Conference Priesthood session — gone?

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by LDS Watchman »

cyclOps wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 10:38 pm
spiritMan wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 5:16 pm
cyclOps wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 5:06 pm
spiritMan wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 4:49 pm
Wait, what?

So it's totally cool to tell everyone and anyone openly my deepest sexual desires and that's totally cool?
Are you going to tell me you’re attracted to the opposite sex?
No. I am married. God tells me what I am to do
"That whosoever looketh. on a woman to lust after her hath committed. adultery with her already in his heart"

https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/lust
"Longing desire; eagerness to possess or enjoy"

Sexual desire for any woman not my wife is ungodly.

What about this is so complicated?
Do I need to tell you that every time I pass a candy store, I have a lust to take candy?
No!
To me there is a distinction between your basic sexual attraction and then lusting after someone.

Did you stop being heterosexual when you got married? No. Does that mean you lust after other women? No. Therefore I don’t think someone who is homosexual automatically falls into the category of someone who lusts after others.
I agree. Being attracted to someone doesn't automatically mean that you lust after them and desire sex with them.

However, I think there's a danger in comparing heterosexual attraction and homosexual attraction. They aren't the same thing. Heterosexual attraction is natural and from God, when kept with in its proper bounds. Homosexual attraction is unnatural and not from God. Ultimately it needs to be completely overcome, not kept just kept in check.

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5868
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by TheDuke »

If a missionary has SSA and keeps their mouth shut (like a horny hetero would) then no one will know and no one will be hurt. However, I stand by my comments that being openly gay, talking it up, bragging about it, and then living with another man, is not proper. I don't care if they find their companion ugly or unattractive. I mean I don't hang around hetero's that openly speak of lust. There is the occasional comment of some famous hot actress perhaps, but that is not indicative of lust.

The post above suggests what would happen to a straight missionary if he complained about a gay companion. It would not come to that as I would have already pulled my son and we'd be having the conversation in SLC in the church office building with the GA in charge of missionary policies, as likely the others would shun me. Sorry, but I would never put my son in that position, arrest me, ex me, whatever. Anyone who feels otherwise is entitled to their views, great, but keep you SSA children away from mine please! There are plenty of accepting companions I'm sure, you wouldn't need my sons.

User avatar
cyclOps
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1354

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by cyclOps »

LDS Watchman wrote: October 3rd, 2022, 9:34 am
cyclOps wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 10:38 pm
spiritMan wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 5:16 pm
cyclOps wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 5:06 pm

Are you going to tell me you’re attracted to the opposite sex?
No. I am married. God tells me what I am to do
"That whosoever looketh. on a woman to lust after her hath committed. adultery with her already in his heart"

https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/lust
"Longing desire; eagerness to possess or enjoy"

Sexual desire for any woman not my wife is ungodly.

What about this is so complicated?
Do I need to tell you that every time I pass a candy store, I have a lust to take candy?
No!
To me there is a distinction between your basic sexual attraction and then lusting after someone.

Did you stop being heterosexual when you got married? No. Does that mean you lust after other women? No. Therefore I don’t think someone who is homosexual automatically falls into the category of someone who lusts after others.
I agree. Being attracted to someone doesn't automatically mean that you lust after them and desire sex with them.

However, I think there's a danger in comparing heterosexual attraction and homosexual attraction. They aren't the same thing. Heterosexual attraction is natural and from God, when kept with in its proper bounds. Homosexual attraction is unnatural and not from God. Ultimately it needs to be completely overcome, not kept just kept in check.
I agree with all of that. How and when can it be overcome? I don’t have any experience with homosexual attraction so all I know is it can be overcome through Jesus Christ. See my post linked below where I tried to articulate more completely my thoughts on this subject.

viewtopic.php?p=1307650#p1307650

Serragon
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3444

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by Serragon »

Valheim wrote: October 3rd, 2022, 3:59 am The church has kept all that matters and done away with some pointless stuff. The church is handling the lgbt matters perfectly imo. Oaks and countless others have reaffirmed the eternal nature of things, and the priesthood duty of missionary work, but also acknowledged and worked with some lgbt organizations.
The fall back position of all those whose faith resides in the institution.

The generic words you occasionally hear and can be interpreted by all people as all things are the "real" position. The changes you see happening in the church itself regarding homosexuality is the unimportant stuff.

Who cares if a majority of our youth now believe that homosexuality is perfectly fine and that same sex marriage should not be considered sin? Unimportant
Who cares if people are no longer being taught to overcome this particular vice and fetish and are instead encouraged to indulge themselves further? Unimportant

We need to focus on the important stuff like making sure people who have chosen to indulge their sexual fetish can feel safe and comfortable broadcasting their sin and perversion in our meetings and activities. We need to make sure that the church re-inforces that this fetish is actually their primary identity and that all church members recognize and submit to it.

Yes.. they are handling it "perfectly".

