Elder Holland - "The issue is chastity. The issue is not gender."

[p8riot]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntc38LbtvzU

"I think we have talked altogether too much about gender and altogether too little about chastity. The issue is chastity. The issue is not gender."

So is the Proclamation on the Family outdated?

He also says "to be very clear for all people for for all of his children now when that attraction exists what we ask for those inclined to a homosexual feeling is exactly what we ask for those with heterosexual feelings I'm talking to a young single adult group and that is be faithful be clean be chaste and for you every blessing of this church is available in terms of the sacraments the ordinances going to the temple."

So EVERY blessing is available, including celestial marriage?

[Subcomandante]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntc38LbtvzU

"I think we have talked altogether too much about gender and altogether too little about chastity. The issue is chastity. The issue is not gender."

So is the Proclamation on the Family outdated?

He also says "to be very clear for all people for for all of his children now when that attraction exists what we ask for those inclined to a homosexual feeling is exactly what we ask for those with heterosexual feelings I'm talking to a young single adult group and that is be faithful be clean be chaste and for you every blessing of this church is available in terms of the sacraments the ordinances going to the temple."

So EVERY blessing is available, including celestial marriage?

The Law of Chastity, as defined in the Endowment, is that the sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve shall have no sexual relations except with those who are legitimately and legally wedded, according to the law of God.

UPDATE per Wolfwoman, direct quote down here for 2023:

We are instructed to give unto you the law of chastity, which is that God’s sons and God’s daughters shall have sexual relations only with those to whom they are legally and lawfully wedded according to His law.

The law of God makes no room for same-sex "marriages."

If a person openly declares himself as having same sex attraction, yet still follows the covenants by marrying the opposite sex, there is no issue as long as he doesn't fall into that temptation.

[Good & Global]

The Law of Chastity, as defined in the Endowment, is that the sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve shall have no sexual relations except with those who are legitimately and legally wedded, according to the law of God.

The law of God makes no room for same-sex "marriages."

If a person openly declares himself as having same sex attraction, yet still follows the covenants by marrying the opposite sex, there is no issue as long as he doesn't fall into that temptation.

Who are "those" referred to there? It is a subtle change.

But why was it so overwhelming necessary to change the wording from "which is that the daughters of Eve and the sons of Adam shall have no sexual intercourse except with their husbands or wives to whom they are legally and lawfully wedded"

Because the new change does allow for a Bill Clinton style I did not have sexual relations with that (now one can fill in the blank). Was it so same sex marriage or polygamy could "legitimately" exist alongside traditional marriage of the opposite sexes as defined by the previous temple endowment wording?

The structure of the prior wording only allowed sexual intercourse with what seemed like clearly defined opposite sex partners.

The new wording with the usage of the words "those" "legitimately" and "according to the law of God" with the last part being even more nebulous than the first two are ambigious. With the pace of the things the Law of God can change. Christ like was never used to denote wearing a mask ever. Tithing was never denoted for usage to build a shopping mall ever. And the moniker of mormons was never used to denote a victory for Satan prior.

[Telavian]

The law of God makes no room for same-sex "marriages."

The law of God according to the LDS church is whatever the current leader says it is. The LDS church could allow polygamy or gay marriage. There is a legitimate scriptural case for both.

A lot of people say they would leave the LDS church if either of them happened however I seriously doubt it. People have too much invested to abandon the church. Especially if a strong case was made as to God allowing it.

[Good & Global]

The law of God makes no room for same-sex "marriages."

The law of God according to the LDS church is whatever the current leader says it is. The LDS church could allow polygamy or gay marriage. There is a legitimate scriptural case for both.

A lot of people say they would leave the LDS church if either of them happened however I seriously doubt it. People have too much invested to abandon the church. Especially if a strong case was made as to God allowing it.

Agreed. If they wouldn't object at people losing their lives of the current direction doubtful they would do it over gay marriage. They are all talk and no walk. Instead they will just rabidly hunt down any truth tellers like they do now.

Anyone who dare question the official narrative or non sensical rhetoric will be "heretics" of their earthly religion.

[Wolfwoman]

The Law of Chastity, as defined in the Endowment, is that the sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve shall have no sexual relations except with those who are legitimately and legally wedded, according to the law of God.

The law of God makes no room for same-sex "marriages."

