Polygamy Revisited

[rubondfan2]

Please consider the FACT that polygamy does not necessarily equate repression of women any more than men holding the Priesthood equates repression of women.

Some women (myself included) prefer both.

There are MANY benefits to living in polygamy and if I were young again, I might seriously consider it.

Of course in some instances it has its problems, but then, so does monogamy!

I agree with you, DeborahC. Thanks for your post.

I've opted to start a new thread to present some ideas my wife and I have been discussing about this lately. It's a long post, so please bear with me.

I find it interesting that the subject of Polygamy is gaining more of a foothold in everyday conversation throughout the world, and specifically right here at home in our North American region. The recent thread which started by quoting an article which was published in 2007 may seem to mitigate the level of attention this issue has come to gain within our society, however I would counter that in recent years we have had quite a bit of media attention being given to this subject. HBO's "Big Love" has been on for a few years now. TLC's "Sister Wives" is now gaining momentum. The discourse with respect to polygamist groups in Texas, Arizona, Colorado and other places (like Canada) in the news media has increased (at least in my eyes).

I tend to ask "why" whenever any topic is disseminated to us by the media. Given that the news media as a whole is controlled by only a few, elite individuals, I for one believe that what we see in our media doesn't just arrive there through circumstance or chance. It is purposefully and thoughtfully put before us.

First, I will say that I believe Polygamy to be an eternal principle and I believe it will be practiced in the Celestial Kingdom, certainly, and likely during the Millenium. I also believe that each of us have our agency and no one is going to be forced to enter into a marriage relationship, monogamous or otherwise, against their will. Our understanding now, in our mortal state is so much less than it will be beyond the veil. There is so much knowledge to be gained; so much eternal wisdom yet to be discovered. Who of any of us can propose to judge the righteousness or worthiness of the principle of Polygamy in our mortal state here on earth and under our current state of preparation for such a practice?

Are there groups today practicing Polygamy illegally and for reasons that fly in the face of morality and good judgment? Certainly. Are there ENTIRE CULTURES today practicing Polygamy in which all parties are respected, nourished, loved, supported and whose families are stronger than many of our own here in our "Western", "enlightened" or "civilized" culture? Absolutely.

It's no debate that Polygamy has been practiced at various times throughout the history of mankind. In fact, up until just a few hundred years ago, the practice was more prolific worldwide than it even is today. It has only been in recent history, through the influence of the Catholic Church (gosh, they seem to be at the heart of a lot of major changes in world history, don't they? Hmm...) that the practice of Polygamy began to take a beating.

Having said all of this, I would like to present the following opinion.

Perhaps Polygamy is very much an eternal principle that Heavenly Father will re-establish among His kingdom as soon as He possibly can. Perhaps through Polygamy (the righteous entry into it, that is), we would see much stronger family units. We would see closer knit communities, we would see less divorce, less abuse and greater love and care given to our worthy and righteous mothers/wives and to our children.

Now, before some of you jump on me with quotes like this one:

I'm sorry, I just don't understand how. The bonds of marriage are meant to be between one man and one woman, right?

I would like to answer that up front by encouraging care in putting words in the Lord's mouth. The proclamation specifically says, "...marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God..." and a few lines later says, "Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan." It does not say "between ONE man and ONE woman" only between A man and A woman. To assume that the singular expression of "A" is meant to imply an eternal principal of only a one to one relationship would be fallacic, in my opinion. The "...marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God..." is most certainly correct and I don't see how Polygamy, under righteous and approved circumstances, and properly re-instituted under the direction of the First Presidency or the Lord Himself would be in conflict with this statement.

Here's some of my logic.