Serragon
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3444

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by Serragon »

LDS Watchman wrote: October 3rd, 2022, 9:02 am
Serragon wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 4:53 pm
Our church leaders and those who defend this stuff play a shell game. They constantly shift to something you are not addressing to avoid being specific and to appear that nothing has really changed.

If you ask if homosexuality is sinful, they will say that same sex attraction has never been a sin. But that wasn't what you were asking.
Homosexual acts are sinful. Being tempted to commit homosexual acts, but resisting this temptation, is not sinful.

Furthermore, being attracted to someone doesn't mean that you fantasize about having sex with them or lust after them.
Serragon wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 4:53 pm If you ask if the church's position on homosexuality has changed, they will say that the Church will never recognize same sex sealings. But that wasn't what you were asking.
Etc.
The church has consistently maintained that homosexaul acts are a sin. This has not changed.

However, the church is trying to be much more inclusive of homosexauls, including those who engage in homosexual acts.

The church no longer teaches that there's anything wrong with same-sex attraction or even identifying as LGBTQ. The church no longer teaches that these desires are unnatural and need to be overcome.

The church has also softened up on its punishment for committing homosexual acts. It no longer automatically requires excommunication and no longer labels those in same-sex relationships as apostates.

Hope this answers your questions. :)
Your response very accurately describes the church's position, except for the statement that the church maintains that homosexual acts are a sin. This is incorrect. Homosexual acts are no longer considered sinful, and any act that is acceptable for heterosexuals under the law of chastity is also permissible for homosexuals.

But that does not mean that the accurate description makes any sense. The policies contradict the words, and the changes contradict all of judeo-christan history and all previous prophets of the restoration.

The reality is that the church no longer considers homosexuality to be sinful. They maintain that marriage must be between a man and a woman, but no longer maintain that any sexual or romantic conduct between people of the same sex is wrong. Consequently, as you noted, they no longer seek to defend or safeguard these doctrines, so membership councils are no longer required for members who decided to marry someone of the same sex anyway.

So clearly the church's position has changed in almost every facet. In fact, I can't think of one area involving homosexualiy or SSM where the church has not embraced the worldly definitions and ideas and rejected the scriptures and past prophets.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by LDS Watchman »

Serragon wrote: October 4th, 2022, 10:39 am
LDS Watchman wrote: October 3rd, 2022, 9:02 am
Serragon wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 4:53 pm
Our church leaders and those who defend this stuff play a shell game. They constantly shift to something you are not addressing to avoid being specific and to appear that nothing has really changed.

If you ask if homosexuality is sinful, they will say that same sex attraction has never been a sin. But that wasn't what you were asking.
Homosexual acts are sinful. Being tempted to commit homosexual acts, but resisting this temptation, is not sinful.

Furthermore, being attracted to someone doesn't mean that you fantasize about having sex with them or lust after them.
Serragon wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 4:53 pm If you ask if the church's position on homosexuality has changed, they will say that the Church will never recognize same sex sealings. But that wasn't what you were asking.
Etc.
The church has consistently maintained that homosexaul acts are a sin. This has not changed.

However, the church is trying to be much more inclusive of homosexauls, including those who engage in homosexual acts.

The church no longer teaches that there's anything wrong with same-sex attraction or even identifying as LGBTQ. The church no longer teaches that these desires are unnatural and need to be overcome.

The church has also softened up on its punishment for committing homosexual acts. It no longer automatically requires excommunication and no longer labels those in same-sex relationships as apostates.

Hope this answers your questions. :)
Your response very accurately describes the church's position, except for the statement that the church maintains that homosexual acts are a sin. This is incorrect. Homosexual acts are no longer considered sinful, and any act that is acceptable for heterosexuals under the law of chastity is also permissible for homosexuals.

But that does not mean that the accurate description makes any sense. The policies contradict the words, and the changes contradict all of judeo-christan history and all previous prophets of the restoration.

The reality is that the church no longer considers homosexuality to be sinful. They maintain that marriage must be between a man and a woman, but no longer maintain that any sexual or romantic conduct between people of the same sex is wrong. Consequently, as you noted, they no longer seek to defend or safeguard these doctrines, so membership councils are no longer required for members who decided to marry someone of the same sex anyway.

So clearly the church's position has changed in almost every facet. In fact, I can't think of one area involving homosexualiy or SSM where the church has not embraced the worldly definitions and ideas and rejected the scriptures and past prophets.
A quick check in the new For Strength of Youth Guide shows that what you are saying about the church no longer saying that homosexual acts are sinful is false.

"Sexual feelings are an important part of God’s plan to create happy marriages and eternal families. These feelings are not sinful—they are sacred. Because sexual feelings are so sacred and so powerful, God has given you His law of chastity to prepare you to use these feelings as He intends. The law of chastity states that God approves of sexual activity only between a man and a woman who are married. Many in the world ignore or even mock God’s law, but the Lord invites us to be His disciples and live a standard higher than the world’s."


