Credibility of "monogamy is the rule and polygamy the exception" statements

[woo-sow856]

Hello,

I am an active member of the church and have been listening to the recent Face to Face event with Elder Cook.  I was very concerned with the mention of the latter-prophets telling us how the polygamy situation will be in the next life.  This contradicts things I have heard before in the church, and I don't understand why the church is making statements on things they don't know.  If what they are saying is true that "monagamy will be the rule and polygamy the exception" in the next life, and that "polygamy in the early days of the church has accomplished its purpose", does anyone know what sources they are drawing off of?  I personally haven't been able to find any statements by the brethren suggesting they know how things will be in the next life in this regard.  If we do have statements suggesting such, I would like to know.  Thanks for your help.

[ksfisher]

11 minutes ago, woo-sow856 said:

Hello,

I am an active member of the church and have been listening to the recent Face to Face event with Elder Cook.  I was very concerned with the mention of the latter-prophets telling us how the polygamy situation will be in the next life.  This contradicts things I have heard before in the church, and I don't understand why the church is making statements on things they don't know.  If what they are saying is true that "monagamy will be the rule and polygamy the exception" in the next life, and that "polygamy in the early days of the church has accomplished its purpose", does anyone know what sources they are drawing off of?  I personally haven't been able to find any statements by the brethren suggesting they know how things will be in the next life in this regard.  If we do have statements suggesting such, I would like to know.  Thanks for your help.

Do you have the time during the face to face when this statement was made?  It would be helpful for those trying to answer your question to understand the context in which this statement was made.

[bluebell]

46 minutes ago, woo-sow856 said:

Hello,

I am an active member of the church and have been listening to the recent Face to Face event with Elder Cook.  I was very concerned with the mention of the latter-prophets telling us how the polygamy situation will be in the next life.  This contradicts things I have heard before in the church, and I don't understand why the church is making statements on things they don't know.  If what they are saying is true that "monagamy will be the rule and polygamy the exception" in the next life, and that "polygamy in the early days of the church has accomplished its purpose", does anyone know what sources they are drawing off of?  I personally haven't been able to find any statements by the brethren suggesting they know how things will be in the next life in this regard.  If we do have statements suggesting such, I would like to know.  Thanks for your help.

I think a lot of it is based on BOM Jacob 2: 27 and 30-

"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;.... For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things."

Those verses say that unless God commands it, the rule is monogamy.  The would mean that polygamy is an exception to the rule.

[Robert F. Smith]

27 minutes ago, woo-sow856 said:

......I am an active member of the church and have been listening to the recent Face to Face event with Elder Cook.  I was very concerned with the mention of the latter-prophets telling us how the polygamy situation will be in the next life.  This contradicts things I have heard before in the church, and I don't understand why the church is making statements on things they don't know. 

The "church" is not a sentient being who has opinions. The 'church" is an organization of many different people with very diverse opinions.  Elder Cook has opinions, and so do many other members of the LDS faith.  Whether anyone knows anything about polygamy is a matter for historical research. In all such discussions we need to cite the opinions of specific people, by name.

27 minutes ago, woo-sow856 said:

If what they are saying is true that "monagamy will be the rule and polygamy the exception" in the next life, and that "polygamy in the early days of the church has accomplished its purpose", does anyone know what sources they are drawing off of?  I personally haven't been able to find any statements by the brethren suggesting they know how things will be in the next life in this regard.  If we do have statements suggesting such, I would like to know.  Thanks for your help.

It is quite possible that the Brethren do not know how marriage will be in the next life, whether monogamy or polygamy will predominate.  From an anthropological and historical POV, it is likely that monogamy will predominate since that has been the standard throughout most of human history (pair bonding).  There has also been a lot of polygamy, but we can only find it being practiced in Scripture at particular times and places.  Otherwise we are left without adequate information on which to base our opinions.  Getting excited and upset about such arcane questions is probably a waste of time.  We simply do not have the data on which to base our opinions.

