unworthy missionaries?  I went on a mission unworthily, that was wicked.  It was wrong.  Why should we lower the bar?  How is that following what God has asked of us?  If you don't live the law of chastity as a missionary you are a hypocrite and serving in vain.  I was a hypocrite and I served in vain.  I did the wrong thing.  We can't move forward and make progress being in blatant disobedience to what God has asked of us.  1 worthy missionary will do more good for God's church than 10,000,000 fake missionaries.  Have we not just had a powerful lesson on what fake men do to a church?  Does the Catholic church have more members than The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints?  Yes.  Does it have more leaders?  Yes.  And what good has sexual wickedness done the larger church?  It's turned into criminal activity, has broken the hearts of sincere believers and essentially put a nail in the coffin of that church's reputation.

 

If the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints can't live the law of chastity there is a problem.  Zion is not going to be built by a half-hearted embrace of the law of chastity.  Masturbation is pornography consumption.  Trading your birthright for a mess of porridge.

Edited August 31, 2018 by FoolsMock

[lostinwater]

17 minutes ago, FoolsMock said:

We can't move forward and make progress being in blatant disobedience to what God has asked of us.  1 worthy missionary will do more good for God's church than 10,000,000 fake missionaries. 

i don't meant to be confrontational - but statements like this sadden me a lot.  

Labels like "unworthy" and "fake".  i get why they are used - but i wonder if people really understand just how much damage they do when they actually stick.  

[BJ64]

29 minutes ago, FoolsMock said:

Are you suggesting we send out unworthy missionaries?  

I am suggesting that if a leader held missionaries to a higher standard than what is required by the church then it could lower the number of missionaries serving. 

[FoolsMock]

16 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

i don't meant to be confrontational - but statements like this sadden me a lot.  

Labels like "unworthy" and "fake".  i get why they are used - but i wonder if people really understand just how much damage they do when they actually stick.  

I masturbated on my mission.  I was a sinner.  I lied to my family to go on a mission.  I lied to my bishop.  I  took out my endowments  while nursing a pornography and masturbation addiction.  This problem haunted my missionary work.  It didn't disappear on my mission (but I sure believed it would! If I could just get out there things would change!) and it took serious, life-changing effort for years after my mission to find healing from this damaging behavior and now, I feel like a completely different person.  I have never been happier.  I never believed people could change from such harrowing, haunting behavior.  Part of repentance is admitting fault and turning to the Lord to find healing from problems. If people can't admit where they have sinned, that is pride, that is not repentance.

 

An army of law of chastity breaking missionaries isn't a solution to anything.  Neither is lowering the standards of the church to make people feel less bad about engaging in sinful behavior.  Do you think the law of chastity is a lie or just a suggestion?  Do you not believe in it?  I just don't understand what you want.  Worthiness interviews should just be tossed aside and we just need to hug each other as we look at porn and masturbate why telling the world we believe in this law of chastity thing but don't feel bad if you can't live it?  God has given us rules and we have seen in scripture it is legitimately blasphemous and damaging to God's church to alter the rules and to preach "easier laws" over what God wants us to follow.  Whenever the church got out of line in the Book of Mormon's narrative, God stretched out his hand to try and help people see they had gone off the mark (well until the Jaredites and Nephites had pushed things too far).  I am saddened and honestly discouraged so many members take the law of chastity and repentance so lightly, but this is the Lord's church and I have faith we will be called to repentance

Edited August 31, 2018 by FoolsMock

[FoolsMock]

2 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

I am suggesting that if a leader held missionaries to a higher standard than what is required by the church then it could lower the number of missionaries serving. 

The church requires missionaries to live the law of chastity.  Abstaining from masturbation is part of the law of chastity.  Too many years of too many people preaching the "there are two types of people in the world; those that masturbate, and those that lie about it" philosophy of man has poisoned what people consider to be following the law of chastity and I'm not shocked this has given reason for clarification on this to be addressed in some interviews.

Edited August 31, 2018 by FoolsMock

[BJ64]

8 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

i don't meant to be confrontational - but statements like this sadden me a lot.  

Labels like "unworthy" and "fake".  i get why they are used - but i wonder if people really understand just how much damage they do when they actually stick.  

One might add that no one is sinless so missionaries will always also be sinners. It’s just a matter of how much sin is acceptable for a missionary. The same applies to temple attenders. They are all sinners as well. 