If a person openly declares himself as having same sex attraction, yet still follows the covenants by marrying the opposite sex, there is no issue as long as he doesn't fall into that temptation.

Who are "those" referred to there? It is a subtle change.

But why was it so overwhelming necessary to change the wording from "which is that the daughters of Eve and the sons of Adam shall have no sexual intercourse except with their husbands or wives to whom they are legally and lawfully wedded"

Because the new change does allow for a Bill Clinton style I did not have sexual relations with that (now one can fill in the blank). Was it so same sex marriage or polygamy could "legitimately" exist alongside traditional marriage of the opposite sexes as defined by the previous temple endowment wording?

The structure of the prior wording only allowed sexual intercourse with what seemed like clearly defined opposite sex partners.

The new wording with the usage of the words "those" "legitimately" and "according to the law of God" with the last part being even more nebulous than the first two are ambigious. With the pace of the things the Law of God can change. Christ like was never used to denote wearing a mask ever. Tithing was never denoted for usage to build a shopping mall ever. And the moniker of mormons was never used to denote a victory for Satan prior.

The quote that subcomandante put up is not exactly how it is said in the endowment. I don’t know that it matters that much though. But the old quote said something about who you are legally and lawfully married to and after same sex marriage was legalized in the US, maybe they felt like it needed to be changed. The new quote actually makes more sense because it includes the laws of God.

[Wolfwoman]

The law of God makes no room for same-sex "marriages."

The law of God according to the LDS church is whatever the current leader says it is. The LDS church could allow polygamy or gay marriage. There is a legitimate scriptural case for both.

A lot of people say they would leave the LDS church if either of them happened however I seriously doubt it. People have too much invested to abandon the church. Especially if a strong case was made as to God allowing it.

What’s the legitimate scriptural case for same sex marriage?

[Subcomandante]

The Law of Chastity, as defined in the Endowment, is that the sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve shall have no sexual relations except with those who are legitimately and legally wedded, according to the law of God.

The law of God makes no room for same-sex "marriages."

If a person openly declares himself as having same sex attraction, yet still follows the covenants by marrying the opposite sex, there is no issue as long as he doesn't fall into that temptation.

Who are "those" referred to there? It is a subtle change.

But why was it so overwhelming necessary to change the wording from "which is that the daughters of Eve and the sons of Adam shall have no sexual intercourse except with their husbands or wives to whom they are legally and lawfully wedded"

Because the new change does allow for a Bill Clinton style I did not have sexual relations with that (now one can fill in the blank). Was it so same sex marriage or polygamy could "legitimately" exist alongside traditional marriage of the opposite sexes as defined by the previous temple endowment wording?

The structure of the prior wording only allowed sexual intercourse with what seemed like clearly defined opposite sex partners.

The new wording with the usage of the words "those" "legitimately" and "according to the law of God" with the last part being even more nebulous than the first two are ambigious. With the pace of the things the Law of God can change. Christ like was never used to denote wearing a mask ever. Tithing was never denoted for usage to build a shopping mall ever. And the moniker of mormons was never used to denote a victory for Satan prior.

The quote that subcomandante put up is not exactly how it is said in the endowment. I don’t know that it matters that much though. But the old quote said something about who you are legally and lawfully married to and after same sex marriage was legalized in the US, maybe they felt like it needed to be changed. The new quote actually makes more sense because it includes the laws of God.

That is correct Wolfwoman. I put the direct quote in my first post for extra context.

[Chip]

There's no good response for people who want to castrate themselves or sodomize each other, but Elder Holland was attempting to make one here:

"I think we have talked altogether too much about gender and altogether too little about chastity. The issue is chastity. The issue is not gender."

No! The issue is that some people, for whatever reasons, have very unnatural desires. Chastity is tangential to the root issue. There's no "Aw, shucks"-ing this kind of problem away and pretending like it's just a matter of applying one of our tried-and-true templates for good behavior.

Aside from the matter of chastity, he should throw in "not speaking ill of the Lord's annointed", just for even application.

[FrankOne]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntc38LbtvzU

"I think we have talked altogether too much about gender and altogether too little about chastity. The issue is chastity. The issue is not gender."

So is the Proclamation on the Family outdated?

