Polygamy is affecting my testimony

[Wingnut]

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that the only time Jim shows up is to correct LDS doctrine and stir up trouble?

[Moksha]

Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that the only time Jim shows up is to correct LDS doctrine and stir up trouble?

Without the question we would not have the opportunity to clarify our values.

[u235sentinel]

A righteous man would never desire more than his one living wife. He would be repulsed by polygamy & how it would deeply injure his wife. As Abraham was repulsed by having to sacrific his son Issac. He would only do it if his wife asked him to because God asked her to & then he would let her choose who it would be, someone she would be comfortable with, to preserve her feelings as much as possible. He would not go out looking around or date or seek another wife. His 1st wife would always come 1st & never be neglected. Modern Prophets have taught so much more about marriage now & the correct relationship between husband & wife & the equality of women than they did in the 1800's when women were not treated as equals in marriage. Most women reluctantly went along with polygamy in the 1800's because they were told that they had to be sealed in this life to a man, which we now know is not true, they can be sealed later if they don't find a good man in this life.

Monogamous marriage will most likely be the norm in the Celestial Kingdom because most men have trouble being worthy & faithful to their one wife without wondering eyes, thoughts, hearts & bodies & thus will be lucky to get to be with her in the next life if she still wants him.

I guess Joseph Smith restored too much when restoring polygamy in modern days.

[foreverafter]

Oh really? So, the second wife is a lesser wife?

It was the women who said, if the Lord told you to do it, do it.

The 1st wife's position is always respected, for she is the one who made the greatest sacrifice in sharing her husband. The other wives didn't have to marry a man already married, they could have waited to be a 1st wife too. They knew that the man may not love them as he does his 1st. Joseph honored Emma's feelings before his other wives & so did Abraham, etc. Both men let wives go because of the 1st wife's feelings.

If you study about it much, you find that though many women went along with plural marriage, they underneath it all did not like it & it was extremely painful for them, including some of the greatest women of all time, Emma & Brigham's wives.

But Heavenly Father knew this would be the case & wanted women to start to stand up for themselves & expect respect from their husbands, something that Emma started & tried to teach to the women of her day & it is something that all women needed to learn & do so the Kingdom of God could move forward. Heavenly Father needed women to awake finally after 6000 years of being relagated by men to a secondary position, as Pres. Hinckley put it, & rise to their true equal station in marriage, which the pains of polygamy did & then polygamy was taken away, for Heavenly Father does not want his daughters to be in pain more than is needful to wake them up, to expect respect, faithfulness & equality from men. My how different plural marriage would be done, if it is brought back again, now that many women are fully awake to their high position.

Edited July 12, 2009 by foreverafter

[MarginOfError]

Polygamy in every society in the history of the world has been an "abomination", a "whoredom", & a "gross crime", as the Book of Mormon describes it in Jacob 2, except in rare cases when it is authorized by God & the man is truely righteous. It is a common natural man carnal desire to have more than one wife. Just another form of adultery & spouse abuse.

A righteous man would never desire more than his one living wife. He would be repulsed by polygamy & how it would deeply injure his wife. As Abraham was repulsed by having to sacrific his son Issac. He would only do it if his wife asked him to because God asked her to & then he would let her choose who it would be, someone she would be comfortable with, to preserve her feelings as much as possible. He would not go out looking around or date or seek another wife. His 1st wife would always come 1st & never be neglected. Modern Prophets have taught so much more about marriage now & the correct relationship between husband & wife & the equality of women than they did in the 1800's when women were not treated as equals in marriage. Most women reluctantly went along with polygamy in the 1800's because they were told that they had to be sealed in this life to a man, which we now know is not true, they can be sealed later if they don't find a good man in this life.

If polygamy ever becomes legal again than it will be the 1st time in the history of the world that a major society allowed it for both men & women. For now women's equality is acknowledged & honored for the 1st time & it would go both ways if it becomes legal. How much crazier would society be if men had multiple wives & women had multiple husbands with all the children in between.

Monogamous marriage will most likely be the norm in the Celestial Kingdom because most men have trouble being worthy & faithful to their one wife without wondering eyes, thoughts, hearts & bodies & thus will be lucky to get to be with her in the next life if she still wants him.

So now in addition to false doctrine you're going to start in on misandry.

I'm going to have to call you on all this as well. You need sources, because very little of what you've said is backed up by LDS scripture and doctrine.

And since no righteous man would ever take a second wife unless his wife told him to, I guess we can all go in search of a new religion since Emma Smith never told Joseph to take a second wife. We've all been suckered!

