Joseph Smith Celebration

[Heather]

Yup good thing. :) And I know I'm so wonderful that my husband would rather be with me than have a dozen other women all at once.

Was Emma given any say in the matter? I'm really interested in that book Snow. I'll have to go get a copy of it myself.

Edit: just got it on Amazon.com. That was the cheapest place I could find it. $ $23.10, and free shipping since I ordered another book to bring the total over $25.

[Ray]

I'm interested in hearing from women who would say they would tell their husbands to marry another woman, in addition to themselves, once they knew it was the will of our Lord, preferably describing how they could handle it.

And I'm also interested in hearing from men who could also handle that, preferably describing how they could handle all of that.

Personally, I don't think it would be as much "fun" as some would imagine, but then again, I can see some positive things about it, especially in how it would give my wife or wives more people to associate with besides children, other men, and other men's wives.

[BenRaines]

Boy I have avoided this one for a long time but decided to put my two cents worth in. First I do not condone plural marriage. I do not believe it should be practiced today and I know of no living prophet, President Gordon B. Hinkley, that endorses it.

I find it amazing in a world that sees nothing wrong with men spawning multiple children by many different women. Men living with men as couples, women living with women as couples. Men having intimate relations (having s*x) with as many women as they want outside of marriage, women having intimate relations (having s*x) with as many men as they want outside of marriage. And yet they have a problem with a man taking on the responsibility of multiple wives and children.

Before you go there I understand the scammers that have many wives and children to mooch off of welfare. That is true married to them or not.

The world is an amazing place but can't we all just get along. :)

[Maureen]

Originally posted by BenRaines@Oct 26 2005, 03:52 PM

...I find it amazing in a world that sees nothing wrong with men spawning multiple children by many different women.  Men living with men as couples, women living with women as couples.  Men having intimate relations (having s*x) with as many women as they want outside of marriage, women having intimate relations (having s*x) with as many men as they want outside of marriage.  And yet they have a problem with a man taking on the responsibility of multiple wives and children...

Ben - Maybe you would be interested in taking this survey - or anyone here might be interested.

I have permission from the surveyor:

http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id...hreadID=2283205

Here's the survey:

http://class.georgiasouthern.edu/psycholog...description.htm

M.

[Snow]

Originally posted by Please@Oct 26 2005, 12:05 PM

Why are you avoiding putting out the proof of your statements? Your dodge is a sick one... pointing a wicked finger at me and calling me Lazy... just so you don't have to back up what you say... with proof...

Put out the names of the children who were supposed to have been conceived through JS...  you sad sack!

←

Peace - when you get like this it is just creepy. Get a grip on yourself before you spiral out of control - again.

I gave you six sources; for you to turn around and say I am avoiding proof and calling me sick is not only dishonest and lazy, but it goes to your already limited credibility.

[Snow]

Originally posted by BenRaines@Oct 26 2005, 02:52 PM

I find it amazing in a world that sees nothing wrong with men spawning multiple children by many different women.  Men living with men as couples, women living with women as couples.  Men having intimate relations (having s*x) with as many women as they want outside of marriage, women having intimate relations (having s*x) with as many men as they want outside of marriage.  And yet they have a problem with a man taking on the responsibility of multiple wives and children.

Before you go there I understand the scammers that have many wives and children to mooch off of welfare.  That is true married to them or not.

The world is an amazing place but can't we all just get along. :)

←

First, a number of the Brethren today do in fact practice plural marraige in that when their wife dies, they get eternally sealed to a second wife. As I recall, permission of the first wife is required to add a second wife so I wonder how they arrange that.

Second, many of the men that practice plural marriage today do not take on the responsibility of multiple wives and children but rather mooch off welfare and their working wives. Not that being on welfare is a sin but deliberately raising a family you can't care for is.

[Snow]

Originally posted by Serg@Oct 26 2005, 08:27 AM

QUOTE(Snow @ Oct 25 2005, 07:20 PM)

"No observable good has come of plural marriage and much bad has come of it. I think that we would all have been better off without it."

          Well Snow, the christian God thinks different from you. The very house of Israel was founded on a plural marriage and the names of the children(12 tribes) will stand on the veri door of the Celestialized City in this world at His coming.  But then again, who am i to judge the Lord?

           

,

←

Egads - we got a wide-eyed true believe who thinks he speaks for God.

In truth, you have no more idea about what God thinks than do I. You simply have faith that God agrees with you. Here's news for you... so does everyone.

[Ray]

Originally posted by Maureen+Oct 26 2005, 05:21 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-BenRaines@Oct 26 2005, 03:52 PM

...I find it amazing in a world that sees nothing wrong with men spawning multiple children by many different women.  Men living with men as couples, women living with women as couples.  Men having intimate relations (having s*x) with as many women as they want outside of marriage, women having intimate relations (having s*x) with as many men as they want outside of marriage.  And yet they have a problem with a man taking on the responsibility of multiple wives and children...

Ben - Maybe you would be interested in taking this survey - or anyone here might be interested.

I have permission from the surveyor:

http://www.aimoo.com/forum/postview.cfm?id...hreadID=2283205

Here's the survey:

http://class.georgiasouthern.edu/psycholog...description.htm

M.

