Church responds to man on hunger strike

[Just_A_Guy]

39 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

I believe there are too many members who blow the seriousness of masturbation way out of proportion to the actual seriousness of the matter.

I’m sure you do believe that, BJ.  I’m sure you do.

And since when do you care a fig about what Spencer Kimball ever said about matters of sexual propriety?  Changed your mind about his First Presidency’s warning against oral copulation, have you?

Edited September 1, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[Iggy]

29 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

(money saving tip: never pay for lostinwater's opinion - it's always free ).

so is mine. @lostinwater have you read all of his posts? He is saying all of that, not others using him to their own ends.

Quote

@BJ64 “rather common indiscretion”. 

Common indiscretion does NOT mean, oh well - since so MANY do it, it is okay. It means, It is a rather common (meaning many are doing it), indiscretion (meaning that in Pres. Kimball day, rather than say Masturbation/ Sexual stimulation - the polite term was indiscretion.

Just like the polite term in his day for a pregnant woman was: With Child.

Need to get the language usages correct. 🤔

[lostinwater]

1 minute ago, Iggy said:

so is mine. @lostinwater have you read all of his posts? He is saying all of that, not others using him to their own ends.

i assume you mean Sam Young.  Yes, i've listened to him extensively.  

i know people who have been probed in completely unacceptable ways by ecclesiastical leaders.  Anyone is more than welcome to tell these people that they are wrong, prideful, sinful, unworthy, or statistically irrelevant outliers.  But as far as i'm concerned, those are the people Sam is talking about.  And honestly, i don't think organizations change without methods like the ones that Sam's using.  

And i'm certainly not saying TCOJCOLDS is under any obligation not to excommunicate him.  i don't think anyone could not have seen this one coming.

i'm entirely aware that there are experiences outside of my circle of influence that can, and should, be accounted for.   My thinking has been moderated by hearing some of those experiences here - and for that i am grateful.

[Iggy]

5 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

i assume you mean Sam Young.  Yes, I've listened to him extensively.  I know people who have been probed in completely unacceptable ways by ecclesiastical leaders. [/quote] 

So how many Bishops, 1st Counselors, 2nd Counselors in the 30,506 Wards and Branch's have done this? - According to Sam Young, the gist of his blog posts is that it is 99% of them. That is 29,802 Wards and Branch's. THAT is just fantastical. So much so that he is 100% NOT believable to me.

I won't argue that there are Bishops & Counselors, Steak Presidencies also who have totally stepped over the line of their sacred stewardship. I also agree that their are simple priesthood holders who have also stepped over their sacred stewardship and molested the youth. But why stop at just the youth, certainly their have been Good Latter-day Saints who have broken the law of Chasity, and also has not been sexual faithful to a spouse [fidelity]. 

He got what he wanted from the 1st Presidency. There will be 2 adults in all youth classes. There will be another adult in with the interviews IF the interviewee wishes it. The 1st Presidency has also stated that the questions to be asked, be given to the parents/guardians so that they may go over them & go over them with their child.

Now, please explain to me, Why is he still complaining???? Oh, yeah the 1st Presidency made it public.

Quote

And honestly, i don't think organizations change without methods like the ones that Sam's using.  

I honestly know that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, DO INDEED change policies without the dramatic take it to the public eye antics that Sam is employing. One that I was involved with was changing the way the people sent the names of the dead into the Temple. With my employing the Report button as often as I had to when my little sister kept sending/reserving names of our Uncles/Aunts/Cousins/Nephews without the proper permission. Took me nearly a year of reporting, getting minutely detailed instructions on how to undo, and clean it up. Man Sakes Alive that Nitwit had our biological grandmother married to 6 different men, and her real husband married to 4 other women. AND had sent all of their work in to the temple to be done.

So, if you go to your Temple & Family History Consultant in your Ward/ Branch or even in your Stake, they can tell you the improvements that have come about because enough members used that little report button and wrote out in plain wording the problem with that part of sharing your ancestors names to have their proxy work done at the Temple. 

Also, with all of the names I reported, there were over 50 - the powers to be- the Temple & Family History., the Temple in her area, The Stake President and her own Bishop. Her temple recommend was taken away, she was blocked out of sharing names with the temple, or others and from reserving and printing out ordinance cards. She is still allowed to add sources - but when she does I get an email and text alert so that I can go and make sure they are correct.