Every one of us is blatantly disobedient to some degree. If not then we’d be perfect already. 

[FoolsMock]

Just now, BJ64 said:

One might add that no one is sinless so missionaries will always also be sinners. It’s just a matter of how much sin is acceptable for a missionary. The same applies to temple attenders. They are all sinners as well. 

Every one of us is blatantly disobedient to some degree. If not then we’d be perfect already. 

I agree 100%. 

[BJ64]

8 minutes ago, FoolsMock said:

The church requires missionaries to live the law of chastity.  Abstaining from masturbation is part of the law of chastity.  Too many years of too many people preaching the "there are two types of people in the world; those that masturbate, and those that lie about it" philosophy of man has poisoned what people consider to be following the law of chastity and I'm not shocked this has given reason for clarification on this to be addressed in some interviews.

How do you interpret this statement given to Time Magazine by Kim Clark then president of BYU Idaho, now a member of the seventy?

 

Time Magazine: Do the church and the school see masturbation as a sin?

 

Kim Clark: Well, it is interesting. I would frame it this way. Masturbation is a behavior that, if continued, could over time lead to things that are sinful, so the counsel that the church gives to its leaders is to counsel with young people to help them understand that their bodies are the temple of the Holy Ghost. That comes right out of Corinthians, that is what Paul taught, and it is a beautiful doctrine—that our bodies are a great gift from God and we need to take good care of them, and that the procreative powers that God has given us, he cares very much about how they are used, and so that we need to learn to use them in ways that are in accordance with his will and his mind.

 

[lostinwater]

15 minutes ago, FoolsMock said:

I was a sinner. 

i guess the choice of tense is what i am getting at.  And i try not to be picky on grammar unless it's use reflects a perception.

Anyways, i get what you are saying - people need a firm hand.  Lots of people need to be told to just soldier up and change.  That's very true.  i appreciate your more pragmatic approach.

But i can say that words like "worthy" and "fake" have way more power than most people realize - especially when applied to people.  You find what seems like the most rotten "sinners" out there - and i'd bet the majority of them are people who heard words like those said about them when they are very vulnerable - and actually believed that designation was correct.

Edited August 31, 2018 by lostinwater

[FoolsMock]

13 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

How do you interpret this statement given to Time Magazine by Kim Clark then president of BYU Idaho, now a member of the seventy?

 

Time Magazine: Do the church and the school see masturbation as a sin?

 

Kim Clark: Well, it is interesting. I would frame it this way. Masturbation is a behavior that, if continued, could over time lead to things that are sinful, so the counsel that the church gives to its leaders is to counsel with young people to help them understand that their bodies are the temple of the Holy Ghost. That comes right out of Corinthians, that is what Paul taught, and it is a beautiful doctrine—that our bodies are a great gift from God and we need to take good care of them, and that the procreative powers that God has given us, he cares very much about how they are used, and so that we need to learn to use them in ways that are in accordance with his will and his mind.

 

I think the statement that it LEADS to sinful behavior is playing softball and implying it isn't sinful behavior in itself.  I think it goes against a more recent video they made about masturbation being wrong and encouraging individuals to help others who are engulfed in that behavior.  A pretty important old testament prophet got drunk and slept with his daughters, people, even leaders of the church make mistakes.  I will never feel modern-day apostles and prophets have always worded every statement 100% correctly.  The Book of Mormon honestly may not have, we're told if it has any errors, that comes with man. Masturbation is breaking the law of chastity.  No matter how much addicts wish it weren't.

 

 

Edited August 31, 2018 by FoolsMock

[FoolsMock]

5 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

But i can say that words like "worthy" and "fake" have way more power than most people realize - especially when applied to people.  You find what seems like the most rotten "sinners" out there - and i'd bet the majority of them are people who heard words like those said about them when they are very vulnerable - and actually believed that designation was correct.

