Polygamy In The Celestial Kingdom

[MadHatter]

My Grandfather was married to the same woman for many years and sealed to her in the temple. Before she died, she made my grandfather promise to marry her sister, they were all very good friends. After my grandmother died, my grandfather and my Great aunt got married and sealed in the temple.

As far as i know, a man can still be sealed to mor than one woman (but only in cases of which i explained above where the man is a widower.)

The Doctrine of plural marriage is still a true doctrine dating back to the tiem of Abraham and Moses, we do not practice it because it is illegal, and we are to abide by the laws of the land. Also when it was practiced onlybetween 2-5% of the body of the church actually did practice it. so it was very controlled. Also, it wasn't just that some guy felt like having a hierem, so he took wives to himself. It was a calling. In order for a man to take a second wife, his wife first had to agree completely. And If a man had 10 wives, all 10 had to agree to take on an 11th or it didn't happen

I know my grandfather will have two wives when they are resurrected. and they probably won't have a problem with it because it was understood before my grandmother died.

Here's my question to everyone else.

Do any women have a problem sharing thier husbands in the afterlife? If you died and your husband remarried and was sealed to another woman, would you be upset?

[Canuck Mormon]

My wife has an issue with Polygamy in the Celestial Kingdom. I'm not sure I want more than 1 wife. My wife is my second wife (divorced, not polygamist) and the only one I want to be with forever. I couldn't "handle" more than one wfie.

I don't know if we will be "forced" to take more wives if we do not want to in the Celestial Kingdom. I think that, like here on earth, we will have our free-agency. But who knows, I could be completely wrong.

[antispatula]

Also when it was practiced onlybetween 2-5% of the body of the church actually did practice it.

On lds.org it actually said about 25% practiced polygammy.

[a-train]

I think if we 'have a problem' or 'get upset' about anything the LORD is giving us, we exhibit the attitude of the Devil and his followers. This forum seems to often ask the question: 'Would you be or are you unhappy with 'insert revealed principle or practice here' or 'insert rhetorical will of God here'?' The LORD does NOT operate as does a car salesman who says: 'How would you feel about a brown interior instead of grey?'

Satan is the being here who is ever ready to negotiate with us concerning the will of the LORD and our course toward His Presence. He offers us infinite possible wills of God. What if the LORD wants us to wear teal tunics, pasley purple parkas, or yellow yarmelkes? How would you feel?

The answer should always be the same: 'I will go and do the things which the LORD hath commanded.' (1 Nephi 3:7)

Are we concerned that those who overcome and enter the LORD's Presence by the Blood the Lamb arrive their only to find that they don't like it? Do they find that the clothing in fashion there is unappealling, the social engagements are boring, the partnership of the others there is unfulfilling, the ergonomics are uncomfortable, or the scenery is less than stellar? Is Satan's home more pleasant and happy?

I believe Alma who said that the 'spirits of those who are righteous are received into a state of happiness, which is called paradise, a state of rest, a state of peace, where they shall rest from all their troubles and from all care, and sorrow.' (Alma 40:12)

I have enough faith to say that if I arrive in the Presence of the Almighty to be so for eternity, I can tell you I verily believe that I'll be more than happy and will not be even slightly upset, nor will I have any problems with whatever else is there with Him.

-a-train

[Annabelli]

It was my understanding that a man had to provide a separate home for each of his wives. Many genealogy records of land ownership during the time that Saints lived in Illinois and Missouri indicate that this is true.

[snipe123]

I think if we 'have a problem' or 'get upset' about anything the LORD is giving us, we exhibit the attitude of the Devil and his followers. This forum seems to often ask the question: 'Would you be or are you unhappy with 'insert revealed principle or practice here' or 'insert rhetorical will of God here'?' The LORD does NOT operate as does a car salesman who says: 'How would you feel about a brown interior instead of grey?'