Now, she didn't start up a petition to demand things from the church, or to tell people NOT to join the church or to leave the church. She also didn't bait the 1st Presidency and all of the Apostles to come around to her way of thinking. At least her Bishop &/or Stake President hasn't notified me of that. What they have texted to me is that she is doing well in the classes they all recommended -  and she finally got a decent job with decent wages and they hope and pray that she will keep her fantastical stories to her journal and not voice them [she reinvents her own and our families life stories - and it is malicious, not fun time] to anyone and everyone in hearing distance.

[BJ64]

53 minutes ago, Iggy said:

so is mine. @lostinwater have you read all of his posts? He is saying all of that, not others using him to their own ends.

Common indiscretion does NOT mean, oh well - since so MANY do it, it is okay. It means, It is a rather common (meaning many are doing it), indiscretion (meaning that in Pres. Kimball day, rather than say Masturbation/ Sexual stimulation - the polite term was indiscretion.

Just like the polite term in his day for a pregnant woman was: With Child.

Need to get the language usages correct. 🤔

The point I was trying to make is that he called it a rather common indrescretion not a horrendous sin. He didn’t say it was okay. 

in·dis·cre·lion

ˌindəˈskreSH(ə)n/

noun

1. behavior or speech that is indiscreet or displays a lack of good judgment.

   "he knew himself all too prone to indiscretion"

   synonyms:

   imprudence, injudiciousness, incaution, irresponsibility; carelessness, rashness, recklessness, impulsiveness, foolhardiness, foolishness, folly;  tactlessness, thoughtlessness, insensitivity;  humorousfoot-in-mouth disease "he was prone to indiscretion" blunder, lapse, gaffe, mistake, faux pas, error, slip, impropriety; misdemeanor, transgression, peccadillo, solecism, misdeed; informalslip-up "his past indiscretions"

 

He did not say indiscretion to avoid the use of the word masturbation. Here is the complete sentence.

“Masturbation, a rather common indiscretion, is not approved of the Lord nor of his church, regardless of what may have been said by others whose “norms” are lower. Latter-day Saints are urged to avoid this practice.”

[BJ64]

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I’m sure you do believe that, BJ.  I’m sure you do.

And since when do you care a fig about what Spencer Kimball ever said about matters of sexual propriety?  Changed your mind about his First Presidency’s warning against oral copulation, have you?

My point is that the only prophet in recorded history to speak out against masturbation called it a rather common indiscretion. He was opposed to it but he called it an indiscretion. 

in·dis·cre·tion

ˌindəˈskreSH(ə)n/

noun

1. behavior or speech that is indiscreet or displays a lack of good judgment.

   "he knew himself all too prone to indiscretion"

   synonyms:

   imprudence, injudiciousness, incaution, irresponsibility; carelessness, rashness, recklessness, impulsiveness, foolhardiness, foolishness, folly;  tactlessness, thoughtlessness, insensitivity;  humorousfoot-in-mouth disease "he was prone to indiscretion" blunder, lapse, gaffe, mistake, faux pas, error, slip, impropriety; misdemeanor, transgression, peccadillo, solecism, misdeed; informalslip-up "his past indiscretions"

[Just_A_Guy]

13 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

The point I was trying to make is that he called it a rather common indrescretion not a horrendous sin. He didn’t say it was okay. 

in·dis·cre·lion

ˌindəˈskreSH(ə)n/

noun

1. behavior or speech that is indiscreet or displays a lack of good judgment.

   "he knew himself all too prone to indiscretion"

   synonyms:

   imprudence, injudiciousness, incaution, irresponsibility; carelessness, rashness, recklessness, impulsiveness, foolhardiness, foolishness, folly;  tactlessness, thoughtlessness, insensitivity;  humorousfoot-in-mouth disease "he was prone to indiscretion" blunder, lapse, gaffe, mistake, faux pas, error, slip, impropriety; misdemeanor, transgression, peccadillo, solecism, misdeed; informalslip-up "his past indiscretions"

 

He did not say indiscretion to avoid the use of the word masturbation. Here is the complete sentence.

“Masturbation, a rather common indiscretion, is not approved of the Lord nor of his church, regardless of what may have been said by others whose “norms” are lower. Latter-day Saints are urged to avoid this practice.”

The point I was trying to make is that you. do. not. care. what. Kimball. really. said.

If you had, perhaps you’d have also added the rest of his quotation: 

Anyone fettered by this weakness should abandon the habit before he goes on a mission or receives the holy priesthood or goes in the temple for his blessings.  