Why do you think this? I have no issue saying I was unworthy to do things (I called myself unworthy then and I refer to who I was back then as unworthy now) and it didn't make me hate myself.  It was honesty that allowed me to change.  Have you lived a double life for nearly 15 years?  I did. I just feel you are speaking to someone who has experienced this and you are saying "oh no, you're wrong.  yeah, you went through an awful addiction for 13 years and completely changed but you don't understand this, let me explain to you what you went through yet you don't get it, we need to caudal people in their problems, you don't understand".  It's offensive to be honest.  More offensive than me being honest that I was unworthy to do certain things ever was

Edited August 31, 2018 by FoolsMock

[BJ64]

23 minutes ago, FoolsMock said:

I think the statement that it LEADS to sinful behavior is playing softball and implying it isn't sinful behavior in itself.  I think it goes against a more recent video they made about masturbation being wrong and encouraging individuals to help others who are engulfed in that behavior.  A pretty important old testament prophet got drunk and slept with his daughters, people, even leaders of the church make mistakes.  I will never feel modern-day apostles and prophets have always worded every statement 100% correctly.  The Book of Mormon honestly may not have, we're told if it has any errors, that comes with man. Masturbation is breaking the law of chastity.  No matter how much addicts wish it weren't.

 

 

The interview excerpt I posted was about the very video you posted. Here is more of it. 

“For Clark, the sudden online attention missed the point completely. “Neither my talk nor the video has anything to do with masturbation. There’s nothing in the video or in my talk about that,” Clark said, in an interview with TIME Thursday. “We were really focused on addictions, pornography, things that are really damaging spiritually to people.”

In his words the video you posted has nothing to do with masturbation.

Can you find any scripture anywhere which says that masturbation is a sin?

Edited August 31, 2018 by BJ64

[lostinwater]

8 minutes ago, FoolsMock said:

Why do you think this? I have no issue saying I was unworthy to do things (I called myself unworthy then and I refer to who I was back then as unworthy now) and it didn't make me hate myself.  It was honesty that allowed me to change.  Have you lived a double life for nearly 15 years?  I did. I just feel you are speaking to someone who has experienced this and you are saying "oh no, you're wrong.  yeah, you went through an awful addiction for 13 years and completely changed but you don't understand this, let me explain to you what you went through yet you don't get it, we need to caudal people in their problems, you don't understand".  It's offensive to be honest.  More offensive than me being honest that I was unworthy to do certain things ever was

Thank-you.  Respect that - and you.

My comments just reflect the people i've known - and i'll be the first to admit that the experiences with which i am acquainted are a tiny subset of all the experiences that are out there.

[FoolsMock]

5 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

The interview excerpt I posted was about the very video you posted. Here is more of it. 

“For Clark, the sudden online attention missed the point completely. “Neither my talk nor the video has anything to do with masturbation. There’s nothing in the video or in my talk about that,” Clark said, in an interview with TIME Thursday. “We were really focused on addictions, pornography, things that are really damaging spiritually to people.”

In his words the video you posted has nothing to do with masturbation.

 

Yeah, I just read that actually.  I admit I was wrong about the video.  You ask how I feel about his statement on this.  Confused and disheartened is how I feel. Disappointed as well. 

Edited August 31, 2018 by FoolsMock

[JohnsonJones]

5 hours ago, lostinwater said:

This has actually blown up recently.

Sam got a letter calling him to a disciplinary council.  i think in about a week.  No surprise, for sure.  Article is (or at least was ) on front page of Fox News, US News and World Report, and probably several others.

Assuming he is excommunicated (and i can't imagine he won't be) - this is going to make for quite the headline, especially given the recent goings-on in the Catholic church.

They might differ the headlines depending on the area you live in.  When I woke up this morning and read this went to check Fox new's website.  Didn't see anything, at least today, even skimming down all the to the bottom past multiple stories.  Did see a story about Disneyland is going to get alcohol, and McCain and Franklin.  Same with US News and World Report.

Or it may be they use tracking to see what we normally read and thus what shows up on your front page of the News might not appear on Mine?

Interesting that it appeared on some people's front page.  Nary a sign of it where I'm at that I can see.

From what I've read about his actions over the past little while it would not surprise me if he got disfellowshipped or excommunicated.  He's been utilizing a LOT of the anti-Mormon networks to further his cause and though many of them have a complaint in the areas of youth interviews, there are also other items which he has been promoting along anti-Mormon lines.  Some of the things I've read he was involved with are greatly disturbing and seem to indicate that he, himself, has turned a great deal against the church due to having become somewhat anti-Mormon himself.  HOW this actually is I hope is resolved, and I truly hope that if he has been called to a disciplinary council it is done in love for his soul and the hope to help him do better.  I think his idea of gathering stories from those who have suffered from such abuses was a better idea, and that gathering those who have suffered to find a common ground among members was far better than harboring with those who simply hate Members of the Church simply on principle.  Perhaps if this is a lesser discipline (rather that excommunication) he will find a better approach that conjoins with the members of the church and works to strengthen members and leaders in a wholesome manner?