"I am attracted to people of my same sex. How do these standards apply to me? Feeling same-sex attraction is not a sin. If you have these feelings and do not pursue or act on them, you are living Heavenly Father’s sacred law of chastity. You are a beloved child of God and a disciple of Jesus Christ. Remember that the Savior understands everything you experience. Through your covenant connection with Him, you will find strength to obey God’s commandments and receive the blessings He promises. Trust Him and His gospel."

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... y?lang=eng

Serragon
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3444

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by Serragon »

LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 3:02 pm
Serragon wrote: October 4th, 2022, 10:39 am
LDS Watchman wrote: October 3rd, 2022, 9:02 am
Serragon wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 4:53 pm
Our church leaders and those who defend this stuff play a shell game. They constantly shift to something you are not addressing to avoid being specific and to appear that nothing has really changed.

If you ask if homosexuality is sinful, they will say that same sex attraction has never been a sin. But that wasn't what you were asking.
Homosexual acts are sinful. Being tempted to commit homosexual acts, but resisting this temptation, is not sinful.

Furthermore, being attracted to someone doesn't mean that you fantasize about having sex with them or lust after them.
Serragon wrote: October 2nd, 2022, 4:53 pm If you ask if the church's position on homosexuality has changed, they will say that the Church will never recognize same sex sealings. But that wasn't what you were asking.
Etc.
The church has consistently maintained that homosexaul acts are a sin. This has not changed.

However, the church is trying to be much more inclusive of homosexauls, including those who engage in homosexual acts.

The church no longer teaches that there's anything wrong with same-sex attraction or even identifying as LGBTQ. The church no longer teaches that these desires are unnatural and need to be overcome.

The church has also softened up on its punishment for committing homosexual acts. It no longer automatically requires excommunication and no longer labels those in same-sex relationships as apostates.

Hope this answers your questions. :)
Your response very accurately describes the church's position, except for the statement that the church maintains that homosexual acts are a sin. This is incorrect. Homosexual acts are no longer considered sinful, and any act that is acceptable for heterosexuals under the law of chastity is also permissible for homosexuals.

But that does not mean that the accurate description makes any sense. The policies contradict the words, and the changes contradict all of judeo-christan history and all previous prophets of the restoration.

The reality is that the church no longer considers homosexuality to be sinful. They maintain that marriage must be between a man and a woman, but no longer maintain that any sexual or romantic conduct between people of the same sex is wrong. Consequently, as you noted, they no longer seek to defend or safeguard these doctrines, so membership councils are no longer required for members who decided to marry someone of the same sex anyway.

So clearly the church's position has changed in almost every facet. In fact, I can't think of one area involving homosexualiy or SSM where the church has not embraced the worldly definitions and ideas and rejected the scriptures and past prophets.
A quick check in the new For Strength of Youth Guide shows that what you are saying about the church no longer saying that homosexual acts are sinful is false.

"Sexual feelings are an important part of God’s plan to create happy marriages and eternal families. These feelings are not sinful—they are sacred. Because sexual feelings are so sacred and so powerful, God has given you His law of chastity to prepare you to use these feelings as He intends. The law of chastity states that God approves of sexual activity only between a man and a woman who are married. Many in the world ignore or even mock God’s law, but the Lord invites us to be His disciples and live a standard higher than the world’s."


"I am attracted to people of my same sex. How do these standards apply to me? Feeling same-sex attraction is not a sin. If you have these feelings and do not pursue or act on them, you are living Heavenly Father’s sacred law of chastity. You are a beloved child of God and a disciple of Jesus Christ. Remember that the Savior understands everything you experience. Through your covenant connection with Him, you will find strength to obey God’s commandments and receive the blessings He promises. Trust Him and His gospel."

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... y?lang=eng
When they say sexual activity, they are referring to fornication. Unless you believe hand holding, kissing, dating, and having a relationship sexual relations.

It is good that they say you should not pursue or act on any attraction to the same sex. But this is extremely weak sauce, especially when you consider the changes over the last few years to the handbook and to the Law of Chastity as taught in the temple. It is a watering down of just how serious the sin of homosexuality is.

So you can look at one small sentence in the new FTSOY booklet to try and say the church is still maintains that homosexual acts are a sin. But the changes to the handbook and to the definitions of what constitutes serious sin beg to differ. The allowance of openly gay and practicing (not going all the way though!) homosexual missionaries begs to differ. The allowance of openly and practicing homosexuals and advocates into leadership begs to differ.

The church's stance on homosexuality has changed, whether you want to believe it or not. They no longer consider it sin. At worst, they may consider a "transgression". There is no longer anything to overcome. There is no longer anything to repent of. Just the normalization of a sexual fetish and constant affirmation that the church will support you as you make this fetish your identity.

Jashon
captain of 100
Posts: 501

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by Jashon »

We all know that the church has gone beyond the mark by saying that identifying as gay is acceptable. This is the slippery slope. This is like the on-deck batter, preparing to make a plate appearance and bat.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by LDS Watchman »

Serragon wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:17 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 3:02 pm
Serragon wrote: October 4th, 2022, 10:39 am
LDS Watchman wrote: October 3rd, 2022, 9:02 am

Homosexual acts are sinful. Being tempted to commit homosexual acts, but resisting this temptation, is not sinful.

