Jesus reveals ban on LGBTs to LDS elder apostle Russell M. Nelson

[Prestor John]

Hello Skwim and others.

I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints and I fully believe that this decision was a revelation from the Lord Jesus Christ to the leaders of the Church.

I am willing to discuss why I believe this decision was revelatory and how it was the only option left available to the Church in regards to this issue.

I personally believe that the decision makes sense in light of the LDS beliefs concerning God, His nature and His plan for us.

If anyone is at all interested in hearing what a faithful member of the LDS Church would say on this issue please go ahead and ask me exactly what you have issue with and be open to the idea that your outrage may be because of a misunderstanding you have of LDS beliefs and practices.

I believe that anyone can come to understand why this decision was made even if they do not necessarily agree with it.

 

[Katzpur]

Just for everybody's information, that's not how it works. I mean, Elder Nelson can call it "revelation" if he wants, but God would never have revealed something to a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles without first revealing it to the Prophet/President of the Church. I haven't read the OP because I have whoever posted it on "ignore," but the title of the thread is, in and of itself, an inaccurate statement. Whether it reflects the OP's understanding of the situation, I don't claim to know.

 

[Scott C.]

So, is this the beginning of the end of all LGBT Mormons. Are they all on their way to becoming persona non grata?

Many people seem confused on the LDS Church's beliefs on revelation and on homosexuality. A few points:

1-Church leaders teach frequently that when the Quorum of the Twelve and First Presidency meet to decide an important issue, that they are guided by God. They all express strong and diverse opinions and wait for unanimity before they proceed. They frequently give testimony that God guides this process by revelation. There is absolutely nothing new or different about Elder Nelson saying this was the process followed to come to this decision. If others in the Twelve describe it as a practical decision, that is also accurate. The process of making the decision includes discussion from all angles, practical and otherwise. The end result is by inspiration. That's how I believe it works. It should not be earth shattering to anyone who knows my church, that Elder Nelson described it this way.

2-Is this the beginning of the end of all LGBT Mormons? The question doesn't make a lot of sense to someone who understands my church. Homosexual conduct is prohibited by my church. It always has been. I don't understand why some seem surprised or shocked when my church says or does something to reinforce this. Yes my church works with gay Mormons and welcomes them to church. You should not confuse this with a softening on the position that gay conduct is prohibited. It's just as prohibited as is fornication or adultery. But my church always keeps the doors open to all peoples, except to those who pose a safety risk or serious disruption to meetings through their conduct. The church wants gay to know they are loved and to feel welcome. Nevertheless, if a person insists on gay sex and has no intention of trying to abstain, there's a good chance they will lose some or all membership privileges. Even then, they will be welcome at church.

3-In my opinion my church is in a tough position regarding baptizing the children of gay couples. Imagine my church baptizes a 12 year old child who's parents are gay. As with all children, the parents must consent. I'm not sure why they would consent to send their child to a church that teaches that they are living a sinful relationship and their marriage is not recognized by God. But suppose they do consent. Is it really fair for a 12 year old child to belong to a church that teaches a life style in opposition to his or her fundamental family life? How long would it take for someone to sue the LDS Church and accuse them of "recruiting" children and indoctrinating them in an attempt to destroy his or her family? My church does not want to put that pressure on a child to choose whether or not he or she will believe in the gospel or believe in her parent's life style. It is not too much to ask that he wait until he's at least 18 to make the decision to be baptized. This policy is not based on trying to hurt or cast out a child. Quite the contrary, it's done to protect the child.

4-I understand that there are many who simply disagree with my church's stance on homosexuality period, regardless of their position on baptizing the children of gay couples. These people will be unhappy with any messages or policies from my church that reinforce these beliefs. But if you look at this from the point of view that my church teaches that marriage between a man and woman is ordained of God and a homosexual union is not ordained of God, and if you realize that this is a fundamental tenant of faith, you should be able to see the wisdom in having such children postpone baptism until everyone is certain that they are ready to fully embrace the teaching of my church, and ready to face the hard reality that there parents are in a relationship that is contrary to God's commandments.

 

[Prestor John]

I do not wish to be contradictory to any of my fellow members of the Church, but I felt inclined to find and quote Elder Russell M. Nelson's exact words on this issue in the hopes of clearing up any confusion.

He spoke on this topic in the Worldwide Devotional for Young Adults on January 10, 2016 at the Brigham Young University in Hawaii. It was titled, "Becoming True Millennials".

