fate

Well Vort seems to believe that one person saying something that another person said is a lie. I've read that quote before and also read D&C 76 and have read enough about Joseph Smith to know that the quote is "most likely" true, that doesn't mean it is, but nonetheless it wouldn't be called a Telestial "Glory" if it was burning and hellfire. I believe the general Christian belief of hell is either one of two places: 1) the place where Satan and his angels are at, or 2) spiritual prison aka outer darkness, where we are tormented, I'd imagine by the reflection of our life choices (not a physical torment or torture).

Would the church even be supportive of changes to polygamy laws? There was quite a bit of commotion over Prop 8, which I know is completely different, but I just feel like I've stopped myself because of 1) personal greed and 2) unfair laws of the land.

Okay new thought -- I know some groups in Utah have been trying to legalize it, however I'd like to attack the laws in some of these states that have already legalized Gay Marriage -- since it seems like a stepping stone. How would the church change it if was legal? I know you probably don't have an answer to this ... Now I'm just back to square 1.

Thanks for that -- still doesn't help my situation though lol.

Please don't give me any further advice -- you clearly don't know what you're talking about and you're just going to frustrate me further. I'm on these forums because I'm looking for a reasonable solution. Please keep it a reasonable argument.

From OD1 -- "contracting" implies a contract, which I don't have. Again, this brings up a legal contract performed under the laws of another country. Also "forbidden by the law of the land" ... which again brings up a contract performed in another country?What of those in other countries where polygamy IS legal and the church exists? Are they even allowed to fulfill the commandments given in D&C?

That IS a good question -- but the REAL question is, what does it MEAN to be with God?? We don't know. Joseph Smith said that the Telestial Glory was so great a man would kill himself just to get there! So what exactly does it mean to be with God? We have no idea -- what am I really striving for? You're absolutely right, which means we FULLY believe in polygamy, just don't practice it because of the laws of the land. So ... new question: If I am legally married under the laws of another country, would the church then allow me my desires? EDIT: Because there are a few states that still frown on it, but allow polygamous marriages under foreign law.

Please don't think I'm trying to argue or being naive...I'm seriously troubled by this.

Where is this? And where is anything by a living prophet that says I'm wrong?

You're all right, I doubt anyone would ever see things the way I see things, that's why I stopped going to church. I analyze scripture and base my life off core doctrine, not hasty interpretations. Sure I made a mistake, so I'm not perfect, but in analyzing core doctrine the only real fault here is not being "legally" married to her. As for "temporary feeling of pleasure" and "being selfish" ... sure the original mistake was a temporary feeling of pleasure, but not it's grown into more than that. I wouldn't want to be with both women "forever" if it was temporary feelings. As for the "pleasure" part -- I find it funny that whenever anyone mentions more than one wife, one of the first things that come up is pleasure aka sex. Sure sex is involved in a marriage, but if you think marriage is about sex then you're way off base and shouldn't be giving me any advice in the first place. And YES, I'm being selfish -- that's what ETERNAL HAPPINESS is about, being selfish! Why would I want eternal happiness if not for myself? Jesus sacrificed His mortal body for us, but do you think for an instant He would have sacrificed His Eternal Glory (knowing full well what that actually meant)? And yes, there was a violation of my temple covenant, in which "We are instructed to give unto you the law of Chastity, which is that you shall have no sexual relations except with your husband or wife to whom you are legally and lawfully wedded." The "legally and lawfully" is violated, although taking her as a wife outside of a legal contract is not "illegal" either, but I cannot argue that I violated this covenant. Finally, my state has no repercussions for sex outside of marriage. I know some do, but mine does not.

I'd just like to bring up adultery. First off, the definition of adultery differs from state to state (and country to country). Some regard it as ANY sex to someone other than you legally married spouse, others regard it as sexual relations with another without permission of the legally married spouse. As far as the church goes, D&C has the following: D&C 42:75. But if ye shall find that any persons have left their companions for the sake of adultery, and they themselves are the offenders, and their companions are living, they shall be case out from among you. I'd like to point out in this, that I have not "left" my companion, we are still very happily together. D&C 132:41. And as ye have asked concerning adultery, verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man receiveth a wife in the new and everlasting covenant, and if she be with another man, and I have not appointed unto her by the holy anointing, she hath committed adultery and shall be destroyed. This verse only is applying to the woman being with another man (I only bring this verse up because someone tried to use it against me in the past). D&C 132:43. And if he husband be with another woman, and he was under a vow, he hath broken his vow and hath committed adultery. This verse is specifically pointing out a vow to not be with another woman ever, and never have I been under such a vow. And now the most important: D&C 132:61. And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood-if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else. Although I have not "legally" married the second, in only a few definitions of marriage does it require the contract to be legal. I know nobody likes Wikipedia, but the beginning of the entry states "Marriage is a social union or legal contract between people that creates kinship. It is an institution in which interpersonal relationships, usually intimate and sexual, are acknowledged in a variety of ways, depending on the culture or subculture in which it is found. Such a union, often formalized via a wedding ceremony, may also be called matrimony." There is nothing wrong or illegal with marrying a woman outside of law. This is one of the many reasons why the Utah Attorney General has said they will never go after polygamists simply for their life-style (not to mention he's brought up the sheer number of them and how it'd be nearly impossible to stop the practice).

I am an inactive member of the church and have been considering coming back to the church, but I have the following dilemma. In short I'm in a polygamous relationship, but not quite by definition. The background is such: I'm married with three children and my wife had her tubes tied after the third. It was a decision by both of us to stop at three, not that we didn't want more but that we (mostly I) didn't want to overburden my wife and we felt that three had fulfilled our commandment to multiply and replenish. At this time we were active members in the church. Over the next few years we slowly became inactive. I had joined the Army and was pretty much wiped out by the weekend. I know that's no excuse. Now to the more recent: I became close to a girl at an evening job I had and we began to develop feelings for each other. Because of my 100% honest relationship with my wife, I immediately told her my feelings. We fought for a bit, but in the end she decided she wanted me to be happy and she became good friends with this girl and eventually, essentially, gave her to me as a "gift." Before long I had a child with this girl, so now I have one child with this girl and three with my wife. I love them both and they both love me, and they both enjoy being around each other so there is no tension in our family. We all live together and we're happy. Now I've decided I want to go back to church, especially because I feel it's important for my children to be raised in the church, but here comes into play the dilemma. Although I technically haven't been excommunicated from the church because I just stopped going, I'm sure that I would be. However, I believe 100% in the church and because of my own selfish reasons I've fallen away, but now I am in a situation where I want to go back but I don't think I'd be welcomed back. I can't just leave the second girl, that's not right, especially when we all love each other and we're in a healthy relationship. She's not like drugs or alcohol, that can be left with only one party making a sacrifice, she's a person with feelings and leaving her is not an option. I know the church hasn't performed a polygamous marriage since the end of the 1800s because of the law, but I also know that the church continues to perform sealings to other women, such as in the case of a death or separation. I guess my main question is: would the church force me to leave my 2nd love if I wanted to come back? Although I wasn't "called" to be in this relationship like they were in the early history of the church, I am in this relationship nonetheless. I want to be with both of these women forever, and they with me. Would it be possible to be sealed to the second girl without being in a legal marriage? I know it's bending the rules ... Please don't criticize me, I've done that plenty to myself. I'm looking for advice. Thanks.