It is currently Mon Oct 14, 2019 8:35 pm

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 6:10 am 
God

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:01 am
Posts: 8997
The Church used Conference to make some amendments to the temple recommend questions. This thread is for discussion about the change to Question 7 specifically, and it's implications for temple recommend holders and Church Leaders.

Old Version
7. Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

New Version
7. Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

The active part of the question has changed from the Temple Recommend seekers support for another individual or group, to the seekers direct support for the idea. I think this is particularly impactful in relation to same sex marriage. As a member of the Church you cannot be supportive of your child's, sibling's, friend's or acquaintences desire to enter in to a same sex marriage, regardless of their membership status. For instance, your gay child wants you as their parent to participate in their wedding ceremony. The Church will now retract your temple recommend if you do. If you attend a same sex marriage of friend's or relatives and Tweet or Instagram about how wonderful it was and how happy the couple are, the Church can retract your temple recommend. Attendance at a same sex marriage can (and damn well should) be deemed to be supportive of it. For that you can no longer hold a temple recommend - regardless of how loving and understanding Mr Nelson says you should be of your gay friends and family.

It's a subtle change to the question, but it's been thought long and hard about by the Church and its Leaders, and there's a purpose to it. There is a clear difference between what is said by Church Leaders and what it does.

Mr Nelson speaks with a forked tongue.

_________________
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 6:30 am 
Valiant A
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2014 4:23 am
Posts: 168
I interpret that the opposite way. By removing “support/affiliate... group or individual,” it’s actually more inclusive. If your gay child wants you to participate in their wedding... previously, that would be supporting an individual who is contrary to the church. Now, you can indeed support the individual person by being there for them and showing them love, while not necessarily supporting what they are doing. It’s a fingers-crossed kind of support/love, as pertaining to that recommend question, but I believe the intent is to let people off the hook for loving their gay family members, not to go after them more for that.

_________________
http://www.WeirdAlma.com
Weird Alma - Prophet of the New Disputation


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 7:56 am 
God

Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 1:21 pm
Posts: 1024
The old and the new version of it sucks. Not one member can honestly say no to those questions.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 8:47 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 9:49 am
Posts: 8588
Location: Somewhere between bemused and curious.
Given that defining doctrine in Mormonism is like nailing green Jell-O to a sisal carpet covered wall, local leaders now have carte blanche to exclude vocal members from the temple based on that leadership's personal interpretation of doctrine.

They are really increasing the focus on the temple. It is being used as a reward/punishment system to get members to fall into line and pay tithing.

"If you don't do what we say and give us your money, you and your loved ones will be separated forever by God."

It is really an odious message. It's no wonder the youth are leaving in droves. I recently had my 30 something niece, who I had thought was fully TBM up until then, that she did not need the church to tell her that God loved her. These cosmetic changes Nelson keep making to the organization are not going to result in higher activity, in fact they will have the opposite impact, in that when a religious organization demands less of its members, activity falls off, especially the activity of those members who are used to doing all the work.

_________________
What Joseph Smith should have said: "No man knows my hagiography."
What Jane Manning did say: "I am white except for the color of my skin."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:33 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:28 pm
Posts: 2361
I have a question wrote:
The Church used Conference to make some amendments to the temple recommend questions. This thread is for discussion about the change to Question 7 specifically, and it's implications for temple recommend holders and Church Leaders.

Old Version
7. Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

New Version
7. Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

The active part of the question has changed from the Temple Recommend seekers support for another individual or group, to the seekers direct support for the idea. I think this is particularly impactful in relation to same sex marriage. As a member of the Church you cannot be supportive of your child's, sibling's, friend's or acquaintences desire to enter in to a same sex marriage, regardless of their membership status. For instance, your gay child wants you as their parent to participate in their wedding ceremony. The Church will now retract your temple recommend if you do. If you attend a same sex marriage of friend's or relatives and Tweet or Instagram about how wonderful it was and how happy the couple are, the Church can retract your temple recommend. Attendance at a same sex marriage can (and damn well should) be deemed to be supportive of it. For that you can no longer hold a temple recommend - regardless of how loving and understanding Mr Nelson says you should be of your gay friends and family.

