Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

kamenraider

The Law Of Plural Marriage -- Suspended? Or Revoked?

  

75 members have voted

  1. 1. The priesthood law requiring plural marriage was...

    • suspended.
    • revoked.
    • neither suspended nor revoked -- only the practice of it was suspended by the Church.
    • I don't believe there is such a law.
    • Other (explain below)


Recommended Posts

Sure. D&C section 113 clearly is speaking of Joseph Smith Jun as the "rod". He was a mixture of the seed of Jesse and of the House of Ephraim. It mentioned no other genetic contributions other than these two. Thus, Joseph Smith Jun. is exemplary of who the natural seed of Israel is.

It is true the 10 tribes did mix in but there were also significant numbers of them wo did not mix in. The scriptures establish a very clear basis for this being fact. There are either the natural branches still in existence or there isn't. God's Word says there is. God's Word also gives clear indication that after the times of the fullness of the Gentiles and they reject the fulness of the Gospel that it would be taken from them and given to the natural branches, which implies Israel's remnant in their purity would be preserved.

All that I am saying is scriptural. So, if you want to continue to insist this is smut, take it to the Lord. He's the one who said it.

JBug

Wasn't Ephraim half Egyptian?

Joseph Smith is representative of the natural seed of Ephraim? Lehi and Ishamel were natural descendants of Ephraim and Manasseh. Do their descendants bear resemblance to Joseph Smith?

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps I should be more clear.

I'm less interested in modern interpretations of what is to happen than I am in what Joseph actually had to say on the matter.

Can you provide a quote from Joseph, with citation, which supports the idea of latter-day animal sacrifice?

I never said WE (LDS) would be doing it, I don't think we ever will. But it is true that the Jews will be doing it. It is not a matter of "modern interpretations", it is what they are waiting for. They need a fully red heifer to sacrefice at the dedication of the Third Jewish Temple. That is what they are waiting for. The last red heifer had 3 white hairs and thus was not pure red and could not be used.

Share this post


Link to post

Please cite the scripture that states that Boaz had a living wife at the time he married Ruth.

Hi,

The sciptures do not say. But Boaz was "a mighty man of wealth", so there is every reason to believe he had a living wife. The Law of Moses allowed plural marriage, and there does not seem to be any stigma attached to those who lived it.

Richard

Share this post


Link to post

Wasn't Ephraim half Egyptian?

That is correct. Although like the USA is right now, Egypt was a bit of a melting pot so I am not aware of the exact ethnicity of Joseph's wife. It is quite likely that she was an unclean woman though. This is evidenced by the Lord splitting the tribe of Manasseh on two sides of the Jordan river. The Lord splits things to cleanse them. For example, the animals with a cloven hoof are clean where those who are not cloven, like a horse, are unclean. Thus, it seems to me that the Lord actually set things up specifically so that Ephraim would fail since he didn't do with Ephraim as He did with Manasseh to cleanse them as a tribe. But, this gets into a much deeper and more involved discussion that I am not willing to get into in public.

Joseph Smith is representative of the natural seed of Ephraim? Lehi and Ishamel were natural descendants of Ephraim and Ishmael. Do their descendants bear resemblance to Joseph Smith?

A very simple review of the history of the children of Lehi will show this to be a false basis. The Nephites were a white and a delightsome people. The Lamanites received a cursing and a mark of dark skin placed upon them. It is the Lamanites who survived so they do not bring forward a pure basis of comparison. Because of this, and because they were not gathered during the time of the Gentiles, they will have to step forward and assert their rights in order to receive them. I believe a powerful spokesman will be raised up among them who will assist in this. They won't be convinced until Zion is established and is real. Then, they will likely become one of the greatest forces to assist in its further establishment.

JBug

Share this post


Link to post

Wasn't Ephraim half Egyptian?

Joseph Smith is representative of the natural seed of Ephraim? Lehi and Ishamel were natural descendants of Ephraim and Ishmael. Do their descendants bear resemblance to Joseph Smith?

Hi,

Joseph married a woman that lived in Egypt. That does not mean she was Egyptian. For instance, Joseph lived in Egypt, and he was an Israelite.

Consider how carefully Abraham and God provided a wife of the same race for Issac. It is believable that the wife God provided for Joseph would also be of the same race.