Furthermore, being attracted to someone doesn't mean that you fantasize about having sex with them or lust after them.



The church has consistently maintained that homosexaul acts are a sin. This has not changed.

However, the church is trying to be much more inclusive of homosexauls, including those who engage in homosexual acts.

The church no longer teaches that there's anything wrong with same-sex attraction or even identifying as LGBTQ. The church no longer teaches that these desires are unnatural and need to be overcome.

The church has also softened up on its punishment for committing homosexual acts. It no longer automatically requires excommunication and no longer labels those in same-sex relationships as apostates.

Hope this answers your questions. :)
Your response very accurately describes the church's position, except for the statement that the church maintains that homosexual acts are a sin. This is incorrect. Homosexual acts are no longer considered sinful, and any act that is acceptable for heterosexuals under the law of chastity is also permissible for homosexuals.

But that does not mean that the accurate description makes any sense. The policies contradict the words, and the changes contradict all of judeo-christan history and all previous prophets of the restoration.

The reality is that the church no longer considers homosexuality to be sinful. They maintain that marriage must be between a man and a woman, but no longer maintain that any sexual or romantic conduct between people of the same sex is wrong. Consequently, as you noted, they no longer seek to defend or safeguard these doctrines, so membership councils are no longer required for members who decided to marry someone of the same sex anyway.

So clearly the church's position has changed in almost every facet. In fact, I can't think of one area involving homosexualiy or SSM where the church has not embraced the worldly definitions and ideas and rejected the scriptures and past prophets.
A quick check in the new For Strength of Youth Guide shows that what you are saying about the church no longer saying that homosexual acts are sinful is false.

"Sexual feelings are an important part of God’s plan to create happy marriages and eternal families. These feelings are not sinful—they are sacred. Because sexual feelings are so sacred and so powerful, God has given you His law of chastity to prepare you to use these feelings as He intends. The law of chastity states that God approves of sexual activity only between a man and a woman who are married. Many in the world ignore or even mock God’s law, but the Lord invites us to be His disciples and live a standard higher than the world’s."


"I am attracted to people of my same sex. How do these standards apply to me? Feeling same-sex attraction is not a sin. If you have these feelings and do not pursue or act on them, you are living Heavenly Father’s sacred law of chastity. You are a beloved child of God and a disciple of Jesus Christ. Remember that the Savior understands everything you experience. Through your covenant connection with Him, you will find strength to obey God’s commandments and receive the blessings He promises. Trust Him and His gospel."

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... y?lang=eng
When they say sexual activity, they are referring to fornication. Unless you believe hand holding, kissing, dating, and having a relationship sexual relations.

It is good that they say you should not pursue or act on any attraction to the same sex. But this is extremely weak sauce, especially when you consider the changes over the last few years to the handbook and to the Law of Chastity as taught in the temple. It is a watering down of just how serious the sin of homosexuality is.

So you can look at one small sentence in the new FTSOY booklet to try and say the church is still maintains that homosexual acts are a sin. But the changes to the handbook and to the definitions of what constitutes serious sin beg to differ. The allowance of openly gay and practicing (not going all the way though!) homosexual missionaries begs to differ. The allowance of openly and practicing homosexuals and advocates into leadership begs to differ.

The church's stance on homosexuality has changed, whether you want to believe it or not. They no longer consider it sin. At worst, they may consider a "transgression". There is no longer anything to overcome. There is no longer anything to repent of. Just the normalization of a sexual fetish and constant affirmation that the church will support you as you make this fetish your identity.
Come on man. Normally you're pretty level-headed but right now you're stooping to the level of the haters who hurl false accusations. You're better than this.

The church has never said that it's okay for two men or two women to date each other, hold hands, make out, etc. I agree that the church's softening stance has blurred this considerably, which I see a major problem with, but they absolutely still consider sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman to be sinful. This has not changed. So please stop saying it has.

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by Luke »

LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:26 pm
Serragon wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:17 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 3:02 pm
Serragon wrote: October 4th, 2022, 10:39 am

Your response very accurately describes the church's position, except for the statement that the church maintains that homosexual acts are a sin. This is incorrect. Homosexual acts are no longer considered sinful, and any act that is acceptable for heterosexuals under the law of chastity is also permissible for homosexuals.

But that does not mean that the accurate description makes any sense. The policies contradict the words, and the changes contradict all of judeo-christan history and all previous prophets of the restoration.

The reality is that the church no longer considers homosexuality to be sinful. They maintain that marriage must be between a man and a woman, but no longer maintain that any sexual or romantic conduct between people of the same sex is wrong. Consequently, as you noted, they no longer seek to defend or safeguard these doctrines, so membership councils are no longer required for members who decided to marry someone of the same sex anyway.