Divorce has three primary root causes... 1) Infidelity, 2) Finances and 3) Selfishness (broad, yes... but supported by the words of at least one of our recent prophets)

In a properly and righteously functioning Polygamist marriage, logic would tend to lean toward a massive reduction in infidelity. Apart from quippy logic such as, "gosh, who would have the time to cheat if they had more than one wife?" or, "well, with all that sex going on in the marriage, no man would have the sexual drive or desire to stray for more"; I think there are some other, much more worthy and less anecdotal reasons for infidelity to decrease. Namely, a true and lasting marriage is one in which there is intimacy, understanding, love, kindness and many other Christlike attributes too numerous to mention. Monogamous couples spend their entire lives here on earth striving to master such a relationship. Many of us fall woefully short of meeting the emotional needs of our spouses (mostly the wives suffer). How much more emotionally supported would (or could) a woman be in an intimate relationship if they had sister wives... other women who can certainly relate to one another on ways that no man (or very, very few in my experience) could ever do. The biggest barrier to success in a Polygamist marriage, in my opinion, would be jealousy. But who is to say that with the blessings of the Lord and the blessings of temple ordinances, that each of us couldn't come to see the world and marital relationships through eyes other than jealous ones?

Jealousy, after all, is really a form of selfishness. Which leads me to one of the other "big three" causes of divorce I mentioned earlier. What better way to overcome selfishness but to ADD another spouse or spouses to the equation. Learning to meet the needs of not just one person, but 2 or more... and all of the additional children which would result from such a union. With the support of multiple mature adults in a loving, trusting, open and intimate relationship... imagine the amount of learning that could take place? Multiple people loving and trusting one another and able to see a problem or an issue from a different perspective... how wonderful would that be? Just think in your own marriages today how many times the two of you get all wrapped around the axle on a particular issue? You then bring in an outsider; a Bishop, a counselor, a trusted friend to look at your situation and offer advice from their perspective. How much easier might it be for a marriage with 4, 5 or even 6 adults bringing each of their own ideas, thoughts, inspirations and gifts into the equation? I'm not saying it would all be perfect and rosy all of the time, but I could certainly envision such a relationship, if conceived in righteousness and sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise to be so rewarding and so much closer to the love and formation of community that Heavenly Father enjoys. (And yes, I believe our Heavenly Father has more than one wife... which actually might be another reason why we don't ever hear the name of Heavenly Mother spoken... something to think about, eh?)

And lastly, finances. Who is to say that one or more of the sister wives could not engage in income earning activities to help support the overall needs of the family. Nowhere in the Proclamation does it say that the man has to be the only one earning money. With multiple adults in the family community each pitching in with their strengths, how much stronger could that marriage and family become? I've found that women are natural entrepreneurs as well... how awesome to have 2, 3, or 4 women working together to come up with some cool business model to help earn income for the family... an income that could even make it easier for Dad to be home more... nurturing, caring, loving and raising his children in ways only a worthy patriarch and Priesthood holder can do?

I think we may be undergoing some preparatory phases on a road which eventually leads to the re-institution of Polygamy... sometime within most of our lifetimes right here on this forum. Clearly, the Lord is not going to be able to just tap on President Monson's shoulder next week and out of the blue reveal that Polygamy is now back in practice. There is going to have to be some groundwork laid. There are going to have to be societal and legal changes to take place. And there will have to have been a lot of dialogue, teaching and understanding to have taken place.

Are my wife and I ready to run out and start lobbying our leaders to re-institute this practice (as if that's even the way it works... ha ha)? Heck no. Would she and I even be "able" to live within a Polygamist model? That remains to be seen. But has our dialogue of the subject increased between us as a direct result of the attention it has been given in the media the past several years? Yes. Yes it has. And the results of our discussions have been very interesting. Very humbling. The subject keeps coming around for us again and again. Each time with a little deeper understanding; a little more open mindedness and a little more maturity.

Would love to hear the thoughts of the forum on this topic. I know it's been discussed before, but not in precisely the same way, nor with the same perspective that we have now in 2011.

[Backroads]

Weirdly enough, I've never really had much of a problem with polygamy. I have some cousins who were in polygamous relationships that weren't good and escaped, but the principal itself does not bother me.

