Polygamy is affecting my testimony

[HEthePrimate]

It is never good to judge past morality based on our own era, even with the early church

Really? So it might not be ok to kill or steal today, but it's unfair to make judgments about people who killed or stole a few hundred years ago? Okaaaayyyy....

What about God being the same yesterday, today, and forever?

[HEthePrimate]

Bytor,

I do believe JS was a prophet, but I do not believe prophets are infallible. How many antis out there say that JS could not have been a prophet because he did this or that, because he made mistakes or said silly things. If we believe prophets have to be perfect and never make mistakes, then we are setting ourselves up for apostasy because when a prophet does make a mistake, that can destroy our testimony.

Because I accept that the prophets are human beings who can make mistakes, I don't get all upset and leave the Church when they do make mistakes. To paraphrase JS himself, I'm willing to cut them slack as they cut me slack.

Peace,

HEP

[bytor2112]

Bytor,

I do believe JS was a prophet, but I do not believe prophets are infallible. How many antis out there say that JS could not have been a prophet because he did this or that, because he made mistakes or said silly things. If we believe prophets have to be perfect and never make mistakes, then we are setting ourselves up for apostasy because when a prophet does make a mistake, that can destroy our testimony.

Because I accept that the prophets are human beings who can make mistakes, I don't get all upset and leave the Church when they do make mistakes. To paraphrase JS himself, I'm willing to cut them slack as they cut me slack.

Peace,

HEP

But you think that polygamy was from JS and not Heavenly Father...yes? If yes, how do we explain the practice continuing with other Prophets? If we believe that they receive revelation and they were in error, wouldn't the Lord have instructed them?

I guess what I am getting at is, if JS was acting alone....surely the Lord would have made it known to his successors, yet they continued the practice. I agree that Prophets are not infallible, but that would be an enormous mistake don't you think?

[HEthePrimate]

But you think that polygamy was from JS and not Heavenly Father...yes? If yes, how do we explain the practice continuing with other Prophets? If we believe that they receive revelation and they were in error, wouldn't the Lord have instructed them?

I guess what I am getting at is, if JS was acting alone....surely the Lord would have made it known to his successors, yet they continued the practice. I agree that Prophets are not infallible, but that would be an enormous mistake don't you think?

Well, by then the other leaders were invested in the practice of polygamy, too.

BTW, I think blacks not having the priesthood was not God's idea, either.

Our church is so conservative we tend not to question what previous leaders have said. BY decided blacks wouldn't have the priesthood, and it was not seriously questioned by his successors until the 1960s. When Pres. Kimball so persistently asked the question of the Lord in the 1970s, because it bothered him (SWK), the Lord revealed to him to give blacks the priesthood (just as JS had done in his time).

The Lord doesn't appear to shove things down our throat very often. He seems, rather, to work with us at our own pace.

Edited July 30, 2009 by HEthePrimate

[bytor2112]

Well, by then the other leaders were invested in the practice of polygamy, too.

BTW, I think blacks not having the priesthood was not God's idea, either.

Our church is so conservative we tend not to question what previous leaders have said. BY decided blacks wouldn't have the priesthood, and it was not seriously questioned by his successors until the 1960s. When Pres. Kimball so persistently asked the question of the Lord, because it bothered him (SWK), the Lord revealed to him to give blacks the priesthood (just has JS had done in his time).

I tend to agree with you about blacks and the Priesthood. But what about the revelation regarding plural marriage...made up? I am sure you would agree, that if we are listening to the Spirit we can discern whether something is of God or not...particularly when faced with a decision. JS and other Prophets were surely in tune with the Spirit and as Prophets probably received a greater out pouring of the Spirit. Seems to me the Lord would have withdrawn HIS Spirit had JS been "diddling" young girls and other men's wives. Seems as though the Lord would not have elected to have the church continue with that "stigma" attached to it....and to many it is a stigma and a reason why they can't accept the church.

[HEthePrimate]

I don't know where some LDS get the idea that plural marriage is an eternal principle, etc. The Book of Mormon itself condemns the practice, except in very rare cases, which leads me to wonder why some Mormons so eagerly defend the practice and tell people it'll be practiced in the next life, or even that we'll be required to do so(!). How does that make sense?

[Guest Alana]

I got the impression that polygamy would be practiced in the next life because sealings follow the pattern of polygamy, as in one man can be sealed to many women.

[bytor2112]

I don't know where some LDS get the idea that plural marriage is an eternal principle, etc. The Book of Mormon itself condemns the practice, except in very rare cases, which leads me to wonder why some Mormons so eagerly defend the practice and tell people it'll be practiced in the next life, or even that we'll be required to do so(!). How does that make sense?

We know it is an Eternal principle because men have been sealed to more than one woman, Elder Nelson recently was sealed to another woman. It is not a requirement for salvation or exaltation and I don't believe we will be REQUIRED to do so. But, it will be practiced...by everyone? Dunno.

