thews

See things as you wish and use whatever timeline suits you. As a Christian, my timeline starts after Jesus died for our sins. No. Watering down polygamy and comparing it to changes in diet is absurd IMO. We're talking about Joseph Smith marrying many women and other men's wives. This is the Mormon prophet of God, speaking for God, so the question is quite valid. If you believe in what Joseph Smith said regarding what God wants, then in the Mormon version of heaven polygamy is required, and a woman can expect to share her husband, while a man can expect to have many wives. This isn't my opinion, but cannonized doctrrine in the D&C... would you agree?

Thank you for this post. I have no doubt or reservations about this decision, but I was hoping there could be comfort found in telling them that while our beliefs differ, because I am a Christian and accept Jesus Christ I will not be damned, which is why I asked this question. In the last conversation I had with my father, I had this letted penned and ready to send out. He advised me not to send it for fear of what it would cause within the family. My father was a ex-Mormon as well, but while he didn't asked me to never submit it, he advised me not to then. I see this as a statement to where I place my faith, and it's something I want to do. As near as I can tell by the quoted by BY in the previous post, I will be damned by the LDS version of God for rejecting Joseph Smith while being commited to Jesus Christ, mainly because there was a time I did accpt Joseph Smith as a prophet of God. Thank you again for this most... it's been post helpful.

You can call yourself what you wish, but if you believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, by definition it would make you a Mormon. Differences in doctrine are vast, and it's the doctrine that defines one's beliefs. I find that LDS members that choose to answer the question "Christian" when asked about their faith, are really trying to distance themselves from Joseph Smith. A "Mormon" believes Joseph Smith wasa prophet of God, accepts the Book of Mormon, BOA, POP etc., and all the sealings, and temple rituals that are exclusive to Mormonism. You could argue that because Catholics use rosary beads it would be the same thing (difference), but I would contend the doctrine is what defines "Christian" religions, as all "Christian" religions reject Joseph Smith as a prophet of God. Well, let's see what the Mormon prophets said of Christianity:Quotes by LDS Leaders Why are Mormons ashamed to be called Mormons?

So you are saying Joseph Smith was in love with 38 women? I'm asking this because someone said on another board (an LDS member) he was married to more than one woman in the temple, but it was not a tradtional marriage. This is the crux of the question, because "marriage" to me means the love between one man and one woman, rather than one many and many wives (I'm referring to the afterlife). Likewise My pointis that once Jesus died for our sins, we start from there. Going back in time before Jesus Christ to justify an act 1800 years later is what doesn't make sense to me. Comparing diet and circumcision to polygamy is a bit of a reach don't you think? Diet and scripture changes that allow men to have multiple wives are not the same. This is a big rationalization IMO. God is perfect and God's word will stand the test of time and always be true... always. I disagree that the bible changes. Translation changes can be argued, but not scripture content.

You claimed God changes his mind as political climate changes, and I stated one of the tests of a prophet of God, is that if he is in fact speaking God's words, those words will come true and be true forever. This thread is asking for the LDS version of God's view of marriage and i don't wish to engage you in a two-wrongs-make-a-right argument about a different topic. Is the topic of sealed marriages to men already married off limits? I ask this sincerely, becuase it was brought up by a Mormon on another board, so I assume it's not. If not, are some of you married to more than one person, though not in a traditional polygamous sense, but in a spiritual one? Thanks

One of the tests the bible speaks on regarding whether or not a prophet is speaking for God, is that it will never change... regardless of political climate.

It's a long story, but having my name removed is something I want to explain to family members who are devout LDS. If they think I'll be sent to hell for doing so, or not, I just wanted to know the LDS stance. OK. I disagree. "Christians" believe that Joseph Smith was a false prophet of God, while "Mormons" believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God and accept the Mormon doctrine of Joseph Smith. We're talking about the definition of the word "Christian" and what it encompasses vs. the definition of the word "Mormon" and what it encompasses, which is its doctrine.Jews and Christians are separated by definition based on the doctrine they subscribe to. Claiming one is a Jew-Christian would be the same as claiming one is a Christian-Mormon. There is no denying the roots of Mormonism in Christianity, but stating "Christian" by itself would imply one does not put faith in Joseph Smith as a prophet of God. JMHO.

Thanks. For the record, I do not reject Jesus Christ.

What is your point by saying this? I have serious questions that I'd like an answer to. Is it your nature to mock?

Let me point out that Christians don't believe Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, nor that the BOM is another testament. If one believes that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, then they would be defined as "Mormon" by the actual definition. You make a good point. The answers to my questions aren't so much for me, but for my family members. The counter point to this proof is that Joseph Smith didn't write the BOM, but only claimed to and it was written by someone else. I don't belong to another organized religion, but I consider my beliefs Christian by definition, based on the doctrine I place that belief in. Thanks for the reply.