Sometimes masturbation is the introduction to the more serious sins of exhibitionism and the gross sin of homosexuality. We would avoid mentioning these unholy terms and these reprehensible practices were it not for the fact that we have a responsibility to the youth of Zion that they be not deceived by those who would call bad good, and black white.

”Bad”.  “Unholy”.  “Reprehensible”.  Quite strategic omissions on your part, no?  

And you’ve alleged in this thread that yet your stake president had no business asking you about it before you were ordained as a high priest, even though Kimball is quite clear that the practice—until abandoned— disqualifies one from advancement in the Melchizedek Priesthood.

I get not wanting people—especially youth—to become overly neurotic and debilitated by past behaviors, @BJ64; but the tenor of your rhetoric and mis-selection of quotes whose authors you obviously don’t consider to be truly authoritative, suggest that you are subtly trying to advance a much more libertine agenda here.

[Just_A_Guy]

8 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

My point is that the only prophet in recorded history to speak out against masturbation called it a rather common indiscretion. He was opposed to it but he called it an indiscretion. 

in·dis·cre·tion

ˌindəˈskreSH(ə)n/

noun

1. behavior or speech that is indiscreet or displays a lack of good judgment.

   "he knew himself all too prone to indiscretion"

   synonyms:

   imprudence, injudiciousness, incaution, irresponsibility; carelessness, rashness, recklessness, impulsiveness, foolhardiness, foolishness, folly;  tactlessness, thoughtlessness, insensitivity;  humorousfoot-in-mouth disease "he was prone to indiscretion" blunder, lapse, gaffe, mistake, faux pas, error, slip, impropriety; misdemeanor, transgression, peccadillo, solecism, misdeed; informalslip-up "his past indiscretions"

What did Kimball say about lying?

Kimball was not the “only prophet” to speak out against masturbation.  Elders Petersen, Packer, and McConkie all addressed the topic of masturbation; and church materials released under the imprimatur of the First Presidency over the past forty years have consistently warned against it.

Edited September 1, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[BJ64]

2 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

The point I was trying to make is that you. do. not. care. what. Kimball. really. said.

If you had, perhaps you’d have also added the rest of his quotation: 

Anyone fettered by this weakness should abandon the habit before he goes on a mission or receives the holy priesthood or goes in the temple for his blessings.  

Sometimes masturbation is the introduction to the more serious sins of exhibitionism and the gross sin of homosexuality. We would avoid mentioning these unholy terms and these reprehensible practices were it not for the fact that we have a responsibility to the youth of Zion that they be not deceived by those who would call bad good, and black white.

”Bad”.  “Unholy”.  “Reprehensible”.  Quite strategic omissions on your part, no?  

And you’ve alleged in this thread that yet your stake president had no business asking you about it before you were ordained as a high priest, even though Kimball is quite clear that the practice—until abandoned— disqualifies one from advancement in the Melchizedek Priesthood.

I get not wanting people—especially youth—to become overly neurotic and debilitated by past behaviors, @BJ64; but the tenor of your rhetoric and mis-selection of quotes whose authors you obviously don’t consider to be truly authoritative, suggest that you are subtly trying to advance a much more libertine agenda here.

I could post the entire article here but it would consume a lot of space. 

You will also remember that he said that those practicing oral sex should not enter the temple. Something that is not asked about, talked about nor do I think anyone even thinks about these days. 

I believe he was just as much opposed to oral sex as he was masturbation. However instead of calling it a rather common indiscretion he called it an unholy and impure practice. 

[BJ64]

47 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

What did Kimball say about lying?

Kimball was not the “only prophet” to speak out against masturbation.  Elders Petersen, Packer, and McConkie all addressed the topic of masturbation; and church materials released under the imprimatur of the First Presidency over the past forty years have consistently warned against it.

My definition for prophet in this case is the senior apostle. The only man on earth authorized to receive revelation for the entire church. 

Materials published by the church May have mentioned it but most have been quoting President Kimball or have no direct link to who said it. I challenge you to find a direct quote on the subject by any prophet (president) of the church in recorded history other than President Kimball. I also challenge you to find a direct quote from a current church source from Elders Peterson, Packer or McConkie. 

I know that all print and digital versions of Elder Packers masturbation talk have been removed from church sources and I have never found Elder Peterson’s guide to overcoming masturbation from any official church source. I have never been aware of statements on masturbation by Elder McConkie from any official church source. 