It's a subtle change to the question, but it's been thought long and hard about by the Church and its Leaders, and there's a purpose to it. There is a clear difference between what is said by Church Leaders and what it does.

Mr Nelson speaks with a forked tongue.


Dare I say it? The church is becoming more Cult like

_________________
"...The official doctrine of the LDS Church is a Global Flood" - BCSpace

"...What many people call sin is not sin." - Joseph Smith

"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away" - Phillip K. Dick

“The meaning of life is that it ends" - Franz Kafka


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 10:04 am 
Holy Ghost
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:12 pm
Posts: 406
I have a question wrote:
The Church used Conference to make some amendments to the temple recommend questions. This thread is for discussion about the change to Question 7 specifically, and it's implications for temple recommend holders and Church Leaders.

Old Version
7. Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

New Version
7. Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

It was a question about affiliation with a group or individual (support and agree with a group are types of affiliation) that taught or engaged in practices that contradicted those of the Mormon church. Now, it is delving into your support of ideas and practices that contradict those of the Mormon church. Suppose a Mormon is part of a group that espouses 10 ideas, 2 of which were inconsistent with Mormon teachings. The Mormon agrees with 7 of the ideas, disagreeing on the 2 inconsistent with Mormon teachings and 1 of the other 8. Previously, the Mormon could not answer "no" to Q7 because of the affiliation with the group. Now that Mormon can answer "yes". Now, it is easier to be a Democrat and get a TR, for example, or to join in LGBTQ parades and awareness events--you might do so to help achieve more tolerance by society, but not necessarily support gay marriage. Don't hold up a placard at such an event, that says you support gay marriage, and you're okay to get a TR now even if you are at the event.

Practically speaking, this takes from bishops/stake presidents a reason to withhold a TR from you if it has been reported that you are an LGBTQ sympathizer. Now, the bishop/stake president would need a report that, from my example above, you held the placard supporting gay marriage. Short of that, the bishop/stake president has to take your word for it when you answer no.

_________________
Oscar Wilde wrote "Religion is like a blind man in a black room, looking for a black cat that isn't there, and finding it."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 10:17 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 9:49 am
Posts: 8588
Location: Somewhere between bemused and curious.
Holy Ghost wrote:
Practically speaking, this takes from bishops/stake presidents a reason to withhold a TR from you if it has been reported that you are an LGBTQ sympathizer. Now, the bishop/stake president would need a report that, from my example above, you held the placard supporting gay marriage. Short of that, the bishop/stake president has to take your word for it when you answer no.


I disagree. I think this gives the local leadership more power to deny TR's. They do not have to take your word for what you believe. If fact they can decide for themselves if you are in line with what ever notion of "doctrine" they hold to be true. My experience is that local leadership roulette will inevitable produce those leaders who feel it is their duty to punish members for something as innocuous as a 'like' vote on Facebook post on Gay marriage.

_________________
What Joseph Smith should have said: "No man knows my hagiography."
What Jane Manning did say: "I am white except for the color of my skin."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 11:28 am 
Sunbeam

Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2014 10:50 pm
Posts: 56
Location: The Land of Ooo
I think that the vast, vast majority of bishops and stake presidents are good people trying to look out for the best interests of their flock. Kind of like a local manager just trying to muddle through whatever bs is passed down from corporate. The problem of leadership roulette, as has been mentioned, can make a black and white thinking church leader take the churches statement at face value and then make a mess of things. And even in the case of a church leader making a mess of things it’s still the churches fault for not clearly defining what the crap they’re talking about. Maybe the church should release a FAQ statement with regard to this TR question.

_________________
Mathematical!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 11:44 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2014 9:59 pm
Posts: 1431
Location: Land of the Stupid People (Utah)
Big Deal. Thought control measure, so what. Lying during your temple recommend interview IS THE ONLY WAY anyone gets a temple recommend. If answered honestly every question can disqualify the applicant from a recommend.

1. Do you have faith in and a testimony of God the Eternal Father, His Son Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost?
Sure, you bet.

2. Do you have a testimony of the Atonement of Christ and of His role as Savior and Redeemer?
Okay, no proof he actually existed, but sure.