It can be found in full here: https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/arti...ls/2016/01/becoming-true-millennials?lang=eng

The portion of his address that is relevant to this discussion reads,

"We sustain 15 men who are ordained as prophets, seers, and revelators. When a thorny problem arises—and they only seem to get thornier each day—these 15 men wrestle with the issue, trying to see all the ramifications of various courses of action, and they diligently seek to hear the voice of the Lord. After fasting, praying, studying, pondering, and counseling with my Brethren about weighty matters, it is not unusual for me to be awakened during the night with further impressions about issues with which we are concerned. And my Brethren have the same experience.

The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles counsel together and share all the Lord has directed us to understand and to feel individually and collectively. And then we watch the Lord move upon the President of the Church to proclaim the Lord’s will.

This prophetic process was followed in 2012 with the change in minimum age for missionaries and again with the recent additions to the Church’s handbook, consequent to the legalization of same-sex marriage in some countries. Filled with compassion for all, and especially for the children, we wrestled at length to understand the Lord’s will in this matter. Ever mindful of God’s plan of salvation and of His hope for eternal life for each of His children, we considered countless permutations and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise. We met repeatedly in the temple in fasting and prayer and sought further direction and inspiration. And then, when the Lord inspired His prophet, President Thomas S. Monson, to declare the mind of the Lord and the will of the Lord, each of us during that sacred moment felt a spiritual confirmation. It was our privilege as Apostles to sustain what had been revealed to President Monson. Revelation from the Lord to His servants is a sacred process, and so is your privilege of receiving personal revelation."

He also said,

"Prophets see ahead. They see the harrowing dangers the adversary has placed or will yet place in our path. Prophets also foresee the grand possibilities and privileges awaiting those who listen with the intent to obey. I know this is true! I have experienced it for myself over and over again.

The Lord has promised us that He will never allow the prophet to lead us astray. President Harold B. Lee declared: 'You may not like what comes from the authority of the Church. It may contradict your political views. It may contradict your social views. It may interfere with some of your social life. But if you listen to these things, as if from the mouth of the Lord Himself, with patience and faith, the promise is that ‘the gates of hell shall not prevail against you; yea, and the Lord God will disperse the powers of darkness from before you, and cause the heavens to shake for your good, and his name’s glory’ (D&C 21:6).'

You may not always understand every declaration of a living prophet. But when you know a prophet is a prophet, you can approach the Lord in humility and faith and ask for your own witness about whatever His prophet has proclaimed."

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Protip: Anyone who claims to get messages directly from god(s) is either insane or a scam artist - and often both.

 

[Prestor John]

Protip: Anyone who claims to get messages directly from god(s) is either insane or a scam artist - and often both.

Thank you for sharing your opinion.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Thank you for sharing your opinion.

You're welcome. However, it isn't my opinion. This truth was revealed to me by the one true God.

 

[Scott C.]

Protip: Anyone who claims to get messages directly from god(s) is either insane or a scam artist - and often both.

If those are the only two choices, then you have just proven that these men do it fact receive revelation. They are most certainly not insane. There are 15 of them. Look at their lives and accomplishments, intelligence and service to others. It's simply not possible that they are all insane. There's also no way that they are scam artists. I'm not a scam artist and I believe in my religion. If I were called tomorrow to become an Apostle (which isn't very likely) I wouldn't suddenly abandon my integrity, and join in on the scam which I didn't even know existed. These men have lived and believed all of their lives and did not choose to be in these leadership positions. They were honest when they were missionaries at 19, honest when they married and raised kids, honest as bishops, and honest as Apostles. I am 100% certain that they believe what they say. I'm also 100% certain that they are not scammers. You will have to look for explanations other than insanity or dishonesty to explain away their revelations.

 

[Skwim]

Many people seem confused on the LDS Church's beliefs on revelation and on homosexuality. A few points:

1-Church leaders teach frequently that when the Quorum of the Twelve and First Presidency meet to decide an important issue, that they are guided by God. They all express strong and diverse opinions and wait for unanimity before they proceed. They frequently give testimony that God guides this process by revelation. There is absolutely nothing new or different about Elder Nelson saying this was the process followed to come to this decision. If others in the Twelve describe it as a practical decision, that is also accurate. The process of making the decision includes discussion from all angles, practical and otherwise. The end result is by inspiration. That's how I believe it works. It should not be earth shattering to anyone who knows my church, that Elder Nelson described it this way.

2-Is this the beginning of the end of all LGBT Mormons? The question doesn't make a lot of sense to someone who understands my church. Homosexual conduct is prohibited by my church. It always has been. I don't understand why some seem surprised or shocked when my church says or does something to reinforce this. Yes my church works with gay Mormons and welcomes them to church. You should not confuse this with a softening on the position that gay conduct is prohibited. It's just as prohibited as is fornication or adultery. But my church always keeps the doors open to all peoples, except to those who pose a safety risk or serious disruption to meetings through their conduct. The church wants gay to know they are loved and to feel welcome. Nevertheless, if a person insists on gay sex and has no intention of trying to abstain, there's a good chance they will lose some or all membership privileges. Even then, they will be welcome at church.