Amen. It seems that questions like the example that A-train formulated here (Very clever wording there A-train...quite amusing...lol) are there just to spark controversy on a subject that is neither decided or voted on by the participants in the discussion...These matters are decided already by God...If I have a problem with it, then I need to make the adjustment, not gripe about it or try to change it...

[MadHatter]

<div class='quotemain'>

Also when it was practiced onlybetween 2-5% of the body of the church actually did practice it.

On lds.org it actually said about 25% practiced polygammy.

Gordon B. Hinckley in an interview stated only between 2 and 5 percent, not 25%, the site may have a typo or forgot to add the - or you may have read it wrong.

If you could, please provide a link to the source.

[Canuck Mormon]

I think if we 'have a problem' or 'get upset' about anything the LORD is giving us, we exhibit the attitude of the Devil and his followers. This forum seems to often ask the question: 'Would you be or are you unhappy with 'insert revealed principle or practice here' or 'insert rhetorical will of God here'?' The LORD does NOT operate as does a car salesman who says: 'How would you feel about a brown interior instead of grey?'

Satan is the being here who is ever ready to negotiate with us concerning the will of the LORD and our course toward His Presence. He offers us infinite possible wills of God. What if the LORD wants us to wear teal tunics, pasley purple parkas, or yellow yarmelkes? How would you feel?

The answer should always be the same: 'I will go and do the things which the LORD hath commanded.' (1 Nephi 3:7)

Are we concerned that those who overcome and enter the LORD's Presence by the Blood the Lamb arrive their only to find that they don't like it? Do they find that the clothing in fashion there is unappealling, the social engagements are boring, the partnership of the others there is unfulfilling, the ergonomics are uncomfortable, or the scenery is less than stellar? Is Satan's home more pleasant and happy?

I believe Alma who said that the 'spirits of those who are righteous are received into a state of happiness, which is called paradise, a state of rest, a state of peace, where they shall rest from all their troubles and from all care, and sorrow.' (Alma 40:12)

I have enough faith to say that if I arrive in the Presence of the Almighty to be so for eternity, I can tell you I verily believe that I'll be more than happy and will not be even slightly upset, nor will I have any problems with whatever else is there with Him.

-a-train

WHOA! Time to get off your soapbox or whatever.

I NEVER said I wouldn't obey, neither did my wife. If the LORD asks it of us, we will do it. If it happens in this life (not likely), then we will pray and ask the LORD for his direction, which is what the prophet asks us to do anyway. But what do I know, I have the attitude of the Devil and his followers

Now feel free to get back up on your soapbox.

A little sarcasm never hurt anyone, did it?

[antispatula]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

Also when it was practiced onlybetween 2-5% of the body of the church actually did practice it.

On lds.org it actually said about 25% practiced polygammy.

Gordon B. Hinckley in an interview stated only between 2 and 5 percent, not 25%, the site may have a typo or forgot to add the - or you may have read it wrong.

If you could, please provide a link to the source.

really! I find that very interesting.

If the Prophet said so, I believe him,

I'm sure it was a typo.

[sixpacktr]

I think if we 'have a problem' or 'get upset' about anything the LORD is giving us, we exhibit the attitude of the Devil and his followers. This forum seems to often ask the question: 'Would you be or are you unhappy with 'insert revealed principle or practice here' or 'insert rhetorical will of God here'?' The LORD does NOT operate as does a car salesman who says: 'How would you feel about a brown interior instead of grey?'

Satan is the being here who is ever ready to negotiate with us concerning the will of the LORD and our course toward His Presence. He offers us infinite possible wills of God. What if the LORD wants us to wear teal tunics, pasley purple parkas, or yellow yarmelkes? How would you feel?

The answer should always be the same: 'I will go and do the things which the LORD hath commanded.' (1 Nephi 3:7)

Are we concerned that those who overcome and enter the LORD's Presence by the Blood the Lamb arrive their only to find that they don't like it? Do they find that the clothing in fashion there is unappealling, the social engagements are boring, the partnership of the others there is unfulfilling, the ergonomics are uncomfortable, or the scenery is less than stellar? Is Satan's home more pleasant and happy?