3. Do you have a testimony of the restoration of the gospel in these the latter days?
Which version?

4. Do you sustain the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as the Prophet, Seer, and Revelator and as the only person on the earth who possesses and is authorized to exercise all priesthood keys? Do you sustain members of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles as prophets, seers, and revelators? Do you sustain the other General Authorities and local authorities of the Church?
Uh, which one, the current one who is making up ____ that does away with the ____ the last one said? My local leader who wants me to become a deTerra associate under him, etc.

5. Do you live the law of chastity?
Yep, don't have the internet. Not really but hey who's checking.

6. Is there anything in your conduct relating to members of your family that is not in harmony with the teachings of the Church?
Nope, love all my relatives, even the ones who scammed me out of my life's saving in Rust Coins' investment scheme. And I especially love Uncle Ted who has been molesting me like Horny Holy Joe since I was 3, but he is in the Bishopric so it must be okay.

7. Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?
I am a doTerra salesman, does that count. I mean they sell magic liquid just like you do. I attend Sunstone symposiums, does that count? My brother in law is gay, does that count?

8. Do you strive to keep the covenants you have made, to attend your sacrament and other meetings, and to keep your life in harmony with the laws and commandments of the gospel?
Try but fail daily. But since I believe in the words of the Profits, and since Kimball destroyed all hope of Repentance with his book Miracle of Forgiveness, why try, and here comes suicide.

9. Are you honest in your dealings with your fellowmen?
As honest as the Mormon corporation is in theirs.

10. Are you a full-tithe payer?
Net or Gross?

11. Do your keep the Word of Wisdom?
Are Cokes bad?

12. Do you have financial or other obligations to a former spouse or children? If yes, are you current in meeting those obligations?
____ OFF AND DIE, that's for me and my lawyer to know.

13. If you have previously received your temple endowment: 1) Do you keep the covenants that you made in the temple? 2) Do you wear the garment both night and day as instructed in the endowment and in accordance with the covenant you made in the temple?
Which version?

14. Have there been any sins or misdeeds in your life that should have been resolved with priesthood authorities but have not been?
Yeah, living life.

15. Do you consider yourself worthy to enter the Lord's house and participate in temple ordinances?
As worthy as you are.

STUPID ____ Mormons

All Hail Google GOD and her son eBay and the holy toaster youtube

_________________
I don't heed advise, dietary practices, criticism, moral guidance, social causes, political views or job advice from someone who worships a man who had sexual relations with little girls and other men's wives. https://www.LDS.org/topics/plural-marri ... o?lang=eng


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 12:08 pm 
God

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:01 am
Posts: 8997
Here's a question the senior Church Leadership now needs to answer to provide clarification on Question 7.

I'm a temple recommend holding male, my friend is gay and wants me to be his best man for his forthcoming wedding to his husband. If I agree and support his marriage by acting as his best man and being happy for him, am I worthy to hold a temple recommend?

_________________
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 12:24 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2014 9:59 pm
Posts: 1431
Location: Land of the Stupid People (Utah)
I have a question wrote:
Here's a question the senior Church Leadership now needs to answer to provide clarification on Question 7.

I'm a temple recommend holding male, my friend is gay and wants me to be his best man for his forthcoming wedding to his husband. If I agree and support his marriage by acting as his best man and being happy for him, am I worthy to hold a temple recommend?

Nope in one case, yep in another. Are you a full NET tithe payer, then no you are no longer worthy. Are you a full GROSS tithe payer with a LARGE income (Steve Young, Jon Huntsman, Jr., etc. come to mind) then yes, all is forgiven and you are Worthy.

_________________
I don't heed advise, dietary practices, criticism, moral guidance, social causes, political views or job advice from someone who worships a man who had sexual relations with little girls and other men's wives. https://www.LDS.org/topics/plural-marri ... o?lang=eng


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 12:29 pm 
Holy Ghost
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:12 pm
Posts: 406
I have a question wrote:
Here's a question the senior Church Leadership now needs to answer to provide clarification on Question 7.

I'm a temple recommend holding male, my friend is gay and wants me to be his best man for his forthcoming wedding to his husband. If I agree and support his marriage by acting as his best man and being happy for him, am I worthy to hold a temple recommend?

