<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: From the Archives: The Real Issue</title>
	<atom:link href="http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/03/from-the-archives-the-real-issue/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/03/from-the-archives-the-real-issue/</link>
	<description>Truth Will Prevail</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 14:21:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: hurricane</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/03/from-the-archives-the-real-issue/#comment-126556</link>
		<dc:creator>hurricane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:47:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3025#comment-126556</guid>
		<description>bbell (146)-

&lt;i&gt;Based on his comments expect that the COC leadership will eventually OK Homosexuality with all the fireworks that usually comes along with it.&lt;/i&gt;

The CofC already went through the ringer when they ordained women.  The body of the church that exists today is theologically liberal--they&#039;ve had their schisms over women&#039;s issues.  I suspect as the RLDS move toward full inclusion of homosexuals they will do so quietly and without much fuss at all.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>bbell (146)-</p>
<p><i>Based on his comments expect that the COC leadership will eventually OK Homosexuality with all the fireworks that usually comes along with it.</i></p>
<p>The CofC already went through the ringer when they ordained women.  The body of the church that exists today is theologically liberal&#8211;they&#8217;ve had their schisms over women&#8217;s issues.  I suspect as the RLDS move toward full inclusion of homosexuals they will do so quietly and without much fuss at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hurricane</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/03/from-the-archives-the-real-issue/#comment-126555</link>
		<dc:creator>hurricane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:45:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3025#comment-126555</guid>
		<description>rd (145)-

&lt;i&gt;That may very well be. For all I know, itâ€™s the hardest, most testing, least understood, sin to sacrifice.&lt;/i&gt;

Wait, I thought the impulse/attraction/orientation wasn&#039;t a sin...

&lt;i&gt;I hope that a discussion of SSA in the abstract does not demean one who deals with it. If so, and you can say so, I will stop right now and leave it alone.&lt;/i&gt;

I know you are addressing D. Fletcher, but I&#039;m gay, and it doesn&#039;t bother me.  On a completely petty note though, I wish we would throw the euphemistic term &quot;SSA&quot; in the trash.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>rd (145)-</p>
<p><i>That may very well be. For all I know, itâ€™s the hardest, most testing, least understood, sin to sacrifice.</i></p>
<p>Wait, I thought the impulse/attraction/orientation wasn&#8217;t a sin&#8230;</p>
<p><i>I hope that a discussion of SSA in the abstract does not demean one who deals with it. If so, and you can say so, I will stop right now and leave it alone.</i></p>
<p>I know you are addressing D. Fletcher, but I&#8217;m gay, and it doesn&#8217;t bother me.  On a completely petty note though, I wish we would throw the euphemistic term &#8220;SSA&#8221; in the trash.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bbell</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/03/from-the-archives-the-real-issue/#comment-126552</link>
		<dc:creator>bbell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:37:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3025#comment-126552</guid>
		<description>The COC statements do not surprise me in the least.

They are turning into a liberal protestant denominations gradually over time with the same type of membership issues/demographics of that group of churches.

Based on his comments expect that the COC leadership will eventually OK Homosexuality with all the fireworks that usually comes along with it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The COC statements do not surprise me in the least.</p>
<p>They are turning into a liberal protestant denominations gradually over time with the same type of membership issues/demographics of that group of churches.</p>
<p>Based on his comments expect that the COC leadership will eventually OK Homosexuality with all the fireworks that usually comes along with it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rd</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/03/from-the-archives-the-real-issue/#comment-126551</link>
		<dc:creator>rd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:36:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3025#comment-126551</guid>
		<description>D. Fletcher,

That may very well be.  For all I know, it&#039;s the hardest, most testing, least understood, sin to sacrifice.  

But, if God says no, does that make it right?