I believe Alma who said that the 'spirits of those who are righteous are received into a state of happiness, which is called paradise, a state of rest, a state of peace, where they shall rest from all their troubles and from all care, and sorrow.' (Alma 40:12)

I have enough faith to say that if I arrive in the Presence of the Almighty to be so for eternity, I can tell you I verily believe that I'll be more than happy and will not be even slightly upset, nor will I have any problems with whatever else is there with Him.

-a-train

Amen and amen, A-train. I for one am getting a little tired of the constant 'polls' that are coming up on this board, usually to generate some sort of controversy, it seems.

[Skyeishness]

I think if we 'have a problem' or 'get upset' about anything the LORD is giving us, we exhibit the attitude of the Devil and his followers. This forum seems to often ask the question: 'Would you be or are you unhappy with 'insert revealed principle or practice here' or 'insert rhetorical will of God here'?' The LORD does NOT operate as does a car salesman who says: 'How would you feel about a brown interior instead of grey?'

Wasn't it the "Devil" who's plan was for us to follow without question and without choice?

and let's think about what the LORD is giving us, shall we?

A temple worthy man can be sealed to more than one woman. and maybe even more in the eternities..

If that man falls below the standards and becomes shall we say.... Less than stellar at being a preisthood holder, he is ineligible to enter the celestial kingdom. But what happens to the women? what if they stayed true and held fast even though their husband didn't. was it just their bad luck that they hitched their wagon to that dim star?

oh yeah, they'll be "taken care of"

(maybe I'm just to cynical, but when I think of "taken care of" I think of someone shooting old yeller.

"Old Yeller is taken care of, Marge")

My Mother was so afraid of this scenario, when my father was having problems, she divorced him and married a former ward bishop. Because I guess being a struggling young mens president just wasn't enough to ensure that my mother got to the celestial kingdom. Too bad for her, my dad won't give her a temple divorce. She'd rather be the 2nd wife of a bishop than the 1st wife of a good man.

in case you forgot. we really are human and are subject to such follies as questioning and making choices whether they are right or wrong.

Gee.. I Wish there were some way to repent of all these terrible sins of questioning advanced doctrine. You know, I just wish there were someone out there who would stand up for all the sinners and say "I'll be your savior!"

[a-train]

Exaclty Sk0y. That is my whole point. Even in the more extreme scenario of a Priesthood holder turned abuser, wino, and down-right scum-bag, we can rest assured that the worthy and faithful wife and family of this man will have just that same rest and enjoyment in the Presence of the LORD that is in store for all of the faithful.

Satan's desire to take upon himself the honor as supreme ruler among men through the overtaking of man's agency was rooted in a seemingly righteous desire to save all the souls of mankind, but when his proposition was disallowed by the Father in the Grand Council he rose up in pride and lost his faith, seemingly unconvinced that the preservation of the agency of man would actually yield the blessed happy state of immortality and eternal life promised by the Father as the ultimate achievement of His Plan of Salvation. He, at least, was not convinced that he would be so happy without assuming the role he desired.

It was in this prideful state that Satan fell. Unwilling to take a less lofty position among the great and noble ones than that which he desired, he rebelled against the Father and was cast out.

We, like Satan, can hold on to our personal view of our Father's Plan of Salvation for us as an individual, or we can again realize that what we may perceive as a less glorious and enjoyable scenario can yield something indeed more glorious. This is faith in the LORD. Although it may seem that His will does NOT include a happy and enjoyable scenario for us, we must trust Him that He knows how to give good gifts. (Matt. 7:11)

The yoke of the LORD is easy and His burden is light (Matt. 11:30), but the grass may look greener on the other side. We must trust the LORD, that the trials and afflictions through which we are called to pass in this life will ultimately be overcome and happiness and peace shall be the reward of those who keep their second estate, regardless of the logistics.