He also says "to be very clear for all people for for all of his children now when that attraction exists what we ask for those inclined to a homosexual feeling is exactly what we ask for those with heterosexual feelings I'm talking to a young single adult group and that is be faithful be clean be chaste and for you every blessing of this church is available in terms of the sacraments the ordinances going to the temple."

So EVERY blessing is available, including celestial marriage?

If i'm reading this right, he is saying that as long as a gay couple is legally married, then sodomy is just fine. Remember, it's not about gender, it's just chastity. Sex after one gets a STATE marriage license is God approved , that apparently now goes for gays as well? State approved is God approved!

[Telavian]

What’s the legitimate scriptural case for same sex marriage?

I will be honest. I am not sure how I feel about homosexuality. I think clearly there is a biological component, however I think all sexual deviations have a biological component. That in no way should justify the behavior though.

I have listened to a few of Dan McClellan's videos about scriptures and homosexuality. He is an ancient language expert and uses that to interpret the writers meaning. Basically his argument is the biblical authors had a very different view of sexuality than we do today. They actually had a lot of different views than we do today yet we ignore those scriptures and focus on the ones about homosexuality instead.

He says the idea of being a homosexual wasn't even a concept for them as homosexuality is different from same sex attraction. In many cases the cultures of the time thought same sex activity was fine as long as the male assumed the dominate role.

Regardless though, I think the scriptures are mostly unclear on this point because it wasn't a concern then.

https://www.youtube.com/@maklelan/search?query=gay

[Subcomandante]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntc38LbtvzU

"I think we have talked altogether too much about gender and altogether too little about chastity. The issue is chastity. The issue is not gender."

So is the Proclamation on the Family outdated?

He also says "to be very clear for all people for for all of his children now when that attraction exists what we ask for those inclined to a homosexual feeling is exactly what we ask for those with heterosexual feelings I'm talking to a young single adult group and that is be faithful be clean be chaste and for you every blessing of this church is available in terms of the sacraments the ordinances going to the temple."

So EVERY blessing is available, including celestial marriage?

If i'm reading this right, he is saying that as long as a gay couple is legally married, then sodomy is just fine. Remember, it's not about gender, it's just chastity. Sex after one gets a STATE marriage license is God approved , that apparently now goes for gays as well? State approved is God approved!

This assumption is incorrect.

The endowment spells it out even clearer with the 2019 and 2023 revisions.

[Jashon]

It seems the aim of mekleln, who works at church hq, is to take the church and gullible members down the primrose path.

[FrankOne]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntc38LbtvzU

"I think we have talked altogether too much about gender and altogether too little about chastity. The issue is chastity. The issue is not gender."

So is the Proclamation on the Family outdated?

He also says "to be very clear for all people for for all of his children now when that attraction exists what we ask for those inclined to a homosexual feeling is exactly what we ask for those with heterosexual feelings I'm talking to a young single adult group and that is be faithful be clean be chaste and for you every blessing of this church is available in terms of the sacraments the ordinances going to the temple."

So EVERY blessing is available, including celestial marriage?

If i'm reading this right, he is saying that as long as a gay couple is legally married, then sodomy is just fine. Remember, it's not about gender, it's just chastity. Sex after one gets a STATE marriage license is God approved , that apparently now goes for gays as well? State approved is God approved!

This assumption is incorrect.

The endowment spells it out even clearer with the 2019 and 2023 revisions.

wait...what? Apparently I've been living under a rock...

are you saying that married gay couples are fully accepted in the church and can go to the temple? Please clarify, thanks.

[Arm Chair Quarterback]

In the beginning god created man in his own image, chaste and unchaste created he them.

[Subcomandante]

If i'm reading this right, he is saying that as long as a gay couple is legally married, then sodomy is just fine. Remember, it's not about gender, it's just chastity. Sex after one gets a STATE marriage license is God approved , that apparently now goes for gays as well? State approved is God approved!

This assumption is incorrect.

The endowment spells it out even clearer with the 2019 and 2023 revisions.

wait...what? Apparently I've been living under a rock...

are you saying that married gay couples are fully accepted in the church and can go to the temple? Please clarify, thanks.

God's Law is a marriage between a man and a woman.

It is not between a man and a man.
Nor is it between a woman and a woman.

It's a man and a woman.

The 2019 and 2023 revisions clarify that, by stating that the ultimate law to follow, is God's law.

[Arm Chair Quarterback]

What’s the legitimate scriptural case for same sex marriage?

