Exaltaion requirements

[James Banta]

I don't spend a lot of time here because I was told by a member of your church I had no right to be here. But this question has come up on another Posting board and I would like to get input from believing members of the church.. Please if you are not LDS don't respond.. IHS jim

[Jason]

What the devil is being a polygamist "at least at heart" supposed to mean?

[thesometimesaint]

James Banta:

As long as you follow the board guidelines I see no reason to exclude you from the discussion. However I too have no idea what polygamist "at least at heart" means.

[Gillebre]

I think being a 'polygamist at heart' means that you would, if called and commanded by Jesus Christ, practice polygamy.

As in, you would be obedient to the Savior if He required it of you, even if He never does in this life or the next, the intent to obedience in your heart, were He to choose to ask it of you, is what is seen.

I can say, personally, that if the Savior desired of me that I should practice it, I would. So, in heart, I am a polygamist you could say. However, in practice, I am not, because He has not called me to live in such a manner.

And as far as the poll question is concerned, with what I believe to be the definition of 'polygamist at heart', yes, one must be at the very least that much, to inherit exaltation. Will they ever practice it? Maybe not. Not in this life, I'd say. BUT, they must be, in their hearts, truly willing to obey any and every command of their Lord, even to the taking of multiple spouses. It is the principle therein, the obedience to whatsoever thing He would inflict upon them, that would take part in qualifying them for exaltation.

Does that help at all?

[James Banta]

James Banta:

As long as you follow the board guidelines I see no reason to exclude you from the discussion. However I too have no idea what polygamist "at least at heart" means.

To be a polygamist at heart is to believe in it as an eternal principle.. That you are ready to live in it as soon as the Prophet say God wants the practice restarted.. That you see it as an eternal doctrine of the Church.. I have no hidden agenda in this I just want to understand where the hearts of the membership lays in this matter..

I am not alway gentle in my presentation of the truth of the Bible as the Holy Spirit has given it to me.. This means that I stir the pot a LOT.. Some of you it would seem would rather not have their religion question by Biblical standards.. At no time have I or will I ever get obscene or make personal attacks. IHS jim

[James Banta]

I think being a 'polygamist at heart' means that you would, if called and commanded by Jesus Christ, practice polygamy.

As in, you would be obedient to the Savior if He required it of you, even if He never does in this life or the next, the intent to obedience in your heart, were He to choose to ask it of you, is what is seen.

I can say, personally, that if the Savior desired of me that I should practice it, I would. So, in heart, I am a polygamist you could say. However, in practice, I am not, because He has not called me to live in such a manner.

And as far as the poll question is concerned, with what I believe to be the definition of 'polygamist at heart', yes, one must be at the very least that much, to inherit exaltation. Will they ever practice it? Maybe not. Not in this life, I'd say. BUT, they must be, in their hearts, truly willing to obey any and every command of their Lord, even to the taking of multiple spouses. It is the principle therein, the obedience to whatsoever thing He would inflict upon them, that would take part in qualifying them for exaltation.

Does that help at all?

This is just the thing I am looking for.. When the Bible is clear that the leaders of the Church are to have ONE wife would you be willing as a member of the LDS to go against that teaching if your Prophet said the time had come to make it part of the "gospel" again.. Thanks you for your input... IHS jim

[thesometimesaint]

James Banta:

I'm not big on hidden agenda's so unless it is patently obvious I give people the benefit of the doubt.

Thanks for the clarification. Then my answer would be yes.

[Jason]

If willing obedience to God's commandments was the real question, why not make the question "Must a person be willing to do whatever God requires of them?" rather than focusing specifically on polygamy?

EDIT: This is why I rarely answer polls on this forum. They all either have an agenda behind them or are so badly worded that I can't honestly say that they represent my views.