Do you not mean that: Lehi and Ishmael (of the Book of Mormon) were natural descendants of Manasseh and Ephraim?

The Lamanites were given a curse that changed their look, so there is no reason to believe the native Americans (who must also have much non-Lamanite blood also) would look like natural descendants of the house of Joseph.

Joseph Smith taught that the LDS church was a gathering of Ephraimites, and that he was an Ephraimite. I take it he was being true prophet when he said this.

Richard

Share this post


Link to post

Wasn't Ephraim half Egyptian?

Joseph Smith is representative of the natural seed of Ephraim? Lehi and Ishamel were natural descendants of Ephraim and Ishmael. Do their descendants bear resemblance to Joseph Smith?

Yes. According to Nephi, those who left Europe to settle the promised land looked like his own people.

And based on a reading of 2 Nephi 3 and similar passages, some believe that Joseph Smith was a direct descendant of Lehi.

For those interested in an overview, feel free to start at page 16 of this, and read to the end of that short chapter.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes. According to Nephi, those who left Europe to settle the promised land looked like his own people.

And based on a reading of 2 Nephi 3 and similar passages, some believe that Joseph Smith was a direct descendant of Lehi.

Based on the fact that JST Genesis 50 has a nearly identical version of this the source was NOT Lehi. He was merely teaching his son Joseph what he learned from the brass plates.

Those who say this pertains exclusively to Lehi's posterity are mistaken. Joseph Smith was not a descendent of Lehi. Nor will the King-Messiah yet to come be a descendent of Lehi.

JBug

Share this post


Link to post

Based on the fact that JST Genesis 50 has a nearly identical version of this the source was NOT Lehi. He was merely teaching his son Joseph what he learned from the brass plates.

Towards the end of the chapter, Lehi adds his own commentary to what he had read in the brass plates. It's his closing blessing to his son Joseph. It's that commentary which I'm referring to.

Those who say this pertains exclusively to Lehi's posterity are mistaken.

Don't know what you're referring to here. I must have missed part of the discussion. Who was talking about this pertaining to them exclusively?

Joseph Smith was not a descendent of Lehi.

Are you basing this on references to being a Gentile?

If so, we all have multiple ancestors. Both can be true.

Share this post


Link to post

Jbug and erichard,

I wasn't suggesting that Joseph Smith was wrong WRT his comments on the tribe of Ephraim. But if Lehi's descendants were cursed due to their wickedness, why are we working under the asumption that the rest of Ephraimites remained undiluted during periods of apostasy?

As an aside, I find the variety of opinions on this forum fascinating. There's another thread in which people are declaring that God is barely involved in our lives and here we are suggesting that He's picking and choosing spouses for each of us to keep the gene pool undiluted. (scratching my head in wonder ;-)

*** yes, I did mean ephraim and manasseh. It's well past midnight here and I've got sleepy brain. Thanks for catching that.

Share this post


Link to post

Perhaps I should be more clear.

I'm less interested in modern interpretations of what is to happen than I am in what Joseph actually had to say on the matter.

Can you provide a quote from Joseph, with citation, which supports the idea of latter-day animal sacrifice?

Since we're off topic anyway, I thought I'd post this:

"The Quorum of the Twelve had been filled, but of the number selected one--Willard Richards--was in England and Joseph was instructing those present of that Quorum how they must proceed to prepare themselves, that they might ordain Willard Richards to the Apostleship when they should reach that country. Joseph told them to go to Kirtland and cleanse and purify a certain room in the temple, that they must kill a lamb and offer a sacrifice unto the Lord which should prepare them to ordain Willard Richard a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles.

Sidney made some remarks, when Joseph spoke with great power and spirit, said he, 'I know the law'. To a remark made by Heber C. Kimball he said, 'It will be the sweetest smelling savor you ever smelled.' "

--Journal of Wandle Mace, typescript, Harold B. Lee Library, BYU, pg. 32.

P.S. Why don't you guys move the race discussion to another thread?

Share this post


Link to post

Hi,

The sciptures do not say. But Boaz was "a mighty man of wealth", so there is every reason to believe he had a living wife. The Law of Moses allowed plural marriage, and there does not seem to be any stigma attached to those who lived it.

