A Question About The New And Everlasting Covenant

[Dr T]

If that is the case, then the LDS Church is false, and Joseph Smith and several LDS prophets were carnal frauds.

It's a good thing the above hypothetical is just that: hypothetical. It's also a good thing God did reveal the principle of polygamy, and it's also a very good thing that He still guides His children through living prophets.

Thank you CK. I understand that's your assertion. This issue we'd disagree on. I'd assert that it goes against God and lustful desires while you would say God used it in his plan. Without trying to be disrespectful or incite anger in you, I'd truthfully wonder if this issue is one of the things that we can see as "loving evil and seeing good as evil" that is talked about. I know it is part of your LDS history and is justified in your church. It's hard to talk about these things because it is like slapping someone's significant other. Their love affair would want to stop that-I understand. I didn't mean to be offend, just laying out some thoughts.

[LukeAir2006]

[Canuck Mormon]

Me and my fiance were having this very discussion the other week. She wasn't sure if she'd be able to practice it and honestly, neither was I. But through our discussion we came to this conclusion. IF it is commanded of us in the CK, our hearts will be changed and we will accept it. I must admit that if the church ever brings it back into practice during my life, it will be hard to practice it. The Prophet had said that the church will be challenged in the last days, maybe this will be that challenge.

[Snow]

I never said that plural marriage was required now in order to qualify for exaltation.

Was it some other LukeAir2006 that said: "Wiley's question was "Do we have to live in a polygamous relationship in the Celestial Kingdom in order to receive exaltation?" And the correct answer is (as answered by CK) - Yes, of course. The Celestial Law of Marriage is the Law of Plural Wives?"

[LukeAir2006]

[CrimsonKairos]

I'd assert that it goes against God and lustful desires while you would say God used it in his plan.

Put the LDS example of polygamy aside for a moment. Are you saying that you don't believe God ever used polygamy to further His purposes, or that He never approved it in any epoch of human history?

[Snow]

Lets not flatter ourselves. We're so righteous and good that the Lord is taking things away from us! Lets just drop this now before we offend our God. The Saints have trouble living the basic requirements, never mind the higher laws. If Wiley and his spouse ever get to the CK, then they'll find out first hand whats required of them!

I repeat for, what is it, the 3rd time? Have any modern general authorities officially agreed with you recently?

[a-train]

It is interesting to note the spectrum of feelings many of us have for our mortal bodies and the functions thereof. Some have supposed that sexual desires, acts, and sexuality in general are all totally abominable in the sight of God. There are even many who have assumed that the forbidden fruit partaken of by our first parents was actually sexual intercourse itself.

I would ask: Who created these bodies and assigned them the function of sexual reproduction? Did Satan? Did Man? Isaiah warned: 'Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!' (Isaiah 5:20) How are we to correctly assume the role of sexual conduct in the life of a righteous God-fearing people without bringing the woe upon us described by Isaiah?

Take a look at Genesis chapter one. It says that God created man, male and female and 'said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.' (Gen 1:28) After this, in verse 31, we are told that 'God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.' (Gen. 1:31)

Did man receive his sexual reproductive powers outside of his creation by God? Did he receive it from God, and yet it was evil? Was there another means provided whereby man could multiply?

We can witness in the Law of Moses the commandement for men to raise children to their dead brethren through their widow: 'If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband’s brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband’s brother unto her.' (Duet. 25:5)

WARNING BIBLICAL GRAPHIC CONTENT!: 'And Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him. And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother’s wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother. And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother’s wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also' (Gen. 38:7-10) For those that don't know, the origin of the term 'onanism' has it's place in this scripture.

Now, was Onan killed for going in unto the woman, or for making a mockery of the purpose wherein he was sent?

Would it be wrong to assume that chastity is: that sexual acts, desires, thoughts, and appetites are to be kept within the bounds set by Him who gave us sexuality itself? Isn't chastity determined by the LORD who gave it and not by man who received it? How can we presume to tell God what is chaste? Can we say: 'God, those commandments for men to sexually reproduce with their brother's widows was wrong!'?

Doesn't He who has power to limit sexual conduct also have power to command it as He did our first parents?