←

I finished the survey and, as typical of most surveys, I think the questions are skewed to the point where a simple Yes/No, Agree/Disagree response won’t give an accurate interpretation of what I meant when giving my answers.

For example, question 71 was:

Compared to men in monogamous marriages, polygamous fathers are ____ attentive to their children.

The options were: more, equally, or less.

I answered equally, because I believe fathers can be as attentive to their children whether they have one or a dozen, but I didn’t mean that all fathers are equally attentive to their children, and I also didn’t mean that a child receives the same type or amount of attention from a father with eleven other children. Or in other words, being attentive is not a matter of only doing one thing, and there are many different types of attention, and I believe a father can give all of his children enough of the attention they need whether a father has one or more children.

Question 104 was::

If a couple has been sealed for eternity in the temple, and one dies, the surviving spouse should be able to be sealed to another spouse for enternity.

The options were:

Yes, for men and women.

Yes, but only men should be free to marry another spouse.

Yes, but only women should be free to marry another spouse.

No, regardless of the surviving spouse’s gender.

I answered Yes, for men and women, but I did not mean that I believe both men and women should have multiple spouses at the same time.

For instance, when a man is sealed to a woman who is not his first wife, he can choose to remain sealed to his first wife and take his second wife as another wife that he will continue to have in eternity. And yes, the second wife has been made aware of this and has signified that she understands and has chosen to accept this.

On the other hand, when a woman is sealed to a man who is not her first husband, she has chosen to have her sealing to her first husband broken, or “loosed”, because she understands that our Lord authorizes women to have only have one husband at a time, whether in time or eternity.

There were also a lot of questions asking which books I “regularly read”, and aside from the standard works and the Ensign, I don’t “regularly” read anything else, but how much do you want to bet my answers will be interpreted to indicate that I am not very informed about what the Church has or has had to say? And btw, there is no indication or definition given for “regularly”, so one person’s “regularly” could be different from another person’s “regularly”, which would also give inaccurate or un-scientific results.

Question 123 was:

I consider Mormon Polygamists to be Mormons.

To which I responded by saying Strongly Agree, but I didn’t mean that I believe they are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Question 128 was:

What would you do if faced with a church policy or program with which you disagree?

The answers were:

Accept it on faith and do my best to carry it out.

Express myself to my leaders and then go along with the policy.

Dissent privately but avoid acting in a way that would generate open conflict with church members.

Gather support for my position from other church members and then petition leaders to change the policy.

I chose “Accept it on faith and do my best to carry it out” with the understanding that “accepting it on faith” means to “accept the assurance of God which has told me that the leaders of the Church are authorized by Him to act in His name”, and with that understanding I would then be able to carry it out to the best of my ability.

But a better answer would have been that I believe the leaders of the Church would never issue a program or policy that I wouldn’t agree with, even though I might face challenges in carrying them out.

Anyway, as I said, I think the results of this survey will be skewed in terms of giving an accurate interpretation of my answers, and the answers of other people, which is typical of most surveys I have ever seen.

[Serg]

"In truth, you have no more idea about what God thinks than do I. You simply have faith that God agrees with you. Here's news for you... so does everyone" (Quote from Snow)

Well, you and our friends Jason and Tao, have a very pessimistic view over "God's" dealings with men and all...

Jason claims to be deist, and said that a deist believed nothing at all, just that we cant know the truth of God, and none can. Well, thats not a new conception, thats far more less graded skepticism than the original, even a gnostic seems more understandable. My point being, not to attak your faith, but to ask you, what in fact do u believe? For your posts are very varied, some against something and some others pro-that something...

Jason that claims that we cant know in fact the TRUTH or "GOD", claimed last time that "the only covenant God made with men was creating them"...well how does he know that if "in fact" he cant?

Well, i'll give you a hint, its called "christian influence" ...

And as to your claim of "my faith", ÿour faith"and "God agrees with me", thats got NO value as an argument, thats like putting a woman to box with a man(nothing against it) , not as to which arguments is weaker but that they apply to different cathegories....

If you're talking about the christian God and his dealings and his servants, I'll respond you according to that faith, mine...its got no sense at all that you would ask something about the christian faith(as plural marriage) and expect me to give you pagan arguments....

Best regards,

[Heather]

Have you seen Ali's daughter box? Yeah, she's awesome. :)

[Ray]

Originally posted by Heather@Oct 27 2005, 12:01 PM

Have you seen Ali's daughter box?  Yeah, she's awesome. :)

←

She may be awesome, but she does not box as well as someone else who can box better than she can, just as someone cannot reveal the will of our Lord better than someone else who has a better understanding of the will of our Lord.

Or in other words, some people may think they are a good prophet, but a better prophet knows better.

[Snow]

Originally posted by Serg@Oct 27 2005, 09:56 AM

"In truth, you have no more idea about what God thinks than do I. You simply have faith that God agrees with you. Here's news for you... so does everyone"  (Quote from Snow)

          Well, you and our friends Jason and Tao, have a very pessimistic view over "God's" dealings with men and all...