[mnn727]

My only problem with polygamy is the way some offshoots run it - the FLDS for one,

with compounds, under age marriages, etc.

Say what you want about Big Love -- In general I like the way they (usually) handle their marriage.

Edited January 20, 2011 by mnn727

[Seminarysnoozer]

I think that polygamy is one of those concepts that we may find is a higher law that really only works when everyone and everything around is perfect. I think it is hard to plug into a world that is corrupt as ours. I think it is kind of like the law of consecration that would take 100% effort from everyone in the community.

I do have a couple thoughts though about some of the things people say are good reasons to have it that I don't think will necessarily be of issue in the next life. 1. If it is a matter of having more "help" around, from which one of your brothers or sisters in the Celestial kingdom would not already "help" out as if that person was a family member already? We will all be sealed to each other as one family in the Celestial Kingdom already, isn't that part of the purpose of the spirit of Elijah already? Why would there need to be a separate unique "sealing" to another individual other than maybe the issue of procreation which is my second point. But if it is just to have more "help" around like you say in your list of reasons for it, like bringing in another person for their opinion or financial help or moral support etc. I don't think those things will be lacking in the Celestial Kingdom anyways. I don't think there will be a need for a second marriage type relationship so that there is more moral support or a third opinion. Think about how close the Godhead is right now. Is HF married to Jesus, no, that is ridiculous and yet they can be of one mind and thought without being married. So, that to me is not a reason for polygamy.

2. Second point. (Maybe estrogen talking here, sorry) We really do not understand the procreation process for having spirit children. We do not know, for example if there is a gestational period. How do we know it is not instantaneous? If it is instantaneous then there is no need for multiple wives as far as procreation goes because there would be wives waiting around. Here we deliver in pain, and let me tell you, after 4 children it isn't just the actual birthing process that is painful, a lot of the pregnancy is too. I am kind of hoping, as suggested, the painful aspect of childbirth and pregnancy are not there in the next life, if it is a similar process. To assume that a man can impregnate several women at the same time is too much of a blinded assumption. So, we really don't know if it is necessary to have multiple wives to have numerous offspring. If one man can have numerous offspring I believe it possible that one woman can have numerous offspring. If I have any say in how the perfect body is designed that I get in the next life I might recommend that the birthing process last about a twinkling of an eye's amount of time, then my husband won't have to have another wife, I'll be ready for the next one before he will. (that's enough for now, ....I think I need an Advil)

[rubondfan2]

I think that polygamy is one of those concepts that we may find is a higher law that really only works when everyone and everything around is perfect. I think it is hard to plug into a world that is corrupt as ours. I think it is kind of like the law of consecration that would take 100% effort from everyone in the community.

I would tend to agree with you on this Seminarysnoozer. No doubt that Polygamy, in the form in which it intended to be instituted is a form of higher law. I would also offer up the speculation that perhaps properly instituted Polygamy is one of the tools in Heavenly Father's toolchest to move us toward the Law of Consecration. In my view, the Law of Consecration and Polygamy are closely tied, and the former would be difficult for many to live without the latter instituted.

Thanks for your post. I giggled at the Advil comment. But alas... no laugh button.

[rameumptom]

Relationships are hard. And marriage, where two people must learn to cooperate, bargain, and compromise, is even harder. Now add in more people, and the issues become more complex.

I can see how it could be good in some cases. If the wives/sisters truly become like sisters, they can work together to ensure their husband does not become abusive or intolerant with a spouse. We think so often on how women were abused in some of these relationships, and I'm sure it is true. Yet, I wonder if the statistics are any better/worse than in monogamous relationships?

With polygamy, a woman can be fairly certain that her husband will be with one of the wives. In monogamy, we have men cheating on their wives constantly, and the wife often does not find out. Or if she does find out, it is usually in a shocking way: she now has AIDS, finds a letter, etc. I don't see this as being more beneficial to anyone.