4 hours ago, BJ64 said:

The list of interview questions for Melchizedek Priesthood ordinations prints up along with the recommendation form the same way the baptism questions print up with the baptism recommendation form. The ordination questions are essentially the same as the temple recommend questions. I know the guidelines say that the interviewer should not deviate from the temple interview questions. 

I can only imagine how our stake president must grill young men preparing for missions. Perhaps there is a connection here as to why there are fewer than two missionaries out per ward/branch in our stake. 

 

Well...when I went on a Mission it seemed like the questions were a LOT more invasive to a degree.  It was a different time.  I don't know if or what guidelines they had back then.  I was asked about things that I had no idea what they meant.  I knew certain things were against the law of chastity, but I had NO idea what they actually were or meant.  It was only years later that I learned what they were.  Luckily I had not done any of them (I suppose I was far more naïve than many would think a young man would be, and far more naïve than many of the youth today...though there are still some out there that are rather innocent of impure thought or even knowledge), not that I felt tempted to do any of them when I was younger either. 

I believe they made things even stricter in the 90s as far as what young men could have done and been involved with in regards to going on missions.  It continued that way for about a decade and then seemed to cool down.  I think it has a lot to do with the numbers and how many missionaries are out in the field vs. how many they need.  As they need more the restrictions get more to a standard, and when they need less they raise the bar.

Whichever reasons I SUPPORT our General Authorities and leaders in their decisions on HOW to handle this matter.  Currently they have taken giant strides at tackling it and I think their decisions on the matter have been inspired.  I see that there are wards that do not use the new guidelines that they have come out with, but pray that people will take the words of our Church General Authorities more seriously.  I feel if they do, that most of the problems people are complaining about will no longer be a problem (but that is obviously my opinion from my viewpoint currently).

4 hours ago, FoolsMock said:

The church requires missionaries to live the law of chastity.  Abstaining from masturbation is part of the law of chastity.  Too many years of too many people preaching the "there are two types of people in the world; those that masturbate, and those that lie about it" philosophy of man has poisoned what people consider to be following the law of chastity and I'm not shocked this has given reason for clarification on this to be addressed in some interviews.

 

To be honest, I actually think that the idea that there are those that masturbate and those that lie about it is pretty accurate to a degree.  I'd say that probably close to 8 out of every 10 or maybe even 9 out of every 10 young men do so.  However, I would like to add, and I was one of those in my youth, THAT THERE ARE THOSE WHO DO NOT DO THIS either.  In truth, some of them (like I actually didn't understand what it entailed or what one did until MUCH later in life AFTER I was actually married) have no idea what it actually IS (yes, they hear about it but do not really understand how one would do it or how it works).

A recent study differed, but it's means of data collection also differed.  The original study individuals were able to fill out the study without the embarrassment of actually coming forward.  In the recent study it was done face to face.  Unsurprisingly that study I believe only found 6 in 10 men had this difficulty. 

The interesting thing about Masturbation is that it was NOT part of the Law of Chastity...until it was.  In fact no major artifacts regarding it really came out in the early days of the church.  It wasn't until nearly 50 years that we start even hearing some peeps about it. If one tries to find what the actual origins of it was from a worldly historical point of view (rather than spiritual) much of it seems related to several quack theories that came out in the 19th century and were spreading among religions concerning it causing insanity and other maladies among other ridiculous claims. It has been proven these claims which started this religious fervor over masturbation were false and had no basis in reality or medicine.  However, despite that, these claims have continued (and you can even see remnants of acceptance of these in some LDS books as late as the 1970s and 80s, far past it was proven to be false medically, where they claim similar things of masturbation leading to insanity or homosexuality.  luckily these same books cover OTHER elements in regards to chastity and why one should strive not to participate in masturbation or other self debasing actions).

Then there came a focus and we DID hear from Prophets and Apostles that young men should Refrain from this and it was deeply associated with the Law of Chastity.  However, if one looks at the wording in the Bible and actual meanings, there is NO commandment against it in the Bible or scriptures.  It is NON-Scriptural.