          Jason claims to be deist, and said that a deist believed nothing at all, just that we cant know the truth of God, and none can. Well, thats not a new conception, thats far more less graded skepticism than the original, even a gnostic seems more understandable. My point being, not to attak your faith, but to ask you, what in fact do u believe? For your posts are very varied, some against something and some others pro-that something...

          Jason that claims that we cant know in fact the TRUTH or "GOD", claimed last time that "the only covenant God made with men was creating them"...well how does he know that if "in fact" he cant?

          Well, i'll give you a hint, its called "christian influence" ...

        And as to your claim of "my faith", ÿour faith"and "God agrees with me", thats got NO value as an argument, thats like putting a woman to box with a man(nothing against it) , not as to which arguments is weaker but that they apply to different cathegories....

          If you're talking about the christian God and his dealings and his servants, I'll respond you according to that faith, mine...its got no sense at all that you would ask something about the christian faith(as plural marriage) and expect me to give you pagan arguments....

        Best regards,

←

1. I do not have a pessimistic view of God's dealings with man. I am simply dubious abou the many dogmatics claims from man about what God's dealings are.

2. I am a believing, card carrying Mormon. I argue for and against position that I think are erroneous or possibly erroneous regardless of whether they are pro-Mormon positions or not. Mostly I argue against things that sound like nonsense or irrational.

3. I don't know what you are trying to say about Christian faith or pagan arguments. You posted that the Christian God disagrees with me (and by inference agrees with you). You aren't any more privy to God's (and I think there is only one) mind than I am. You simply have a dogmatic view of what God's mind ought to be. I don't necessarily share all your dogma.

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by Snow+Oct 27 2005, 09:24 PM-->

<!--QuoteBegin-Serg@Oct 27 2005, 09:56 AM

"In truth, you have no more idea about what God thinks than do I. You simply have faith that God agrees with you. Here's news for you... so does everyone"  (Quote from Snow)

           Well, you and our friends Jason and Tao, have a very pessimistic view over "God's" dealings with men and all...

          Jason claims to be deist, and said that a deist believed nothing at all, just that we cant know the truth of God, and none can. Well, thats not a new conception, thats far more less graded skepticism than the original, even a gnostic seems more understandable. My point being, not to attak your faith, but to ask you, what in fact do u believe? For your posts are very varied, some against something and some others pro-that something...

          Jason that claims that we cant know in fact the TRUTH or "GOD", claimed last time that "the only covenant God made with men was creating them"...well how does he know that if "in fact" he cant?

          Well, i'll give you a hint, its called "christian influence" ...

        And as to your claim of "my faith", ÿour faith"and "God agrees with me", thats got NO value as an argument, thats like putting a woman to box with a man(nothing against it) , not as to which arguments is weaker but that they apply to different cathegories....

          If you're talking about the christian God and his dealings and his servants, I'll respond you according to that faith, mine...its got no sense at all that you would ask something about the christian faith(as plural marriage) and expect me to give you pagan arguments....

         Best regards,

←

1. I do not have a pessimistic view of God's dealings with man. I am simply dubious abou the many dogmatics claims from man about what God's dealings are.

2. I am a believing, card carrying Mormon. I argue for and against position that I think are erroneous or possibly erroneous regardless of whether they are pro-Mormon positions or not. Mostly I argue against things that sound like nonsense or irrational.

3. I don't know what you are trying to say about Christian faith or pagan arguments. You posted that the Christian God disagrees with me (and by inference agrees with you). You aren't any more privy to God's (and I think there is only one) mind than I am. You simply have a dogmatic view of what God's mind ought to be. I don't necessarily share all your dogma.

←

argue, argue, argue... is that all you can do? What does all that contention do for or against your spiritual capabilities?

[Snow]

Yeah, that's right Peace. I never engage in discussion, I never tell jokes, I never answer questions and I am certainly never use sarcastic. All I can do is argue. You're good and I'm bad.

[Guest Member_Deleted]

Originally posted by Snow@Oct 28 2005, 08:41 AM

Yeah, that's right Peace. I never engage in discussion, I never tell jokes, I never answer questions and I am certainly never use sarcastic. All I can do is argue. You're good and I'm bad.

←

I love it when you call me Peace. :) It was my all time favorite moniker (sp).

And you are right. You are bad and I am good. Thanks for being so easy about telling the truth here. B)

[Maureen]

Originally posted by Please@Oct 28 2005, 08:06 AM

I love it when you call me Peace.  :)  It was my all time favorite moniker (sp).

I almost did that once. A kind of Freudian slip, until I caught myself. I was sure I was correct, but thought it best to call you Please instead. It's good to know I was right though. :)

M.

[Serg]

I would never nor have said that God has more inclination to talk to me than you have. Nor have i INTENTIONALLY insinuated that you are not christian or pagan or anything, i said: Christian God disagrees with you"that was because YOU were arguing towards a behavior that one finds within a CHRISTIAN CHURCH(Lds), and so I only could provide the Christian's point of view, this is the BIBLE. But if you understood it differently, then i'm very sorry, really.

Best regards brother,