Richard

I agree there was no stigma and it was not particularly unusual. I still see no reason to believe that Boaz's marriage to Ruth was a polygamous one. Mighty men of wealthy could be widowers and people died frequently.

Share this post


Link to post

I like your sense of humor.

Thanks. Then you might enjoy this.

(A little ditty I built awhile back as a demo for a few jobs I was applying for - you'll need to use speakers or headphones to enjoy it properly.)

Why presume I think less of other cultures?

Because it temporarily makes me feel important? :0)

Seriously, an emphasis on any single culture sometimes leaves an odd impression.

That said, my apologies for assuming.

God has given His People Israel a job to do for the world. A job that He will support us in doing if we have the faith to do it. It is to give them liberty and enable them to enjoy all of their unalienable rights free of molestation and tyranny. This also means free of socialism, communism, globalism, etc. where man is using force and control and compulsion and preventing people from living God's Law.

From your perspective, how do you see that rolling out?

I say what I say because I love all of humanity and value them.

I believe you.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks. Then you might enjoy this.

(A little ditty I built awhile back as a demo for a few jobs I was applying for - you'll need to use speakers or headphones to enjoy it properly.)

That was definitely clever. I liked it!!

Because it temporarily makes me feel important? :0)

Seriously, an emphasis on any single culture sometimes leaves an odd impression.

That said, my apologies for assuming.

There has been a lot of effort on the part of the adversary to charge this situation with a heavy stigma to leave the issue alone. This fact alone ought to give cause to pause and reconsider this issue.

You have shown to have the kind of intellectual integrity to throw off the adversary's programming and dig down to the bare facts of my position. I'm very impressed by that. This skill will serve you very well in your quest! Indeed, it is people such as yourself I would definitely consider having as a traveling companions on dangerous adventures.

From your perspective, how do you see that rolling out?

I foresee that first the Elias/Elijah of the King-Messiah from the House of Joseph has to come onto the scene first. He must come and make a restitution of all things. As I understand it this will simply be to establish Zion just as Joseph Smith was given to establish it. There will be all of the parts of Zion that will be setup in just the way that the Lord intended for them to work. Initially this will have to be done outside the mainstream church because they are in a posture to resist implementing Zion. They don't facilitate consecration and don't appear to be moving in that direction anytime soon.

Only members who are tired of not getting the real deal from the church will look for and find where the real Zion is. In time the King-Messiah will come and be a part of this group, even if quite small. What matters to the Lord is that He is among people who are living the Laws He gave them. In time He will present himself at a place and time to call to the carpet the leaders who are standing in the way of Zion and have them removed out of their place. He will set the church in order. This is what I believe 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 is prophesying about. Once the church is cleansed of this standing apostasy He will then begin to use the church as it was intended to be used. It is the gateway and missionary arm not to itself alone but to the political and economic order of Zion.

The US government will come apart and so that will give opportunity for the political kingdom of Zion to quickly fill the void. The King-Messiah will be the king and under his leadership there will be a new phase of missionary work that will be a whole lot different than what is going on right now. An ensign will be raised to all the scattered people of Israel to gather to Zion and build it up. There will also be additional records to come fourth and new truths that are available to those who are a part of Zion. All will be living the Law of Consecration that are a part of this gathering and it will quickly be prosperous and funds will be available for many things. It will be the only people on the entire face of the planet that will be living in peace. The rest of the world will be in the hell they have created for themselves. Great curses will be upon the waters such that if the wicked try and come upon Zion to loot or attack, etc. they will be destroyed. God will be specially protecting Zion. All who fight against Zion shall surely be smitten at last!

Isaiah is loaded with imagery about both the Elijah and the King-Messiah of the latter-days. There are some definite shockers that most LDS are totally unprepared to consider. I suppose that is why it says when the King-Messiah goes about doing His work the "kings shall shut their mouths at him" and "they will hear that which they had not considered".

I believe you.

Thank you!

JBug

Share this post


Link to post

Wasn't Ephraim half Egyptian?

Yes, but what does that actually mean?

Probably not what many people think, at least.

Lehi

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, but what does that actually mean?

Probably not what many people think, at least.

Lehi

I don't know what it means - I was just making the point that racial purity (which if I'm understanding correctly is core to jbug's assertions) is a matter of perspective.