Let me be frank in saying that discussions like this are difficult because on the one hand, I am sympathetic to the reality that these issues are much more serious, significant, real, than I can treat them over the internet.  On the other I have strong feelings on the topic.  I hope that a discussion of SSA in the abstract does not demean one who deals with it.  If so, and you can say so, I will stop right now and leave it alone.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>D. Fletcher,</p>
<p>That may very well be.  For all I know, it&#8217;s the hardest, most testing, least understood, sin to sacrifice.  </p>
<p>But, if God says no, does that make it right?</p>
<p>Let me be frank in saying that discussions like this are difficult because on the one hand, I am sympathetic to the reality that these issues are much more serious, significant, real, than I can treat them over the internet.  On the other I have strong feelings on the topic.  I hope that a discussion of SSA in the abstract does not demean one who deals with it.  If so, and you can say so, I will stop right now and leave it alone.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: D. Fletcher</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/03/from-the-archives-the-real-issue/#comment-126549</link>
		<dc:creator>D. Fletcher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:30:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3025#comment-126549</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Is it possible that God defines/characterizes/declares certain behaviors as sin that the natural man cannot comprehend and that require real, sometimes excrutiatingly painful, faith to overcome?&lt;/i&gt;

I&#039;m not sure there&#039;s another sin like this (the homosexual impulse) that seems so natural to some, so abominable to others. And the sin is all wrapped up in love, something we are taught to seek, and to give, to everyone.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Is it possible that God defines/characterizes/declares certain behaviors as sin that the natural man cannot comprehend and that require real, sometimes excrutiatingly painful, faith to overcome?</i></p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure there&#8217;s another sin like this (the homosexual impulse) that seems so natural to some, so abominable to others. And the sin is all wrapped up in love, something we are taught to seek, and to give, to everyone.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hurricane</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/03/from-the-archives-the-real-issue/#comment-126548</link>
		<dc:creator>hurricane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:21:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3025#comment-126548</guid>
		<description>rd (141)-

&lt;i&gt;Is it possible that God defines/characterizes/declares certain behaviors as sin that the natural man cannot comprehend and that require real, sometimes excrutiatingly painful, faith to overcome?&lt;/i&gt;

At the risk of being presumptuous, I&#039;m willing to bet that there isn&#039;t a gay Mormon alive who takes his/her faith seriously who hasn&#039;t pondered this question at length.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>rd (141)-</p>
<p><i>Is it possible that God defines/characterizes/declares certain behaviors as sin that the natural man cannot comprehend and that require real, sometimes excrutiatingly painful, faith to overcome?</i></p>
<p>At the risk of being presumptuous, I&#8217;m willing to bet that there isn&#8217;t a gay Mormon alive who takes his/her faith seriously who hasn&#8217;t pondered this question at length.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hurricane</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/03/from-the-archives-the-real-issue/#comment-126546</link>
		<dc:creator>hurricane</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:14:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3025#comment-126546</guid>
		<description>MikeInWeHo (133)-

The RLDS/CofC are moving steadily toward greater inclusion of gay people and theological acceptance of homosexuality.  Here are two relatively recent statements from the CofC leadership:

http://www.cofchrist.org/news/oct02/WCLC
http://www.cofchrist.org/seek/qanda/sexuality.asp

The former CofC president, Grant McMurray, addressed the issue directly in a sermon from 2002:

(Here&#039;s the link: http://www.cofchrist.org/wc2002/sermons/Grant2002.asp)

      &lt;i&gt;So now let me speak to one such issue that threatens to divide us. In the past few weeks I have been the recipient of scores of letters, e-mails, and phone calls generated by the resolutions before our Conference dealing with homosexuality. Some have been thoughtful and reasoned, but many have been desperate and angry, sometimes accompanied by symbolically crumpled paper or copies of offending text besmirched with bold, black lines. And this weekend we have been faced with pickets proclaiming a hateful God I do not recognize and describing good people in vile and contemptible terms.