[Jason]

This is just the thing I am looking for.. When the Bible is clear that the leaders of the Church are to have ONE wife would you be willing as a member of the LDS to go against that teaching if your Prophet said the time had come to make it part of the "gospel" again.. Thanks you for your input... IHS jim

Out of curiosity, where does the Bible say that the leaders of the Church are to have ONE wife, and what does that mean for the Roman Catholics?

[mercyngrace]

This is just the thing I am looking for.. When the Bible is clear that the leaders of the Church are to have ONE wife would you be willing as a member of the LDS to go against that teaching if your Prophet said the time had come to make it part of the "gospel" again.. Thanks you for your input... IHS jim

That definition is no different than saying "I am willing to be completely submissive to God and do whatsoever He commands."

Of course, I think submissivenes is a requirement for exaltation.

Since there is historical precedent for divinely endorsed plural marriage in the Old Testament, I would say it's foolish to completely exclude the possibility of God asking man to practice it again. To utterly reject the possibility would be behaving similarly to Saul as he struggled with Christianity. He held fast to the interpretations of the law that he had been taught even to the point that he persecuted early saints and participated peripheally in the murder of Stephen. Had he only been willing to accept the possibility of continued revelation.... thank the heavens, he finally had his spiritual (and physical) sight restored.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I don't spend a lot of time here because I was told by a member of your church I had no right to be here. But this question has come up on another Posting board and I would like to get input from believing members of the church.. Please if you are not LDS don't respond.. IHS jim

Glad to se you are feeling well enough to ask a question you already know the answer too. If you had to be a polygamist to be exalted that would really be bad for the members for the last 120 years. As a fo-mo you know that Section 132 of the D&C does not apply after 1890.

[Doctor Steuss]

Polygamy? Nah. A form of polyfidelity wherein the individual ceases to exist outside the "one," likely minus the polyamorous aspects associated with the term? Perhaps.

[cinepro]

What the heck does "at least in heart" mean?

If it means that the person would be willing to live the commandment if so commanded, then it might be reasonable to answer "yes".

But I don't believe everyone will be commanded, since I don't believe there will be a >2:1 ratio of women to men in the CK.

[Maidservant]

When the Bible is clear that the leaders of the Church are to have ONE wife would you be willing as a member of the LDS to go against that teaching if your Prophet said the time had come to make it part of the "gospel" again

My understanding and belief at the moment is an emphatic: "I don't know!"

By the way there are multiple questions going around in this thread. The title to the thread says "Exaltation requirements". Again, "I don't know." A completely different question is being willing to participate in anything (including polygamy) if it was believed that God himself had commanded it whether or not it was required for exaltation. I am genuinely curious if you want to know if we think it is required for exaltation, or if we would be willing to do it (at least as obedience to God). Which question do you want answered, because I think they are different questions?

I would rephrase your assessment: "When GOD is clear that ALL PEOPLE are to have ONE SPOUSE and yet there have been times when God has at least countenanced MULTIPLE SPOUSES, would you be willing as a member of THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST to BE FAITHFUL TO THE BIBLE AS IT STANDS IN ITS ENTIRETY AND AS MADE CLEARER BY GOD'S CURRENT INTEREST AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR HIS PEOPLE TODAY if GOD THROUGH HIS PROPHET said the time had come to make polygamy and/or polyandry ACCEPTABLE, POSSIBLE, or CALLED to practice it in TODAY'S CHURCH POLICY."

By the way, the gospel is faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, baptism, the gift of the Holy Ghost, and enduring to the end. THAT is the gospel. Everything else is by some other category.

I LOVE the scripture you quote in your signature line . . . thrills me every time I say it.

Welcome to MADB. God bless and good luck.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

To be a polygamist at heart is to believe in it as an eternal principle.. That you are ready to live in it as soon as the Prophet say God wants the practice restarted.. That you see it as an eternal doctrine of the Church.. I have no hidden agenda in this I just want to understand where the hearts of the membership lays in this matter..

So why not ask then in your poll, that we believe that if God through a prophet commands us do do something that we will do it??

That is an entirely differnet question than being something at heart.

