Entering The Principle, Neccesary For Exaltation?

[juliann]

The quote is a fine one for Saints after plural marriage was done away with. Sure this is the position from Pres. Grant forward. However, in the 19 century it is pretty clear that Brigham and other Church leaders taught that celestial marriage was plural marriage and such was required for exaltation in their minds and in what they taught.

And your point is? Mine is that we followmodern prophets. Those who don't are usually called apostates or something like that.

Still waiting for a statement from a modern prophet.

[juliann]

Whether I have to have 1,2 or 100 wives in the eternities...I have no idea.

Why not a million?

What is your fantasy about this? What will a hundred wives accomplish for you? What is the purpose? If you can't come up with a practical and pragmatic reason as to why this improves your lot as well as the women you want to take from other men.... then why not be a Muslim martyr and get the 70 virgins? Sounds like more of a sure thing.

[Teancum]

And your point is? Mine is that we followmodern prophets. Those who don't are usually called apostates or something like that.

Still waiting for a statement from a modern prophet.

My point is two fold.

1: There was a time when the living prophet declared that plural marriage was celestial marriage and requireed for exaltation. Some argue that this was never the case.

2: That some find the fact that a succeeding prophet took a position contrary to a prior requirement for exaltation troubling. Certainly there are FLDS that think the successors of BY and John Taylor were far from the mark on this. They believe we are the apostates. Non LDS critics also struggle with what they view as a moving target more based on expediency then revelation.

[juliann]

My point is two fold.

1: There was a time when the living prophet declared that plural marriage was celestial marriage and requireed for exaltation. Some argue that this was never the case.

Shouldn't you expect to find someone to argue just about anything on a message board? Why does that matter?

2: That some find the fact that a succeeding prophet took a position contrary to a prior requirement for exaltation troubling. Certainly there are FLDS that think the successors of BY and John Taylor were far from the mark on this. They believe we are the apostates. Non LDS critics also struggle with what they view as a moving target more based on expediency then revelation.

By virtue of being an "LDS critic", a position I find repugnant no matter what religion they target, they are going to use anything they possibly can. I'm not sure what criminal groups have to do with anything..other than for a little old fashioned well poisoning. To date I haven't seen anything remotely similar in LDS polygamy and criminal groups other than the multiple marriages...and no one minds if there are extra women around as long as its not called a marriage. And I would hope that revelation is always expedient....the complaint from the career critis is usually that it isn't expedient enough...until that isn't convenient, of course.

[Obiwan]

From Brigham Young:

Now, we as Christians desire to be saved in the kingdom of God. We desire to attain to the possession of all the blessings there are for the most faithful man or people that ever lived upon the face of the earth, even him who is said to be the father of the faithful, Abraham of old. We wish to obtain all that father Abraham obtained. I wish here to say to the Elders of Israel, and to all the members of this Church and kingdom, that it is in the hearts of many of them to wish that the doctrine of polygamy was not taught and practiced by us. It may be hard for many, and especially for the ladies, yet it is no harder for them than it is for the gentlemen. It is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to you, and all the world, that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained. This is as true as that God lives. You who wish that there were no such thing in existence, if you have in your hearts to say: "We will pass along in the Church without obeying or submitting to it in our faith or believing this order, because, for aught that we know, this community may be broken up yet, and we may have lucrative offices offered to us; we will not, therefore, be polygamists lest we should fail in obtaining some earthly honor, character and office, etc,"-the man that has that in his heart, and will continue to persist in pursuing that policy, will come short of dwelling in the presence of the Father and the Son, in celestial glory. The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy. Others attain unto a glory and may even be permitted to come into the presence of the Father and the Son; but they cannot reign as kings in glory, because they had blessing offered unto them, and they refused to accept them.

There's context involved in the meaning of this passage, so here here's the full sermon:

http://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_11/refJDvol11-41.html

The ONLY Faith we are to have, is that it is a doctrine of God, for which he gives according to his will.

