If you had a gay brother

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

"I'm through with the church, and want nothing to do with any of that in my life."

I'm not sure it's about him making me feel better, but the latter statement would be more psychologically beneficial to him, IMHO. Let the eternities take care of themselves.

[CardiacCoug]

He has to come to his own decision regarding his relationship with the Church that he feels good about. I personally wouldn't have a preference about his relationship with the Church except to hope it is a relationship that he feels comfortable with -- that he is at peace with his decision.

I can't imagine not having some type of loyalty and fond feelings toward the Church and its doctrines even if I stopped being a fully active member. I think many gay people feel a strong need to retain some type of connection with the Church, and I hope that becomes increasingly possible.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by CardiacCoug

He has to come to his own decision regarding his relationship with the Church that he feels good about. I personally wouldn't have a preference about his relationship with the Church except to hope it is a relationship that he feels comfortable with -- that he is at peace with his decision.

I can't imagine not having some type of loyalty and fond feelings toward the Church and its doctrines even if I stopped being a fully active member. I think many gay people feel a strong need to retain some type of connection with the Church, and I hope that becomes increasingly possible.

I don't really care about his relationship, because as a brother that is my relationship with him. His other relationships are for him to figure out.

[CardiacCoug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

I don't really care about his relationship, because as a brother that is my relationship with him. His other relationships are for him to figure out.

Exactly.

[BYUsportsguy]

I think the first option of "I still believe the gospel but don't feel like being active in chuch anymore" isn't completely congruent because the gospel teaches that homosexual relationships are wrong. If my brother really believes the gospel, he would understand that any efforts the church makes to encourage him to feel bad about his gay attraction is just a way of trying to help, as unwelcome as it is at times.

But if somehow he could still love Christ and keep the rest of the commandments, he'd probably come back around eventually and realize he's supposed to be straight, so I'd choose option #1.

[Anthesian]

What about the misconceptions surrounding the specific verses that supposedly condemn homosexuality? It is important to remember, as Rev. Mel White said, that scripture is not about sex but about God. Historical context (who's talking, who they're talking to, and why) is by far the most important part to remember when interpreting scripture. Scripture is a historical record of Gods dealings with His children. Historical context outweighs 'modern revelation', IMHO. There is a reason why things were said and done at a specific time but that does not mean they apply now. We should look to scripture for inspiration on ways to improve our relationship with the divine and not as a creedal dos and don'ts list. As I said before in another thread...Orthopraxy is more important than orthodoxy. IMHO, of course.

[CardiacCoug]

Originally Posted by BYUsportsguy

But if somehow he could still love Christ and keep the rest of the commandments, he'd probably come back around eventually and realize he's supposed to be straight, so I'd choose option #1.

So he should just stay active in the Church until he realizes he's "supposed to be straight" and then he becomes straight and lives happily ever after?

Interesting.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Anthesian

What about the misconceptions surrounding the specific verses that supposedly condemn homosexuality? It is important to remember, as Rev. Mel White said, that scripture is not about sex but about God. Historical context (who's talking, who they're talking to, and why) is by far the most important part to remember when interpreting scripture. Scripture is a historical record of Gods dealings with His children. Historical context outweighs 'modern revelation', IMHO. There is a reason why things were said and done at a specific time but that does not mean they apply now. We should look to scripture for inspiration on ways to improve our relationship with the divine and not as a creedal dos and don'ts list. As I said before in another thread...Orthopraxy is more important than orthodoxy. IMHO, of course.

"I will refer to a certain meeting I attended in the town of Kirtland in my early days. At that meeting some remarks were made that have been made here today, with regard to the living oracles and with regard to the written word of God. The same principle was presented, although not as extensively as it has been here, when a leading man in the Church got up and talked upon the subject, and said: 'You have got the word of God before you here in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants; you have the written word of God, and you who give revelations should give revelations according to those books, as what is written in those books is the word of God. We should confine ourselves to them.'

"When he concluded, Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, 'Brother Brigham I want you to take the stand and tell us your views with regard to the living oracles and the written word of God.' Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: 'There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day. And now, said he, 'when compared with the living oracles those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books.' That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation; 'Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth.'"

President Wilford Woodruff, October 1897 General Conference

[Anthesian]

Originally Posted by Tex

"I will refer to a certain meeting I attended in the town of Kirtland in my early days. At that meeting some remarks were made that have been made here today, with regard to the living oracles and with regard to the written word of God. The same principle was presented, although not as extensively as it has been here, when a leading man in the Church got up and talked upon the subject, and said: 'You have got the word of God before you here in the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants; you have the written word of God, and you who give revelations should give revelations according to those books, as what is written in those books is the word of God. We should confine ourselves to them.'

"When he concluded, Brother Joseph turned to Brother Brigham Young and said, 'Brother Brigham I want you to take the stand and tell us your views with regard to the living oracles and the written word of God.' Brother Brigham took the stand, and he took the Bible, and laid it down; he took the Book of Mormon, and laid it down; and he took the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and laid it down before him, and he said: 'There is the written word of God to us, concerning the work of God from the beginning of the world, almost, to our day. And now, said he, 'when compared with the living oracles those books are nothing to me; those books do not convey the word of God direct to us now, as do the words of a Prophet or a man bearing the Holy Priesthood in our day and generation. I would rather have the living oracles than all the writing in the books.' That was the course he pursued. When he was through, Brother Joseph said to the congregation; 'Brother Brigham has told you the word of the Lord, and he has told you the truth.'"

President Wilford Woodruff, October 1897 General Conference

Interesting. Thank you. Good for them.

If a 'prophet' says it...then it doesn't mean it's true.

Peace

[BYUsportsguy]

Originally Posted by CardiacCoug

So he should just stay active in the Church until he realizes he's "supposed to be straight" and then he becomes straight and lives happily ever after?

Interesting.

I say that because I if he stays active in church, he won't be committing homosexual acts 24-7 so the Spirit could still touch him when he's receptive and he would likely eventually have a change of heart. It's happened before.

As far as understanding scriptures that condemn homosexuality, I don't see how anybody could believe that God approves of it. I mean, it's completely outside of everything ever revealed. Not to be blasphemous, but can you seriously imagine Christ looking upon homosexual activity and be pleased by it? Do you think he invited his disciples to engage likewise? Such an idea is horrendous - it's not part of the gospel.