[MarginOfError]

The 1st wife's position is always respected, for she is the one who made the greatest sacrifice in sharing her husband. The other wives didn't have to marry a man already married, they could have waited to be a 1st wife too. They knew that the man may not love them as he does his 1st. Joseph honored Emma's feelings before his other wives & so did Abraham, etc. Both men let wives go because of the 1st wife's feelings.

If you study about it much, you find that though many women went along with plural marriage, they underneath it all did not like it & it was extremely painful for them, including some of the greatest women of all time, Emma & Brigham's wives.

But Heavenly Father knew this would be the case & wanted women to start to stand up for themselves & expect respect from their husbands, something that Emma started & tried to teach to the women of her day & it is something that all women needed to learn & do so the Kingdom of God could move forward. Heavenly Father needed women to awake finally after 6000 years of being relagated by men to a secondary position, as Pres. Hinckley put it, & rise to their true equal station in marriage, which the pains of polygamy did & then polygamy was taken away, for Heavenly Father does not want his daughters to be in pain more than is needful to wake them up, to expect respect, faithfulness & equality from men. My how different plural marriage would be done, if it is brought back again, now that many women are fully awake to their high position.

I think it's time you tried reading the Doctrine and Covenants. I highly recommend Official Declaration 1, where President Woodruff says the following:

The question is this: Which is the wisest course for the Latter-day Saints to pursue—to continue to attempt to practice plural marriage, with the laws of the nation against it and the opposition of sixty millions of people, and at the cost of the confiscation and loss of all the Temples, and the stopping of all the ordinances therein, both for the living and the dead, and the imprisonment of the First Presidency and Twelve and the heads of families in the Church, and the confiscation of personal property of the people (all of which of themselves would stop the practice); or, after doing and suffering what we have through our adherence to this principle to cease the practice and submit to the law, and through doing so leave the Prophets, Apostles and fathers at home, so that they can instruct the people and attend to the duties of the Church, and also leave the Temples in the hands of the Saints, so that they can attend to the ordinances of the Gospel, both for the living and the dead?

The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for . . . any of the men in this temple at Logan; for all ordinances would be stopped throughout the land of Zion. Confusion would reign throughout Israel, and many men would be made prisoners. This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we should have been compelled to stop the practice. Now, the question is, whether it should be stopped in this manner, or in the way the Lord has manifested to us, and leave our Prophets and Apostles and fathers free men, and the temples in the hands of the people, so that the dead may be redeemed. A large number has already been delivered from the prison house in the spirit world by this people, and shall the work go on or stop? This is the question I lay before the Latter-day Saints. You have to judge for yourselves. I want you to answer it for yourselves. I shall not answer it; but I say to you that that is exactly the condition we as a people would have been in had we not taken the course we have.

Amazingly, the prophet who revealed that the practice of plural marriage should end said that it was because the Lord would rather suffer the practice end than that all the temples and Church property be confiscated and the work of God be brought to a screeching halt. No where in his explanation did he say anything about the feminist motives you suggest.

Your opinions and view points are not consistent with Church doctrine or history, and are terribly misleading. Again, I find myself wondering what happened to you that you feel you need to seek comfort in such twisted misinterpretations of doctrine instead of seeking the healing power of the Atonement, but I assure you, if you continue seeking comfort in the way you are, you will never find it.

[foreverafter]

And since no righteous man would ever take a second wife unless his wife told him to, I guess we can all go in search of a new religion since Emma Smith never told Joseph to take a second wife. We've all been suckered!

In D&C 132 the Lord requires men to get their 1st wife's consent before taking on another wife. Because usually only a wife knows if her husband is truely worthy & righteous & treats her like he should.

Also, since Joseph's day Prophets have taught much more about how men who truely love their wives would honor & protect their feelings & desires before his own & would rather die than injure his wife in any way. (SWK, Faith Precedes the Miracle, p. 154).

[ruthiechan]

The 1st wife's position is always respected, for she is the one who made the greatest sacrifice in sharing her husband. The other wives didn't have to marry a man already married, they could have waited to be a 1st wife too. They knew that the man may not love them as he does his 1st.

There will be more women in the Celestial Kingdom than men. There are not enough righteous men to go around for every righteous woman. Therefore how is it the second wife's fault that she didn't get to be a first wife?

In D&C 132 the Lord requires men to get their 1st wife's consent before taking on another wife. Because usually only a wife knows if her husband is truely worthy & righteous & treats her like he should.

Also, since Joseph's day Prophets have taught much more about how men who truely love their wives would honor & protect their feelings & desires before his own & would rather die than injure his wife in any way. (SWK, Faith Precedes the Miracle, p. 154).

If wives are to be on equal standing with their husbands than how can one wife be more important than the other? Seems rather unequal to me.