It is not necessary for us to "literally" enter into Polygamy, but to enter into it in Faith according to the Will of the Lord, and if called to enter into it literally.

[kamenraider]

erichard,

I agree with you that the FLDS Church has become a horrible mess. It's a real non-prophet organization.

I also definitely agree with you that the new and everlasting covenant of marriage can be lived with one wife, however I would add that I believe that it can only be lived this way temporarily. In other words, whether it is ten years from now, or a hundred, or a thousand, I believe that each couple will have to either accept or reject the principle of celestial plural marriage, and that if they reject it they thereby reject their exaltation. Whether there will be non-polygamous couples in the Celestial Kingdom I don't know. They may make up the middle degree of that kingdom.

juliann,

You wrote:

Except there is an official statement saying otherwise. And First Presidency statements trump JOD newspaper articles.

"Celestial marriage--that is, marriage for time and eternity--and polygamous or plural marriage are not synonomous terms. Monogamous marriages for time and eternity, solemnized in our temples in accordance with the word of the Lord and the laws of the Church, are Celestial marriages."

Heber J. Grant

Anthony W. Ivins,

J. Reuben Clark, Jr.

James R. Clark, Messages Of The First Presidency, 5:329.

It doesn't matter how many times I post this, it is not acknowledged.

I acknowledge the truth of the statement. I'm currently only married to one wife. We were sealed in the temple and have a "Celestial marriage". When I proposed marriage to her though, I made her acceptance of the principle of plural marriage a condition. I suppose that the day may come, perhaps during the millennium if not sooner (such as if she dies before I do and I remarry in the temple), that we may live the principle. Our marriage would then still be a "Celstial marriage", so I don't think that quote (that you seem to love to post every time this subject comes up here) can be twisted to mean that plural marriage will never be a requirement for exaltation, especially in light of scripture that says that it is (which trumps personal opinions).

One more thing. What does the political opression of women have to do with what you refer to as "polygamy fantasies"?

You seem to think that families that live the principle are "miserable" and "dysfunctional". If there is any misery involved in properly living celestial laws, it certainly can't compare to the miseries of the damned.

I wonder if you have read this quote before:

I speak of plurality of wives as one of the most holy principles that God ever revealed to man, and all those who exercise an influence against it, unto whom it is taught, man or woman, will be damned, and they, and all who will be influenced by them, will suffer the buffetings of Satan in the flesh; for the curse of God will be upon them, and poverty, and distress, and vexation of spirit will be their portion; while those who honor this and every sacred institution of heaven will shine forth as the stars in the firmament of heaven, and of the increase of their kingdom and glory there shall be no end. This will equally apply to Jew, Gentile, and Mormon, male and female, old and young.

-Heber C. Kimball, JD 11:211

Obiwan,

I hope that if an opportunity to righteously live plural marriage presented itself, you wouldn't wait to first get a letter from "box B" that says "Hey Obiwan, get off your behind and take another wife." When do you think your free agency comes into play? After my brother returned from his mission, he used to humorously answer questions about when he was going to get married by saying "Well, no one has asked me yet."

[Olavarria]

Why not a million?

What is your fantasy about this? What will a hundred wives accomplish for you? What is the purpose? If you can't come up with a practical and pragmatic reason as to why this improves your lot as well as the women you want to take from other men.... then why not be a Muslim martyr and get the 70 virgins? Sounds like more of a sure thing.

I love women; what can I say?

ps. the "100" was a stab at hyperbole.

[Obiwan]

I hope that if an opportunity to righteously live plural marriage presented itself, you wouldn't wait to first get a letter from "box B" that says "Hey Obiwan, get off your behind and take another wife." When do you think your free agency comes into play? After my brother returned from his mission, he used to humorously answer questions about when he was going to get married by saying "Well, no one has asked me yet."

Plural Marriage isn't some "right", it's a calling according to the Will of the Lord.

If called, I would do my duty.

