What do the scriptures say about homosexuality?

and good. But when I was was my best friend Mitch in high Wow, I don't know that about you. school, the one I came out to, he is a huge jokester in one day and Sunday school he was like, e would always make stuff up. nd so he was talking about this uy in the Book of Mormon who ut off people's arms and showed im to the king. We're like, you are insane. That did not happen. He was like, "No, I swear." I as like, "No, this we're like you are insane." None of us ha

read the Book of Mormon. And th n when we were like, 17,

children. We have a daughter named Rachel, she and her husband Luke, moved in with us during COVID. They're supposed to be watching our house while we're in Israel. I supposed to be the Academic Director of the Jerusalem center. But...

Because he doesn't have relationships because he probably won't marry. I just, I learned to be a little bit more open to different experiences. You know, I just grew up and I was even though I grew up back east, I went from, you know, sixth generation latter-day saint family. We were Mormons then. But now we're just latter-day saints. And you know, I just grew up with all the normal church expectations. I served a mission in Thailand. You know, I was Elders Quorum President. I served in a

bishopric in Philadelphia. I've been a bishop. I had all these things. I was just checking the boxes being the typical faithful, hyperactive in the church, latter-day saint. The something, one of the most important people in my life. We found out he wasn't going to have the life we wanted for him. And it just made me look at things very, very differently. I mentioned that I was a bishop when I was a young man. I was downtown in Provo, down by the hospital and the power plant,

the old power plant. It's not there anymore. And you know, I was working with a lot of transient people, a very socio economically impacted area. And just suddenly my world that was so clean, and the lines were so firmly drawn. You know, there were people with psychological problems. There were people with economic problems. There were people with social problems. I gradually met people from the LGBTQ community. I made friends with people with different racial and ethnic backgrounds.

Then suddenly, it was not enough to just be your stereotypical Wasatch Front whitebread as my friend Tamiu Smith calls, those of us who are pigment, pigment impaired. Tamiu and Zandra Veins, the sisters in Zion. They're amazing. Yeah. So they, they've opened my eyes to many things. So anyway, that's just a little bit about me. I that wasn't quite the normal introduction, but it will, I think, help explain a little bit about why I approached this particular issue the way I do.

And since I think we're going to talk about homosexuality and the scriptures. I'm more like Charlie than Ben. Sorry, Ben, I read the standard works compulsively as a child. I'm very obsessive compulsive. I often will joke with people, "Obsessive compulsive, yeah, it's a disorder but we get more done than other people." Anyway, so when I was a, when I was starting seminary, 14, it was Old Testament. And it's because I'm competitive I read the Old Testament three times, at 14.

you look at it differently. So for instance, you know, we all know from first Nephi 19, about likening all scriptures to yourself, what's the word for that? Well, the technical term for that is exposition, you're taking something and applying it to yourself. The term for understanding the original meaning of a text to its initial audience is exegesis, which comes from the Greek to lead out the meaning, actually, it's trying to establish the presumed original meaning of the text, because...

audience. It's what I, to simplify it in a religion class, I say, what does it mean to them, there, then, and I always tell my students that you need to understand what a passage means to them, there, then before you do the us, here, now, because although the Spirit can guide you and give you a personal interpretation and application of a passage, and that's great, sometimes we can become a little irresponsible or sloppy with our personal

application. So if you can understand what the original meaning was to that initial audience to them, there, then, it can kind of guide you in being responsible in your application or your exposition. Sometimes it's interesting, I'm sorry, I'm kind of going off in a sidebar here. Sometimes a passage can mean something completely different to its original audience, and can mean something valid and true, but completely different to us. An example that jumps to mind is

eternal life in them. And actually, if you look at the original context, Jesus is talking to, you know, the Pharisees and the Jewish leadership in chapter five. He's actually saying to them, you have your noses in those dusty old Torah scrolls, right? Your your scrolls of the laws and the Prophet.

the 80s to do that. If I read my Book of Mormon 20 minutes every morning, and I think I'm going to be saved because I'm reading the Book of Mormon, I'm not going to be saved. It's because the Book of Mormon is another testament of Christ. So having both those meanings, the original meaning, and the way we usually apply it today in mind, actually helps me search the scriptures more responsibility to find Jesus. That was a long kind of sidebar, as I said, I don't want to get too much in

the weeds. But when we're talking about something as as difficult and sometimes as unclear as sexuality, it is important to understand how those passages would have been understood and applied to their original audiences before we can apply them in our own situation. And there has been I would suggest a lot of, I don't want to say sloppy exegesis or exposition application, but it's not very subtle. And so sometimes these passages have been used as bludgeons. Right?