I posted some interesting commentary from Elder McConkie on the subject.

Doctrine of Plural Marriage

by Bruce R. McConkie

According to the Lord's law of marriage, it is lawful that a man have only one wife at a time, unless by revelation the Lord commands plurality of wives in the new and everlasting covenant. (D. & C. 49:15-17.) Speaking of "the doctrine of plurality of wives," the Prophet said: "I hold the keys of this power in the last days; for there is never but one on earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred; and I have constantly said no man shall have but one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise." (Teachings, p. 324.)

The Lord, by the mouth of his Prophet Jacob, gave similar direction to the Nephites: "For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none; For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts. Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes. For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things." (Jacob 2:27-30.)

From such fragmentary scriptural records as are now available, we learn that the Lord did command some of his ancient saints to practice plural marriage. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob -- among others (D. & C. 132) -- conformed to this ennobling and exalting principle; the whole history of ancient Israel was one in which plurality of wives was a divinely accepted and approved order of matrimony. Those who entered this order at the Lord's command, and who kept the laws and conditions appertaining to it, have gained for themselves eternal exaltation in the highest heaven of the celestial world.

In the early days of this dispensation, as part of the promised restitution of all things, the Lord revealed the principle of plural marriage to the Prophet. Later the Prophet and leading brethren were commanded to enter into the practice, which they did in all virtue and purity of heart despite the consequent animosity and prejudices of worldly people. After Brigham Young led the saints to the Salt Lake Valley, plural marriage was openly taught and practiced until the year 1890. At that time conditions were such that the Lord by revelation withdrew the command to continue the practice, and President Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto directing that it cease. (Discourses of Wilford Woodruff, pp. 213-218.) Obviously the holy practice will commence again after the Second Coming of the Son of Man and the ushering in of the millennium. (Isa. 4.)

Plural marriage is not essential to salvation or exaltation. Nephi and his people were denied the power to have more than one wife and yet they could gain every blessing in eternity that the Lord ever offered to any people. In our day, the Lord summarized by revelation the whole doctrine of exaltation and predicated it upon the marriage of one man to one woman. (D. & C. 132:1-28.) Thereafter he added the principles relative to plurality of wives with the express stipulation that any such marriages would be valid only if authorized by the President of the Church. (D. & C. 132:7, 29-66.)

All who pretend or assume to engage in plural marriage in this day, when the one holding the keys has withdrawn the power by which they are performed, are guilty of gross wickedness.

Edited July 30, 2009 by bytor2112

[Guest Alana]

Nice quote of Bruce R. McConkie. I'm siding with him on this one.

[bytor2112]

President John Taylor:

Where did this commandment come from in relation to polygamy? It also came from God. It was a revelation given unto Joseph Smith from God, and was made binding upon His servants. When this system was first introduced among this people, it was one of the greatest crosses that ever was taken up by any set of men since the world stood. Joseph Smith told others; he told me, and I can bear witness of it, "that if this principle was not introduced, this Church and kingdom could not proceed." When this commandment was given, it was so far religious, and so far binding upon the Elders of this Church that it was told them if they were not prepared to enter into it, and to stem the torrent of opposition that would come in consequence of it, the keys of the kingdom would be taken from them. When I see any of our people, men or women, opposing a principle of this kind, I have years ago set them down as on the high road to apostacy, and I do to-day; I consider them apostates, and not interested in this Church and kingdom.

[its_Chet]

Am I the only one who thinks these acronyms are stupid?

Looking that way.

[its_Chet]

Well, by then the other leaders were invested in the practice of polygamy, too.

BTW, I think blacks not having the priesthood was not God's idea, either.

Our church is so conservative we tend not to question what previous leaders have said. BY decided blacks wouldn't have the priesthood, and it was not seriously questioned by his successors until the 1960s. When Pres. Kimball so persistently asked the question of the Lord in the 1970s, because it bothered him (SWK), the Lord revealed to him to give blacks the priesthood (just as JS had done in his time).

The Lord doesn't appear to shove things down our throat very often. He seems, rather, to work with us at our own pace.

I, for one, am inclined not to imagine that I know better than the Prophets. When I hear of something that happened in Church History that sounds wrong or strange, I dig deeper and I always find an explanation that makes sense of it.

But even if I didn't, I have a testimony which is stronger than any misunderstanding or misconception that results from mortal observations or short sighted interpretations in books. When the Holy Spirit says the Church is true, it doesn't matter if someone thinks Joseph Smith was a philanderer, or that William Law's or Warren Parrish's hypocritical allegations were true. I know better, courtesy of the Holy Spirit.

If I could be half the man Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were, I think I'd probably have my calling and election made sure.

[Moksha]

Am I the only one who thinks these acronyms are stupid?

JFK, FDR, JS, BY. These are handy ways for not having to type the whole name.