So clearly the church's position has changed in almost every facet. In fact, I can't think of one area involving homosexualiy or SSM where the church has not embraced the worldly definitions and ideas and rejected the scriptures and past prophets.
A quick check in the new For Strength of Youth Guide shows that what you are saying about the church no longer saying that homosexual acts are sinful is false.

"Sexual feelings are an important part of God’s plan to create happy marriages and eternal families. These feelings are not sinful—they are sacred. Because sexual feelings are so sacred and so powerful, God has given you His law of chastity to prepare you to use these feelings as He intends. The law of chastity states that God approves of sexual activity only between a man and a woman who are married. Many in the world ignore or even mock God’s law, but the Lord invites us to be His disciples and live a standard higher than the world’s."


"I am attracted to people of my same sex. How do these standards apply to me? Feeling same-sex attraction is not a sin. If you have these feelings and do not pursue or act on them, you are living Heavenly Father’s sacred law of chastity. You are a beloved child of God and a disciple of Jesus Christ. Remember that the Savior understands everything you experience. Through your covenant connection with Him, you will find strength to obey God’s commandments and receive the blessings He promises. Trust Him and His gospel."

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... y?lang=eng
When they say sexual activity, they are referring to fornication. Unless you believe hand holding, kissing, dating, and having a relationship sexual relations.

It is good that they say you should not pursue or act on any attraction to the same sex. But this is extremely weak sauce, especially when you consider the changes over the last few years to the handbook and to the Law of Chastity as taught in the temple. It is a watering down of just how serious the sin of homosexuality is.

So you can look at one small sentence in the new FTSOY booklet to try and say the church is still maintains that homosexual acts are a sin. But the changes to the handbook and to the definitions of what constitutes serious sin beg to differ. The allowance of openly gay and practicing (not going all the way though!) homosexual missionaries begs to differ. The allowance of openly and practicing homosexuals and advocates into leadership begs to differ.

The church's stance on homosexuality has changed, whether you want to believe it or not. They no longer consider it sin. At worst, they may consider a "transgression". There is no longer anything to overcome. There is no longer anything to repent of. Just the normalization of a sexual fetish and constant affirmation that the church will support you as you make this fetish your identity.
Come on man. Normally you're pretty level-headed but right now you're stooping to the level of the haters who hurl false accusations. You're better than this.

The church has never said that it's okay for two men or two women to date each other, hold hands, make out, etc. I agree that the church's softening stance has blurred this considerably, which I see a major problem with, but they absolutely still consider sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman to be sinful. This has not changed. So please stop saying it has.
You're wrong, and you know you're wrong. Stop grasping at straws.

Serragon
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3444

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by Serragon »

LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:26 pm
Serragon wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:17 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 3:02 pm
Serragon wrote: October 4th, 2022, 10:39 am

Your response very accurately describes the church's position, except for the statement that the church maintains that homosexual acts are a sin. This is incorrect. Homosexual acts are no longer considered sinful, and any act that is acceptable for heterosexuals under the law of chastity is also permissible for homosexuals.

But that does not mean that the accurate description makes any sense. The policies contradict the words, and the changes contradict all of judeo-christan history and all previous prophets of the restoration.

The reality is that the church no longer considers homosexuality to be sinful. They maintain that marriage must be between a man and a woman, but no longer maintain that any sexual or romantic conduct between people of the same sex is wrong. Consequently, as you noted, they no longer seek to defend or safeguard these doctrines, so membership councils are no longer required for members who decided to marry someone of the same sex anyway.

So clearly the church's position has changed in almost every facet. In fact, I can't think of one area involving homosexualiy or SSM where the church has not embraced the worldly definitions and ideas and rejected the scriptures and past prophets.
A quick check in the new For Strength of Youth Guide shows that what you are saying about the church no longer saying that homosexual acts are sinful is false.

"Sexual feelings are an important part of God’s plan to create happy marriages and eternal families. These feelings are not sinful—they are sacred. Because sexual feelings are so sacred and so powerful, God has given you His law of chastity to prepare you to use these feelings as He intends. The law of chastity states that God approves of sexual activity only between a man and a woman who are married. Many in the world ignore or even mock God’s law, but the Lord invites us to be His disciples and live a standard higher than the world’s."


"I am attracted to people of my same sex. How do these standards apply to me? Feeling same-sex attraction is not a sin. If you have these feelings and do not pursue or act on them, you are living Heavenly Father’s sacred law of chastity. You are a beloved child of God and a disciple of Jesus Christ. Remember that the Savior understands everything you experience. Through your covenant connection with Him, you will find strength to obey God’s commandments and receive the blessings He promises. Trust Him and His gospel."

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... y?lang=eng
When they say sexual activity, they are referring to fornication. Unless you believe hand holding, kissing, dating, and having a relationship sexual relations.

It is good that they say you should not pursue or act on any attraction to the same sex. But this is extremely weak sauce, especially when you consider the changes over the last few years to the handbook and to the Law of Chastity as taught in the temple. It is a watering down of just how serious the sin of homosexuality is.