And I think sometimes have caused more pain than they have encouraged people to control their behavior.

anything like unto it. And I have heard some people say, well, committing adultery, breaking a covenant, for sexual behavior, something like unto that would be any sexual behavior outside of marriage between a man and woman. That's the only passage as I was looking through the scriptures this afternoon ahead of this visit, that I could find in restoration scripture that could be taken to allude to sexual behavior, which outside of marriage, which would include homosexual behavior.

throughout high school. But it wasn't until a couple years ago when I like, really, I mean, I've told the story before but the first time I ever read the Book of Mormon through the lens of my orientation, and not trying to pretend I was straight, just like as a gay man, I read it, I was like, oh, like, there's nothing that's like, attacking me here. Like it all is building me and everything I found was, was good and light and what didn't like hurt my testimony as I thought it would have.

was much more patent open. I fact, it was ritual, sometime it wasn't just behavior betwee individuals. It was sometime ritualized, temple prostitute , that kind of thing. And so the e was a reason I would sugges , and we'll look at some of the e passages in a moment, w y Leviticus and Deuteronomy wou d address it head on. Where s restoration scripture didn't s because it was so much more, I won't say it's much mo e prevalent, but it was more o

t in the open. Likewise, and I o know a lot more about this n Greco Roman culture, homosexu l behaviors of various kinds, we e much more around and open. A d so there was a reason for Pa l and Romans or First Corinthia s to address it. That's ju t a guess. But I would suggest hat the Hebrew Bible and the reek New Testament address ce tain homosexual behaviors, be ause they were issues that were eing openly discussed in heir surrounding cultures.

hereas at the time of Joseph mith, Doctrine and Covenants, I on't know about Book of Mormon eople's, but maybe it's the ame among the nephites and amanites. That wasn't something hat was openly discussed and xhibited. And so there wasn't s much reason to talk about it. ust a guess. Just a

excluded. But within the Book of Mormon, which is my favorite scriptural text, I love it, because it doesn't say anything specifically, or like, I can't misinterpret anything like, I don't have to worry about historical or cultural aspects of homosexuality in the ancient Americas, like, all of that's not there. So I can just like accept the gospel of Christ as the gospel of Christ for me, you know, right, that makes sense.

Sodomites. Hospitality is a big thing in the ancient world, whether you're talking about the Semitic world, the Hebrews or in Greco Roman culture. If you've read the Iliad and the Odyssey, particularly the Odyssey, you know, hospitality was a huge deal. And because Lot had taken these angels into his home and provide them hospitality, he had to protect them, and the people of Sodom were abusing that. But there are actual references for instance, in Ezekiel, Ezekial refers to this I think it's in

unquote know them. Another way that sometimes this is looked at is not so much the particular kind of sexual behavior they were threatening, but the fact that they were threatening sexual violence. In fact, if you look a passage in in Judges 19, it's the story about the Levite and his concubines where his concubine is raped and and left for dead and he cuts her up and sends her all over. But, but the real problem there, the reason the Benjamites end up getting clobbered in war is because of

sexual violence. So even if you're to look at the sin of Sodom as a sexual sin, in this case, same sex behavior, it was sexual violence and rape, that really seems to been the thing that pushed it over the edge.