3-In my opinion my church is in a tough position regarding baptizing the children of gay couples. Imagine my church baptizes a 12 year old child who's parents are gay. As with all children, the parents must consent. I'm not sure why they would consent to send their child to a church that teaches that they are living a sinful relationship and their marriage is not recognized by God. But suppose they do consent. Is it really fair for a 12 year old child to belong to a church that teaches a life style in opposition to his or her fundamental family life? How long would it take for someone to sue the LDS Church and accuse them of "recruiting" children and indoctrinating them in an attempt to destroy his or her family? My church does not want to put that pressure on a child to choose whether or not he or she will believe in the gospel or believe in her parent's life style. It is not too much to ask that he wait until he's at least 18 to make the decision to be baptized. This policy is not based on trying to hurt or cast out a child. Quite the contrary, it's done to protect the child.

4-I understand that there are many who simply disagree with my church's stance on homosexuality period, regardless of their position on baptizing the children of gay couples. These people will be unhappy with any messages or policies from my church that reinforce these beliefs. But if you look at this from the point of view that my church teaches that marriage between a man and woman is ordained of God and a homosexual union is not ordained of God, and if you realize that this is a fundamental tenant of faith, you should be able to see the wisdom in having such children postpone baptism until everyone is certain that they are ready to fully embrace the teaching of my church, and ready to face the hard reality that there parents are in a relationship that is contrary to God's commandments.

I understand your church's tenets, but I can also see it as deterring those homosexuals who wish to get married from remaining or becoming members. And perhaps also deterring other homosexuals who simply find it too exclusionary. I can honestly see it chasing away homosexuals of all stripes.

.

 

[Katzpur]

1-Church leaders teach frequently that when the Quorum of the Twelve and First Presidency meet to decide an important issue, that they are guided by God. They all express strong and diverse opinions and wait for unanimity before they proceed. They frequently give testimony that God guides this process by revelation. There is absolutely nothing new or different about Elder Nelson saying this was the process followed to come to this decision. If others in the Twelve describe it as a practical decision, that is also accurate. The process of making the decision includes discussion from all angles, practical and otherwise. The end result is by inspiration. That's how I believe it works. It should not be earth shattering to anyone who knows my church, that Elder Nelson described it this way.

Well, as I said before, the OP may very well have given a title to this thread that inaccurately describes how the policy in question actually came to be put into effect. It certainly wouldn't be the first time that's happened.

 

[Scott C.]

I understand your church's tenets, but I can also see it as deterring those homosexuals who wish to get married from remaining or becoming members. And perhaps also deterring other homosexuals who simply find it too exclusionary. I can honestly see it chasing away homosexuals of all stripes.

.

I agree that there are probably many homosexuals who leave my church over it's position. Given my church's position on this, they can only do so much to encourage gays to stay. They can't allow members to have gay sex with no intention of trying to avoid that temptation. Once they enter into a gay marriage, they are saying in effect that they do not believe my church and have no intention of conforming to it's teachings. They can still come to church but will lose membership privileges, as would someone who insists on living a life of polygamy or adultery or pre-marital sex with no intention of changing.

 

[blue taylor]

Why not just kick out all the gays in the church and put up a sign that says GAYS GO AWAY? King James was bisexual and also noted that Jesus was gay too.

I, James, am neither a god nor an angel, but a man like any other. Therefore I act like a man and confess to loving those dear to me more than other men. You may be sure that I love the Earl of Buckingham more than anyone else, and more than you who are here assembled. I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect (being gay) , for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had John, and I have George.

 

[Prestor John]

You're welcome. However, it isn't my opinion. This truth was revealed to me by the one true God.

Heheh.

Then which are you?

 

[Prestor John]

Why not just kick out all the gays in the church and put up a sign that says GAYS GO AWAY? King James was bisexual and also noted that Jesus was gay too.

I, James, am neither a god nor an angel, but a man like any other. Therefore I act like a man and confess to loving those dear to me more than other men. You may be sure that I love the Earl of Buckingham more than anyone else, and more than you who are here assembled. I wish to speak in my own behalf and not to have it thought to be a defect (being gay) , for Jesus Christ did the same, and therefore I cannot be blamed. Christ had John, and I have George.

The leaders of the LDS Church do not want those who struggle with same-sex attraction to leave or "go away". They want to comfort them with the words of the Lord Jesus Christ so they can be healed.

What King James did or claimed has no bearing on the beliefs and practices of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.