Share this post


Link to post

The revelation was concerning, not plural marriage, but the New and Everlasting Covenant of marriage. ...

:P Um, Cold Steel, what was the historical context for the Sept. 27, 1886 revelation?

;) Not concerning plural marriage? Really?

...When He commands that men take more than one wife and they do, then it is justified.

Yes, and he did that in the form of the revelation given July 12, 1843 -- D&C 132.

When He commands otherwise, they are obligated to stop.

When did the Lord "command otherwise"? CFR.

Jacob said the law of the Lord was to have but one wife, unless He commanded otherwise.

Jacob didn't say anything about monogamy being the "law of the Lord". This is what he said:

Jacob 2:25-28

25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.

26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.

27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;

28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.

But if you read D&C 132, you see what the Everlasting Covenant is:

And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred), are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead.

Yes D&C 132:7 gives the conditions of the law. It does not mention polygamy because polygamy is understood to be included in the law itself and the same conditions apply to both the first, and all subsequent sealings.

Now note the language:

Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word, and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead, and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world. Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in marriage; but are appointed angels in heaven, which angels are ministering servants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.

Thus the covenant refers to the sealing power, not the number of wives.

This must be read in context with the entire revelation. Other parts of the revelation do deal with having multiple wives. The fact that this verse mentions "a wife" does not contradict those other parts of the revelation at all. The reason it says "a wife" is simply because plural marriage sealings take place for each wife separately and multiple wives are never sealed to a man simultaneously.

If the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage was plural marriage, then we would have little need of temples today.

I'm not sure I follow your argument there. Are you saying that because receiving only one mariage sealing would be an incomplete state, that it would be pointless to do any temple work? The second anointing, which is also essential to receive for exaltation, was hardly given at all during the 1930's and 1940's, yet it was still a worthwhile endeavor to do other temple work during that time.

It was the exception rather than the norm? Could this have been due to the wickedness of the people?

We don't know. Joseph Smith was preaching and publishing one man to one wife in Nauvoo. He was only permitted to expand the "principle" only to a few. Those to whom he revealed it to were called to live it. But for the rank and file of the church, they were not. Had Joseph revealed it to the entire church, I would have said YES.

Temple ordinances were also only given to a few at first. The opportunity to practice polygamy expanded as more people received their endowments and sealings. The opportunity to enter it was not witheld from any member of the church who was endowed and kept their covenants.

People are strange. When it was first revealed, no one wanted to live it.

A majority of the people that it was revealed to wanted to live it during that time (when it was mostly known about only by those who had receieved the endowment).

When the Lord stopped it, no one wanted to stop. ...

Are you sure about that? I thought that the vote to sustain OD 2, the manifesto, was nearly unanimous.

Share this post


Link to post
D&C 132:7 gives the conditions of the law. It does not mention polygamy because polygamy is understood to be included in the law itself . . ..

CFR

Share this post


Link to post

CFR

:P

D&C 132:7 And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred), are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead.

Share this post


Link to post

:P

D&C 132:7 And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred), are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead.

This is a non-answer.

As quoted, you claimed that verse 7 "does not mention polygamy because polygamy is understood to be included in the law itself . . .." Please show that polygamy "is understood to be included in the law itself." That is the point you have merely assumed and not yet demonstrated. Proof by assumption established nothing.

Share this post


Link to post

This is a non-answer.

As quoted, you claimed that verse 7 "does not mention polygamy because polygamy is understood to be included in the law itself . . .." Please show that polygamy "is understood to be included in the law itself." That is the point you have merely assumed and not yet demonstrated. Proof by assumption established nothing.

Okay, sorry about that -- I thought you were referring to the conditions part.

That's why I put the eye rolling smiley, because I thought that was obvious. My bad.

Are you aware that the title for D&C 132 in earlier editions of the Doctrine and Covenants was "Revelation on the Eternity of the Marriage Covenant, Including a Plurality of Wives"? The present edition of the D&C has the words "as also plurality of wives". We understand the significance of the revelation a bit differently today. I saw a show on the KBYU TV channel the other day where some BYU professors were discussuing D&C 132. It was amusing to see how tense they were, and was surprising to see how much of the revelation they either paraphrased, glossed over, or misinterpreted.