And I certainly think the application of that is as an active faithful latte-day saint I believe any sexual behavior outside of the bonds of sacramental marriage, I, I've decided to use that term now in the age of marriage equality, or same sex marriage, you can have whatever legal or civil contracts you want, but sacramental marriage, the way we look at it, not just the legal marriage, but we call a marriage, in harmony with the law of the Lord. Any sexual behavior outside of sacramental

marriage is wrong. And so that would certainly be a legitimate application or exposition of those two passages. What's really interesting, particularly in chapter 18, it's part of Leviticus, section of Leviticus sometimes called the holiness code. It's about setting apart the people of God as separate and distinct from the people who were in the land. The land is holiest, we've got to get rid of the Canaanites, and we can't do anything like they were doing.

Now, there are different ways that particularly Protestant scholars have tried to understand this, and perhaps reconcile this to, you know, more inclusive, scriptural view. They will point out that most of what you get in chapter 18, is actually about incest. It's the different kinds of sexual behavior that you cannot have with a man or woman within your

family circles. I think that's actually straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel, I think that's actually trying to rationalize a little bit too much, because the very next verse is about beastiality and you don't see, you know, that animal is being a member of your family. But I do think, as I was mentioning earlier, this was something that was really in the

forefront. You know, we assumed that Moses was at least the source or the authority behind these texts, whoever actually wrote the books attributed to him. But this was something that Moses and I would say the Lord really want the people of Israel to do to distinguish themselves from all the other peoples who were not holy who were not set apart to service. And so to just take those two verses out, 18:22

But I think a lot of Christians don't pay any attention to that kind of thing. So those are the bludgeon passages of the Old Testament, but except for later prophets like Zeke and Isaiah, alluding to the sin of Sodom, and Ezekiel actually making that being uncharitable and not necessarily sexually violent. The next set of passages are all attributed to our friend Brother Paul, right.

you call them? Clobber passages? The clobber passages are Romans

mollacoy, which means soft. But in that context, but it's not about mannerisms. So that's why effeminate is the wrong term there. It is about, it's probably in a sexual context about passive sexual behavior. And then there's also a term "arsenacotoy", which means men lying with men, which is probably talking about active behavior. And I have seen Protestant exigeets, bending over backwards trying to say particular sexual behaviors might be forbidden, but not

homosexual behavior itself. You know, and maybe something else is, is appropriate. But I think the reason Paul's talking about it is both Rome and Corinth were huge urban centers, with lots of decadence. And homosexual behavior was only one of a number of what we would call sinful behaviors in those cities. So those are probably why Paul was concerned about them.

loving. Yeah, so you know, we can take and we're gonna come back to the words of Jesus in a moment, I brought a book with me, which is an attempt to try to understand both the clobber passages in the Old Testament and in the New Testament.

age. Slavery is kind of an interesting thing as well, because the Old Testament condones slavery. And Paul actually says, if you're a slave, don't, don't escape it just be a good slave. And actually, in the antebellum south, some people use the Bible to justify African slavery in the American South. So I'd gotten this book for that class on women in the Bible, that seminar, but what Webb does is he looks at these three issues, slavery, gender issues, and

issues of homosexuality. And he tries to see how, as a believing Christian, he and his readers can perhaps understand how we should read those passages now. Now, I will go ahead and spoiler alert, he comes down very traditionally at the end, that homosexuality is not wrong, but homosexual behavior is so he holds the line on that. But he points out that slavery is clearly wrong. And treating women unequally is wrong. And he suggests, he posits this model he calls a redemptive movement

hermeneutic. Okay, hermeneutic is interpretive strategy, redemption, we're trying to redeem us make ourselves better. It's a movement because he sees God speaking to people, in fact, think of Alma 30, is it 29 or 30? 29, where Alma wants to be an angel and speak with... And he says, you know, "God speaks to all people according their own language, what part of his word he feels in his wisdom

they're ready to have." And so what Webb suggests is that early in Israelite history, okay, because of the culture in which they lived, women and slaves play different roles. What he actually points out, though, is that women in many ways, were protected more in Israelite law than they were in some surrounding cultures. And slavery was actually very regulated. So you couldn't beat your slave, you know, there are

various kinds of things. And then what he says is that you move into the New Testament, and women are able to prophesy and speak in tongues, and they follow Jesus. And so we're seeing a development there. Yes, there is slavery. But Paul says, I would in Philemon, for instance, if you really want to do me a favor, you let him go.