That plural marriage done correctly requires prophetic consent means there is not free love or sleeping around going on (at least there should not be). There must be strict guidelines for those involved, and a severe punishment for the man who cheats or abuses.

[Stacy]

The law of Jesus Christ is the higher law. And as detailed in the book of Mormon the Law of Jesus Christ is given to this land. If the higher law was polgamy we would be practicing it now. Zion must be established according to the laws of Jesus Christ.

The principle of monogamy is first established with our first parents Adam and Eve.

Genesis 2:22-24

And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

Polygamy seems to have been one of the down falls that lead to the flood Genesis 6:2-3 states

That the Sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all the chose.

And the Lord said My spirit shall not always strive with man....

The flood is promised:

And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth...Genesis 6:6-7

But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord. Genesis 6:8

And the Lord makes a covenant with Noah and Noah builds an ark and his family is saved along with one male and one female of various animals.

The principle of Monogamy is expressed through out the Holy Scriptures even in our own D&C we read.

Wherefore, it is lawful that he should have one wife, and they twain shall be bone flesh, and all this that the earth might answer the end of its creation. D&C 49:16

Note he said lawful!

The law is really important to us! For there is a law given and a punishment affix and a repentance grated. And mercy claimeth penitent. Nephi 42:22-24

I repeat as we learn in the book of Mormon the law of Christ is given to this land. And we must serve the God of this land or be swept off. Ether 2

In D&C 101 the Lord clearly says:

I [the Lord] established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose...

the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles.

In D&C 98 we read:

And now, verily I [the Lord] say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them.

And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me.

And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil.

Polygamy was and is illegal in America and according to Noah Webster one of our founding fathers: the offender is punishable for polygamy. Such is the fact in christian countries." Webster 1828

In 1835 the Church accepted the Articles of Marriage as the will of God. The general population of the church followed the law of the land regrading marriage and the articles of marriage was and is harmonious with the laws of this land.

Polygamy was practiced by some leaders in the church but was rejected by the assembly to be the will of God.

It is my firm conviction that polygamy among the early saints is one of the things that frustrated the establishment of Zion. And they were drove out by the chastening hand of our loving God for he said that he would not allow the children of the Kingdom to pollute the holy land...which is in Missouri. D&C 84:59

Live close to the spirit so you can test all counsel.

for....ye are commanded in all things to ask of God, who giveth liberally; and that which the Spirit testifies unto you even so I would that ye should do in all holiness of heart, walking uprightly before me, considering the end of your salvation, doing all things with prayer and thanksgiving, that ye may not be seduced by evil spirits, or doctrines of devils, or the commandments of men; for some are of men, and others of devils. D&C 46:7

The Articles of Marriage were removed and section 132 was inserted around 1852 when polygamy became practiced church wide in Utah.

wo unto him that has the law given, yea, that has all the commandments of God, like unto us, and that transgresseth them, and that wasteth the days of his probation, for awful is his state!

O that cunning plan of the evil one! O the vainness, and the frailties, and the foolishness of men! When they are learned they think they are wise, and they hearken not unto the counsel of God, for they set it aside, supposing they know of themselves, wherefore, their wisdom is foolishness and it profiteth them not. And they shall perish. 2Nephi9:28

The Lord says,

...whoso receiveth not my voice is not acquainted with my voice, and is not of me.

And by this you may know the righteous from the wicked, and that the whole world groaneth under sin and darkness even now.

And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief, and because you have treateddlightly the things you have received—

Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation.

And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all.

And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant (baptism D&C22), even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written—

That they may bring forth fruit meet for their Father’s kingdom; otherwise there remaineth a scourge and judgment to be poured out upon the children of Zion.