      To all of this, I say to you, &quot;No, no, no.&quot; We must not succumb to our fears nor fail to respect those who disagree with us. We must instead be voices of reconciliation and ministers of healing. In the midst of our differences, there just has to be a better way. There is no issue that divides churches around the world in our time like the issue of homosexuality. It is for us to decide whether we will be rendered asunder by it, or whether we have the spiritual courage to face it together.

      Tonight I am going to take a risk. What I am about to say is my personal statement to you on this issue, joined in by Ken and Peter, my colleagues in the First Presidency, after many hours of conversing together. I have not consulted with other church officers or asked for their consent. What I say does not change church policy. It does not require action or agreement. It simply describes the present situation openly and honestly, expresses our own thoughts after prayerful and extensive reflection, and points to what we believe is possible for us to do as a diverse community of God&#039;s people.

      Gay and lesbian brothers and sisters are walking with us on the path of the disciple. They have chosen to be there because they feel God&#039;s call to them. Some have struggled throughout their lives with questions and uncertainties about their identity, their acceptability, their status as children of God. Some have dared to tell their story, resulting at times in warm acceptance and other times in cold rejection. Some have come to understand that God loves them unconditionally and embraces them as valued members of the human family; others are not so sure.

      Our church, like all churches, has struggled with how to be inclusive, agreeing that God&#039;s love comes to all persons, but differing on what behaviors and lifestyles are deemed acceptable. Because there is no social consensus, no moral agreement, no definitive psychological explanation, we have all cast about in search of answers. For some, that answer is provided in one of the seven biblical passages that seem to condemn homosexuality as a sin. For others, the answer is in compassion upon seeing the face of a man or woman who simply says &quot;this is my story.&quot; For our brothers and sisters in some cultures of the world, it is not something to be discussed nor is it thought by them to exist in that culture to any appreciable degree. For families and friends the answer comes only in the call to love a loved one, which has precedence over virtually every other call.

      Because of these many differences, our church stands in the midst of much ambiguity and inconsistency. We have a twenty-year-old statement from the Standing High Council that serves as official guidance, but has not been universally adhered to throughout the church. I will be totally honest and acknowledge that I have myself participated in situations where its provisions were not honored. I have been present in conferences where persons I knew to be in long-term, committed homosexual relationships were approved for priesthood in jurisdictions where their lifestyle was known and their ministry was accepted. The conflict within me was between lawgiver and pastor. To enforce the policy would have required me to intervene and prevent the ordination of someone whose call to ministry I could not deny. This I could not do. This I will not do.

      In fairness, you should know the hearts of those of us you uphold in leadership. I read scripture contextually. I believe that scripture carries a powerful witness of the love of God but that it has to be read in its totality and not in phrases and fragments here and there. When it comes to people and our many differences, I will always choose to love rather than to judge. My instincts are toward inclusion and not exclusion

At the same time, I am fully supportive of our historic polity of theocratic democracy, which balances the priestly witness with the consent of the people. Ministry is not just about calling. It is also about acceptance of that calling by those who will receive the ministry. Therefore, it is not just my views but all of our views that must be weighed as we make decisions together.

      The word &quot;catechesis&quot; is defined as &quot;a dialogue between believers&quot; (Westminster Dictionary of Theology). Hear the distinction. This is not a dialogue between faithful and unfaithful people. It is not a dialogue between saints and sinners. It is a dialogue between believers, between disciples, over differences that are real and honorable. I ask us, as members of the Community of Christ, to be willing to share with each other in that exploration.

I am not in the habit of telling our delegates how they should vote, but I am about to make an exception. I request the delegates to this World Conference to table or refer all pending legislation on homosexuality so that we can avoid actions that will be divisive and shape a process by which a broader understanding and consensus can be built. I will ask the Standing High Council to participate with others in looking anew at this matter, seeking issues on which we can surely agree (God&#039;s love of all people, fidelity, the value of family, the sacredness of sexuality as part of creation) and shaping dialogue in areas where we do not agree (the blessing of same-sex relationships, standards for ordination, the interpretation and authority of scripture).