Sure, be the best man, but then deny that you support or promote gay marriage. You can slice it that you were supporting Jim, not gay marriage, just like you might go to a straight wedding of a niece even if you didn't like the dirtbag guy she was marrying.

_________________
Oscar Wilde wrote "Religion is like a blind man in a black room, looking for a black cat that isn't there, and finding it."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 12:35 pm 
Holy Ghost
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:12 pm
Posts: 406
I have a question wrote:
The Church used Conference to make some amendments to the temple recommend questions.

Were these changes discussed in general sessions of conference?

_________________
Oscar Wilde wrote "Religion is like a blind man in a black room, looking for a black cat that isn't there, and finding it."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 1:26 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:38 am
Posts: 2113
Location: Edessa
I think this question is mainly due to the fact that the LDS church is dealing more and more with part member families. One spouse is in, one spouse is out.

That's my case, I'm out, wife is in. In the past Stake Presidents have tried to make our marriage a case of my wife supporting people who are contrary to the church. She called BS on them and said that question did not apply to supporting family members who are not LDS. My wife was happy with the change; she doesn't have to put up with that crap anymore.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 2:28 pm 
God

Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 1:21 pm
Posts: 1024
For a while the church was very much about saying, "you can believe what you want privately. Just don't make it public or talk about it in church and stuff." I think this goes towards that. This question always got me back in the day. I was like, "yeah...I support anyone whose pursuing good things and the Church doesn't have a monopoly on good things. That includes all sorts of people, seeing as it potentially supports anyone." I usually got a chuckle and they signed me off anyway.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 2:49 pm 
God

Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 6:56 pm
Posts: 1734
Finn the human wrote:
I think that the vast, vast majority of bishops and stake presidents are good people trying to look out for the best interests of their flock. Kind of like a local manager just trying to muddle through whatever bs is passed down from corporate. The problem of leadership roulette, as has been mentioned, can make a black and white thinking church leader take the churches statement at face value and then make a mess of things. And even in the case of a church leader making a mess of things it’s still the churches fault for not clearly defining what the crap they’re talking about. Maybe the church should release a FAQ statement with regard to this TR question.




Good thinking Finn on A FAQ listing/statement!

FAQ 1. As doctrine does the church teach a global flood? Yes, you must believe it or be in violation of TR 7 and you are headed to a disciplinary council or even outer darkness.

Next


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 5:15 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 5:37 pm
Posts: 8983
Location: On walkabout
Grudunza wrote:
I interpret that the opposite way. By removing “support/affiliate... group or individual,” it’s actually more inclusive. If your gay child wants you to participate in their wedding... previously, that would be supporting an individual who is contrary to the church. Now, you can indeed support the individual person by being there for them and showing them love, while not necessarily supporting what they are doing. It’s a fingers-crossed kind of support/love, as pertaining to that recommend question, but I believe the intent is to let people off the hook for loving their gay family members, not to go after them more for that.


That’s the way I read it. The old question disqualified people who associated with sinners. (Would Jesus have qualified for a recommend?) The new one allows one to support the sinner but not the sin. Marginally better, IMO.

_________________
​“The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists.”

― Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism, 1951


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2019 9:11 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2010 9:49 am
Posts: 8588
Location: Somewhere between bemused and curious.
Res Ipsa wrote:
Grudunza wrote:
I interpret that the opposite way. By removing “support/affiliate... group or individual,” it’s actually more inclusive. If your gay child wants you to participate in their wedding... previously, that would be supporting an individual who is contrary to the church. Now, you can indeed support the individual person by being there for them and showing them love, while not necessarily supporting what they are doing. It’s a fingers-crossed kind of support/love, as pertaining to that recommend question, but I believe the intent is to let people off the hook for loving their gay family members, not to go after them more for that.


That’s the way I read it. The old question disqualified people who associated with sinners. (Would Jesus have qualified for a recommend?) The new one allows one to support the sinner but not the sin. Marginally better, IMO.


Unfortunately it is not the individual applying for the temple recommend who gets to decide what "support" means. In most cases I can see the bishop or stake president allowing the member to make that decision him/herself, but in the case where leadership knows how the member feels about certain controversial issues (GLBTQ issues, women & the priesthood and so on) this allows leadership to deny a recommend based on that knowledge. Think also in terms of social networks here. All leadership has to see or hear about is a Facebook post or tweet from a member expressing support for a Gay marriage of a non member, and right there, they could deny such a recommend.