Verily, verily, I say unto you who now hear my words, which are my voice, blessed are ye inasmuch as you receive these things;

For I will forgive you of your sins with this commandment—that you remain steadfast in your minds in solemnity and the spirit of prayer, in bearing testimony to all the world of those things which are communicated unto you.

Therefore, ago ye into all the world; and unto whatsoever place ye cannot go ye shall send, that the testimony may go from you into all the world unto every creature.-D&C 84

For he that diligently seeketh shall find; and the mysteries of God shall be unfolded unto them, by the power of the Holy Ghost, as well in these times as in times of old, and as well in times of old as in times to come; wherefore, the course of the Lord is one eternal round. 1Nep 10:19

Hearken, O ye people of my church, saith the Lord your God, and hear the word of the Lord concerning you—

The Lord who shall suddenly come to his temple; the Lord who shall come down upon the world with a curse to judgment; yea, upon all the nations that forget God, and upon all the ungodly among you.

For he shall make bare his holy arm in the eyes of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth shall see the salvation of their God....

Go ye out from Babylon. Be ye clean that bear the vessels of the Lord....

Go ye out from among the nations, even from Babylon, from the midst of wickedness, which is spiritual Babylon.

D&C 133

Abide ye in the liberty wherewith ye are made free entangle not yourselves in sin but let your hands be clean, until the Lord comes. D&C 88:86

Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart I have written my law, fear ye not the reproach of men, neither be ye afraid of their revilings. -2nep 8:7 -Isa 51:7

"I hated polygamy in my heart"

-Helen Kimbell daughter of Heber Kimbell

Helen married to Joseph Smith 1843 at the age of 14 and her father had 39 wives

Peace and love my beloved friends In the name of Jesus Christ Amen

Edited January 26, 2011 by Stacy
added Gen. 2:22 and 2:23

[Dravin]

The law of Jesus Christ is the higher law. And as detailed in the book of Mormon the Law of Jesus Christ is given to this land. If the higher law was polgamy we would be practicing it now. Zion must be established according to the laws of Jesus Christ.

You do realize by that logic that the Law of Consecration is a lessor law? That's a conclusion that Elder Hales disagrees with:

Tithing: A Test of Faith with Eternal Blessings

Tithing has a special purpose as a preparatory law. Early in this dispensation, the Lord commanded certain members of the Church to live the higher law of consecration—a law received by covenant. When this covenant was not kept, great tribulations came upon the Saints. 7 The law of consecration was then withdrawn. In its place the Lord revealed the law of tithing for the whole Church. 8 On July 8, 1838, He declared:

It also means that divorce, which is currently allowed, is the higher law over remarriage being adultery? Of course that's a conclusion that Elder Oaks disagrees with:

Divorce

The kind of marriage required for exaltation—eternal in duration and godlike in quality—does not contemplate divorce. In the temples of the Lord, couples are married for all eternity. But some marriages do not progress toward that ideal. Because “of the hardness of [our] hearts,” the Lord does not currently enforce the consequences of the celestial standard. He permits divorced persons to marry again without the stain of immorality specified in the higher law. Unless a divorced member has committed serious transgressions, he or she can become eligible for a temple recommend under the same worthiness standards that apply to other members.

[Stacy]

The Law of Consecration would not be effected:

The fundamental principle of [the United Order] was the private ownership of property. Each man owned his portion, or inheritance, or stewardship, with an absolute title, which he could alienate, or hypothecate, or otherwise treat as his own. The Church did not own all of the property, and the life under the United Order was not a communal life, as the Prophet Joseph, himself said. The United Order is an individualistic system, not a communal system. -J. Reuben Clark, Jr.

------

Section 42:74-75 covers the Lords will concerning adultery and fornication

Polygamy and polyandry are both adultery under the law of Christ.

Polyandry is when a woman has two or more husbands at the same time.

11 of Joseph Smiths wives were already married when he married them.