And the way I describe this in terms of gender issues, is I tell my students, that, that God put Israelite women in a slightly more protected position than say Canaanite women were. And then Jesus was very liberating. And although there are a couple difficult passages in Paul, about gender issues, like there are about sexuality issues, Paul still is giving women a role in the Christian movement they hadn't had before.

And so I describe it as you're moving the ball down the line, you're moving down the field. And so the question is Christians, particularly at the time of Joseph Smith, they took Paul's position, he'd moved the ball down to say, the 20 yard line, and they assume that's what has to be fixed. But I would say Joseph Smith turning the key on behalf of the women in Nauvoo Relief Society he's actually advancing the ball farther. So that's what Webb means by redemptive movement

hermeneutic. But what he points out is that in the case of slavery and gender issues, the rules first for Israel, and then for the church, were actually more empowering and liberating. There were more rules there. But what you find out with the sexual behavior is that the Israelites and the Christians actually had higher standards than the surrounding world. Does

that make sense? So women were more protected and given more rights in Christianity, but the rules on sexual behavior were firmer than those around them. So, so web actually does come out. But he makes some interesting points, though. He calls out Christian hypocrisy, because he says, yes, we can say that marriage between a man and a woman and any sexual behavior outside of Covenant marriage--he uses terms that are very familiar to us as latter-day

saints--is wrong. But we have all of these straight born again, Christians who are addicted to porn, and are beating their wives. And he calls out what he calls Christian hypocrisy. And he comes down to a position which I think a lot of us in the church allies, I hope, families are members of the LGBTQ community, where we should be loving and accepting of people, even if we don't always accept their

choices and behavior. Now, to something you texted me about when you invited me to do this episode, you said what the Scriptures say about homosexuality, and I can say pretty clearly nothing. They say nothing about orientation. We have those, quote unquote clobber passages about

homosexual behavior. And I think that's an important point, because when I was growing up, I'm 20-30 years older than you two, when I was growing up, homosexuality equaled homosexual behavior, just like our sexual behavior, regardless of orientation is a choice, somehow being homosexual was a choice. I mean, that's the way that was the verbiage I heard. That's what I heard in the 60s and 70s, and 80s, is that people chose to

be gay. And as Tom talks in his book, Tom Kristofferson talks in his book, merely accepting he was homosexual, he asked to be excommunicated, because that was the assumption, this conflation of identity and orientation with behavior. And I would say the scriptures don't address that. And the reality is in the ancient world, the Greeks didn't really have a word for homosexuality. They had all kinds of words for all kinds of

sexual behavior. But the reality is no one, I'm not saying that people weren't gay or lesbian in the ancient world. didn't have the orientations we describe it. That's just not the way they discussed it. They just discussed behaviors. Whereas we talked for a long time about people and their labels and conflated that with their behaviors.

trip up on it quite a bit. I had a couple of thoughts as you were talking, I guess, first off, I was looking into the history of the word homosexual, and a lot of different interpretations of the Bible, like the New International Version, and things like that include the word homosexuality, but that didn't really start until like, 1946, from what I was reading, and I just thought that was interesting that like, I think people live under this guise of like, oh, the Bible is very

clear and what it says about homosexuality, and I'm kind of like, well, the word didn't exist. And also it's not really that clear.

I'm not gonna say changed, but more inspiration, I think came to our leaders, and they realized it was important to distinguish between any kind of behaviors and who people are.

accounts. It's I don't think it was, at least for me, I've never believed that it was fully intended to be like, all of everything God wanted us to have, which also is another wonderful reason why we have the Book of Mormon to kind of like,

give context to that. And then and then one other thing I pointed out, because I was kind of looking through these, these passages, too, and in Romans, and the first verse, in the very next chapter in Romans 2, Paul is condemning those who misuse God's teachings to judge others. And I just, I just thought that was kind of like interesting how this verse is so used to condemn homosexuality, and judge people

who are born gay. And then in the very next verse, it says, Please don't misuse God's word, to judge others and do harm. Yeah.