For those interested, the word masturbation has been said seven times in general conference in the entire church history. Self pollution zero times, self abuse zero times, pornography 413 times. 

The seven times masturbation has been said were in two talks. One by President Kimball and the other by Elder Featherstone. Elder Packer’s talk was completely metaphorical and therefore never said the word. Elder Scott also had a way of addressing masturbation without ever actually mentioning it. 

Edited September 1, 2018 by BJ64

[BJ64]

Duplicate post

Edited September 1, 2018 by BJ64

[JohnsonJones]

6 hours ago, BJ64 said:

 self abuse zero times

 

Just a note, though some Mormons HAVE used this with a different definition that they associate with sexual items...self abuse in the Bible and traditionally is talking about something else and something FAR darker.

It is literally abuse of the body.  It is the desecration of one's body typically, normally by cutting or other measures.  Today it is associated in many instances with depression.

The ideas around it have changed over the years.  In some times it was not just those that cut and intentionally broke bones and other things, but also those that actually modified their body (for example, those ear plugs that are popular these days in some eras would have fallen under this, tattoos have fallen under this in some societies, various piercings of the body, etc, and obviously self flagellation, but when we refer to that we mean people literally whipping themselves, at times with small pieces of metal in a whip or otherwise). 

Self Flagellates and those who did these things were many times associated with idolatry and the worship of the Pagan Idols of the nations that surrounded Israel.   They would cut themselves and desecrate their (and others) bodies.  This was a direct practice associated directly with Pagan religions and idolatry.  Self abuse (self injury and self multilation) were practiced regularly in these religions.

Obviously much of the ideas of what went with this changed in the Middle Ages and Rennaissance but normally one could tell if someone was self abusing if the individual was cutting themselves or abusing their own bodies.

It is interesting that we, as Mormons, who hold that our bodies are a temple, do not normally recognize the various things about self abuse.  Self Harm has become much more popular in today's society.

Part of that is because of the later change to what the word meant, especially in the past hundred years, to where it can also be a euphemism for self-arousal...etc.  Typically though, self harm or self inflicted wounds and injuries and self mutilation are something rather serious.  Which leads to the other reason we may not see it as it was originally intended.  Self Harm and Self inflicted injuries are now associated with Mental illness and the church has avoided this subject as bringing on sinful behavior.  In addition, Self-Mutilation is more acceptable these days than it was, even a mere 40 years ago.

[Just_A_Guy]

11 hours ago, BJ64 said:

I could post the entire article here but it would consume a lot of space. 

You will also remember that he said that those practicing oral sex should not enter the temple. Something that is not asked about, talked about nor do I think anyone even thinks about these days. 

I believe he was just as much opposed to oral sex as he was masturbation. However instead of calling it a rather common indiscretion he called it an unholy and impure practice. 

You obviously didn’t read the quote I provided, in the which a) Kimball said people struggling with masturbation shouldn’t go to the temple, and b) Kimball described “masturbation” as amongst a collection of “unholy” terms and “reprehensible” practices. Go into the talk itself and you’ll see he actually calls it “reprehensible” twice.  

And you don’t address the fact that no matter how explicit Kimball (or any other Church president) may have chosen to be on the matter, you yourself are quite happy to throw their unambiguous counsel out the window whenever you find it inconvenient—as you have on the issue of oral sex.  Even if one were to accept arguendo the proposition that you are citing Kimball honestly (which you aren’t), why should anyone else grant him more deference than you do?  You’ve spent the last few months here tearing down the house you now want to live in.

10 hours ago, BJ64 said:

My definition for prophet in this case is the senior apostle. The only man on earth authorized to receive revelation for the entire church. 

Materials published by the church May have mentioned it but most have been quoting President Kimball or have no direct link to who said it. I challenge you to find a direct quote on the subject by any prophet (president) of the church in recorded history other than President Kimball. I also challenge you to find a direct quote from a current church source from Elders Peterson, Packer or McConkie. 

I know that all print and digital versions of Elder Packers masturbation talk have been removed from church sources and I have never found Elder Peterson’s guide to overcoming masturbation from any official church source. I have never been aware of statements on masturbation by Elder McConkie from any official church source. 

For those interested, the word masturbation has been said seven times in general conference in the entire church history. Self pollution zero times, self abuse zero times, pornography 413 times. 