[bytor2112]

It is my firm conviction that polygamy among the early saints is one of the things that frustrated the establishment of Zion. And they were drove out by the chastening hand of our loving God for he said that he would not allow the children of the Kingdom to pollute the holy land...which is in Missouri.

So, what are your thoughts on being sealed to another wife if your first wife dies first? (Like...Elder Nelson) Obviously, plural marriage will continue at some point.

Edited January 26, 2011 by bytor2112

[Seminarysnoozer]

So, what are your thoughts on being sealed to another wife if your first wife dies first? (Like...Elder Nelson) Obviously, plural marriage will continue at some point.

Is there anything that says that it is possible to have eternal increase with more than one wife? In reality all those that are in the Celestial Kingdom are sealed to each other by way of being on this Earth and linked up directly or adopted into the lineage of Abraham. I think so long as one takes on that level of commitment through the appropriate covenant promises with the right authority then one could be in that Kingdom without a partner. I think the promise is an opportunity to be together forever. ...not set in stone. Otherwise, if one of the partners of a two person marriage was unfaithful in their covenants it would pull down the other. I think these things will be worked out later. I don't think it is as obvious as you suggest. Maybe the second or the first wife of Elder Nelson finds the perfect partner from a half faithful marriage in the next life. Us being all sealed to each other at that level might allow for such movement in the partnerships, possibly. God will work it out.

[bytor2112]

Is there anything that says that it is possible to have eternal increase with more than one wife? In reality all those that are in the Celestial Kingdom are sealed to each other by way of being on this Earth and linked up directly or adopted into the lineage of Abraham. I think so long as one takes on that level of commitment through the appropriate covenant promises with the right authority then one could be in that Kingdom without a partner. I think the promise is an opportunity to be together forever. ...not set in stone. Otherwise, if one of the partners of a two person marriage was unfaithful in their covenants it would pull down the other. I think these things will be worked out later. I don't think it is as obvious as you suggest. Maybe the second or the first wife of Elder Nelson finds the perfect partner from a half faithful marriage in the next life. Us being all sealed to each other at that level might allow for such movement in the partnerships, possibly. God will work it out.

Or..it might be as simple as plural marriage will continue.

[Dravin]

The Law of Consecration would not be effected:

The fundamental principle of [the United Order] was the private ownership of property. Each man owned his portion, or inheritance, or stewardship, with an absolute title, which he could alienate, or hypothecate, or otherwise treat as his own. The Church did not own all of the property, and the life under the United Order was not a communal life, as the Prophet Joseph, himself said. The United Order is an individualistic system, not a communal system. -J. Reuben Clark, Jr.

One of the more impressive non sequiturs I've seen.

[Stacy]

Quote:"So, what are your thoughts on being sealed to another wife if your first wife dies first? (Like...Elder Nelson) Obviously, plural marriage will continue at some point."

I am sure it will be according to the desires of people's hearts. And I know that vanity possesseth many who are desirous to know the certainty of things to come.

link to Webster 1828 dictionary word vanity

Search => [word] => vanity :: 1828 Dictionary :: Search the 1828 Noah Webster's Dictionary of the English Language (FREE) :: 1828.mshaffer.com

[bytor2112]

Quote:"So, what are your thoughts on being sealed to another wife if your first wife dies first? (Like...Elder Nelson) Obviously, plural marriage will continue at some point."

I am sure it will be according to the desires of people's hearts. And I know that vanity possesseth many who are desirous to know the certainty of things to come. link to Webster 1828 dictionary

Search => [word] => vanity :: 1828 Dictionary :: Search the 1828 Noah Webster's Dictionary of the English Language (FREE) :: 1828.mshaffer.com

So...the Gospel of Jesus Christ feeds men's vanities? Cool. Guilty as charged...I want to know what happens when I die...with a certainty...don't you?

[Stacy]

Quote:One of the more impressive non sequiturs I've seen.