I will be honest. I am not sure how I feel about homosexuality. I think clearly there is a biological component, however I think all sexual deviations have a biological component. That in no way should justify the behavior though.

I have listened to a few of Dan McClellan's videos about scriptures and homosexuality. He is an ancient language expert and uses that to interpret the writers meaning. Basically his argument is the biblical authors had a very different view of sexuality than we do today. They actually had a lot of different views than we do today yet we ignore those scriptures and focus on the ones about homosexuality instead.

He says the idea of being a homosexual wasn't even a concept for them as homosexuality is different from same sex attraction. In many cases the cultures of the time thought same sex activity was fine as long as the male assumed the dominate role.

Regardless though, I think the scriptures are mostly unclear on this point because it wasn't a concern then.

https://www.youtube.com/@maklelan/search?query=gay

After all the Covid experts we have endured do you think it’s now wise to listen to linguistic experts on the topic of biology? The expert class has become a farce in so many ways.

[Arm Chair Quarterback]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntc38LbtvzU

"I think we have talked altogether too much about gender and altogether too little about chastity. The issue is chastity. The issue is not gender."

So is the Proclamation on the Family outdated?

He also says "to be very clear for all people for for all of his children now when that attraction exists what we ask for those inclined to a homosexual feeling is exactly what we ask for those with heterosexual feelings I'm talking to a young single adult group and that is be faithful be clean be chaste and for you every blessing of this church is available in terms of the sacraments the ordinances going to the temple."

So EVERY blessing is available, including celestial marriage?

The Law of Chastity, as defined in the Endowment, is that the sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve shall have no sexual relations except with those who are legitimately and legally wedded, according to the law of God.

UPDATE per Wolfwoman, direct quote down here for 2023:

We are instructed to give unto you the law of chastity, which is that God’s sons and God’s daughters shall have sexual relations only with those to whom they are legally and lawfully wedded according to His law.

The law of God makes no room for same-sex "marriages."

If a person openly declares himself as having same sex attraction, yet still follows the covenants by marrying the opposite sex, there is no issue as long as he doesn't fall into that temptation.

Are we taking about gods law or gods law according to smith young and Nelson?

[Subcomandante]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntc38LbtvzU

"I think we have talked altogether too much about gender and altogether too little about chastity. The issue is chastity. The issue is not gender."

So is the Proclamation on the Family outdated?

He also says "to be very clear for all people for for all of his children now when that attraction exists what we ask for those inclined to a homosexual feeling is exactly what we ask for those with heterosexual feelings I'm talking to a young single adult group and that is be faithful be clean be chaste and for you every blessing of this church is available in terms of the sacraments the ordinances going to the temple."

So EVERY blessing is available, including celestial marriage?

The Law of Chastity, as defined in the Endowment, is that the sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve shall have no sexual relations except with those who are legitimately and legally wedded, according to the law of God.

UPDATE per Wolfwoman, direct quote down here for 2023:

We are instructed to give unto you the law of chastity, which is that God’s sons and God’s daughters shall have sexual relations only with those to whom they are legally and lawfully wedded according to His law.

The law of God makes no room for same-sex "marriages."

If a person openly declares himself as having same sex attraction, yet still follows the covenants by marrying the opposite sex, there is no issue as long as he doesn't fall into that temptation.

Are we taking about gods law or gods law according to smith young and Nelson?

It is simply God's law. Not God's law as interpreted by any man. But what God has caused to be revealed to His messengers over the ages, and those revelations we have in the Scriptures.

[Wolfwoman]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntc38LbtvzU

"I think we have talked altogether too much about gender and altogether too little about chastity. The issue is chastity. The issue is not gender."

So is the Proclamation on the Family outdated?

He also says "to be very clear for all people for for all of his children now when that attraction exists what we ask for those inclined to a homosexual feeling is exactly what we ask for those with heterosexual feelings I'm talking to a young single adult group and that is be faithful be clean be chaste and for you every blessing of this church is available in terms of the sacraments the ordinances going to the temple."

So EVERY blessing is available, including celestial marriage?

The Law of Chastity, as defined in the Endowment, is that the sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve shall have no sexual relations except with those who are legitimately and legally wedded, according to the law of God.