The seven times masturbation has been said were in two talks. One by President Kimball and the other by Elder Featherstone. Elder Packer’s talk was completely metaphorical and therefore never said the word. Elder Scott also had a way of addressing masturbation without ever actually mentioning it. 

This is like trying to nail Jell-O to a wall.  First you say “a prophet must have said it”, so I offer several prophets who have said it (and in hindsight could actually offer two more), and in response you change the goalposts by prescribing which kind of prophet, the circumstances under which the statement was made, the precise vocabulary that must be used, and the means by which that statement must still be available for modern consumption.  (“The fact that the conference was reported and that the audio remains on the Church website isn’t enough; it’s not binding unless it’s online in *written* form!”  I mean—really?!? You’re going to hang your hat at the final judgment on that defense?)

But, to show the rank dishonesty of your claim that no other Church president has condemned masturbation (or used the term “self abuse” in a Conference setting, I give you . . . 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1983/10/what-manner-of-men-ought-we-to-be?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1986/10/godly-characteristics-of-the-master?lang=eng

 

 

 

Your most recent post, though, does confirm my earlier observation that: there are many *members* in the Church who treat masturbation far too lightly (and frankly, are generally more interested in defending some presupposed right to sexual pleasure than they are interested in knowing the Lord may have to say on the matter).  Your posts here have had none of the spirit of sincere curiosity as to the Lord’s thoughts and warnings on the matter, but reek of a legalistic mentality of “what can I get away with, and how can I justify indulging in something the Church has clearly and unambiguously warned against?”

Edited September 1, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[BJ64]

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Just a note, though some Mormons HAVE used this with a different definition that they associate with sexual items...self abuse in the Bible and traditionally is talking about something else and something FAR darker.

It is literally abuse of the body.  It is the desecration of one's body typically, normally by cutting or other measures.  Today it is associated in many instances with depression.

The ideas around it have changed over the years.  In some times it was not just those that cut and intentionally broke bones and other things, but also those that actually modified their body (for example, those ear plugs that are popular these days in some eras would have fallen under this, tattoos have fallen under this in some societies, various piercings of the body, etc, and obviously self flagellation, but when we refer to that we mean people literally whipping themselves, at times with small pieces of metal in a whip or otherwise). 

Self Flagellates and those who did these things were many times associated with idolatry and the worship of the Pagan Idols of the nations that surrounded Israel.   They would cut themselves and desecrate their (and others) bodies.  This was a direct practice associated directly with Pagan religions and idolatry.  Self abuse (self injury and self multilation) were practiced regularly in these religions.

Obviously much of the ideas of what went with this changed in the Middle Ages and Rennaissance but normally one could tell if someone was self abusing if the individual was cutting themselves or abusing their own bodies.

It is interesting that we, as Mormons, who hold that our bodies are a temple, do not normally recognize the various things about self abuse.  Self Harm has become much more popular in today's society.

Part of that is because of the later change to what the word meant, especially in the past hundred years, to where it can also be a euphemism for self-arousal...etc.  Typically though, self harm or self inflicted wounds and injuries and self mutilation are something rather serious.  Which leads to the other reason we may not see it as it was originally intended.  Self Harm and Self inflicted injuries are now associated with Mental illness and the church has avoided this subject as bringing on sinful behavior.  In addition, Self-Mutilation is more acceptable these days than it was, even a mere 40 years ago.

Thank you. I agree with your assessment of self abuse. However, self abuse is the euphemism currently used in the English language version of the general handbook of instructions when referring to masturbation. Other languages use the word masturbation. 

Tadd R. Callister also used the term self abuse when speaking about masturbation in a talk given at BYU Idaho a few years ago. A version of this talk was also printed in the Ensign magazine with the same self abuse wording. 

I don’t know why the church/ church leaders are so into using euphemisms to avoid saying masturbation. (Elder Packer”s “little factory” talk) Elder Scott and FTSOY carefully word their advice with terms like “avoid arousing sexual feelings in your own body”. If the church doesn’t want you to masturbate then why don’t they just say don’t masturbate instead of beating around the bush? (No pun intended)

I may be totally wrong here, and I probably am but I wonder if the reason is because masturbation has become completely socially acceptable and those who condemn it are viewed as old fashioned and foolish. So rather than risking looking old fashioned and foolish they use other words to get their point across. 