But the literary questions a e, What kind of writing is th s? Who is it written to? and Wh t comes before and after? and t at's so important, we have a ten ency to do something called cher y pick, we take a verse and we u e it as a proof text. It's not hat the application that we're g ving it isn't legitimate, y u know, being baptized wate and the spirit. I mean, that's mportant proof text. Even thou h it's a proof text, it's te ching us something true and i

portant. But if we don't see w at comes before and after we can take something out of conte t or not understand the full pic ure. And so that one passage in 1 Corinthians 6, which is ab ut you know, fornicato s, idolaters, nor adulterers, or feminists, that was the s ft ones and the abuses themsel es with mankind. Those are men ho lie with men. The next minu e talks in the next verse abo t thieves and drunkards, verse 1 , we still have a list of sinner

, but 11. So here's the verse th t comes right after it that's o beautiful. "And such were some of you, but ye are washed, ut ye are sanctified, ye re justified in the name of he Lord Jesus, and by the spirit of our God." These particular se ual sins are just two in a lis of all kinds of sins, that ere part of the surrounding cul ure in Corinth, and the Corint ian saints had been involved in all those things, but it di n't matter because of Jesus.

hey had been washed, they'd b en justified, which meant t at their sins were forgiven. T ey were brought in harmony w th law, they were sanctified, t ey were made holy, which is ot just making it back to grou d zero, right? I often when I tr to explain justification and anctification, I say if you have the law which defined sin, that s base zero, and you sin, you o down minus five, just fication brings you back to zero

it forgives you. But what sanc ification does, and we thin it's misleading to sanc ified could mean cleanse in Engl sh, but in Greek and Hebr w, it means make holy, it take you to plus five. So the aton ment first brings you back to b se zero, it forgives your sin rings you back in harmony with l w, but then it transforms you nd makes you more like God nd exalts you. And that's the p int doesn't matter who you are

r what you did. When you are ju tified and sanctified through th blood of Jesus Christ and the p wer of the Spirit, it doesn't atter. And it's interesting th t, you know, once again, whe I was growing up, we had t is big thing about ranking sin . And I think part of that's be ause we know that murder is y u can't undo murder. And y u know, sexual sins are very g

ievous. But we had a great time ranking our sexual sins, you k ow, and my fornicating was ad, but nothing as bad as an of you doing homosexual st ff, you know, a single sin can set you apart from God. And yet all of those things can be ove come by the grace of Christ. ow, you had asked earlier, and hadn't dodged, because I always want to talk about Jesus. But hat has Jesus taught about it? othing, right. Jesus does not address the issue of homosexual

ehavior clearly at all. He oes, of course, talk about marri ge. And that's the closest I co ld come as I was trying to refl ct upon this. You know, Cha lie has talked movingly about how the Book of Mormon is a life ine for him, because it just t stifies to him of truth and bri gs them to Christ, and does 't have clobber passages that c

uld set him off. I don't w nt this passage from from M rk, and there's a parallel in Matthew to set anyone off who d esn't feel like she or he an be in a heterosexual marri ge in this life, or ever that it s another issue, I'd like to, I d like to hear as much from y u as talk because this is, th s is your life. I'm looking t it from the outside. I know marriage. And the promise about hether you're gonna have ever blessing the next lif or not, is a complicated on

. You know, I mentioned my son at the beginning, it was very easy for me as I first bec me sensitized to LGBTQ issue , to say, Oh, this is just anot er disability in life. You know just like my son can't have relationship won't get married in this life. But I've been pro ised that the resurrection will e made whole. I didn't realize hat sometimes the way the res of us glibly talk about this c n actually be hurtful. I gav a devotional that addressed some of these issues back in A

gust of 2018. And as a resu t, I spoke at Northstar o ce. And in my preparation for orthstar, a gay friend warned e he said, Eric don't do the d sability thing. Because I have f iends who feel very strongly th t that is their eternal identit . And the reality is, we don't know what the Scriptures say about homosexuality, nothin . What do they say about it origins? Nothing. What do they