[Olavarria]

plural marriage = theological powderkeg

[Zakuska]

Tell me about it!

Look what happened to Moses' brother and sister when he took a second wife?!!!

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/num/12/1

[juliann]

I acknowledge the truth of the statement. I'm currently only married to one wife. We were sealed in the temple and have a "Celestial marriage". When I proposed marriage to her though, I made her acceptance of the principle of plural marriage a condition. I suppose that the day may come, perhaps during the millennium if not sooner (such as if she dies before I do and I remarry in the temple), that we may live the principle. Our marriage would then still be a "Celstial marriage", so I don't think that quote (that you seem to love to post every time this subject comes up here) can be twisted to mean that plural marriage will never be a requirement for exaltation, especially in light of scripture that says that it is (which trumps personal opinions).

I use that quote because of the claims that polygamy is required for a "celestial marriage". It obvoiusly is not which you have just agreed.

One more thing. What does the political opression of women have to do with what you refer to as "polygamy fantasies"?

You made your wife accept polygamy? And you wonder why fulfilling the fantasy of living life under Brigham Young instead of modern prophets you must have women who will behave as they did in the 19th century. It isn't a man's game anymore. You don't get to make those decisions...and you had better hope you outlive your wife because if she marries again she can be sealed to her second husband after death and maybe she will make you accept the principle of polygamy, too.

You seem to think that families that live the principle are "miserable" and "dysfunctional". If there is any misery involved in properly living celestial laws, it certainly can't compare to the miseries of the damned.

You are distorting much of what I said...why? I referred to the Patriarchs very specifically...not that the same things wouldn't happen with other families. Do you really think they had functional families? Abraham sent his own son in the desert to die to keep the peace!

[kamenraider]

Plural Marriage isn't some "right", it's a calling according to the Will of the Lord.

If called, I would do my duty.

I agree that it isn't a right. Orson Pratt, on pg. 31 of The Seer, describes how a man obtains a plural wife. His discription of the process could be outlined in five steps:

1. Select a potential wife.

2. Obtain approval from the Prophet.

3. Obtain approval from her parents.

4. Court her and successfully propose marriage to her.

5. Get sealed to her.

That's how it works. There certainly are higher blessings that would be inappropriate to ask for, but not taking another wife. It's done according to "your own free will and choice". In the 1886 revelation I posted above, the Lord says "...it is more pleasing to me that men should use their free agency in regard to these matters." Where did you get the idea that polygamy is "a calling" that you are asked to do? (CFR)

***************************

I use that quote because of the claims that polygamy is required for a "celestial marriage". It obvoiusly is not which you have just agreed.

I'm not sure what the meaning of that second sentence is, but I think it should be obvious to people that have read and believe D&C 132 that polygamy is eventually required for a celestial marriage, if not presently.

You made your wife accept polygamy? And you wonder why fulfilling the fantasy of living life under Brigham Young instead of modern prophets you must have women who will behave as they did in the 19th century. It isn't a man's game anymore. You don't get to make those decisions...and you had better hope you outlive your wife because if she marries again she can be sealed to her second husband after death and maybe she will make you accept the principle of polygamy, too.

I didn't make my wife accept polygamy -- she chose to as one of the conditions to our becoming engaged and sealed. I don't have "a fantasy of living life under Brigham Young", either. I think you've got me mixed up with those people in "Dixie" wearing beards and pioneer dresses. My wife may "make me accept the principle of polygamy, too"? Do you mean polyandry? I already accept the principle of polygamy. If my wife were sealed to some other man as well for eternity, she'd have to pick one -- she wouldn't be able to have both. That's no problem. If polyandry were approved of the Lord, however, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Paul says in 1 Cor. chap. 6 that I don't even own myself, so how could I be selfish enough to be jealous?

You are distorting much of what I said...why? I referred to the Patriarchs very specifically...not that the same things wouldn't happen with other families. Do you really think they had functional families? Abraham sent his own son in the desert to die to keep the peace!