      In the meantime, I ask the Community of Christ to be willing to live with us on the boundary for a while. To do this means that we may not have a policy that guides every decision, but we will have to trust the Holy Spirit to accompany us in our choices. It means that some parts of the church may function differently from other parts of the church and there will be distinctions that are occasionally unsettling but representative of the diversity of our body, both in terms of viewpoints and cultures. We recognize that certain national governments have requirements that our local church leaders in those nations will need to respect and interpret in accordance with their own cultural understandings.&lt;/i&gt;

And this from 2004: http://www.cofchrist.org/wc2004/legislation/H-9.asp</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MikeInWeHo (133)-</p>
<p>The RLDS/CofC are moving steadily toward greater inclusion of gay people and theological acceptance of homosexuality.  Here are two relatively recent statements from the CofC leadership:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cofchrist.org/news/oct02/WCLC" rel="nofollow">http://www.cofchrist.org/news/oct02/WCLC</a><br />
<a href="http://www.cofchrist.org/seek/qanda/sexuality.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.cofchrist.org/seek/qanda/sexuality.asp</a></p>
<p>The former CofC president, Grant McMurray, addressed the issue directly in a sermon from 2002:</p>
<p>(Here&#8217;s the link: <a href="http://www.cofchrist.org/wc2002/sermons/Grant2002.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.cofchrist.org/wc2002/sermons/Grant2002.asp</a>)</p>
<p>      <i>So now let me speak to one such issue that threatens to divide us. In the past few weeks I have been the recipient of scores of letters, e-mails, and phone calls generated by the resolutions before our Conference dealing with homosexuality. Some have been thoughtful and reasoned, but many have been desperate and angry, sometimes accompanied by symbolically crumpled paper or copies of offending text besmirched with bold, black lines. And this weekend we have been faced with pickets proclaiming a hateful God I do not recognize and describing good people in vile and contemptible terms.</p>
<p>      To all of this, I say to you, &#8220;No, no, no.&#8221; We must not succumb to our fears nor fail to respect those who disagree with us. We must instead be voices of reconciliation and ministers of healing. In the midst of our differences, there just has to be a better way. There is no issue that divides churches around the world in our time like the issue of homosexuality. It is for us to decide whether we will be rendered asunder by it, or whether we have the spiritual courage to face it together.</p>
<p>      Tonight I am going to take a risk. What I am about to say is my personal statement to you on this issue, joined in by Ken and Peter, my colleagues in the First Presidency, after many hours of conversing together. I have not consulted with other church officers or asked for their consent. What I say does not change church policy. It does not require action or agreement. It simply describes the present situation openly and honestly, expresses our own thoughts after prayerful and extensive reflection, and points to what we believe is possible for us to do as a diverse community of God&#8217;s people.</p>
<p>      Gay and lesbian brothers and sisters are walking with us on the path of the disciple. They have chosen to be there because they feel God&#8217;s call to them. Some have struggled throughout their lives with questions and uncertainties about their identity, their acceptability, their status as children of God. Some have dared to tell their story, resulting at times in warm acceptance and other times in cold rejection. Some have come to understand that God loves them unconditionally and embraces them as valued members of the human family; others are not so sure.</p>
<p>      Our church, like all churches, has struggled with how to be inclusive, agreeing that God&#8217;s love comes to all persons, but differing on what behaviors and lifestyles are deemed acceptable. Because there is no social consensus, no moral agreement, no definitive psychological explanation, we have all cast about in search of answers. For some, that answer is provided in one of the seven biblical passages that seem to condemn homosexuality as a sin. For others, the answer is in compassion upon seeing the face of a man or woman who simply says &#8220;this is my story.&#8221; For our brothers and sisters in some cultures of the world, it is not something to be discussed nor is it thought by them to exist in that culture to any appreciable degree. For families and friends the answer comes only in the call to love a loved one, which has precedence over virtually every other call.</p>