say about its end nothing. So I understand that, that talki g about this can be triggerin for some in the LGBTQ communi y. But it is true that Jesus in the earliest, Mark's earlie than Matthew, which is why I al ays start in Mark first. This

separate." So Jesus c early endorses heterosexual marr age, as coming from God, whic of course a latter-da saints, the proclamati n family, we certainly a cept as well. But you know, what is really striking because of o r, our cultural as well as ur religious surroundings, nd acculturation. The Scriptu es actually talk a lot less ab ut marriage than you assu

church today. And there's actually not as much of in the New Testament either or the Book of Mormon, for that matter. I mean, you've got section 132, but that's fraught with some of the plural marriage things even. Part of it may be because it was such a given in all societies, that there wasn't the need to talk about its importance and sanctity as much, but Jesus clearly does espouse marriage is

from God. There is one passage and I don't know that I can firmly say, I promised you I would not say anything the scriptures clearly say. So this is just me wondering with you. There's in Matthew's version of the marriage passage. This is in

And in the mythean version, I better read this rather than paraphrase because I don't want to get it wrong. Jesus actually says, All men cannot receive the same save they to whom it is given. This idea that heterosexual marriage is a gift from God and should be indissolvable, it should be permanent. He said, not everyone can accept that though. And then he has this interesting passage in verse 12. For there are some eunuchs which are born from

their mother's womb. And there are some which are made eunuchs of men. And there be eunuchs which have made themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven sake. Now, clearly here, eunuch doesn't have to be literally a castrated male. You know, it could be suggesting some people are born with birth defects that don't let them function sexually, or perhaps emotionally like as a person with autism like my son, some are made eunuchs by men. Well, clearly there was a lot of slavery going on and eunuchs

were created. But that last line, some make themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven sake. Now, there's a horrible story of an early Christian father named Origen, who struggled with chastity. And in a moment of, you know, excessive piety, castrated himself with a piece of glass, trying to make himself a eunuch for the Kingdom of Heaven's sake. But let's just say for a moment that this is...

with him. If we're using eunuch symbolically, for people who are not married permanently, as Jesus has just laid out to the Pharisees and his disciples, someone who and I know this is a choice that I can't even relate to. But for those who elect a life of Covenant keeping, which might mean a life that's single to keep the covenants and receive the promises they've been given. Could that not be those who make themselves

eunuchs for heaven's sake. Now, once again, I understand this can be triggering, and I don't want to be flippant about it as an outsider, I was brought to my attention about the same time I was speaking at Northstar, that someone a leader actually had said to someone, you know, it's not any different than being a single woman who doesn't have a chance to get married. And this person's response was a single woman can pray every night that

she'll meet and marry. I have to pray every night that I don't fall in love. So I understand. These are hard issues.

her Penihah, I think is her. Her sister wife has given her a hard time because she doesn't have any children. And she kind of complains. She kind of complaints her husband Elkanah answers, you know, she's got all these kids and I have nothing. He says, aren't I better than 12 sons to you? Typical male thing to say right?

suggestions. Because I need to listen to the experiences you're having, and how difficult it is, how rewarding it is. That's where a lot of us mainstream members of the church would do better to listen more.

pretty compassionate. I often tell my students don't diss the Pharisees all the time. I know Matthew does, but the other gospel authors don't as much. They don't take a hypocritical oath to be a fantasy. I mean, they were actually the progressives in Judaism in Second Bethel Judaism. And the Beit Hillel, the group of the house of Hillel said, No, we should love our wives, we shouldn't just divorce them for

any cause. So the Pharisees were actually asking Jesus to, to take a stand in an argument they were having in their own group. And so he's given this big long thing about you know, God created man and woman, and a man shall leave his father and a mother shall leave her home, and they shall clean together and what God has put together don't, don't separate, the Pharisees leave. And then Peter says, His disciples say to him, not Peter I'm not going to blame it on hi

. If this is the case of the man be so with his wife, it's g od not to marry. There's no esca e clause, I'd rather not get ntangled. And Jesus says, but he said unto them, all men cannot r ceive the same save them to hom it is given. It seems, I mea , reading between the lines, o ce again, leaving exegesi and just speculating a litt e bit. So this is just our o inion. It seems to be openin the door that Jesus recognize that not everyone hearing h m then or reading him now will

e in that situation. Not everyo e will be in that marriage man and woman that we should not