God Bless, especially your family.

-a-train

[Elphaba]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

Also when it was practiced onlybetween 2-5% of the body of the church actually did practice it.

On lds.org it actually said about 25% practiced polygammy.

Gordon B. Hinckley in an interview stated only between 2 and 5 percent, not 25%, the site may have a typo or forgot to add the - or you may have read it wrong.

If you could, please provide a link to the source.

The exact percentage of Latter-day Saints who participated in the practice is not known, but studies suggest a maximum of from 20% to 25% of LDS adults were members of polygamous households.

BYU Studies LDS FAQ

Elphaba

[Elphaba]

It was my understanding that a man had to provide a separate home for each of his wives. Many genealogy records of land ownership during the time that Saints lived in Illinois and Missouri indicate that this is true.

It is true separate living spaces were customary, but in reality it depended on the economic circumstances and personal desires of those involved.

Rarely was a man financially able to afford multiple homes for his wives, and so if the women wanted their own respective homes, they often had to work and do what they could to contribute to the cost of their homes.

However, there were times the husband just could not afford the separate houses, and unless the women could afford her own home by herself, they were forced to live together under one roof.

One example is if their husband were called to go on a mission, often for years at a time. Many men made arrangements for his wives to live together during this time because he knew he could do nothing to contribute to their finances.

Sometimes these setups worked well, sometimes not. And of course, there were a myriad of different circumstances that determined whether the women had separate houses or not.

But in all of the journals I have read, content wth their living circumstances or not, they all speak of how the Principle has been commanded of God and so they will live it.

Elphaba

[boyando]

<div class='quotemain'>It was my understanding that a man had to provide a separate home for each of his wives. Many genealogy records of land ownership during the time that Saints lived in Illinois and Missouri indicate that this is true.

It is true separate living spaces were customary, but in reality it depended on the economic circumstances and personal desires of those involved.

Rarely was a man financially able to afford multiple homes for his wives, and so if the women wanted their own respective homes, they often had to work and do what they could to contribute to the cost of their homes.

However, there were times the husband just could not afford the separate houses, and unless the women could afford her own home by herself, they were forced to live together under one roof.

One example is if their husband were called to go on a mission, often for years at a time. Many men made arrangements for his wives to live together during this time because he knew he could do nothing to contribute to their finances.

Sometimes these setups worked well, sometimes not. And of course, there were a myriad of different circumstances that determined whether the women had separate houses or not.

But in all of the journals I have read, content wth their living circumstances or not, they all speak of how the Principle has been commanded of God and so they will live it.

Elphaba

Hey Sis,

This comment is not to belittle all your studies, but to point out how easy it is to rely on these studies. The Beehive house in Downtown Salt Lake City, shows that they didn't all have separate quarters. simple and easy.

As too rather or not, polygamy was an easy live style to live, Grandma Case, explained, that it almost cost her father, membership in this Church and it was only the "manifesto on marriage" that saved his priesthood. Not an exact quote, but close enough to get the point.

Just the same I think that when you bring it closer to home, it has more meaning. As always, with love - allmosthumble

[Skyeishness]

Exaclty Sk0y. That is my whole point. Even in the more extreme scenario of a Priesthood holder turned abuser, wino, and down-right scum-bag, we can rest assured that the worthy and faithful wife and family of this man will have just that same rest and enjoyment in the Presence of the LORD that is in store for all of the faithful.

Satan's desire to take upon himself the honor as supreme ruler among men through the overtaking of man's agency was rooted in a seemingly righteous desire to save all the souls of mankind, but when his proposition was disallowed by the Father in the Grand Council he rose up in pride and lost his faith, seemingly unconvinced that the preservation of the agency of man would actually yield the blessed happy state of immortality and eternal life promised by the Father as the ultimate achievement of His Plan of Salvation. He, at least, was not convinced that he would be so happy without assuming the role he desired.