I am not alway gentle in my presentation of the truth of the Bible as the Holy Spirit has given it to me.. This means that I stir the pot a LOT.. Some of you it would seem would rather not have their religion question by Biblical standards.. At no time have I or will I ever get obscene or make personal attacks. IHS jim

I am not interested in your interpretation of the bible. I am interested in what the text says. You deem it to be the HG giving you something. I have to take the critics stance here, what if what you think the HG is saying says something different to a different EV??

It happens all of the time. You guys can't even agree on what it means ot be a trinitarian let alone what the biblical deffinition of a christian is.

BTW the only people that have the authority to not have you be welcome on this board are the admins, and I don't remember them banning you as it is evident you are still posting.

The last thread we were in you took offense to something that was said that was inane and you left the board on you own volition. So don't come here an pretend to be a martyr. It wont work.

I welcome your dialgue.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

This is just the thing I am looking for.. When the Bible is clear that the leaders of the Church are to have ONE wife would you be willing as a member of the LDS to go against that teaching if your Prophet said the time had come to make it part of the "gospel" again.. Thanks you for your input... IHS jim

IT is clear? What is clear is taht God in past times commanded polygamy to be practiced and in other times commanded people to not practice it. I think that is what you are missing.

Consider Amos 3:7

3 For surely the Lord God will do nothing but he revealeth his secerts to his servants the prophets.

And your interpretation of Hebrews that Christ is that last prophet and there will be none after JEsus is false, as the bible tells us in Acts that there were other prophets. Don't forget that John the revelator was a prophet as he revealed quite a bit to us in the books of Revelations and that was after Christ.

[MDalby]

I am not alway gentle in my presentation of the truth of the Bible as the Holy Spirit has given it to me.. This means that I stir the pot a LOT.. Some of you it would seem would rather not have their religion question by Biblical standards.. At no time have I or will I ever get obscene or make personal attacks. IHS jim

Actually, it is quite the contrary. The LDS as biblical Christians strongly welcome the biblical standard, as long as it is consistently applied as a standard. The traditional Christianity that follows the creeds of man is what we cannot accept as a standard.

[Deborah]

When the Bible is clear that the leaders of the Church are to have ONE wife would you be willing as a member of the LDS to go against that teaching if your Prophet said the time had come to make it part of the "gospel" again..

This to me is your real purpose in posting this. Polygamy is NOT a requirement of exaltation. Period. Never was because even when plural marriage was allowed not everyone participated yet were sealed in the temple. What is a requirement is doing what God tells us through his living prophets. And the Bible is clear that plural marriage was part of the law of the ancient Israelites at various times.

[BCSpace]

A poorly worded question. Better to ask if a person would be willing to accept plural marriage as a doctrine. "Polygamist" conjures up all sorts of images, some good and some not so good, even among LDS, and therefore skews the poll results.

The answer of course is that yes, someone must accept the doctrine of plural marriage to enter into the highest degree of the CK whether they are practicing it or not.

Of course this can be distilled down to "Do you need to accept all the doctrine and commandments of God?" as plural marriage is a Biblical doctrine.

[Redefined]

Since it seems the original question was so hard to understand for some. . . If a person rejects the concept of polygamy will they be able to enter into celestial glory. . . or is accepting the concept a requirement?

[Jason]

Since it seems the original question was so hard to understand for some. . . If a person rejects the concept of polygamy will they be able to enter into celestial glory. . . or is accepting the concept a requirement?

What would constitute acceting or rejecting the concept?

[Redefined]

What would constitute acceting or rejecting the concept?

Believing in monogamy and being opposed to polygamy.

[Jason]

Believing in monogamy and being opposed to polygamy.

Believing how? What actions indicate that one believes in monogamy or polygamy?

[Redefined]

Believing how? What actions indicate that one believes in monogamy or polygamy?

Well, for one, only marrying one wife and refusing to marry anymore.

[Olavarria]