[foreverafter]

Amazingly, the prophet who revealed that the practice of plural marriage should end said that it was because the Lord would rather suffer the practice end than that all the temples and Church property be confiscated and the work of God be brought to a screeching halt. No where in his explanation did he say anything about the feminist motives you suggest.

I am well aware of this proclamation. I am looking at the bigger picture, the reason behind the reason. I firmly believe that if Heavenly Father wanted polygamy to go on he could have easily made it possible.

[foreverafter]

There will be more women in the Celestial Kingdom than men. There are not enough righteous men to go around for every righteous woman. Therefore how is it the second wife's fault that she didn't get to be a first wife?

If wives are to be on equal standing with their husbands than how can one wife be more important than the other? Seems rather unequal to me.

There are very few women in this world who don't have a chance to marry & be a 1st wife. If women who marry keep their covenants, even if their husband doesn't, they will always be a 1st wife. If they choose to break their covenants to & leave a difficult husband to find an easier one, even a righteous one, they take an easier road than the 1st wives who choose to stay with or remain faithful to difficult husbands & so they, for an easier road, forfeit the 1st wife status.

For those who don't have an opportunity to marry at all in this life, there are also many men who have died without marrying. They may get a chance in the next life to be a 1st wife.

Also, I don't think it will make as much difference in the next life as this one what wife we are, we will probably all be on equal standing, though the 1st will always be honored & appreciated by the other wives for her sharing her righteous husband with them.

Edited July 12, 2009 by foreverafter

[Just_A_Guy]

Joseph's marriages behind Emma's back aren't necessarily in contravention of what Foreverafter is saying. D&C 132:64-65 exempts the one who holds the keys of the sealing power (i.e. the President of the Church) from the Law of Sarah (the provision that gives the first wife veto over the husband's decision to take subsequent wives). My recollection, however, is that Foreverafter and I disagree as to the substance of the Law of Sarah.

Personally--and I can't back this up with any sources at present--I have a lot of sympathy for Foreverafter's hints that many in the Church were not living the law of plural marriage properly and that this was, to some degree, a factor in the law's suspension. I've read accounts of how some husbands treated polygamous wives--and, more commonly, how polygamous wives treated each other--that would curdle your blood. I wouldn't be surprised if President Woodruff's explanation were indeed the primary factor in the decision--but I also wouldn't be surprised to hear that OD-1 contains a certain amount of spin. Here you've got a decision that had the potential to--and, in a small way, did--split the Church; but President Woodruff couches the decision in such a manner as to unite the Church in resentment about the big, bad government that's forcing this policy upon them. Maybe someday we'll get a chance to ask him ourselves.

I suppose I could also sympathize with Foreverafter's argument that the first wife always takes pre-eminence; at least theologically. But from a practical standpoint, I think that any polygamist who openly favors one of his wives--even the first one--is just begging for trouble.

Edited July 12, 2009 by Just_A_Guy

[Misshalfway]

I don't think this thread is addressing the concerns of the OP. I think she was worried about the practice of polygamy in the hereafter, not here on earth.

[Moksha]

I don't think this thread is addressing the concerns of the OP. I think she was worried about the practice of polygamy in the hereafter, not here on earth.

Would it not follow that what we are loath to bind on Earth, we would be loath to bind in Heaven?

[LDSVALLEY]

Would it not follow that what we are loath to bind on Earth, we would be loath to bind in Heaven?

My two cents earlier were to the fact that our understanding of things while on Earth is not the same level of understanding that we will have in Heaven. Therefore our loath based on our ability to understand on Earth does not mean it would hold in Heaven where our understanding would be much greater. Nor,of course, does it mean it would not.

The simple thing is there is no gain and much harm by worrying about what might or might not be in Heaven or how we may or may not feel about it when on the other side of the veil.

Personally I have enough to worry about on Earth while I'm here, just trying to remain worthy to even return to Heavenly Father. I'll leave worrying about the different aspects of the afterlife to my time in the afterlife.

[Moksha]

The simple thing is there is no gain and much harm by worrying about what might or might not be in Heaven or how we may or may not feel about it when on the other side of the veil.

Personally I have enough to worry about on Earth while I'm here, just trying to remain worthy to even return to Heavenly Father. I'll leave worrying about the different aspects of the afterlife to my time in the afterlife.

There is undoubtedly wisdom in this. It would dovetail nicely with President Hinckley saying that we don't really know much about this. Speculations of past speculations is good for backroom ruminations, but should never be confused with what can really be known.

[ryanmercer]

I say... worry about THIS life, not the next one... do what you need to in THIS life to live according to God's will, that is all that should matter. Even if polygamy is 110% guaranteed after this life... you shouldn't worry about it. If that is God's will for that life, so be it, just worry about living this one right so you are ensured of GETTING to that life!