It was in this prideful state that Satan fell. Unwilling to take a less lofty position among the great and noble ones than that which he desired, he rebelled against the Father and was cast out.

We, like Satan, can hold on to our personal view of our Father's Plan of Salvation for us as an individual, or we can again realize that what we may perceive as a less glorious and enjoyable scenario can yield something indeed more glorious. This is faith in the LORD. Although it may seem that His will does NOT include a happy and enjoyable scenario for us, we must trust Him that He knows how to give good gifts. (Matt. 7:11)

The yoke of the LORD is easy and His burden is light (Matt. 11:30), but the grass may look greener on the other side. We must trust the LORD, that the trials and afflictions through which we are called to pass in this life will ultimately be overcome and happiness and peace shall be the reward of those who keep their second estate, regardless of the logistics.

God Bless, especially your family.

-a-train

A-train. You missed my point. but that was expected.

It has been said by lots of general authorities that a man or a woman can not enter the celestial kingdom alone. Especially the woman. That means they have to make it together and my mothers understanding of it was that if her husband didn't make it, no matter how hard she tried, she couldn't either BECAUSE she was sealed to him

Is this untrue?

so! Hypothetical question time.

If The Prophet came out and said that polygamy would be practiced today, but instead of a man having more than one wife, A wife would have more than one husband. and you. Yes you would be the 3rd husband of a woman. what would your first reaction be? Would you not mind sharing one woman with other men?

or would you have an issue with it.

I think you would because throughout history it is a re-occurring theme that women who have more than one mate is seen as lewd and immoral, and undermines male dominance. because in history, women were to be submissive. and that means sharing.

it seems to me that it is easier for you, a man, to accept this celestial law because you benefit from it. and not in the creepy "o0o I get to have more wives hee hee hee" way, you know.. Hugh Heffner. That's just childish. It's a benefit in that you have many, and women are the many.

Maybe you could list the benefits of a woman in a polygamist relationship, besides always having someone to braid your hair and having a full time babysitting staff.

and don't cop out and refuse to because you're content with doing what the Lord says and you'd NEVER question it.

You're human, you have thoughts and it's not about disagreeing with the Almighty. it's about discussion. Because this is a discussion board.

Our Savior doesn't want us to obey blindly, or he would have made us like monkeys.

We're suppose to search, ponder and pray. and if that means working through our initial repulsion to a new concept, then how is that heresy? Everyone struggles sometimes, it's only through the help we get from friends, family, scriptures and the holy ghost that we make the right choice.

[a-train]

It has been said by lots of general authorities that a man or a woman can not enter the celestial kingdom alone. Especially the woman. That means they have to make it together and my mothers understanding of it was that if her husband didn't make it, no matter how hard she tried, she couldn't either BECAUSE she was sealed to him

Is this untrue?

It is totally untrue. The faithful will NOT be blotted out of the book of life because of the sins of their spouse. Further, in the event that she is unable to be sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise to her husband because of his transgressions, she will ultimately have the availability of a faithful husband to which she may be so sealed, whether in this life or the next.

If The Prophet came out and said that polygamy would be practiced today, but instead of a man having more than one wife, A wife would have more than one husband. and you. Yes you would be the 3rd husband of a woman. what would your first reaction be? Would you not mind sharing one woman with other men?

or would you have an issue with it.

I would submit to and trust the LORD believing that He knows what He is doing. Certainly it won't be easy and I would expect the eventual happiness coming therefrom would include a full knowledge of the purpose of God in his will. As Adam killed sacrifices not knowing why save the LORD commanded him, his obedience yielded him happiness and he was eventually rewarded with a knowledge of the symbolism therein and the purpose thereof.

(I'll resist temptations to joke about having more homies around the house to play xbox with.)