That said, the advice for young men who are imbedded with this and cannot overcome this is to speak to a leader to help them with the repentance process.  Fairly often (and I'd opinion that it would be most) Masturbation goes hand in hand with Pornography and/or impure thoughts.  In that regards we DO have commandments against it directly found in the scriptures.  It is part of the higher law. 

My OPINION is that no young man should be involved with Pornography on their Mission.  I am not a Mission President and so my initial reaction probably would be too harsh or far harsher than it would be (if I were a Mission President and found out that a young man was participating in watching pornography on their mission my first instinct would be that they probably should be sent home to hopefully overcome it and recover from it).  However, outside of the mission field it is NORMALLY NOT A HARSH discipline.

In fact, I think part of the problem people have in coming forward is that there are people who ascribe it as a far more serious sin than it is.  ALL sin is serious but an addiction to Pornography is nowhere as bad as involving someone else in their sin and doing such a thing as fornication or other such related chastity problems.  Because people think it is more serious than it really is, it prevents them from coming forward and getting help...which is GREATLY unfortunate.  On the otherhand, I'm not sure the church is actually equipped to deal with all those who suffer from it coming forward at once.  I think some bishops are already dealing with this matter a LOT more than they feel they can, and even more coming forward may be overwhelming.  I DO NOT KNOW THE SOLUTION to this.

I think Pornography is currently a plague upon our society and as such, as any plague probably would, it also deeply affects the church.  It affects young men greatly, but there are also many young woman that also suffer from it.  I say suffer, because that is how I see it.  It is a suffering that they need help to overcome and get better. 

I support our leaders and what they have to say about it.  Currently it seems that the guidance is for people to try to seek out help from others, especially their leaders in the church.  It is such a HUGE plague (in my opinion) that I would hope that revelation from the Lord can make it a more personal matter between the Lord and the individual, but one that they can also still seek help if they need it, but more through the Addiction programs ran by the church and others than forcing Bishops and Bishoprics to deal with it...but that is probably VERY SELFISH of me.

 

ALL that said, you have done VERY well in overcoming this and for that you are to be commended.  I hope that you keep your resolve and spirit strong and never fall back into bad habits and sinful ways.  You have done well and I am very glad that you have overcome this great affliction in your life.  I hope that you also continue to feel proud that you have been able to use the atonement in your life and become closer to your savior.

Edited August 31, 2018 by JohnsonJones
I felt that some of my wording may be too harsh to those suffering from problems involving Chastity and wanted to soften my language regarding it.

[Iggy]

I have read all of the posts here, I followed just a few of the inks. I have just finished perusing through Sam Young's blog.

What I am curious about is he was a Bishop - certainly he interviewed youth for limited us Temple Recommends,  did he ask if these youth masturbated? Or did he ask if they obeyed the Law of Chastity? Did he have an adult in the next room or in the hallway? Did he have a parent in the room during these interviews? Did he do the annual interviews? Did he molest youth during any of these interviews? How old was his daughter when she finally told him of the questions asked of her during an interview with their Bishop?

Why, as a father, he is afraid to ask his daughters any personal questions of themselves, or what was said during Bishop interviews?

I am greatly impressed by the guest post article in the Millennial Star online magazine. I have always found the articles there to be well researched, thought out, written.

My take is this: Sam Young is seriously mentally deranged! He waffles from one end of the spectrum to the end and then across the middle.

He claims that he got an *Excommunication* letter from his stake president, he lies - and he has posted the entire original letter on his blog - silly man - that in itself proves he lies. To quote from the original *Disciplinary* Letter  Quote:  This letter is a formal notice that the stake presidency will convene a formal disciplinary council in your behalf, the result of which includes the possibility of excommunication, disfellowshipment, formal probation, or no action.

To me that says to me he is guilty and he knows it. To publicly state and encourage investigators and newly baptized adult converts to leave the church, THAT alone is why the council has been convened.

Back in 2006 when I was Young Women's Secretary, I would set up the Personal Progress interviews with the Bishop. When his Ex.Sec confirmed the date, BOTH of us also sent out a letter to the parents telling them of the date of the PP interview, and asking if the date worked for them too. Always the parents came with their daughters. Now I don't know if they sat in on the interview or sat in the waiting area, but they were there. I also know that the Ex. Sec sent the list of questions that would be asked, and in the letter they were asked to council with their daughter regarding the questions.