My belief is that this would be a minority of Bishops/Stake presidents who would take such a measure, but that is the problem with an organization whose leadership is led by "divine guidance", you get a bunch of ordinary men taking the same information and situations and making wildly different decisions based on their own personal interpretation of a vague question.

I am too cynical about church leadership to believe this is a move designed to allow mixed belief and or mixed membership families to pass a temple recommended question. I believe this is a move to allow leadership more latitude in delving into individual member's online interactions. Now a simple Facebook post about how gay non-members should be able to marry becomes a potential basis for TR denial.

_________________
What Joseph Smith should have said: "No man knows my hagiography."
What Jane Manning did say: "I am white except for the color of my skin."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2019 9:38 am 
1st Counselor

Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 11:13 pm
Posts: 464
Res Ipsa wrote:
Grudunza wrote:
I interpret that the opposite way. By removing “support/affiliate... group or individual,” it’s actually more inclusive. If your gay child wants you to participate in their wedding... previously, that would be supporting an individual who is contrary to the church. Now, you can indeed support the individual person by being there for them and showing them love, while not necessarily supporting what they are doing. It’s a fingers-crossed kind of support/love, as pertaining to that recommend question, but I believe the intent is to let people off the hook for loving their gay family members, not to go after them more for that.


That’s the way I read it. The old question disqualified people who associated with sinners. (Would Jesus have qualified for a recommend?) The new one allows one to support the sinner but not the sin. Marginally better, IMO.


I agree but only to a point. On one hand, I believe it's an important clarification of what may have previously been interpreted as a prohibition of engaging with individuals and groups who fall outside the church's fellowship. But on the other hand, I see it as to some extent thought policing. You now cannot support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to church teachings, practice, or doctrine. Let's put aside church doctrine, as it's too nebulous. But we have a better idea about what the church teaches and practices. So if the church teaches X whatever it may be (false history narrative, historicity of the Book of Mormon, anything in an approved church teaching manual, etc.) or practices Y (interviewing minors about chastity) and you support an opposing view, even if silently, you may not be able to answer that question truthfully in the negative. Anyone who signed that support LDS children petition is now arguably not temple worthy, depending on leadership roulette. Indeed, anyone who supported that petition in any way, even silently, may not be worth if they disclose their support in the recommend interview.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2019 3:13 pm 
God

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:01 am
Posts: 8997
When the Church talks about Book of Mormon geography, it distinguishes between what a member might speculate on their own time and what can be spoken or espoused on Church time or in a Church setting. Q7 of the temple recommend interview allows no such leeway.

If the Church teaches that the earth is only 6,000 years old (and it does), then if you support or promote anything to the contrary then you are no longer worthy to hold a temple recommend.

And we know the Church shifts its ground - in December 2015 you were required to support the teaching that gay people are apostates, until April of this year when you were required to support the teaching that they aren't. The reality is, the question means that your are required to support and promote nothing contrary to those things current Church Leaders support and promote, even if it's the opposite to that which was taught and which you were required to support, yesterday. Members are in the position of being required to support the Church, even if they think the Church is wrong, despite the evidence that the Church has been wrong on many teachings and practices and has subsequently u-turned on them.

Mr Nelson wants you to kowtow to him, regardless of your own conscience and moral compass, regardless of your own intelligence and intellectual honesty. That's what this question is now all about.

_________________
“When we are confronted with evidence that challenges our deeply held beliefs we are more likely to reframe the evidence than we are to alter our beliefs. We simply invent new reasons, new justifications, new explanations. Sometimes we ignore the evidence altogether.” (Mathew Syed 'Black Box Thinking')


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Significant Change, TR Q7 & same sex marriage
PostPosted: Wed Oct 09, 2019 11:11 pm 
1st Counselor

Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 11:13 pm
Posts: 464
The upside is that if you can’t get a recommend, you can’t go to the temple. For some, this may be a blessing in disguise.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 21 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Philo Sofee, The Dude and 19 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group