Even in its heyday, polygamy was practiced by no more than about 25-30% of the Saints (1870), and it decreased thereafter --   https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-and-families-in-early-utah?lang=eng#14 .  See also https://byustudies.byu.edu/content/demographic-limits-nineteenth-century-mormon-polygyny .

[rpn]

The answer is that if those who are sealed in heaven, are those who accept the gospel and are sealed to their spouse/s on earth, then it logically follows that there will be many more monogamous partners in the eternities since that is what has happened on earth.    Furthermore, God's plan doesn't include forcing His children, so there will be nothing going on within the celestial kingdom that isn't chosen and accepted and decided before the judgment (because there won't be ordinances done on earth which is where they have to be done after the judgment.

[woo-sow856]

On ‎9‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 8:36 AM, ksfisher said:

Do you have the time during the face to face when this statement was made?  It would be helpful for those trying to answer your question to understand the context in which this statement was made.

Hi ksfisher, thank you for your reply.  34:44 is the exact time this topic came up.  The interesting thing is that it was mostly the historians that were speaking at this event, so I didn't know how credible their interpretation of certain doctrines were.  There also wasn't any reference to what they based their interpretations off of other than Jacob 2: 27 and 30.

[strappinglad]

I will be so bold as to assert that  separate and single is the default position in the eternities. Marriage will not exist for anyone except those in the highest Kingdom.

[Stargazer]

7 hours ago, strappinglad said:

I will be so bold as to assert that  separate and single is the default position in the eternities. Marriage will not exist for anyone except those in the highest Kingdom.

Nail meet head!

[woo-sow856]

On ‎9‎/‎20‎/‎2018 at 11:37 AM, rpn said:

The answer is that if those who are sealed in heaven, are those who accept the gospel and are sealed to their spouse/s on earth, then it logically follows that there will be many more monogamous partners in the eternities since that is what has happened on earth.    Furthermore, God's plan doesn't include forcing His children, so there will be nothing going on within the celestial kingdom that isn't chosen and accepted and decided before the judgment (because there won't be ordinances done on earth which is where they have to be done after the judgment. 

Hi rpn, thank you for your comments.  I have thought about this concept of whether or not God will force his children to accomplish his purposes.  The church seems to make it sound like the ultimate purpose in living the gospel is so we can become gods and goddesses ourselves one day, but I know there are people who live the gospel diligently and nonetheless are not necessarily motivated by the idea of becoming a deity.  I wonder if such people will eventually get to the point where even if they don't want that, God will expect them to, and will withhold blessings from them if they don't.  The reason I bring this up on the issue of polygamy is that there is a possibility that some people might want that in the next life, and I'm wondering what would happen if one has lived worthy of the Celestial Kingdom but nonetheless doesn't want to conform to monogamy.  The idea that God will not force his children and that there are different paths in the next life even for those who lived worthy of the Celestial Kingdom sounds appealing and I hope that's the case.  I'd be curious to know if there's a scriptural reference or teaching you know of that backs up this idea. 

[Stargazer]

31 minutes ago, woo-sow856 said:

Hi rpn, thank you for your comments.  I have thought about this concept of whether or not God will force his children to accomplish his purposes.  The church seems to make it sound like the ultimate purpose in living the gospel is so we can become gods and goddesses ourselves one day, but I know there are people who live the gospel diligently and nonetheless are not necessarily motivated by the idea of becoming a deity.  I wonder if such people will eventually get to the point where even if they don't want that, God will expect them to, and will withhold blessings from them if they don't.  The reason I bring this up on the issue of polygamy is that there is a possibility that some people might want that in the next life, and I'm wondering what would happen if one has lived worthy of the Celestial Kingdom but nonetheless doesn't want to conform to monogamy.  The idea that God will not force his children and that there are different paths in the next life even for those who lived worthy of the Celestial Kingdom sounds appealing and I hope that's the case.  I'd be curious to know if there's a scriptural reference or teaching you know of that backs up this idea. 