Just what is so illogical about a quote from J. Reuben Clark, Jr. of the First Presidency (1871-1961)

The J. Reuben Clark Law School, on the campus of Brigham Young University, is named after this prominent lawyer and member of the First Presidency -http://www.law2.byu.edu/

Edited January 26, 2011 by Stacy

[Stacy]

Vanity is not pleasing to God and has infact brought the whole church under condemnation.

D&C 84:55-57

Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation.

And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all.

And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant (Baptism D&C22), even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written—

It is just good to know that:

The atonement of Jesus Christ bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead; and the resurrection of the dead bringeth back men into the presence of God; and thus they are restored into his presence, to be judged according to their works, according to the law and justice. Alma 42:23

[Dravin]

Quote:One of the more impressive non sequiturs I've seen.

Just what is so illogical about a quote from J. Reuben Clark, Jr. of the First Presidency (1871-1961)

The J. Reuben Clark Law School, on the campus of Brigham Young University, is named after this prominent lawyer and member of the First Presidency -http://www.law2.byu.edu/

Your quote in no way address my comments. It's like responding to the objection that apples aren't citrus by quoting someone saying apples are delicious. And his credentials are meaningless as the flaw isn't in the quote but your application, the quote could be from the Lord himself and your response would be a non sequitur.

Edited January 26, 2011 by Dravin

[slamjet]

Vanity is not pleasing to God and has infact brought the whole church under condemnation.

D&C 84:55-57

Which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation.

And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all.

And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant (Baptism D&C22), even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written—

It is just good to know that:

The atonement of Jesus Christ bringeth to pass the resurrection of the dead; and the resurrection of the dead bringeth back men into the presence of God; and thus they are restored into his presence, to be judged according to their works, according to the law and justice. Alma 42:23

Is this not looking forward? So are you of yourself guilty of your definition of vanity? Also, Don't you understand that the Atonement is more than making resurrection possible? That the Atonement also covers sin and suffering, both physical and spiritual? And how do you explain this:

2 Nephi 31:20 Wherefore, ye must press forward with a steadfastness in Christ, having a perfect brightness of hope, and a love of God and of all men. Wherefore, if ye shall press forward, feasting upon the word of Christ, and endure to the end, behold, thus saith the Father: Ye shall have eternal life.

Press forward, endure to the end, Eternal life; so when the prophets were shown what is to come, it's vanity. So when we go forward, feasting on the Word of God with a perfect brightness of hope, When we go to the Temple to learn about things to come, this is all vanity?

You're interpretation of the Atonement is very, very, very narrow. So narrow, you cannot see how broad and all encompassing it is. And let's try reading the whole chapter so that the scriptures can be used in their proper context.

[Stacy]

Quote'You're interpretation of the Atonement is very, very, very narrow. So narrow, you cannot see how broad and all encompassing it is. And let's try reading the whole chapter so that the scriptures can be used in their proper context."

Denying the justice of God would make the atonement to broad:

Here is a link it is an excellent read:)

Alma 42Â*

What, do ye suppose that mercy can rob justice? I say unto you, Nay; not one whit. If so, God would cease to be God. Alma 42:25

Personally I believe D&C 22 not D&C 132 Baptism is the new and everlasting covenant:)

Edited January 26, 2011 by Stacy
Added response to personal accusation

[slamjet]

Quote'You're interpretation of the Atonement is very, very, very narrow. So narrow, you cannot see how broad and all encompassing it is. And let's try reading the whole chapter so that the scriptures can be used in their proper context."

Denying the justice of God would make the atonement to broad:

Here is a link it is an excellent read:)

Alma 42Â*

What, do ye suppose that mercy can rob justice? I say unto you, Nay; not one whit. If so, God would cease to be God. Alma 42:25

Personally I believe D&C 22 not D&C 132 Baptism is the new and everlasting covenant:)

Well, if you want to pick and choose what scriptures in D&C to believe and not is your prerogative. If you want to believe in such a narrow view of the Atonement is your prerogative. If you want to cherry-pick scriptures and use them outside of their intended context, that's your prerogative. If you want to call disagreement, accusations is your prerogative. If you want to throw out so many contradictory statements that clearly don't add up, that's also your prerogative.