So you can look at one small sentence in the new FTSOY booklet to try and say the church is still maintains that homosexual acts are a sin. But the changes to the handbook and to the definitions of what constitutes serious sin beg to differ. The allowance of openly gay and practicing (not going all the way though!) homosexual missionaries begs to differ. The allowance of openly and practicing homosexuals and advocates into leadership begs to differ.

The church's stance on homosexuality has changed, whether you want to believe it or not. They no longer consider it sin. At worst, they may consider a "transgression". There is no longer anything to overcome. There is no longer anything to repent of. Just the normalization of a sexual fetish and constant affirmation that the church will support you as you make this fetish your identity.
Come on man. Normally you're pretty level-headed but right now you're stooping to the level of the haters who hurl false accusations. You're better than this.

The church has never said that it's okay for two men or two women to date each other, hold hands, make out, etc. I agree that the church's softening stance has blurred this considerably, which I see a major problem with, but they absolutely still consider sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman to be sinful. This has not changed. So please stop saying it has.
it is simply the truth. Check your handbook if you don't believe me.

You are correct that the church has not stated that it is OK for same sex people to hold hands, date, etc. The change is that they no longer say it is wrong. This is how they play both sides. Those who want to believe it is still an abomination can say that they have never said it was OK. Those who wish to indulge their fetish can say that they no longer say it is wrong. All things to all people, but standing for nothing.

The FTSOY used to say that homosexuality was a perversion and an abomination unto the Lord. It used to say that it was a serious sin and if anyone was attempting to persuade you to engage in that behavior or you were struggling with those desires you should talk to your parents and/or Bishop. Now... it's probably best if you don't pursue them.

The church's stance on homosexuality has changed, and I suspect will continue to change in the future. It isn't hating. I'm not stooping. I am simply showing you the truth that you would rather not see.
Last edited by Serragon on October 4th, 2022, 4:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Durzan
The Lord's Trusty Maverick
Posts: 3728
Location: Standing between the Light and the Darkness.

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by Durzan »

Its almost like the entire concept of sin is well... BS.

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by Luke »

Durzan wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:40 pm Its almost like the entire concept of sin is well... BS.
Er….….. no.

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by LDS Watchman »

Luke wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:31 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:26 pm
Serragon wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:17 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 3:02 pm

A quick check in the new For Strength of Youth Guide shows that what you are saying about the church no longer saying that homosexual acts are sinful is false.

"Sexual feelings are an important part of God’s plan to create happy marriages and eternal families. These feelings are not sinful—they are sacred. Because sexual feelings are so sacred and so powerful, God has given you His law of chastity to prepare you to use these feelings as He intends. The law of chastity states that God approves of sexual activity only between a man and a woman who are married. Many in the world ignore or even mock God’s law, but the Lord invites us to be His disciples and live a standard higher than the world’s."


"I am attracted to people of my same sex. How do these standards apply to me? Feeling same-sex attraction is not a sin. If you have these feelings and do not pursue or act on them, you are living Heavenly Father’s sacred law of chastity. You are a beloved child of God and a disciple of Jesus Christ. Remember that the Savior understands everything you experience. Through your covenant connection with Him, you will find strength to obey God’s commandments and receive the blessings He promises. Trust Him and His gospel."

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... y?lang=eng
When they say sexual activity, they are referring to fornication. Unless you believe hand holding, kissing, dating, and having a relationship sexual relations.

It is good that they say you should not pursue or act on any attraction to the same sex. But this is extremely weak sauce, especially when you consider the changes over the last few years to the handbook and to the Law of Chastity as taught in the temple. It is a watering down of just how serious the sin of homosexuality is.

So you can look at one small sentence in the new FTSOY booklet to try and say the church is still maintains that homosexual acts are a sin. But the changes to the handbook and to the definitions of what constitutes serious sin beg to differ. The allowance of openly gay and practicing (not going all the way though!) homosexual missionaries begs to differ. The allowance of openly and practicing homosexuals and advocates into leadership begs to differ.

The church's stance on homosexuality has changed, whether you want to believe it or not. They no longer consider it sin. At worst, they may consider a "transgression". There is no longer anything to overcome. There is no longer anything to repent of. Just the normalization of a sexual fetish and constant affirmation that the church will support you as you make this fetish your identity.
Come on man. Normally you're pretty level-headed but right now you're stooping to the level of the haters who hurl false accusations. You're better than this.

The church has never said that it's okay for two men or two women to date each other, hold hands, make out, etc. I agree that the church's softening stance has blurred this considerably, which I see a major problem with, but they absolutely still consider sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman to be sinful. This has not changed. So please stop saying it has.
You're wrong, and you know you're wrong. Stop grasping at straws.
What a great rebuttal. :)

User avatar
Durzan
The Lord's Trusty Maverick
Posts: 3728
Location: Standing between the Light and the Darkness.