.

[its_Chet]

If I could be half the man Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were, I think I'd probably have my calling and election made sure.

I just realized that might sound a bit exclusionary. Let me add this:

If I were a woman, I'd say instead that If I could be half the woman that Eliza R. Snow or Vilate Kimball were, I think I'd probably have my calling and election made sure.

:)

[Wingnut]

Am I the only one who thinks these acronyms are stupid?

No.

Looking that way.

[Moksha]

Well, by then the other leaders were invested in the practice of polygamy, too.

BTW, I think blacks not having the priesthood was not God's idea, either.

The practice of polygamy nearly destroyed the Church. It is still a major PR problem for the Church. In testimony before Congress, Elder Jeffery R. Holland said, that marriage should be between one man and one woman. If only this had been the policy all along the Church would never have been associated with polygamy.

We are still having PR repercussions with the Priesthood Ban. If President McKay has followed up on his discussion with Sterling McMurrin and told the audience in General Conference that the ban was not doctrinal back in 1954, we would have been lauded as forward thinking. Church membership world wide would have been much larger. We might even have better music in our hymn books

:)

[Justice]

If you view it as a skin color was not allowed to have the Priesthood, it's easy to take it as racial. However, it was a tribe that could not hold the Priesthood, just as the Priesthood was regulated in olden days. It just so happened that the tribe was made up mostly of people with dark skin. Joseph Smith ordained blacks to the Priesthood, but not all. There were some white people from that same tribe that were not allowed to have the Priesthood. I don't remember exact names, dates, or how many, but I do remember learning about them in college.

[Vort]

The practice of polygamy nearly destroyed the Church. It is still a major PR problem for the Church. In testimony before Congress, Elder Jeffery R. Holland said, that marriage should be between one man and one woman. If only this had been the policy all along the Church would never have been associated with polygamy.

We are still having PR repercussions with the Priesthood Ban. If President McKay has followed up on his discussion with Sterling McMurrin and told the audience in General Conference that the ban was not doctrinal back in 1954, we would have been lauded as forward thinking. Church membership world wide would have been much larger. We might even have better music in our hymn books

:)

Wow. Too bad Moksha isn't the senior apostle. He has such a deep and profound understanding of Godly truths!!! He'd set things straight in short order!!!!!

Oh, well. I guess we'll just have to hobble along with David O. McKay, Joseph Fielding Smith, Harold B. Lee, Spencer W. Kimball, Ezra Taft Benson, Howard W. Hunter, Gordon B. Hinckley, Thomas S. Monson, Boyd K. Packer, L. Tom Perry, Russell M. Nelson, Dallin H. Oaks...

Poor us.

[JohnnyRudick]

Would like some more choices in songs though.

That would be nice:mellow:

Don't ya think:mellow:

:)

Bro. Rudick

[FunkyTown]

Quoted for truth. I like "Our God is an Awesome God" and "Amazing Grace".

Would like some more choices in songs though.

That would be nice:mellow:

Don't ya think:mellow:

:)

Bro. Rudick

[its_Chet]

The practice of polygamy nearly destroyed the Church. It is still a major PR problem for the Church. In testimony before Congress, Elder Jeffery R. Holland said, that marriage should be between one man and one woman. If only this had been the policy all along the Church would never have been associated with polygamy.

We are still having PR repercussions with the Priesthood Ban. If President McKay has followed up on his discussion with Sterling McMurrin and told the audience in General Conference that the ban was not doctrinal back in 1954, we would have been lauded as forward thinking. Church membership world wide would have been much larger. We might even have better music in our hymn books

:)

I don't know about you, but when I sing "We Thank Thee O God for a Prophet", I mean it.

[JohnnyRudick]

Also songs like

(if I got it even close)

"Life's Railway to Heaven"

is a nice song too.

Remember singing it in camp as a kid and many other songs like it:)

They would hold up boards with the words up front.

This was outside in the woods in a rugged outside amphitheater type setting.

Real fun:)

I am so glad I was sent to This Bible Camp way up in the mountains:)

My Family was Catholic but I was in a foster home for a while.

I think I lucked out:)

Bro. Rudick

[pam]

Am I the only one who thinks these acronyms are stupid?

Not necessarily stupid..but throughout this thread the Prophets have lost names. They have become just initials. Just doesn't seem very respectful to me. Just my opinion.

[Carl62]

Does this mean that we should now start spelling out Brigham Young University-Idaho instead of just BYU-I? At times, I like my acronyms. Just also happens I like my T.V., my VCR and DVD players, and even my C.D./IPod combination in my SUV. I'm currently reading the BOM and D&C as well as the GC's of The COJCOLDS which are always held in SLC. Oh and BTW, IMHO, ELO rocks and MTV sucks!

Edited July 31, 2009 by Carl62

[pam]

Is that not speaking of a school verses a Prophet of God?