The purpose of my first post wasn't to chastize those who are feeling apprehensive about things the LORD may be commanding or may command in the future. We can find many places in scripture where the prophets (and even our LORD Himself) were hoping that the will of God could be accomplished in another way than that He had revealed. We can see that their fears and concerns eventually turned to strength and happiness as they submitted to the will of God and discovered the outcome of God's will.

The reality is that Satan and his crew want us to focus on the temporary and insignificant difficulties associated with the LORD's will and imagine that doing otherwise will be easier and more enjoyable when in fact we will NOT feel happy nor will we experience enjoyment, but we will either slug about in ignorance or unhappiness or both.

-a-train

[alaskanray]

It has been said by lots of general authorities that a man or a woman can not enter the celestial kingdom alone. Especially the woman. That means they have to make it together and my mothers understanding of it was that if her husband didn't make it, no matter how hard she tried, she couldn't either BECAUSE she was sealed to him

Is this untrue?

Sk0y - The answer to your question is a resounding YES!!! IT IS UNTRUE!!! I quote President Joseph Fielding Smith from "Doctrines of Salvation, 2:74-76

"You good sisters, who are single and alone, do not fear, do not feel that blessings are going to be withheld from you. You are not under any obligation or necessity of accepting some proposal that comes to you which is distasteful for fear you will come under condemnation."

We are NOT kept from entering the Celestial Kingdom based on marital status. We simply cannot become Gods and Goddesses within that Kingdom. Only about 1/3 of all the inhabitants of the Celestial Kingdom do become Gods and Goddesses. The scripture tells us that those who are not married are "appointed as ministering angels" IN THE CELESTIAL KINGDOM. This whole idea that a single woman cannot enter the Celestial Kingdom is a chief example of FALSE DOCTRINE that is often espoused in church lesson discussions by misguided brethren and sisters...usually the married ones who feel the need to feel superior to their single counterparts.

We inherit our eternal Kingdom assignment based on the state of our spirits alone. Once in the CK, we have a CHOICE! That is the whole point of the Celestial Kingdom...that we maintain our free agency. Those who fail to enter the Celestial Kingdom lose their free agency. Those who choose NOT to practice polygamy will not be required to. Those who CHOOSE to practice will be allowed to. Those who choose to marry and become Gods and Goddesses will be allowed to. Those who prefer to remain single and be angels, will be allowed to. There is no doctrine that states that single people will be shut out of the Celestial Kingdom. If there were, think of all the children that died before they were even able to find a mate. Not to mention those of us who are left old and lonely after failing to find a good mate. I thank my Father in heaven that I will have a choice when I get to the crossroads. I can, frankly, think of at least two good men I would love to marry when I get there who are both dead and gone and I just pray I make it so that I will have a choice in the end. It will make all these lonely years on Earth worth it.

Further, since this thread topic is polygamy, I will now address my feelings on it. Frankly, there are benefits for a woman to be in a polygamous marriage...not the least of which is having someone to talk to who understands the female mind bent. Another advantage that they had in the old days is help in rearing the children...I, personally, don't know how some of these mothers do it with their ten kids. I only have one and can barely think sometimes trying to teach and manage discipline and keep house. Frankly, I would welcome another woman in the mix. At the same time my sister would never even consider considering it. But that is her choice. It will not be a factor in whether or not either of us enters the Celestial Kingdom because it is a choice, not a commandment.

We had a district president here before we became a stake who talked to my Sunday School class once and his comment which he said with a wink was that he was perfectly happy with one wife but he was a little worried because his wife had a testimony of polygamy.

Bottom line, though, is that it is not a saving principle. The saving principle is abstinance except within the bonds of marriage...whether monogamous or polygamous.

P.S. One other thing you should know about your grandparents: Temple sealings are promisory and null and void if either individual fails to earn a Celestial glory. I don't know the exact reference but I do know that we have been taught that in conference. Everyone in the Celestial Kingdom is sealed to Everyone else, one way or another. Those who fail to earn a Celestial glory, are no longer sealed to anyone.