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by Durzan »

Luke wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:47 pm
Durzan wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:40 pm Its almost like the entire concept of sin is well... BS.
Er….….. no.
Er... yes. Its all made up, to some extent as a way to control people. Or so says the extremely cynical side of me.

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by Luke »

LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:55 pm
Luke wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:31 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:26 pm
Serragon wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:17 pm

When they say sexual activity, they are referring to fornication. Unless you believe hand holding, kissing, dating, and having a relationship sexual relations.

It is good that they say you should not pursue or act on any attraction to the same sex. But this is extremely weak sauce, especially when you consider the changes over the last few years to the handbook and to the Law of Chastity as taught in the temple. It is a watering down of just how serious the sin of homosexuality is.

So you can look at one small sentence in the new FTSOY booklet to try and say the church is still maintains that homosexual acts are a sin. But the changes to the handbook and to the definitions of what constitutes serious sin beg to differ. The allowance of openly gay and practicing (not going all the way though!) homosexual missionaries begs to differ. The allowance of openly and practicing homosexuals and advocates into leadership begs to differ.

The church's stance on homosexuality has changed, whether you want to believe it or not. They no longer consider it sin. At worst, they may consider a "transgression". There is no longer anything to overcome. There is no longer anything to repent of. Just the normalization of a sexual fetish and constant affirmation that the church will support you as you make this fetish your identity.
Come on man. Normally you're pretty level-headed but right now you're stooping to the level of the haters who hurl false accusations. You're better than this.

The church has never said that it's okay for two men or two women to date each other, hold hands, make out, etc. I agree that the church's softening stance has blurred this considerably, which I see a major problem with, but they absolutely still consider sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman to be sinful. This has not changed. So please stop saying it has.
You're wrong, and you know you're wrong. Stop grasping at straws.
What a great rebuttal. :)
I wasn’t trying to rebut anything. Someone else already did.

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by Luke »

Durzan wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:55 pm
Luke wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:47 pm
Durzan wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:40 pm Its almost like the entire concept of sin is well... BS.
Er….….. no.
Er... yes. Its all made up, to some extent as a way to control people. Or so says the extremely cynical side of me.
I mean, I’m cynical, but come on…

Maybe I’m wrong in assuming you believe in the Bible, the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith.

EvanLM
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4798

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by EvanLM »

Since 2020, the Quorums of the Seventy in the LDS Church have been organized into twelve quorums with a presidency of seven. The seventy act as emissaries of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and First Presidency of the church in organizing, training, proselytizing, and administering to millions of people scattered all across the globe.

starting the 144,000? the emissaries would be like working for the DS, right?

EvanLM
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4798

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by EvanLM »

What is the role of the Seventy in the LDS Church?
As a body, the seventy in the church are considered to be equal in priesthood authority with the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. This presumably means that if the apostles were killed or incapacitated, the seventy could take over the function of the apostles. However, in such circumstances, the seventy would be required to act unanimously.

Maybe Jesus did visit . . . . hmmmm

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by LDS Watchman »

Luke wrote: October 4th, 2022, 5:39 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:55 pm
Luke wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:31 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:26 pm

Come on man. Normally you're pretty level-headed but right now you're stooping to the level of the haters who hurl false accusations. You're better than this.

The church has never said that it's okay for two men or two women to date each other, hold hands, make out, etc. I agree that the church's softening stance has blurred this considerably, which I see a major problem with, but they absolutely still consider sex between a man and a man or a woman and a woman to be sinful. This has not changed. So please stop saying it has.
You're wrong, and you know you're wrong. Stop grasping at straws.
What a great rebuttal. :)
I wasn’t trying to rebut anything. Someone else already did.
Oh, so you were just making snide remark from the peanut gallery. Good to know.

EvanLM
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4798

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by EvanLM »

Church of Jesus Christ announces release of 31 Area Seventies
By Trent [email protected]
Aug 26, 2022, 10:55am CDT
Facebook
Twitter
SHARE
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ Church Administration Building is pictured in Salt Lake City on Wednesday, Feb. 19, 2020.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ Church Administration Building is pictured in Salt Lake City on Wednesday, Feb. 19, 2020. The church announced the release of 31 Area Seventies, effective Aug. 1, 2022.Laura Seitz, Deseret NewsPurchase Photo
Thirty-one Area Seventies, serving in locations worldwide, have been released by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

The leadership change, effective Aug. 1, was announced Friday in a news release. The list of Area Seventies being released is found below.

Along with the releases, the church noted that Elder ‘Inoke F. Kupu, an Area Seventy from Tonga, died from cancer on Aug. 13 in Auckland, New Zealand. He was 63. Elder Kupu began his service in April 2019 in the Pacific Area in the Eighth Quorum of the Seventy.


The church announced 45 new Area Seventies from 23 countries in a leadership meeting prior to April 2022 general conference.

The church began announcing and sustaining Area Seventies in the leadership meeting rather than general conference in 2021.