A, which was Plan B, like my plan and plan A was don't be gay. Right, right. That didn't work. And I was like, I

that. And I was just like, ramming my head against this wall, trying to keep that commandment that I thought I had covenanted that I thought was given to me to be married to be exalted. And I was reading in D&C 132, is that it? Where it ta ks about the new and everlast ng covenant? And I actually ead this verse too. And I rayed, and I just had a very trong feeling that that is not our commandment, you are not ne to whom that has been given. nd so you're going to be okay.

nd I don't I don't know. ometimes I feel like I say, I on't want everyone to like, hink what I think is what you hould do. Like everyone is ifferent. But like, when I went o God, and was like, God, I'm ying here. Like, I need omething. The Scriptures, they elped me. And to me, it wasn't capegoat, like, like, someone ould listen to a story that ust told me like, Oh, you found scapegoat where you could kirt that commandment. And to e, that's not that's not what t was at all. It felt like a

elief. It felt like accessing he power of Jesus Christ and eing held and safe, you know, n something that I viewed as a You know, once again, kind of from an outside ommandment that was just urting me and destroying me nternally. And I don't know, t's just.. That's how I speak about it. perspective, watching how not just society has changed in the last 30 or 40 years, in some ways for the better, some ways, perhaps not. But even within the

church. You know, I remember when President Hinckley said marriage is not a solution to this problem. That was probably in the late 80s, maybe the 90s because it had been suggested before, as you know, and one of the first things once again, that I hadn't fathomed, because growing up homosexuality wasn't about orientation. It was about behavior. You know, we didn't

understand. In fact, I was I You know, the the being able to bond and love and care for other didn't understand my sexuality, I didn't understand that it wasn't just about physical acts. It was about bonding. It was about love. It was about connection. Right. And it wasn't just, and that's why these particular passages in the Hebrew Bible in the Greek New Testament aren't enough. This is why we have to have the Spirit.

And we are waiting on revelation from authorized sources to understand more about the cause, and the destiny and the resolution. Because that was really transformative for me to realize this wasn't just about not doing X, Y, and Z. It was about how people related to other people and how they wer bonded and how they wer attracted. You know, I didn' realize it was not just abou not wanting to kiss a girl o

make a baby. It was not abou having that kind of connection And from what I understand thi is sometimes issue in mixe orientation marriages. Yeah because sometimes th heterosexual partner is the on who's really been cheated no because of the sex, but becaus she or he doesn't feel as full loved and cherished. Becaus that's just not in that makeup And yet, I've heard of som people speaking about thei sexuality as a gift

people. You know, sometimes we don't have time to go into the exegesis of this, but 1 Corinthians 7, there's that wonderful, wonderfully complicated thing where Paul seems to be advocating celibacy, and it's unclear what is going on. It says, you know, the married man is careful about the things of his wife. The unmarried man cares about the things the Lord like I said, we don't have time to text Jesus. But the Greek word there "marrymanahoh", doesn't mean careful. It means anxious to the

point of distraction. And what he's actually saying is a married man can be so anxious and worried about pleasing his wife, he's not giving enough attention to God. Well, the celibate person can be so worried about displeasing god, he's not pleasing God either. I mean, what Paul's actually saying in 1 Corinthians 7 is either extreme is wrong, that we should always be outward looking "A" to God, but "B" to our

fellow men and women. And I have had friends share with me that the the love and the camaraderie and the companionship and the caring, and the creativity, and the other things they feel, which is they see as part of their sexuality is something

they wouldn't give up. You know, even if they were given the opportunity to flip the switch and have the mixed orientation marriage or be able to function sexually in a marriage, they wouldn't want to give up all the positive benefits of what they've discovered about themselves. And that's what I'm trying to listen to more and be more open to. I don't know if any of that is useful for you or your audience to hear. But...