What King James did or claimed should have no bearing on anyone who desire to be a Christian.

King James had neither the authority nor historical reference to make any claims about the sexual orientation of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Also, when someone shares a quote, it is proper to share the source from which the quote originated.

Would you mind refraining from sharing anymore meaningless comments? You may distract those who want to have an intelligent discussion.

 

[JoStories]

My suspicion, and that's all it is, is that there was a bit of wrangling within the brotherhood as to how to handle it. In light of the rapidly expanding acceptance of GLBTs across the country, would a mere announcement of policy from the ruling elders carry enough weight to stop Mormon folk from accepting LGBT as a valid life style, or should they appeal to Jesus to establish the clout they felt was needed to bring everyone in line.

I wonder and this is literally just speculation, if this comes on the heels of the Joker..I mean Trump, who is likely to become president..and may God help us from him, who wants to deport all Muslims and mostly all peoples of color, that the LDS church thinks that perhaps they, too, can get on the bandwagon and get myself and others like me deported to some island somewhere where we can no longer embarrass the poor people of the US from the filth we allegedly spread all over them. But like I said, speculation... However, as a group trying to put words in the mouth of God, I am appalled and disgusted that they even have to audacity to say anything at all. And these are allegedly people who follow the teachings of Christ? Bull snot.

 

[JoStories]

Thank you for sharing your opinion.

Yes, it was his opinion but you have to admit that such a heinous statement such as this made by a person who has a great deal of influence in your church is in direct opposition to what Christ taught from the Sermon on the Mount. What Elder Nelson said can also be called opinion as there is no way for you nor any member of your church, no matter whether s/he be an Elder or simply a follower, to prove that such a proclamation could be spoken directly from God. To imply that God would deny children, and if you will recall, Christ did say to suffer the little children unto Him, from worshipping Christ based on the actions and I am appalled that your church would consider a sexual orientation to be a reason to deny children or the parents for that matter, of the parents is the height of lunacy. What could a child have done to deserve such horrid treatment? And do you not see the damage this can and will have on the image of your church? I certainly do.

 

[Sapiens]

I just had a revelation according to the standard protocols that we should kick the damned bigots off these islands.

 

[JoStories]

If those are the only two choices, then you have just proven that these men do it fact receive revelation. They are most certainly not insane. There are 15 of them. Look at their lives and accomplishments, intelligence and service to others. It's simply not possible that they are all insane. There's also no way that they are scam artists. I'm not a scam artist and I believe in my religion. If I were called tomorrow to become an Apostle (which isn't very likely) I wouldn't suddenly abandon my integrity, and join in on the scam which I didn't even know existed. These men have lived and believed all of their lives and did not choose to be in these leadership positions. They were honest when they were missionaries at 19, honest when they married and raised kids, honest as bishops, and honest as Apostles. I am 100% certain that they believe what they say. I'm also 100% certain that they are not scammers. You will have to look for explanations other than insanity or dishonesty to explain away their revelations.

Ok. I respect that you believe this. However, are you willing to say that every person who is a leader of another faith and stands in opposition to these men are scam artists or insane or dishonest? Are you willing to say that Pope Francis is insane? Personally, I find him to be one of the better popes, if not the best, since John Paul II. So are all other religious leaders insane and crazy? Do you begin to see this slippery slope?

 

[JoStories]

I agree that there are probably many homosexuals who leave my church over it's position. Given my church's position on this, they can only do so much to encourage gays to stay. They can't allow members to have gay sex with no intention of trying to avoid that temptation. Once they enter into a gay marriage, they are saying in effect that they do not believe my church and have no intention of conforming to it's teachings. They can still come to church but will lose membership privileges, as would someone who insists on living a life of polygamy or adultery or pre-marital sex with no intention of changing.

I wonder..how are you going to know that gay people are having sex unless they tell you? Are you going to monitor their bedrooms? Are you going to force them to tell you with torture and other means of extracting this information? Are you really willing to say that all heterosexuals are not engaging in sexual acts that might be considered sin in the eyes of your church? I see this as enacting an Orwellian means of kicking people who God loves to the curb. And honestly, perhaps this is for the best really considering what your Elders say and have stated comes from God. Because I would never have the audacity to say I spoke for God.

 

[JoStories]

The leaders of the LDS Church do not want those who struggle with same-sex attraction to leave or "go away". They want to comfort them with the words of the Lord Jesus Christ so they can be healed.

And what words would those be? The ones about loving ones neighbor or the ones about suffering the little children? Would those be the words about removing the splinter in one's own eyes before trying to cast disparagement on others? What words of comfort could you offer to a gay person when out of the other side of your mouth you call them sinners or worse?