This was back in 2006! Now I am assuming that this procedure was to be done CHURCH WIDE.

Again, I repeat, my personal opinion is this man is Stark Raving Nuts! He needs mental health care.

 

[JohnsonJones]

7 minutes ago, Iggy said:

To me that says to me he is guilty and he knows it. To publicly state and encourage investigators and newly baptized adult converts to leave the church, THAT alone is why the council has been convened.

That is a serious thing for him to be doing and I absolutely think a council should be convened in that instance. 

I would disagree that he is crazy (though if he is suffering mental instability, that probably should be a HUGE factor in deciding the outcome of the council...in that instance, even with the above it could be no action is taken but a recognition that he has a mental or emotional handicap that is greatly affecting him...or in my opinion).

I'd say he has slowly gotten involved with a great many who these days do very similar things as anti-Mormons...NOT because they are crazy, but they are VERY bitter against the church and all who are a part of it and thus have become it's enemies and will do all in their power to destroy it.  Whether he is so far down the beaten path that he is one of them I do not know, but I hope that if he is not that he can turn his life around and work in a way that can be harmonious with those who need help as well as the church itself in bettering each.

[Iggy]

14 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

I'd say he has slowly gotten involved with a great many who these days do very similar things as anti-Mormons...NOT because they are crazy, but they are VERY bitter against the church and all who are a part of it and thus have become it's enemies and will do all in their power to destroy it.  Whether he is so far down the beaten path that he is one of them I do not know, but I hope that if he is not that he can turn his life around and work in a way that can be harmonious with those who need help as well as the church itself in bettering each.

A lot of the Anti rhetoric is not just from Ex LDS, but from people of other faiths who I think, feel threatened by us. Who fear us.

I really don't care why they feel threatened or why they fear us. THAT is their problem, not mine. BUT when it comes to them trying to hire someone to beat up or kill any of our Apostles - THAT goes far beyond the extreme. If you go to this link: https://www.millennialstar.org/guest-post-what-is-sam-young-really-after/  then when you reach the blue highlighted [it is a link] March 19, 2017. Click on it, after you read the blog post that comes up, scroll down to the first date of his blog and start reading. You might want to make lunch to eat while you read.

When you have had enough of his waffling, bouncing from one end of the spectrum to the end and then across the middle. Go back to the Millennial Star post and read it to the end.

Oh, I also wanted to add that I personally feel that ALL of the Anti-Mormon's are consumed by satan.

Edited August 31, 2018 by Iggy

[Overwatch]

How is this even an issue? Must be the new generation. Masturbation has always been taboo. Growing up and going through my own religious interviews it was always common knowledge to leave your package alone. I had annoying questions asked like "when was the last time you masturbated" but overall you just say I haven't and keep cruising. I don't know if it's the wide acceptance of unreputable behaviour, easy access to porn or media bombardment of unchaste entertainment but if you are messin with the nether regions you got some work to do. Especially if you are addicted to masturbation, most likely will have to miss out on some holy proceedings until you can cleanse yourself from the addiction. The bishop receives revelation and can guide the person if they need to refrain from some activities or just keep working on it while living a "normal" member life. 

[BJ64]

9 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

The Bishop is there to help one overcome and repent of sin.  This can be one of those.  I PERSONALLY feel it is a personal matter between an individual and the Lord...BUT my personal opinion is not what the directive is.  The directive tends to be open to interpretation, but there have been many church leaders which have expressed that this should be told to a Bishop.  

While throwing out old materials from the stake clerks office I came across an old pamphlet about pornography. I can’t remember the year of publication. It said that every instance of porn viewing should be confessed to the bishop. Considering the broad definition of porn which is often used this would have members seeing their bishop every time they see an inappropriate scene in a tv show or movie, read something sex related or opened the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue.

It has been my understanding that the sins which need to be confessed to the bishop are those which may affect ones standing in the church. Considering that porn use and masturbation are two things among others which are specifically mentioned as not cause for disciplinary action, it would then stand to reason that they don’t need to be confessed to the bishop unless the member wants the counsel and advice of the bishop in the matter. 

[JohnsonJones]

38 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

While throwing out old materials from the stake clerks office I came across an old pamphlet about pornography. I can’t remember the year of publication. It said that every instance of porn viewing should be confessed to the bishop. Considering the broad definition of porn which is often used this would have members seeing their bishop every time they see an inappropriate scene in a tv show or movie, read something sex related or opened the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue.