UPDATE per Wolfwoman, direct quote down here for 2023:

We are instructed to give unto you the law of chastity, which is that God’s sons and God’s daughters shall have sexual relations only with those to whom they are legally and lawfully wedded according to His law.

The law of God makes no room for same-sex "marriages."

If a person openly declares himself as having same sex attraction, yet still follows the covenants by marrying the opposite sex, there is no issue as long as he doesn't fall into that temptation.

Are we taking about gods law or gods law according to smith young and Nelson?

So far as all of us know, Nelson’s version of God’s law is heterosexual marriage. If that ever changes then I think you can make an argument. But as of now, the church, Nelson, and God all agree that marriage is between people of the opposite sex.

[Good & Global]

This assumption is incorrect.

The endowment spells it out even clearer with the 2019 and 2023 revisions.

I will wait for the 2030 revision that will settle all arguments.

I was expecting that to come from Nelson by now but alas it will have to be Oaks or more likely Bednar.

Can we still be sealed to the earth if we go through the full climate repentance process?

[Subcomandante]

This assumption is incorrect.

The endowment spells it out even clearer with the 2019 and 2023 revisions.

I will wait for the 2030 revision that will settle all arguments.

I was expecting that to come from Nelson by now but alas it will have to be Oaks or more likely Bednar.

Can we still be sealed to the earth if we go through the full climate repentance process?

Our works that we do on earth, we will have to account to God for them in heaven. Be they good or bad.

While it is true that the Earth is suffering, it has zero to do with how much carbon or methane or any greenhouse gas is put in the air. Human contribution to that is infinitesimally small.

What does make the earth cry, groan, or revolt?

The sheer wickedness of humanity on the Earth.

We see this in Moses 7 when the earth is seen as crying and moaning due to all manner of wickedness that was upon her. Similar scripts that have been pulled such as the Book of Enoch and the Qumran Book of Giants also speak of this, and specifically call out the violence, murder, and sexual deviancy (licentiousness) as causes of the Earth groaning and moaning.

If there is any repentance that needs to be done, (and there is!) it has nothing to do with any of the goals relating to fighting back climate change as the world sees it. It has to do with performing a correct teshuvah, a correct taubah, a correct metanoia, and forsake those things that cause sadness in the world.

[Good & Global]

Damn! Sub gets it.

Yes the science around climate change does not even support the mantras being forced on humanity which is what they actually are at the end of the day. Mantras, hypotheses, not facts and most certainly not absolutes.

[Arm Chair Quarterback]

The Law of Chastity, as defined in the Endowment, is that the sons of Adam and the daughters of Eve shall have no sexual relations except with those who are legitimately and legally wedded, according to the law of God.

UPDATE per Wolfwoman, direct quote down here for 2023:



The law of God makes no room for same-sex "marriages."

If a person openly declares himself as having same sex attraction, yet still follows the covenants by marrying the opposite sex, there is no issue as long as he doesn't fall into that temptation.

Are we taking about gods law or gods law according to smith young and Nelson?

So far as all of us know, Nelson’s version of God’s law is heterosexual marriage. If that ever changes then I think you can make an argument. But as of now, the church, Nelson, and God all agree that marriage is between people of the opposite sex.

Gods law according to god is marriage between a man and a woman. Gods law according to smith young and Nelson. Is marriage between a man a lot of women.

Polygamy tends to water down any moral authority we have on this lgbtq issue. Just another perversion of gods law.

[spiritMan]

What’s the legitimate scriptural case for same sex marriage?

I will be honest. I am not sure how I feel about homosexuality. I think clearly there is a biological component, however I think all sexual deviations have a biological component. That in no way should justify the behavior though.

I have listened to a few of Dan McClellan's videos about scriptures and homosexuality. He is an ancient language expert and uses that to interpret the writers meaning. Basically his argument is the biblical authors had a very different view of sexuality than we do today. They actually had a lot of different views than we do today yet we ignore those scriptures and focus on the ones about homosexuality instead.

He says the idea of being a homosexual wasn't even a concept for them as homosexuality is different from same sex attraction. In many cases the cultures of the time thought same sex activity was fine as long as the male assumed the dominate role.

Regardless though, I think the scriptures are mostly unclear on this point because it wasn't a concern then.

https://www.youtube.com/@maklelan/search?query=gay

Dan is an LGBTQ advocate, so either you are also an advocate or you are being deceived.