OK thanks... I thought it was written down somewhere. It is an all or nothing thing for me and I appreciate you answering my questions.

I don't understand your logic. Before the time of Chirst, Jesus had not yet died for our sins. I don't agree that God commanded polygamy before Christ, though it is mentioned. If God commanded Joseph Smith to practice polygamy under the threat of a sword, then it must be God's will that polygamy is what he wants, which is why I asked the question.

Why discount it? I don't understand what you mean here. Again I don't understand. I come from polygamy... its in my blood. My question centers on what love is to marriage from an LDS perspective. Well thanks, but I'm still curious which is why I asked the question.

I think I know what love is, but the question specifically asks what the LDS believe God's view on "love" when it comes to marriage, and has nothing to do with children. A person can have many kids and love them all, but a man doesn't need to love a woman to marry her in the LDS faith if I'm understanding correctly.

No that's not what I'm saying at all. Are you saying Joseph Smith made a mistake regarding polygamy? I don't understand how accepting the BOM answers this question? It is in the Mormon doctrine in the D&C isn't it? I don't pretend to know what life after death encompasses, but the question revolves around the bond of love between a man and a woman, or between one man and more than one woman. I need to know if you believe polygamy was a mistake to understand. Thanks

In this scenario I can see both occasions being in love. What I'm talking about something a Mormon said on another board, where he was Temple married to other women, but not in an active polygamous way. This scenario was said to be part of the afterlife as explained in the D&C. In that scenario, I find the sanctity of love not required for marriage, which is why I asked the question.

What I'm looking for isn't opinion, but some sort of official (if you want to call it that) position. If the LDS do baptism for the dead, they are offering the dead a chance to accept the LDS church. For those bron between 1AD and 1830 I understand this concept, but if I have been given the opportunity to accept the LDS church and was baptized a Mormon, but later reject the BOM yet believe in the bible, am I, per the Mormon doctrine, going to be cast into eternal darkness for doing so? This is a big deal and I just want to know what I'm signing up for. Thanks.

As an ex-Mormon, I'm trying to figure out exactly what view the LDS would deem my fate is in the afterlife, while I am a Christian? I don't subscribe to any organized religion, other than to call myself a Christian because I do believe Jesus Christ was God, and I do not believe in the BOM. I'm getting all the ducks in a row before I send off my resignation letter, but this is one I can't find an answer to. Thanks

One of my pet peeves. When someone calls themselves "saved," it makes the decision that they are saved by them, when judgement is only for the Lord. We can believe we'll be saved, but stating it as a matter of fact is not a good idea IMO.

What I don't understand is why people just can't accept history for what it was, instead of attempting to twist it into something they want it to be. Joseph Smith was convicted of "glass looking" a few years prior, so my assumption is that he didn't want to tell other he was using the same method. 1830 was a long time ago. You could make an argument, but since other witnesses used seer stones, I hardly see this as worth the argument. The bible warns against the use of magic. What was used by people before the bible is hardly an argument for what Jesus Christ left for us in the bible. Now my question for you: If many of the witnesses used seer stones, why don't Mormons use them today?

I find WIkiipedia to be quite biased. I understand I don't believe the contents of the papyrus Emma Smith sold is well known at all. I've heard many stories about the papyrus, like it's "as big as a room" and a lot of people believe it was burned in the fire. The Mormon church has the exact papyrus Joseph Smith used to translate the book of Abraham, and it matches letter for letter the book by Joseph Smith Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar. If they are not suppressed, can you link me to a source? Thanks... I didn't know that. It's not so much about who was telling the truth, but the David Whitmer also had a seer stone, as did many of the 11 witnesses. My question was why it isn't put on display.

What are you talking about? Joseph Smith, with the aid of a peep stone and stivepipe hat used it to translate the golden plates. Do you deny this? Joseph Smith used his seerer stone to decipher the golden plates. Do you deny this?

Wikipedia is hardly a source for factual information... it's uploaded by users. The papyrus was given to the Mormon church in 1967 after is was found... after the fire. It's a common papyrus... something one would expect to find in a mummy. I don't understand. We're talking about documents (the papyurs and EAG) that are known to exist, and were displayed for a fee in the arly 1800's. What is your point? What about this photograph? http://nowscape.com/mormon/scrl-xl.jpg David Whitmore also said this: "God spake to me again by his own voice from the heavens, and told me to 'separate myself from among the Latter- day Saints, for as they sought to do unto me, so should it be done unto them." Do you disagree?

Pulp Fiction

Nnnn necktie ...I know it was an N word. The Army of Darkness