<p>      Because of these many differences, our church stands in the midst of much ambiguity and inconsistency. We have a twenty-year-old statement from the Standing High Council that serves as official guidance, but has not been universally adhered to throughout the church. I will be totally honest and acknowledge that I have myself participated in situations where its provisions were not honored. I have been present in conferences where persons I knew to be in long-term, committed homosexual relationships were approved for priesthood in jurisdictions where their lifestyle was known and their ministry was accepted. The conflict within me was between lawgiver and pastor. To enforce the policy would have required me to intervene and prevent the ordination of someone whose call to ministry I could not deny. This I could not do. This I will not do.</p>
<p>      In fairness, you should know the hearts of those of us you uphold in leadership. I read scripture contextually. I believe that scripture carries a powerful witness of the love of God but that it has to be read in its totality and not in phrases and fragments here and there. When it comes to people and our many differences, I will always choose to love rather than to judge. My instincts are toward inclusion and not exclusion</p>
<p>At the same time, I am fully supportive of our historic polity of theocratic democracy, which balances the priestly witness with the consent of the people. Ministry is not just about calling. It is also about acceptance of that calling by those who will receive the ministry. Therefore, it is not just my views but all of our views that must be weighed as we make decisions together.</p>
<p>      The word &#8220;catechesis&#8221; is defined as &#8220;a dialogue between believers&#8221; (Westminster Dictionary of Theology). Hear the distinction. This is not a dialogue between faithful and unfaithful people. It is not a dialogue between saints and sinners. It is a dialogue between believers, between disciples, over differences that are real and honorable. I ask us, as members of the Community of Christ, to be willing to share with each other in that exploration.</p>
<p>I am not in the habit of telling our delegates how they should vote, but I am about to make an exception. I request the delegates to this World Conference to table or refer all pending legislation on homosexuality so that we can avoid actions that will be divisive and shape a process by which a broader understanding and consensus can be built. I will ask the Standing High Council to participate with others in looking anew at this matter, seeking issues on which we can surely agree (God&#8217;s love of all people, fidelity, the value of family, the sacredness of sexuality as part of creation) and shaping dialogue in areas where we do not agree (the blessing of same-sex relationships, standards for ordination, the interpretation and authority of scripture).</p>
<p>      In the meantime, I ask the Community of Christ to be willing to live with us on the boundary for a while. To do this means that we may not have a policy that guides every decision, but we will have to trust the Holy Spirit to accompany us in our choices. It means that some parts of the church may function differently from other parts of the church and there will be distinctions that are occasionally unsettling but representative of the diversity of our body, both in terms of viewpoints and cultures. We recognize that certain national governments have requirements that our local church leaders in those nations will need to respect and interpret in accordance with their own cultural understandings.</i></p>
<p>And this from 2004: <a href="http://www.cofchrist.org/wc2004/legislation/H-9.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.cofchrist.org/wc2004/legislation/H-9.asp</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rd</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/03/from-the-archives-the-real-issue/#comment-126545</link>
		<dc:creator>rd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 22:11:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3025#comment-126545</guid>
		<description>Is it possible that God defines/characterizes/declares certain behaviors as sin that the natural man cannot comprehend and that require real, sometimes excrutiatingly painful, faith to overcome?

Again, I don&#039;t mean to downplay the heightened nature of this challenge for SSA relative to other temptations, but I think that many many people have to give up very much, even what they might view as everything, in order to achieve exaltation.  With those efforts I, on some level empathize, but do truly sympathize.