I've got to get to work right now but will hopefully get back to you soon with some more references for your CFR other than just the one above.

Share this post


Link to post

As I understand it, while it is true that few were required to follow the law of polygamy on Earth, the law is a higher law which all of us will be required to follow in the CK.

I hope not!

Share this post


Link to post

I foresee that first the Elias/Elijah of the King-Messiah from the House of Joseph has to come onto the scene first. He must come and make a restitution of all things. As I understand it this will simply be to establish Zion just as Joseph Smith was given to establish it. There will be all of the parts of Zion that will be setup in just the way that the Lord intended for them to work. Initially this will have to be done outside the mainstream church because they are in a posture to resist implementing Zion. They don't facilitate consecration and don't appear to be moving in that direction anytime soon.

Only members who are tired of not getting the real deal from the church will look for and find where the real Zion is. In time the King-Messiah will come and be a part of this group, even if quite small. What matters to the Lord is that He is among people who are living the Laws He gave them. In time He will present himself at a place and time to call to the carpet the leaders who are standing in the way of Zion and have them removed out of their place. He will set the church in order. This is what I believe 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 is prophesying about. Once the church is cleansed of this standing apostasy He will then begin to use the church as it was intended to be used. It is the gateway and missionary arm not to itself alone but to the political and economic order of Zion.

The US government will come apart and so that will give opportunity for the political kingdom of Zion to quickly fill the void. The King-Messiah will be the king and under his leadership there will be a new phase of missionary work that will be a whole lot different than what is going on right now. An ensign will be raised to all the scattered people of Israel to gather to Zion and build it up. There will also be additional records to come fourth and new truths that are available to those who are a part of Zion. All will be living the Law of Consecration that are a part of this gathering and it will quickly be prosperous and funds will be available for many things. It will be the only people on the entire face of the planet that will be living in peace. The rest of the world will be in the hell they have created for themselves. Great curses will be upon the waters such that if the wicked try and come upon Zion to loot or attack, etc. they will be destroyed. God will be specially protecting Zion. All who fight against Zion shall surely be smitten at last!

Isaiah is loaded with imagery about both the Elijah and the King-Messiah of the latter-days. There are some definite shockers that most LDS are totally unprepared to consider. I suppose that is why it says when the King-Messiah goes about doing His work the "kings shall shut their mouths at him" and "they will hear that which they had not considered".

Sooo...you believe the mainstream LDS church is off course and we'll need a new group outside the confines of the church to live the actual laws of the gospel and prepare for the Savior's return. Unfortunately, for this to happen, there will have to be a new "prophet" to foresee this extra-church group--no doubt one "mighty and strong". Do you know how many men have fallen away into apostasy, leading good, misguided people with them because they wanted to fulfill this prophecy?

And that's where we part company. It's interesting, when I read your initial comments about Women "giving" themselves and Men "receiving" them, earlier on this thread, I thought you had some good ideas...but I had the distinct feeling I should hesitate in offering my agreement with you and your thoughts. Then, I read your comments on the thread about "hormones and revelation" and then this one which I've quoted and I now I know why I'd felt I should be hesitant of you.

But thanks for being up front in expressing your thoughts. I like to know where other posters are coming from, belief wise--that's one reason why, though I disagree with him completely, I appreciate ERichard--he doesn't try to hide his affiliation with a break off LDS church--and I can make allowances for his opinions because I know he comes from a non-mainstream LDS belief system.

Share this post


Link to post

Wasn't Ephraim half Egyptian?

Not only Ephraim, but what about the wives of all of Joseph's brothers? Unless they married their sisters (or themselves), they had to get their wives from somewhere. The Israelites were "mixed blood" from the very beginning. They spent hundreds of years in Egypt. Does anyone really think it is even possible that there were NO marriages to Egyptians over the course of hundreds of years? They were enslaved by the Egyptians. Men have sex with their slave women. This is a fact. The entire idea of Israel being some kind of "pure" race is just completely absurd. Israel themselves took captives. What about all of King Solomon's thousands of children from his "foreign" wives and concubines? They "polluted" the gene pool hundreds of years before Israel was scattered and passed that "impure blood" on to the next generations. There is and never was any "pure" Israelite blood.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...