How will gay, monogomous couples be judged?

66 thoughts on “How will gay, monogomous couples be judged?”

1. Matt, I don’t think it’s a matter of people “forgetting” any such thing, since that “doctrine” was never taught in the history of the LDS church until Dallin Oaks personally invented it approximately two years ago.

   If homosexuality is a “sinful choice,” then this “doctrine” completely contradicts Alma’s teachings in The Book of Mormon, where he indicates that we will retain our same dispositions after death. Oaks’ new “doctrine” only makes sense if one buys into his implied theory that homosexuality is some sort of “birth defect,” to be compared with mental and physical disabilities Oaks and Wickman made this direct comparison, even shamelessly exploiting Wickman’s own daughter to make their point, in their “interview-format” statements on lds.org.

   This new “doctrine” may be growing in LDS popularity, but it has certainly never been canonized or otherwise accepted by a sustaining vote of LDS members in general conference. Therefore, it can only be characterized as Oaks’ opinion, even if repeated by a few other general authorities. It is not the “doctrine” of the LDS church.

2. The point Alma made was that we carry over after death who and what we are, with the idea being that we should repent now and change our lives to conform more closely with what the Lord wishes us to become in the Hereafter, since repentance is more easily done here in mortality. And, yes, I think homosexuals probably have the hardest row to hoe of anyone; but, the rest of us still dispute that idea frequently as we whine about our own problems, challenges, and failures–while hoping that the homosexuals will all hurry up and go to hell so there will be one less thorn in our sides to bother us as we look down from our more superior position.

3. Nick, on what basis do you argue that a desire to engage in sexual activity with members of the same sex is NOT a physical condition? Surely, physical desires stem, in large part, from temporary physical conditions, don’t they? Don’t such feelings wax and wane throughout life? If they are a completely immutable part of the human spirit, then how will they manifest themselves in the resurrection? Based on your interpretation of Alma’s statement that we will retain our dispositions after death, consider this: If I die at the age of 98 with an extremely low interest in sex, will I be resurrected that way, while someone who dies at age 19 with a nearly uncontrollable sex drive will be resurrected that way?

4. Where have I ever argued that homosexuality is “NOT a physical condition?” Of course it’s a physical condition, just like being left-handed is a physical condition. There was, of course, an unenlightened time, when educators and others believed that it was best to force left-handed individuals to “become right-handed.” I’m told, in fact, that the word “sinister” originally meant “left-handed.” I guess if that particular social bias had been just a little stronger, Oaks would have been teaching that the resurrection would make everyone magically turn right-handed, eh?

5. But it’s not an “earthly” condition? How do you know?

6. It appears, ltbugaf, that you are considering Oaks’ statement as a definitive declaration of LDS doctrine, and therefore, an absolute declaration of divinely-revealed truth. In other words, if I were to ask you “how do you know homosexuality is some sort of temporary physical abnormality,” you would consider your position “proven” by the fact that Oaks said so.

   If you are an active member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, however, I expect you are aware that an individual apostle has no authority whatsoever to establish LDS doctrine or proclaim a revelation to the LDS church. Individual apostles make mistakes, such as Bruce R. McConkie declaring that individuals of African descent would never receive the LDS priesthood until at least the Millennium. It didn’t matter how many other LDS leaders repeated McConkie’s opinion–it was still wrong.

   Your reliance on Oaks’ speculation, therefore, is problematic. Even Oaks, for that matter, has not seen fit to explain the basis of his speculation, whether it be his personal reasoning from the LDS scriptures, a spiritual manifestation, or (doubtfully) personal experience.

   Your apparent demand that I prove that Oaks is wrong is, of course, pointless. Given that you are working from a personal assumption that Oaks is correct by virtue of his ecclesiastical position, you will be quick to discount any evidence that I provide to the contrary. After all, in your mind, I am (a) not an LDS apostle, (b) an “apostate” who left the LDS church, and (c) an openly gay man. You will understand, therefore, that I’m really not motivated to engage in the game you propose.

7. Wow, Nick, you’ve certainly read a lot into my statement that isn’t there. I’m just wondering what your basis is for your position.

   I believe, and apparently you do, too (?) that some physical characteristics will rise in the resurrection and some will not. You seem very confident that sexual attraction of men to men and women to women is in the former category. I’m just wondering what you’re founding your belief on.

8. I can see it now: The Gays and Lesbians petition God for full status in the church, including temple sealings, which is granted. Then in the Hereafter, when They are all exalted and receive Their planets to populate, each Couple will be given a rock in the Asteroid Belt between Mars and Jupiter. Since They will have no Eternal Increase, there is no need for full-sized planets for Them to occupy. After They have their own planets settled, which will be fully populated when They settle there, what will then happen throughout the Eternities?

   At least They won’t have any Satans to throw monkey wrenches into Their Systems, so They won’t have any sorrow from Their children falling away from Their Eternal Plans, whatever They may decide to put into action.

   Come to think of it, that sounds like a really good program, in many respects–kind of like Adam and Eve would’ve been in the Garden of Eden, had they not succumbed to temptation.

9. And Nick, let me reassure you that I’m not making the assumptions you say I’m making. It’s true that I feel safe in believing you’re not an apostle, since I’m pretty familiar with the current list of those. But I have no idea whether you have left the Church or qualify as an apostate. I also don’t know (or care to know) whether you are “gay,” openly or otherwise. As far as I know, you’ve never stated any of those thingson this ‘blog; above, you say only that I’m assuming them, not whether they are true or false.

   The only things I know about you are that a long time ago you were a member of the first student ward I moved into at BYU after getting married, that I once read an editorial letter you wrote to The Daily Universe about the John Birch Society, that until recently you ran a rather nice website about LDS temples, and that you have recently championed same-sex marriage and condemned the views of Elder Oaks on this weblog.

   I’m also not making any demand that you prove Elder Oaks wrong. I just see that you have a very definite view on this and would like to know more about why you hold that view.

10. Ah, but Dan, you have overlooked the principle of eternal adoption, whereby same-sex couples could have eternal increase. See comments here and here.

    Meanwhile they may continue to have endless “celestial sex,” as has been described by Dick Baer and Ed Decker in The Godmakers.

11. Why does it matter if they are being monogamous or not?

    “For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” Romans 3:23

    “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Romans 6:23

    All sins are equal in God’s eyes. In this world, each sin has a different consequence and a different imediate effect on a person’s life, but at judgement day a person will be judged for sin.

    Homosexuality is a sin.
    Greed is a sin.
    Lying is a sin.
    Gluttony is a sin.
    Theft is a sin.
    Murder is a sin.
    Hatred is a sin.

    But the gift of God is aternal life through Jesus Christ, regardless of your sin.

    “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whosoever should believe in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” John 3:16

    “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that hears my word, and believes on him that sent me has everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” John 5:24

    I am a homosexual.
    I am a Christian.
    I am going to Heaven.

12. The Bible is clear: God’s plan is one man, one woman in a covenant of marriage (Genesis 2:24).

13. Kevin, The Bible is also clear that God does not seem to object to one man and MANY women in a variety of marriage states. So, perhaps stating a norm or ideal does not preclude approval of other types of marriages and relationships.

14. Kevin,

    The Bible is also very clear about killing homosexuals – “If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

    I hope you’re a man of your word.
    I also hope law enforcement is well informed of your intentions.

15. Sodomites will burn in hell,according to scriptures.

    1. Okay, but that is irrelevant to the discussion here.

Comments are closed.