It has been my understanding that the sins which need to be confessed to the bishop are those which may affect ones standing in the church. Considering that porn use and masturbation are two things among others which are specifically mentioned as not cause for disciplinary action, it would then stand to reason that they don’t need to be confessed to the bishop unless the member wants the counsel and advice of the bishop in the matter. 

It's a delicate subject.  In theory, members have been advised to confess these types of sins to their Bishops.  To understand why, I suppose I could explain my viewpoint.  Understand, this is MY viewpoint, not necessarily the church's.

There are some sins that, regardless of how much you try to repent, you, yourself may not feel that you are completely forgiven without either the Lord coming down personally to tell you, or someone else that he trusts telling you.  In addition, while in the middle of those sins, at times it is very hard for that person to overcome them without some outward form to help them.  Finally, when in the midst of these sins, they have made themselves unclean (I suppose that's a nice way of putting it) and thus they should probably not be performing certain church functions.  Sins that violate the Law of Chastity or are akin to that are some of these sins that often are in this field.

In the 60s, 70s, and early 80s it was highly encouraged for young men and women to come forward and confess of any and all of these types of sins.  That would include Masturbation among many other sins.  This wasn't really a debatable stance.  It was a very clearly stated by apostles and prophets that any young man who was NOT clean of this type of transgression/sin should not be on a mission.

This stance started lightening in the mid-80s around the time Spencer W. Kimball passed and Ezra Taft Benson became prophet.  It didn't go away per se, but it simply wasn't stressed or mentioned as much.  They managed to have a Chastity talk in Priesthood General Conference session at least once a year (and sometimes twice, one at each session), but in many instances it was far more general in the approach of being chaste, though confessing was commonly brought up.

With the spread of TV, internet, and other resources, pornography has exploded.  Even as the problem (in my opinion) has become far more widespread and pestilent, the church has slowly ebbed down on what it enforces or reinforces in various directions.

For example, in the 70s and early 80s it was possible that someone who had committed fornication, sometimes multiple times, would still repent and go on a mission.  This was actually something people remarked about....where the bad boy of high school would clean up their act right after graduation so they could repent and go on a mission.  By the mid to late 90s these types were being advocated to not be allowed to go.  AT the same time, actions regarding a young man that had a masturbation problem was changing.  If they actually made it out to the mission field, instead of being sent home at times, (and it was MP dependent) a young man might be allowed to stay.  It would depend on how bad the MP thought it was and if the young man might be able to overcome it and deal with it as a missionary.  At least from what I saw and my perspective of the missionaries I saw at the time.

We have continued to have the sins of pornography, masturbation, and even other sins with less severe penalty in the church as the problem has grown and gotten worse (once again, in my opinion).  Part of this is exhibiting the LOVE of the Lord.  Our role in this life isn't to cut our brothers and sisters down, but to help them up and bring them up to a higher level.  AS such, it is still advised that the young man confess, but in many instances it is from a different approach.  Rather than the idea that they have violated the law and must be punished, it is from the idea of loving the young man or woman and helping them to repent. 

At times there isn't much too it.  They had the sin many years ago, have since prayed and tried to repent and are no longer involved with it.  In many of these instances they have suffered FAR longer over the years and punished themselves far worse than any church discipline would ever do.  There is no reason to make it worse and all they really need to know is that the Lord has forgiven them already.  You are simply telling them as the Lord's servant so that their minds may be eased and their spirits lifted and their conscience clear.

At other times they have struggled and perhaps given up almost all hope.  Here, one needs to listen to the Spirit and seek the counsel of the Lord.  A plan of action needs to be agreed upon with you and the individual and their hope that they can still be forgiven.  You need to assure them that they are loved tremendously by the Savior and are VERY VALUABLE to him.  However, you CANNOT CONDONE their actions.  You can sympathize with how hard it is or various other things, but you cannot condone their actions, and one should condemn the sin. 

In regards to pornography and masturbation specifically, and not the more serious sin of Fornication...

My personal thoughts as I have seen various young (and not so young even) people struggle with this, and prayed about it in seeing their struggles I have been led to read about it.  I've found out the scriptural contexts and other items that relate to it and my own opinion is that this is a deeply personal difficulty.  It does not affect others as much or directly as many other sins.  In this fashion my opinion is that it IS something that COULD be handled between an individual and the Lord (personal opinion), but many may still have lingering doubts of forgiveness or doubts of whether they are clean or not. 