This however to me just confuses things. When you can honestly say that there is no mention of masturbation in the handbook or FTSOY or any general conference talk in the past 38 years it makes it appear that it is no longer thought of as much to be concerned with. Combine that with a statement by Elder Kim B. Clark saying that “masturbation is a behavior that, if continued, could over time could lead to things that are sinful...” certainly can lead one to believe it’s not much of a sin anymore in the eyes of the church. Yet there are local leaders who still treat it as a sin next to murder. 

Ibasked my current bishop why it is that there is so much inconsistency in how it it treated. His reply was that it’s not like bishops are trained on how to handle it so it’s up to each do decide what to do on an individual basis. If it was a great sin then it would seem that there would be a clearly written policy on how to address it rather than simply saying that self abuse is not a reason for disciplinary action. 

[lostinwater]

10 hours ago, Iggy said:

So how many Bishops, 1st Counselors, 2nd Counselors in the 30,506 Wards and Branch's have done this? - According to Sam Young, the gist of his blog posts is that it is 99% of them. That is 29,802 Wards and Branch's. THAT is just fantastical. So much so that he is 100% NOT believable to me.

 I won't argue that there are Bishops & Counselors, Steak Presidencies also who have totally stepped over the line of their sacred stewardship. I also agree that their are simple priesthood holders who have also stepped over their sacred stewardship and molested the youth. But why stop at just the youth, certainly their have been Good Latter-day Saints who have broken the law of Chasity, and also has not been sexual faithful to a spouse [fidelity]. 

 He got what he wanted from the 1st Presidency. There will be 2 adults in all youth classes. There will be another adult in with the interviews IF the interviewee wishes it. The 1st Presidency has also stated that the questions to be asked, be given to the parents/guardians so that they may go over them & go over them with their child.

Now, please explain to me, Why is he still complaining???? Oh, yeah the 1st Presidency made it public.

Thanks.

Fair points.  i don't know that percentages matter that much when you are touched by this directly.  But i hear what you are saying.

And i actually agree that it's not just affecting youth.  Most of the people i've known who have had a bad experience were over 18. 

Usually, i've seen it go something like this:

- A very above-board question like "Do you keep the law of chastity" is asked

- Strong sense of awkwardness and discomfort enters the room

- Deeply conflicted person feels like they are obligated to answer their priesthood leader (because he is their priesthood leader, and because they want to maintain their standing in TCOJCOLDS).  But they really, really, really don't want to.

- Leader probes, in pornographic detail (trying to keep this G rated - but you can find the kinds of questions that get asked if you choose).  Just a ridiculous amount of detail is demanded.

- Details are reluctantly supplied

- Person leaves the office feeling violated and shamed, having shared the most intimate details of their life with someone they barely know, or someone they know very well on a purely social level (not sure which one is worse)

 

i see a lot of positive stories about people being helped by their bishops in things like these - and i fully acknowledge the positive aspects of those experiences.  

Mostly though, i've seen people just eat themselves alive with shame - and then be written off as sinners who just didn't want to repent when they try to say anything about it at all.

And i guess i seem Sam's as being someone that at least addresses the existence of these kinds of experiences.  Sheds some light on them.

[BJ64]

33 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

First you say “a prophet must have said it”, so I offer several prophets who have said it (and in hindsight could actually offer two more), and in response you change the goalposts by prescribing which kind of prophet, the circumstances under which the statement was made, the precise vocabulary that must be used, and the means by which that statement must still be available for modern consumption. 

You know very well that in the church when we refer to “the prophet” we are referring to the president and senior apostle. I didn’t change any goal post. 

Mas far as being currently available, if it can’t be accessed it’s the same as no longer existing. I know that the Elder Packer address video is still available on  lds.org but it has been removed from the lds gospel library. 

[BJ64]

51 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

But, to show the rank dishonesty of your claim that no other Church president has condemned masturbation (or used the term “self abuse” in a Conference setting, I give you . . . 

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1983/10/what-manner-of-men-ought-we-to-be?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1986/10/godly-characteristics-of-the-master?lang=eng

When I did my search I did not hyphenate self abuse. Self-abuse has been said four times in general conference.  

[BJ64]

55 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

 Your posts here have had none of the spirit of sincere curiosity as to the Lord’s thoughts and warnings on the matter, but reek of a legalistic mentality of “what can I get away with, and how can I justify indulging in something the Church has clearly and unambiguously warned against?”