I.e. D. Fletcher, it seems that your efforts to retain good standing in the church are the result of a conscious decision that the gospel is true.  If so, is there a chance that God (or His prophet) is correct on SSA and that it, too, must be placed on the altar?  Is that a bad thing?  Or is it just very difficult (I know it&#039;s much deeper than &quot;very difficult&quot;)?  I don&#039;t claim to understand your challenges or the challenges of many who are very close to me.  But someone does.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is it possible that God defines/characterizes/declares certain behaviors as sin that the natural man cannot comprehend and that require real, sometimes excrutiatingly painful, faith to overcome?</p>
<p>Again, I don&#8217;t mean to downplay the heightened nature of this challenge for SSA relative to other temptations, but I think that many many people have to give up very much, even what they might view as everything, in order to achieve exaltation.  With those efforts I, on some level empathize, but do truly sympathize.</p>
<p>I.e. D. Fletcher, it seems that your efforts to retain good standing in the church are the result of a conscious decision that the gospel is true.  If so, is there a chance that God (or His prophet) is correct on SSA and that it, too, must be placed on the altar?  Is that a bad thing?  Or is it just very difficult (I know it&#8217;s much deeper than &#8220;very difficult&#8221;)?  I don&#8217;t claim to understand your challenges or the challenges of many who are very close to me.  But someone does.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mullingandmusing (m&#38;m)</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/03/from-the-archives-the-real-issue/#comment-126539</link>
		<dc:creator>mullingandmusing (m&#38;m)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 21:48:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3025#comment-126539</guid>
		<description>#131 -
I went back last nite to see how far we had come from Nate&#039;s original post, and I guess this ended up being what he didn&#039;t want it to be. Sorry, Nate. But here&#039;s the thing...I don&#039;t see how you can just focus on the issue of eternal increase when exaltation is about obedience to commandments, which includes the law of chastity and heterosexual marriage. The blessings of exaltation are promised to ALL who are obedient and faithful -- if we want a doctrine of inclusion, THAT is it. There is no exclusion for homosexuals who are faithful, or couples who can&#039;t have children, or people who don&#039;t get married through no fault of their own.... THAT to me is the key -- faithfulness and obedience to commandments as they have been given. IMO, all the other discussion becomes pointless to a degree (I realize I have engaged in such supposedly pointless discussion, but that&#039;s just because I like to discuss). :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>#131 -<br />
I went back last nite to see how far we had come from Nate&#8217;s original post, and I guess this ended up being what he didn&#8217;t want it to be. Sorry, Nate. But here&#8217;s the thing&#8230;I don&#8217;t see how you can just focus on the issue of eternal increase when exaltation is about obedience to commandments, which includes the law of chastity and heterosexual marriage. The blessings of exaltation are promised to ALL who are obedient and faithful &#8212; if we want a doctrine of inclusion, THAT is it. There is no exclusion for homosexuals who are faithful, or couples who can&#8217;t have children, or people who don&#8217;t get married through no fault of their own&#8230;. THAT to me is the key &#8212; faithfulness and obedience to commandments as they have been given. IMO, all the other discussion becomes pointless to a degree (I realize I have engaged in such supposedly pointless discussion, but that&#8217;s just because I like to discuss). :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: D. Fletcher</title>
		<link>http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2006/03/from-the-archives-the-real-issue/#comment-126538</link>
		<dc:creator>D. Fletcher</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 21:43:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=3025#comment-126538</guid>
		<description>Why worry, BBell? You haven&#039;t said anything I haven&#039;t heard a million times before. Repent. It&#039;s all I need for exaltation. But repent of what? I haven&#039;t done anything but felt love for someone else. And it&#039;s pretty sad to me that in the next life, the love I feel will presumably be... corrected.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why worry, BBell? You haven&#8217;t said anything I haven&#8217;t heard a million times before. Repent. It&#8217;s all I need for exaltation. But repent of what? I haven&#8217;t done anything but felt love for someone else. And it&#8217;s pretty sad to me that in the next life, the love I feel will presumably be&#8230; corrected.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache is installed but broken. The path to wp-cache-phase1.php in wp-content/advanced-cache.php must be fixed! -->