[glow_inthe_dark_girl]

my boyfriend and I were talikn a while ago about this, he said poligamy is a part that he doesnt really undestands, he is new in church, I told him it is hard for me to understand it as well, but I think there are some cases where it might had been necesary and we arent here to judege our HF commandments, I said this but I dont know what would I do if today I was told to share my bf,, he is not my husband but Is not an idea I feel happy about...

oh and I dont think there is any evidence that point that u will have to share ur husband, BYoung said that I dont know the full context of the quote, but i might be applied only to the time he was talking about, as for us, we have a living prophet and if he hasn´t said anything about this, you dont have nothign to fear...

I told my bf that there had been some times when God allowed poligamy such as in the case of Abraham somehow he felt better after this explanation...

[its_Chet]

I don't recall who said it, and I don't have the exact quote, but I remember in recent years a General Authority plainly stated that one wife is enough for a man to have and make it to the Celestial Kingdom.

I do believe that there are people who have passed on without having a proper chance to marry, and that they will be given a spouse on the other side of the veil. I believe there are people whose spouses will not be worthy to enter the Celestial Kingdom, and that, rather than leaving the Celestial spouse high and dry, Heavenly Father will give them a spouse. It may be that in some of those cases Heavenly Father might assign a woman to a man who already has one or more wives. It's not impossible. But I think enough men have died without getting married that it shouldn't be considered a common scenario.

I believe it would happen just like Just_a_Guy says: the idea would be discussed between the man and whatever wives or wife he already has, and the woman's consent would be necessary. For that matter, so would the man's. Anyway, that's my understanding of how it has worked on this side of the veil, and I see no reason why it would be different on the other side.

But like I heard the General Authority say, "one wife is enough".

[its_Chet]

I say... worry about THIS life, not the next one... do what you need to in THIS life to live according to God's will, that is all that should matter. Even if polygamy is 110% guaranteed after this life... you shouldn't worry about it. If that is God's will for that life, so be it, just worry about living this one right so you are ensured of GETTING to that life!

That's a good point. I believe that when we make it to the other side of the veil, things will be so different for us that should we learn something about the Gospel that might make us uncomfortable right now, on the other side of the veil we will be better able to handle it.

This much I know: people who have reported visions, out of body experiences, etc., commonly report a profoundly increased ability to understand what is not observable with our five senses. For example, I heard of a woman whose furnace began leaking carbon monoxide into her home, and she had an out of body experience as a result. She looked around the house and almost instantly realized somehow what was going on. She returned to her body and managed to get a window open, got enough fresh air to give her the strength she needed, and began carrying her family members out of the house, saving their lives.

I'm convinced that on the other side of the veil, we will be able to shed our superstitions, societal conventions, and preconceived ideas, and find it easier to accept the Gospel of Jesus Christ more fully than we are able to in this life. I get excited when I wonder what will then be revealed to us. I look to that time in my existence with anticipation, for what I will be able to learn.

Things will be different there. We will be better able to understand them though.

[Traveler]

Polygamy is lust and adultery put together. Is polygamy a sin in your church? Yes or no. I would love to here your answer.

Is tying up you son, placing him on a table with every intent of killing him with a knife (without taking anything else into account) considered a sin in your church? I would love to hear you answer.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

I don't think this thread is addressing the concerns of the OP. I think she was worried about the practice of polygamy in the hereafter, not here on earth.

I think you are so right about you are saying here. Also I believe that for eternal happiness no one will ever be involved in something that they do not really - really want to be a part of.

The Traveler

[beefche]

changed, who are the handmaids? If everyone in the eternities are body and spirit, yet it takes a flesh and blood person to have children, where will we find these flesh/blood handmaids?

[ruthiechan]

Annamauren, what frightens you about polygamy? That he'll prefer his second wife over you? That he'll ignore you, or prefer to be intimate with her, that he won't have enough love for more than one wife? It seems to me that women who are bothered by polygamy feel threatened or insecure in some way. This isn't a knock on you, but I've found that sometimes getting to the heart of the matter works.

PS: And remember, when polygamy is done the Lord's way, we won't have all the earthly issues that people have in polygamous relationships. It'll be done righteously.

[Carl62]

I always wondered how Solomon put up with having 700 wives. Can you imagine 700 wives? That's beyond insanity!

[foreverafter]

I always wondered how Solomon put up with having 700 wives. Can you imagine 700 wives? That's beyond insanity!

All these wives were considered a "whoredom" & an "abomination" that Solomon committed, according to the Book of Mormon. He seems to have lost the spirit & committed adultery with these wives & lusted after women long before he fell for Bathsheba.