We cannot through any appeal to historical record prove the hearts and minds of the LDS people who were involved in polygamy short of their claim that they were commanded by the same God that has commanded against plural marriage at other times also. How can we therefore undertake to make any assertion one way or another? Perhaps there were men who were looking to gratify unrighteous desires and perhaps there were others who felt only to do that required of God. A sweeping generalization would be unwarranted.

The same scenario exists for our ancient prophets such as Abraham and even the great lawgiver Moses. Should we make an assumption as to their thoughts and desires? Should such an assumption negate their message?

An attempt to ascertain the truthfulness of the message of Mormonism founded in nothing more than an assumption of the motives of Joseph Smith and other Church Leaders in their marital and child-bearing pursuits would prove just as great a folly as would the same application upon Moses and his message. And the consignation of all sexuality to the status of wickedness and immorality is not only unscriptural, but is also nonsense.

-a-train

[Guest mamacat]

i have read, and this is a sensitive subject for me, in many ways, so i reserve my own conclusions for such things until my understanding is greater, but......

i have read that the times at which polygamy was permitted was for the purpose of increasing and preserving a particular bloodline. so throughout biblical history this may be the basis for polygamy. one can understand then how limiting such practice would be necessary as well.

i do believe that ultimately, we are meant to be united with one soul mate, but i also understand the esoteric principle of polygamy in the spirit world.

[Dr T]

Are you saying that you don't believe God ever used polygamy to further His purposes, or that He never approved it in any epoch of human history?

Good question CK. I have not fully studied it (like a lot I still need to look into) and I've read that it was practiced in the OT. Some of the "superstars" were doing it at that time too. I understand that it was practiced in that time and place but I don't remember ever reading of it as condoned by God. I keep coming back to it being adultery, which was very much spoken against. I do not think that God approved of it and do not see it furthering his purposes. That is my opinion.

[wiley]

Let us imagine for a moment that the LORD does ask us to engage a new wife into our family after our exaltation. Will it be so difficult? Will I shrink when He asks me to take another wife? I intend to answer that question when the LORD places it upon me. I say now that I intend to do whatever He asks. Will He ask that? I can't say for sure, but if He does I intend to do whatever he asks.

-a-train

This is a very good answer. I just hope that my wife and I will have the strength and understanding to be able to do such. I still don't know if it is completely true that it will be absolutely necessary. I have been told by local church leaders (stake pres. and such) that a monogomous relationship in the CK is sufficient to recieve the highest of glories. But this is such a under-revelated topic, IMO, that I'm not sure the reality of such is clear, at least to the general public.

Mamacat: i do believe that ultimately, we are meant to be united with one soul mate, but i also understand the esoteric principle of polygamy in the spirit world.

Thanks mamacat for piping in here. It is not lost to me that all of the posters in this thread are male. The whole concept of Everlasting Covenant was never a concern for me until I started looking at it though my wife's eyes. I wonder if it were reversed (theoretically), that is if we had to share our wives with many men, but I got to be the "first husband", how our responses would be.

I would be interested if you could expound on your above thought. It's OK if you don't, but I would like to hear from your perspective.

Snow: Have any modern general authorities officially agreed with you recently?

How modern do they have to be?

I changed me av'tar jus so Mr. T knows whos he talkin to

[Dr T]

That was the first thing I saw. I love it Wiley. :)

[Dr T]

Wiley,

Just to show it was all in fun, I tried putting a Mr. T avatar on my profile but it will not show up. If I offended you with the Coyote pic-I'm truly sorry.

[wiley]

No, no. I was just having fun. I liked it.

[sixpacktr]

a-train,

You hit it right on the head. Elder Holland has spoken in a fireside to young adults of sex being a sacrament, one that is to be partaken of in the proper context and at the proper time. It is no wonder that something like sex would then be perverted by Satan as something filthy and something to be ashamed of. Just like all of Satan's other ploys, he tries to coarsen the sacred, to make light of it and put it before everyone.

My kids were never "shielded" from this. I was a little too blunt at times, perhaps, but they knew what it was for and that it is okay to enjoy it as long as you're married. It was stressed that it is sacred and proper for a man and woman to "become one flesh" because it strengthens the bonds of love.