RELATED
Church names 45 Area Seventies during April 2022 general conference leadership session
Church announces release of 66 Area Seventies as part of new pattern in leadership changes.
What is an Area Seventy?
Area Seventies are local area authorities who serve in each of the church’s geographical areas around the world. They live at home and maintain their nonreligious vocations while serving for a designated number of years.

Area Seventies are ordained to the office of Seventy in the Melchizedek Priesthood, like General Authority Seventies, but are not considered general authorities as their authority is generally limited to the area where they serve. They serve under the direction of the Presidency of the Seventy and their respective area presidency. They meet with and teach local leaders, missionaries and members in local congregations.

The church has 12 quorums of the Seventy. The first two quorums are made up of General Authority Seventies and the third through the 12th consist of Area Seventies.

RELATED
Meet the 77 new Area Seventies from 25 countries named Thursday at the general conference leadership session
Which Area Seventies were released?
The names of the released Area Seventies are listed below by quorum.


Third Quorum of the Seventy (Africa Central, Africa South and Africa West Areas)

Artur J. Miranda.
Elie K. Monga.
Anthony Quaisie.
Fourth Quorum of the Seventy (Asia and Asia North Areas)

Ting Tsung Chang.
Yutaka Nagatomo.
Fifth Quorum of the Seventy (Brazil Area)

Luciano Cascardi.
José L. Del Guerso.
Carlos R. Fusco Jr.
Sixth Quorum of the Seventy (Caribbean, Central America and Mexico Areas)

Luis R. Arbizú.
Pablo H. Chavez.
Jorge A. García.
Sandino Roman.
Johnny F. Ruiz.
Seventh Quorum of the Seventy (Europe, Europe East, Europe North and Middle East/Africa North Areas)

Alessandro Dini Ciacci.
Karl D. Hirst.
K. Roy Tunnicliffe.
Eighth Quorum of the Seventy (Pacific and Philippines Areas)

Paul N. Lekias.
Ninth Quorum of the Seventy (South America Northwest and South America South Areas)

David A. Benalcázar.
Ariel E. Chaparro (effective Oct. 1, 2022).
A. Fabio Moscoso.
Juan C. Pozo.
Martin C. Rios.
Rosendo Santos.
Tenth Quorum of the Seventy (North America Central, North America Northeast and North America Southeast Areas)

Michael V. Beheshti.
Kevin E. Calderwood.
Gordon H. Smith.
Eleventh Quorum of the Seventy (North America Southwest and North America West Areas)

Gary F. Gessel.
Ren S. Johnson.
Jay B. Jones.
Twelfth Quorum of the Seventy (Utah Area)

Berne S. Broadbent.
Raymond A. Cutler

User avatar
Durzan
The Lord's Trusty Maverick
Posts: 3728
Location: Standing between the Light and the Darkness.

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by Durzan »

Luke wrote: October 4th, 2022, 5:40 pm
Durzan wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:55 pm
Luke wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:47 pm
Durzan wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:40 pm Its almost like the entire concept of sin is well... BS.
Er….….. no.
Er... yes. Its all made up, to some extent as a way to control people. Or so says the extremely cynical side of me.
I mean, I’m cynical, but come on…

Maybe I’m wrong in assuming you believe in the Bible, the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith.
Its more like I believe in them... with a heavy dose of salt. They still were written down by men thousands of years ago, are communicated by men, the belief systems described therein are viewed/presented through the eyes/perspective of men, etc. I don't think it wise to take it completely at face value. There's a part of me that believes in it literally, a part of me that believes in it figuratively, and a part of me that thinks its mostly fairy tales made to teach people how to behave. Taking all that into account leaves me with a rather... strange average of those conflicting beliefs.

User avatar
HereWeGo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1222

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by HereWeGo »

LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 5:57 pm
Luke wrote: October 4th, 2022, 5:39 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:55 pm
Luke wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:31 pm

You're wrong, and you know you're wrong. Stop grasping at straws.
What a great rebuttal. :)
I wasn’t trying to rebut anything. Someone else already did.
Oh, so you were just making snide remark from the peanut gallery. Good to know.
I'm curious. Why did you stop posting as Atticus and start posting as LDS Watchman?

LDS Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7390
Contact:

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by LDS Watchman »

HereWeGo wrote: October 4th, 2022, 8:56 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 5:57 pm
Luke wrote: October 4th, 2022, 5:39 pm
LDS Watchman wrote: October 4th, 2022, 4:55 pm

What a great rebuttal. :)
I wasn’t trying to rebut anything. Someone else already did.
Oh, so you were just making snide remark from the peanut gallery. Good to know.
I'm curious. Why did you stop posting as Atticus and start posting as LDS Watchman?
Why do you care? You've made it abundantly clear that I'm nothing more than a despicable worthless troll to you.

User avatar
HereWeGo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1222

Re: Conference Priesthood session — gone?

Post by HereWeGo »

I was just curious as to the thought process behind the change.

Post Reply