It is this to why at times it seems young men have received instructions to talk to their fathers or parents about such things, while at other times they are advised to talk to their church leaders.  It can be very embarrassing for a young man (and many church leaders who listen, believe it or not, it's just not something one wants to really listen to...at least for me) to talk about.  It can be much easier when dealt with via the parents or in that fashion.  I think others have the same opinion that it is more of a personal thing between an individual and the Lord that can be done in that fashion.  The problem is that many cannot tell if or when they were forgiven and thus the problem remains.  In these instances where they've already gone through the process themselves, repented and gone for years without a problem but still weighed down with guilt and talk to a church leader, it is a simple matter of informing them that they are clean.

Much more problematic than that however, in some ways it is far more addicting than even some of the more serious sins that one can be excommunicated from.  In many instances, there are those that without the Lord's help that would not be able to over come the sin of pornography. 

I feel that the Lord will forgive those who are guilty of this sin as soon as they ask...the problem though arises that even as they are forgiven they may already be engaged in it once more.  They need the aid of the Holy Ghost and constant prayer.  This, I feel is one of the big reasons why the apostles encourage those suffering from this sin to go seek help.  Much like Smoking or drinking are not great sins (but will keep you from the temple for the most part), but are highly addictive...so are other sins that people need help overcoming.

These sins are so prevalent and widespread in our day that they MUST address it.  The other difficulty is I feel that there are MANY young men (and I may be mistaken, hopefully I am, but I get the impression of this) that do not seek help but are suffering greatly from this massive plague on our society.  They are dissuaded because they perceive it to be a sin akin to fornication and fear for their membership or standing in the church. 

My personal hope would be that the church eventually addresses this by defining it as a personal sin and making this clear, and telling people that they CAN repent and overcome it on their own if they so desire.  However, also stress that if they cannot the Bishop is there to help them, and that there are many other programs within the church that can also help them.  However, for now we are left with the past admonitions of how to handle it and how one should go about it. 

Edited August 31, 2018 by JohnsonJones
clarity

[NeedleinA]

12 hours ago, BJ64 said:

When I was interviewed to be ordained a high priest about three years ago the stake president asked me if I masturbate.

Personally I found the question offensive.

When you spoke up during your interview and told the Stake President that you found his question offensive, what was his response?

[BJ64]

6 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

The interesting thing about Masturbation is that it was NOT part of the Law of Chastity...until it was.  In fact no major artifacts regarding it really came out in the early days of the church.  It wasn't until nearly 50 years that we start even hearing some peeps about it. If one tries to find what the actual origins of it was from a worldly historical point of view (rather than spiritual) much of it seems related to several quack theories that came out in the 19th century and were spreading among religions concerning it causing insanity and other maladies among other ridiculous claims. It has been proven these claims which started this religious fervor over masturbation were false and had no basis in reality or medicine.  However, despite that, these claims have continued (and you can even see remnants of acceptance of these in some LDS books as late as the 1970s and 80s, far past it was proven to be false medically, where they claim similar things of masturbation leading to insanity or homosexuality.  luckily these same books cover OTHER elements in regards to chastity and why one should strive not to participate in masturbation or other self debasing actions).

Then there came a focus and we DID hear from Prophets and Apostles that young men should Refrain from this and it was deeply associated with the Law of Chastity.  However, if one looks at the wording in the Bible and actual meanings, there is NO commandment against it in the Bible or scriptures.  It is NON-Scriptural.

 

I believe that society’s anti-masturbation hysteria during the 16th through 19th century was due to medical misinformation. When you are told that masturbation causes insanity and all manner of disease of course you’re going to do whatever you can to get everyone to avoid it like the plague. 

 

However I think masturbation became a sin during the middle ages when Catholic theologians pronounced it as such justifying their position on the basis that any sexual act that cannot result in conception is unnatural and therefore evil. This also included any sex act of a married couple which could not result in conception. They went so far as to teach that masturbation and sex acts of married couples which could not result in conception were more grievous sins than rape because rape is a natural sex act that can result in conception. Pretty mixed up stuff. Fortunately I’m not bound by the teachings of medieval  Catholic theologians.