My sincere curiosity has led me over the past seven or eight years to study everything I can find on the subject as far as it has been presented both in and out of the church historically and modern. There’s not much that has been written on the matter that I haven’t read. 

[Just_A_Guy]

4 hours ago, BJ64 said:

This however to me just confuses things. When you can honestly say that there is no mention of masturbation in the handbook or FTSOY or any general conference talk in the past 38 years it makes it appear that it is no longer thought of as much to be concerned with. Combine that with a statement by Elder Kim B. Clark saying that “masturbation is a behavior that, if continued, could over time could lead to things that are sinful...” certainly can lead one to believe it’s not much of a sin anymore in the eyes of the church. Yet there are local leaders who still treat it as a sin next to murder. 

No, you cannot honestly say that there is "no mention of masturbation in the handbook or FTSOY or any general conference talk 38 years".  That's three lies in one.  The only way you can get close to being there is by a) making a legalistic distinction between the word versus the practice the word denotes; or b) deliberately creating confusion where there was none, by insisting on explicit use of the M-word and splitting hairs over terminology that 98% of the active, believing Church membership understands. 

And it's pretty ironic for you to complain that the numerous statements the Church and/or its leaders have made in the issue are somehow lacking in clarity, authority, and/or accessibility; while also hanging your hat on an off-the-cuff quotation from an obscure interview with a Seventy in Time Magazine that is absent from any Church-related publication (whether official or unofficial) and suggesting that said quotation is somehow making the hoi polloi of the Church unsure as to where the Church truly stands on the issue.  

Quote

Ibasked my current bishop why it is that there is so much inconsistency in how it it treated. His reply was that it’s not like bishops are trained on how to handle it so it’s up to each do decide what to do on an individual basis. If it was a great sin then it would seem that there would be a clearly written policy on how to address it rather than simply saying that self abuse is not a reason for disciplinary action.

The Church Handbook of Instructions doesn't say it's not a reason for disciplinary action; it says it's not a reason for a disciplinary council.  Informal probation is still an option for masturbation.  That, by the way, is the same guidance the CHI gives regarding pornography use. 

3 hours ago, BJ64 said:

You know very well that in the church when we refer to “the prophet” we are referring to the president and senior apostle. I didn’t change any goal post. 

You didn't refer to "THE" prophet.  You said "the only prophet in recorded history to speak out against masturbation called it a rather common indiscretion."  You know very well that in the Church we consider all members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve to be prophets; yet you tried to remove at least seven of them from the discussion in one fell swoop.  You failed to mention Elders Wells, Clark, McConkie, Petersen, Packer, Stapley, and Scott; failed to mention President Benson; failed to mention the numerous other Church publications that have gone out over the imprimatur of the entire First Presidency under the administrations of Presidents Kimball, Benson, Hunter, Hinckley, Monson, and Nelson; and failed to even provide the full text of Kimball's own comments to which you cite.  

Quote

Mas far as being currently available, if it can’t be accessed it’s the same as no longer existing. 

Except that you know it exists, I know it exists, God knows it exists, and God knows you know it exists.  So . . . good luck with that excuse at the last day.  

3 hours ago, BJ64 said:

My sincere curiosity has led me over the past seven or eight years to study everything I can find on the subject as far as it has been presented both in and out of the church historically and modern. There’s not much that has been written on the matter that I haven’t read. 

You mean to tell me that over seven or eight years, you never once saw either of Benson's sermons to which I linked earlier?  O-kaaaay, then . . . 

Whatever went into your research, your activities in this forum have been far from sincere.  To the contrary, they represent a one-sided attempt to conceal, de-legitimize, or obfuscate every statement made under the auspices of LDS authority that conflicts with your preferred worldview.

Edited September 1, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[Iggy]

Oh, thank you, thank you sooooooo much JAG - If I could only give your a 1,000 thank you emoji's.

Well said, young man!

[BJ64]

5 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Except that you know it exists, I know it exists, God knows it exists, and God knows you know it exists.  So . . . good luck with that excuse at the last day.  

Excuse for what? I don’t M, I’m merely stating that M is not as great a sin as many make it out to be. Compare the 413 references to pornography to the handful of direct references to M and a few vague references to it in general conference. It seems clear which is a greater concern. 

5 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

You mean to tell me that over seven or eight years, you never once saw either of Benson's sermons to which I linked earlier?  

As I said, I didn’t hyphenate self abuse when I searched. It’s also hard to do searches of vague euphemisms. 