[Skyeishness]

thanks, a-train and alaskanray.

Maybe my mom divorced my dad because she can't stand him.

yeah, my mom wants to get to the highest degree of the CK and she thought she couldn't do that with him.

I guess mostly, I'm just having a problem with that.

thanks for clearing that up.

[lozboz87]

I would hate it if my future husband was sealed to another. but i know it will have to happen any way in the celestial kingdom, because every person has to be married to dwell in the celestial kingdom, and there are more females than males....

[Elphaba]

I would hate it if my future husband was sealed to another. but i know it will have to happen any way in the celestial kingdom, because every person has to be married to dwell in the celestial kingdom, and there are more females than males....

Why do you think there are more females than males?

Elphaba

[a-train]

<div class='quotemain'>I would hate it if my future husband was sealed to another. but i know it will have to happen any way in the celestial kingdom, because every person has to be married to dwell in the celestial kingdom, and there are more females than males....

Why do you think there are more females than males?

Elphaba

And why do you think 'every person has to be married to dwell in the celestial kingdom'?

-a-train

[Adomini22]

<div class='quotemain'>I would hate it if my future husband was sealed to another. but i know it will have to happen any way in the celestial kingdom, because every person has to be married to dwell in the celestial kingdom, and there are more females than males....

Why do you think there are more females than males?

Elphaba

This was a post once, I think, in of itself, but more females would be in the CK because the 1/3 that followed Lucifer were all males. (hi, elphie!)

[Gaia]

This was a post once, I think, in of itself, but more females would be in the CK because the 1/3 that followed Lucifer were all males. (hi, elphie!)

GAIA:

References, please?

With all due respect, LDS apostle John Widtsoe de-bunked the common explanation that polygamy was practiced in order to provide homes to a surplus of women in the church:

“Plural marriage has been a subject of wide and frequent comment. Members of the Church unfamiliar with its history, and many nonmembers, have set up fallacious reasons for the origin of this system of marriage among the Latter-day Saints. “The most common of these conjectures is that the Church, through plural marriage sought to provide husbands for its large surplus of female members. The implied assumption in this theory, that there have been more female than male members in the Church, is NOT supported by existing evidence. On the contrary, there seems always to have been MORE MALES than females in the Church...

“The United States census records from 1850 to 1940, and all available Church records, uniformly show a preponderance of MALES in Utah, and in the Church. Indeed, the excess in Utah has usually been larger than for the whole United States,...Orson Pratt, writing in 1853 from direct knowledge of Utah conditions, when the excess of females was supposedly the highest, declares against the opinion that females out numbered the males in Utah...

“Another conjecture is that the people were few in numbers and that the Church, desiring greater numbers, permitted the practice so that a phenomenal increase in population could be attained. This is not defensible, since there WAS NO SURPLUS OF WOMEN.”

(Evidences and Reconciliations, 1960, pages 390-392)

From the LDS publication, "Juvenile INstructor":

“But then the proportion of the sexes in Utah would not, at present, admit of an extensive practice of plural marriage. When the census was taken five years ago, there were 143,963 souls in Utah Territory, not counting untaxed Indians. In this number there was an excess of 5,055 MALES over females. This does not have the appearance of permitting an extensive practice of plural marriage,...”

(Juvenile Instructor, Vol. 20, page 133)

Blessings --

~Gaia

[lozboz87]

<div class='quotemain'>I would hate it if my future husband was sealed to another. but i know it will have to happen any way in the celestial kingdom, because every person has to be married to dwell in the celestial kingdom, and there are more females than males....

Why do you think there are more females than males?

Elphaba

i didnt mean if you're not married on earth you cant dwell there, what i was meaning to say is everyone is married or has to be married after they die, to dwell there.

forgive me if im wrong.