I now understand where you are coming from. I am in total disagreement with you, that is my prerogative. With that, I'll leave you be.

[Stacy]

Read the scriptures especially the (Book of Mormon) have faith and take the Holy Spirit as your guide my only prerogative is to aid in the establishment of Zion according to the commandments I have received. For we are a chosen generation and we are situated close to the day of the Lord. Let us prepare for it will come as a thief in the night. Seek the face of the Lord yea, oil your lamps and go out to meet him. Peace and love my beloved brothers and sisters May the Spirit be with you and Ephraim my brothers may you lift up your voice both loud and long :)

[Guest]

Read the scriptures especially the (Book of Mormon) have faith and take the Holy Spirit as your guide my only prerogative is to aid in the establishment of Zion according to the commandments I have received. For we are a chosen generation and we are situated close to the day of the Lord. Let us prepare for it will come as a thief in the night. Seek the face of the Lord yea, oil your lamps and go out to meet him. Peace and love my beloved brothers and sisters May the Spirit be with you and Ephraim my brothers may you lift up your voice both loud and long :)

Stacy, you're not the only one who is a devout LDS in this forum. That's not in question.

But, when we start threads that says, "Polygamy Revisited", we expect a discussion on Polygamy, not some mish-mash of scripture quotes that has nothing to do with the discussion at hand - that becomes a "thread hijack" that is very distracting.

Trust me - there are quite a bit of people here who knows their LDS Scriptures. We have bishops and stake presidents here even. We try not to give "sermons" here. We give advice in the Advice Section and Parenting Section, etc. of this forum. The LDS Gospel Discussion forum is what it says - a discussion - with specific topics given in the thread title.

It would be great if you can tell us what you think - and not just throw scripture after scripture - that doesn't really reflect what you, as an individual, think about the topic at hand.

Okay, so this is Advice that is not in the Advice section. Cie la vie...

[Seminarysnoozer]

So...the Gospel of Jesus Christ feeds men's vanities? Cool. Guilty as charged...I want to know what happens when I die...with a certainty...don't you?

Not yet, certainty kills faith. Faith is necessary to reveal our true natures and the desires of our heart which is part of the purpose of this life. So, do I want to thwart one of the main purposes of this life, no. Of course, I want t have all the answers eventually, but I am okay with getting it all after this life.

[Seminarysnoozer]

Or..it might be as simple as plural marriage will continue.

I am okay with that possibility. I think though that people often reason through whether this will continue in the next life based on reasons it might be helpful here. When pondering that though I try to remove all the struggles we face in this life as we won't have those in the next. If women labor in this life, it may not be that way in the next. The process of conception and delivery likely will not be a process that is cumbersome. It possibly won't take as long as it does here.

The 'financial' and 'support' issues that people suggest are positive reasons to consider polygamy are also based on the struggles of this life. One has to take that out of the argument for polygamy in the next life.

So, if it is not for producing a lot of offspring in the next life and it is not for support, financial or moral what's left, in terms of reasons for polygamy? ... I don't see much purpose in it for the next life.

Either you tell me that my eternal husband with multiple wives will; 1) have more offspring in the next life than I will. or 2) I will share in the glory of all the offspring he has from his other wives.

If number 2 is correct, then I don't see that as any different than sharing the glory that comes from all of my brothers and sisters, which would include anyone in the Celestial Kingdom, if I am fortunate to make it there. Because we would all be sealed together under the covenants given in the fullness of the gospel. That is the spirit of Elijah, that we are all sealed together already. There will be no additional sharing of glory, in my mind, between a 'sister wife' than a real sister, which would be any sister in the Celestial Kingdom with me, again if I am fortunate to make it there.