goes away sorrowing. And that's all Matthew and Luke say about it. But Mark, which, theoretically, is the earliest version of this, Has Jesus say, look, beholding him love him. I actually learned this from Elaine Elaine said, you know, Jesus loved that man, even though at that point, he wasn't willing, or able to do the most, sell everything and follow Him. Elaine said, he still loved him. And how do we not know that a month, a year, 10 years later,

he eventually did it. You know, and this is the whole judging thing, right? So sometimes we get in trouble when we talk about loving our fellow men. When we love other people it's not that we're not, we're loving them more than we love God. And I teach John. So I know all about if you love me keep my commandments. In fact, in Greek, it's even stronger. The word the verb "toreo" means to stand on watch, to guard to keep to await instructions. So if you love Jesus, you're just waiting.

You're just not keeping the commandments he's giving you, you're waiting for more. So I fully believe that loving God means keeping His commandments, which in my case includes teaching my children and my students and anyone who listened with those commandments are, but I don't think we need to make this dichotomy that if we love someone who makes a different choice, that we're somehow not loving God.

difference. You know, there are things you can't change. And so those things that people couldn't change, didn't matter. If you couldn't change it, that wasn't your problem. You were still part of the body of Christ, you were all alike to God. And now that we no longer say, as I was told, growing up, that your sexuality was a choice, then we could add another phrase to that male or female, black or white bond or free, gay or straight. The things you can't change you're

not responsible for. But you are still called, you know, once again, what does Jesus say about how we love each other in that passage in Luke? Sorry, I don't have my scriptures.

dinner party? Because in the ancient world, this is another big word I can throw out for you. It's called Commenciality, who do you eat with, because in the ancient world, who you ate with had to do with relationships, family, honor, and you wouldn't eat with someone from the outside or a Gentile or lower class or dishonorable or a sinner. But Jesus ignored that. Everyone's welcome at the table, including the Pharisees, including the self righteous, right? It's not the publicans and sinners that

He's inviting in. He's inviting everyone, the righteous, the unrighteous, the self righteous. And that's the table. You know, we've got this wonderful image each week, particularly now that we can start coming back to sacrament meeting, the pandemic wanes, that we gather around the sacrament table, you know, our Protestant friends call it communion. And I used to always think that was because we're communing with the Lord, right.

We're taking the bread and water and we're thinking about what Jesus has done for us and we're feeling the spirit. But it's also reenacting the Last Supper, Jesus was with the family he chose, his friends, his disciples gathered around sharing bread and wine. And we gather as a ward family, or a church family or a group of friends. And we're, it doesn't matter if we're black or white male or female, under free, straight or gay, we are part of

the family of God. And you mentioned that devotional I was sharing this with you before. Some months after that I had an old lady who was doing a fireside in Orem. I don't remember what the occasion was. And she came up to me afterwards and said, she had a grandson who had come out. And his parents had rejected him. And he said, we haven't had anything to do with my grandson for, you know,

months and months. And when I saw the devotional and talked about how we should love and reach out, I talked to my daughter, and we had a discussion. And it gave her the words to say to her husband, and now we have our grandson back in our family. And it wasn't anything I said it was just preaching Jesus, it was just sharing the principles of the gospel. And you know, in that devotional, I don't know if any of your listeners want to go back and watch that it was

August 2018. I just use scriptures and the words of the Relief Society President, Elder uchtdorf and Elder Holland and President Ballard, you know, it was all straight from the scriptures and the modern authorities. Once again, for those of us who aren't judges in Israel, if I'm not your Bishop or Stake President, your behavior is not my concern. Unless you're a common judge in Israel. Don't even go there with

behavior. Love, accept. And as Tom has said, wow, you know, because not only his family, but that New Canaan ward in Connecticut was so loving. It gave him the chance to come back. Whenever we push people away. We're completely destroying the chances that they'll come back or want to stay. Anyway, thanks for having me. I'm sorry. I talked so long and use big words.

there are many, many more. We encourage you to listen to other voices and hear a wide variety o experiences. If you would lik to submit a question or share comment about today's episode you can email us at question fromthecloset@gmail.com. Until n xt time.