[Fether]

28 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

Excuse for what? I don’t M, I’m merely stating that M is not as great a sin as many make it out to be. Compare the 413 references to pornography to the handful of direct references to M and a few vague references to it in general conference. It seems clear which is a greater concern. 

As I said, I didn’t hyphenate self abuse when I searched. It’s also hard to do searches of vague euphemisms. 

https://www.lds.org/search?

here is a page of links to Church approved articles including the word ‘M’ in it.

I didn’t read them all, but here are some

“ masturbation is considered by many in the world to be the harmless expression of an instinctive sex drive. Teach your children that the prophets have condemned it as a sin throughout the ages and that they can choose not to do it...The sin of masturbation occurs when a person stimulates his or her own sex organs for the purpose of sexual arousal. It is a perversion of the body’s passions. When we pervert these passions and intentionally use them for selfish, immoral purposes, we become carnal.”

“it is far too common a tragedy for young people to cultivate a strong sexual appetite even before they begin to date. One cause of this serious problem can be the sin of masturbation.... Masturbation can be described as manipulating one’s own sexual organs to produce sexual excitement. Such practice “is not approved of the Lord nor of his church,” said President Kimball”

That’s enough for me.

Edited September 2, 2018 by Fether

[Fether]

@BJ64

All that above being said... I do agree and find it frustrating that they don’t just SAY IT.

Charles Morse from the edge saidbit perfectly when he said

”SAY IT!!”

Edited September 2, 2018 by Fether

[zil]

Am I really the only person who thinks the For the Strength of Youth wording is the complete opposite of what @BJ64 calls it (confusing, "beating around the bush", representing a changed perspective toward acceptance)?

Under the law of Moses, the rule was not to commit adultery.  Under the higher law, it was not to even lust after a person - a higher standard.

Under the old law, the rule was "don't masturbate".  Under the higher law, it is "don't do anything which causes you to feel sexually aroused".  The latter can happen before and without masturbation (as well as during).  And it seems pretty obvious from the full text, as opposed to one mocked sentence, that the intent is to stop more than just masturbation, but any and all thoughts and feelings which lead up to that and other sexual sins (emphases mine):

Quote

Never do anything that could lead to sexual transgression. Treat others with respect, not as objects used to satisfy lustful and selfish desires. Before marriage, do not participate in passionate kissing, lie on top of another person, or touch the private, sacred parts of another person’s body, with or without clothing. Do not do anything else that arouses sexual feelings. Do not arouse those emotions in your own body. Pay attention to the promptings of the Spirit so that you can be clean and virtuous. The Spirit of the Lord will withdraw from one who is in sexual transgression.

Avoid situations that invite increased temptation, such as late-night or overnight activities away from home or activities where there is a lack of adult supervision. Do not participate in discussions or any media that arouse sexual feelings. Do not participate in any type of pornography. The Spirit can help you know when you are at risk and give you the strength to remove yourself from the situation. Have faith in and be obedient to the righteous counsel of your parents and leaders.

--from For the Strength of Youth

Just seems obvious to me - this is not a lessening or slackening of standards.  It's not giving up a losing battle.  It's fear of being called foolish - as if a prophet of God would fear such a thing.  It's raising the bar, inviting to embrace a higher standard.

[BJ64]

15 minutes ago, Fether said:

https://www.lds.org/search?

here is a page of links to Church approved articles including the word ‘M’ in it.

I didn’t read them all, but here are some

“ masturbation is considered by many in the world to be the harmless expression of an instinctive sex drive. Teach your children that the prophets have condemned it as a sin throughout the ages and that they can choose not to do it...The sin of masturbation occurs when a person stimulates his or her own sex organs for the purpose of sexual arousal. It is a perversion of the body’s passions. When we pervert these passions and intentionally use them for selfish, immoral purposes, we become carnal.”

“it is far too common a tragedy for young people to cultivate a strong sexual appetite even before they begin to date. One cause of this serious problem can be the sin of masturbation.... Masturbation can be described as manipulating one’s own sexual organs to produce sexual excitement. Such practice “is not approved of the Lord nor of his church,” said President Kimball”

That’s enough for me.

Yes of course I’ve read that passage. It’s found in part in chapter 5 of  A Parent’s Guide. 

Here’s a question for you. I asked before and no one has answered. 

Who were the prophets who throughout the ages have condemned masturbation? I can’t find them.