Whether one is motivated by it or not, you have to remember that you were placed here with enormous limitations on your intellect and your faculties.  Humans cannot multi-track, we must sleep 1/3 of our lives away, our communications are limited to whatever voice, sight and hearing can lend us, and we cannot comprehend anything but the basics of existence.  Even the brightest of intellects here are incredibly limited, compared to what God brought us to be as not-yet-embodied spirits.  A five year old has only the most rudimentary conception of what it means to be an adult, and if polled as to what he or she wants to do when he or she grows up, can hardly give a coherent answer, let alone know what it all will mean.  A five year old might want to be a fireman in adulthood, but how many five year olds know what this really means?  In mortality, even as adults, we have no conception what eternity looks like, and cannot imagine it -- even those of us who think we know, really don't.  So, go ahead and say "Oh, I don't really want to be like Father.  I'm content with the Terrestrial Kingdom." You are the prototypical five year old, and don't know what you're talking about.  Because the only purpose in coming here was to find out if you could hack it, being like Father.  You wanted to hack it, or you would have told Father, "No, don't send me.  I'm Okay with just being Okay."  And He wouldn't have sent you.

The scriptural reference is the Parable of the Sower.  And the parable pertains to who you are -- are you rocky ground, which will not sprout the seeds?  Are you shallow soil, which will not support the newly sprouted seed?  Or are you good, fertile soil, which will nourish the seed to fruition?  That's the question.

[rpn]

the many mansions scripture doesn't bring that to mind for you?

[woo-sow856]

On 9/20/2018 at 11:37 AM, rpn said:

The answer is that if those who are sealed in heaven, are those who accept the gospel and are sealed to their spouse/s on earth, then it logically follows that there will be many more monogamous partners in the eternities since that is what has happened on earth.    Furthermore, God's plan doesn't include forcing His children, so there will be nothing going on within the celestial kingdom that isn't chosen and accepted and decided before the judgment (because there won't be ordinances done on earth which is where they have to be done after the judgment.

Hi rpn, the scripture about there being many mansions prepared definitely is comforting and gives the impression that there will be room even within the next life for people having different types of lifestyles.  Going back to the polygamy issue, there has been a lot said about the commonality the human family within a Zion society (for example, the description of Enoch's people in Moses 7 and the Nephites in 4 Nephi).  The idea of people in the next life still being tied to what type of culture they had in mortality and not being able to take part of the culture of a different time period seems contradictory to the idea of having all things in common.  Also, there's also the question of the purpose of plural marriages performed in the early church that were apparently for "eternity only".  Don't you think there's a possibility that polygamy for that purpose could still prevail within the next life?

[Rain]

Is there any chance this is one of the areas where there is contention between you and your wife?  (the other thread) Or is this just coincidental?

[woo-sow856]

On ‎9‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 10:13 PM, Rain said:

Is there any chance this is one of the areas where there is contention between you and your wife?  (the other thread) Or is this just coincidental?

Hi Rain, to answer your question, the polygamy issue isn't something my wife and I have been arguing about, but my thoughts on the subject are definitely affected by contention we have in other areas.  Things are hard enough in the marriage that the thought of being together for eternity with my wife as she stands right now is painful to say the least.  Part of what I was getting at in this thread is the idea that what we "sealed on earth" during this life is perhaps not the source of ultimate happiness for all of us, and I've been trying to think of a way to convince myself that God is okay with us desiring a way of life in the eternities other than a life centered on the family one was sealed to in this life. 

[Lucian Hodoboc]

On 9/20/2018 at 5:20 PM, woo-sow856 said:

I was very concerned with the mention of the latter-prophets telling us how the polygamy situation will be in the next life.  This contradicts things I have heard before in the church, and I don't understand why the church is making statements on things they don't know.  If what they are saying is true that "monagamy will be the rule and polygamy the exception" in the next life,

I thought that Jesus said that in the life after the resurrection we will neither marry, nor be given in marriage, but rather have no need for romantic and sexual relationships, similarly to how the angels function. 🤔

[JLHPROF]

30 minutes ago, Lucian Hodoboc said:

I thought that Jesus said that in the life after the resurrection we will neither marry, nor be given in marriage, 

Correct.  He did say that.  Which is why all marriage sealings have to be performed in this life.  Even if done vicariously.