[Guest mamacat]

Mamacat: i do believe that ultimately, we are meant to be united with one soul mate, but i also understand the esoteric principle of polygamy in the spirit world.

Thanks mamacat for piping in here. It is not lost to me that all of the posters in this thread are male. The whole concept of Everlasting Covenant was never a concern for me until I started looking at it though my wife's eyes. I wonder if it were reversed (theoretically), that is if we had to share our wives with many men, but I got to be the "first husband", how our responses would be.

I would be interested if you could expound on your above thought. It's OK if you don't, but I would like to hear from your perspective.

hi, thanks wiley...lol, yes it seems males enjoy discussing polygamy more doesn't it? perhaps not so much, if as you mentioned, the issue were polyandry.

in essence, i am trying very hard to understand why polygamy would be commanded by God if, as i believe without a doubt, that we are destined to be with a single twinsoul.

beyond that, i don't have that much to contribute.

it was interesting to see the perspective that God never actually 'commanded' it in the bible.

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>

Mamacat: i do believe that ultimately, we are meant to be united with one soul mate, but i also understand the esoteric principle of polygamy in the spirit world.

Thanks mamacat for piping in here. It is not lost to me that all of the posters in this thread are male. The whole concept of Everlasting Covenant was never a concern for me until I started looking at it though my wife's eyes. I wonder if it were reversed (theoretically), that is if we had to share our wives with many men, but I got to be the "first husband", how our responses would be.

I would be interested if you could expound on your above thought. It's OK if you don't, but I would like to hear from your perspective.

hi, thanks wiley...lol, yes it seems males enjoy discussing polygamy more doesn't it? perhaps not so much, if as you mentioned, the issue were polyandry.

in essence, i am trying very hard to understand why polygamy would be commanded by God if, as i believe without a doubt, that we are destined to be with a single twinsoul.

beyond that, i don't have that much to contribute.

it was interesting to see the perspective that God never actually 'commanded' it in the bible.

Marriage is about service, sacrifice and covenant before G-d. Not about pleasing an individual's fantasies, attractions or desires. When viewing marriage as "what is in it for me" - nothing will make sense and greater satisfaction will always be found elsewhere.

BTW - To accept what G-d offers is to live his commandments. If G-d offers or gives something it is the same as a commandment. But because G-d commandmended someone to sacrifice their first borne son does not mean that all must live by that same commandment.

The Traveler

[Snow]

It is no wonder that something like sex would then be perverted by Satan as something filthy and something to be ashamed of.

What?

You mean I'm doing it wrong?

[a-train]

I once heard someone say: 'All of Satan's teachings are only counterfeits for the LORD's.' Indeed, as I have probed around the world a while, I have found nothing of the LORD's for which there aren't many counterfeits in circulation. Sexuality is certainly no exception.

I don't know Snow, perhaps you should consult your owner's manual for that wife of yours.

-a-train

[LukeAir2006]

[LukeAir2006]

[CrimsonKairos]

No, no, no, Luke...Snow meant in the real world. B)

[LukeAir2006]

[Guest mamacat]

<div class='quotemain'>

hi, thanks wiley...lol, yes it seems males enjoy discussing polygamy more doesn't it? perhaps not so much, if as you mentioned, the issue were polyandry.

in essence, i am trying very hard to understand why polygamy would be commanded by God if, as i believe without a doubt, that we are destined to be with a single twinsoul.

beyond that, i don't have that much to contribute.

it was interesting to see the perspective that God never actually 'commanded' it in the bible.

So do you think Joseph Smith made up his account of plural marriage being revealed to him as a commandment and then when he refused to reveal it he was threatened with immediate destruction?

i wasn't referring in the least to Joseph Smith, rather to Dr. T's statement about the bible ~

" I have not fully studied it (like a lot I still need to look into) and I've read that it was practiced in the OT. Some of the "superstars" were doing it at that time too. I understand that it was practiced in that time and place but I don't remember ever reading of it as condoned by God. I keep coming back to it being adultery, which was very much spoken against. I do not think that God approved of it and do not see it furthering his purposes. That is my opinion."

[CrimsonKairos]

A telestial statement if ever I heard one!

Unless you're living on Kolob, you too dwell in a telestial sphere. Welcome to reality.