Quote

but rather have no need for romantic and sexual relationships, similarly to how the angels function. 🤔

This he did not say.  No idea where you got that false idea.

[Lucian Hodoboc]

9 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

This he did not say.  No idea where you got that false idea.

From Matthew 22:30?

The angels' purpose is to serve God, and having romantic attachments to each other would make their feelings be divided between the object of their affection and God. I'm guessing that they love each other equally, but don't hold a particular type of love that would be the equivalent of romantic love.

[JLHPROF]

7 hours ago, Lucian Hodoboc said:

From Matthew 22:30?

The angels' purpose is to serve God, and having romantic attachments to each other would make their feelings be divided between the object of their affection and God. I'm guessing that they love each other equally, but don't hold a particular type of love that would be the equivalent of romantic love.

30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven

Yep, says nothing about romance, sex, or divided affections.  You really are "guessing".

[woo-sow856]

This is one of those things where I'm sure God expects us to look beyond the immediate meaning of what's said in the scriptures.  Think of all the people who were not able to marry in this life, who were married but could never bear children, or who want to continue their family in the afterlife, etc.  Also, please consider what is said concerning us being God's children, and us being born to him and a Heavenly Mother before we were born in this life.  Considering these things, there's no doubt to me that there will be procreation in the afterlife.  I guess the only question is whether that can only take place among resurrected beings, or if it can happen among spirits, as well.  If it can't happen among spirits, perhaps what Christ is referring to in Matthew 22:30 is part of the nature of spirits awaiting resurrection (although I realize the verse mentions resurrection, that doesn't mean the same thing in every occurrence of the word in the scriptures, and is used elsewhere to refer to people in the spirit world [see Alma 40:15]).  

[Lucian Hodoboc]

2 hours ago, woo-sow856 said:

and us being born to him and a Heavenly Mother before we were born in this life.

Say what now? 😮

[longview]

On 9/22/2018 at 2:34 PM, Stargazer said:

Because the only purpose in coming here was to find out if you could hack it, being like Father.  You wanted to hack it, or you would have told Father, "No, don't send me.  I'm Okay with just being Okay."  And He wouldn't have sent you.

No.  Another important reason for coming to earth is to obtain a physical body (and eventual resurrection, all good and better than being spirit entities).

Which brings up another question:  If the evil spirits requested of Jesus to be allowed to enter into a herd of swine, why were they not willing to keep the first estate so they could qualify to be born into the world?

[The Nehor]

As a rule apostles do not need to cite scripture or precedent to teach something.

[JLHPROF]

On 11/19/2018 at 11:28 AM, Lucian Hodoboc said:

Say what now? 😮

Yep, that's right.  Heavenly Mother.

[Stargazer]

On 11/19/2018 at 11:08 PM, longview said:

No.  Another important reason for coming to earth is to obtain a physical body (and eventual resurrection, all good and better than being spirit entities).

Yes, of course.  But would God have sent you if you decided you didn't want to go?  Personally, I believe that every one of us wanted to come here.

On 11/19/2018 at 11:08 PM, longview said:

Which brings up another question:  If the evil spirits requested of Jesus to be allowed to enter into a herd of swine, why were they not willing to keep the first estate so they could qualify to be born into the world?

They were on Lucifer's side of the question.  They still wanted to come, just weren't allowed to any longer.

I don't know what the "war in heaven" consisted of.  Hard to imagine fist fights, let alone actual combat.  However that went, the rebellious spirits did not accept Father's decision and believed they could force a change to it.  But they couldn't and the attempt to force a change in His decision constituted rebellion and disqualification for the second estate.

[The Refiner's Fire]

Why can a man still be sealed to more than one woman but not a woman to more than one man? Or has this changed? If it is still so, doesn't that implay a specific view of marriage in the afterlife?