You said: "The Bible makes no bones about how miserable the polygamist wives were....it is a lesson in how to set up a dysfunctional family." Since this is a thread about polygamy in general (as opposed to in Biblical times exclusively) being necessary for exaltation, I assumed (hence, I wrote that you "seem to think") that the reference to miserable polygamy in the Bible applied generally to the topic of polygamy as discussed in this thread instead of to Bible characters only. So were you referring to other (presumably modern) families as well as the ancient patriarchs? Do you believe that polygamy leads to misery and to dysfunctional families then? I hope not -- I'd hate to think that we've gone from Reynolds v. U.S. in the 19th century to J. Reynolds v. Joe Smith in the 21st.

[kamenraider]

Entering The Principle, Neccesary For Exaltation?, I want sources people!!!!!!!!!!

Here's a few more quotes, Her Amun:

I would keep this one thing in your minds, and that is, there is none, no, not one, of the sons and daughters of Adam and Eve, that ever received the fullness of the celestial law at the first of the Lord's commencing to reveal it unto them.

--Brigham Young, April 6, 1845, Mill. Star 6:119

If a man gets a fulness of the priesthood of God he has to get it in the same way that Jesus Christ obtained it, and that was by keeping all the commandments and obeying all the ordinances of the house of the Lord.

--Joseph Smith, June 11, 1843, TPJS p.308 comp. by Joseph Fielding Smith, Deseret, SLC 1977 [see also p. 309]

When first enunciated the doctrine of celestial marriage also meant plural marriage.

...

First and foremost plural marriage was rationalized as a divine commandment on which the Saints' personal salvation depended and which could not be set aside without violating God's will.

--Gordon Shepard and Gary Shepard, A Kingdom Transformed: Themes in the Development of Mormonism, Univ. of Utah Press, SLC 1984 pgs. 67, 81

The idea of plural marriage was integrated into the religious framework of Mormonism. The Mormon concept of heaven is complex and expansive. There are different degrees or kingdoms, the highest of which, the celestial, is inherited by those who, either in life or after death, have accepted the gospel and followed its precepts. Within this kingdom, the highest level, called exaltation, is for those who have followed "the fullness" of the gospel by being married, or sealed, celestially in the temple for "time and eternity", and by having remained faithful. They would be reunited with their families in their heavenly kingdom. Now understood as simple temple marriage to one spouse, the principle of celestial marriage (often referred to then as "The Principle") was, from 1852 to the early 1900s, defined by the church leaders as requiring the taking of plural wives.

--David S. Hoopes & Roy Hoopes, The Making of a Mormon Apostle: The Story of Rudger Clawson Madison Books, Lanham, MD, 1990 pgs. 34-35

As many as a fifth of the inhabitants of most Mormon towns lived in plural families; most leaders -- both general and local -- had plural wives; and a whole generation of Latter-day Saints had grown up believing that plurality was not only wholesome and beneficial but ordained of God. Indeed, most church members probably interpreted Section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants as requiring plural marriage for eternal exaltation. Generally, the terms "new and everlasting covenant" of marriage, "celestial marriage", and plural marriage were thought to be equivalent.

--Thomas G. Alexander, Mormonism in Transition Univ. of Ill. press, Urbana and Chicago, 1986 p.60

31 This promise [from God to Abraham] is yours also, because ye are of Abraham, and the promise was made unto Abraham; and by this law is the continuation of the works of my Father, wherein he glorifieth himself.

32 Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved.

33 But if ye enter not into my law ye cannot receive the promise of my Father, which he made unto Abraham.

34 God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises.

--Revelation given to Joseph Smith July 12, 1843 D&C 132: 31-34

Note -- Regarding the meaning of "works of Abraham" and "my law" in the above passage:

The revelation (so called) [i.e. D&C 132] authorized certain men to have more wives than one at a time, in this world and in the world to come. It said that this was the law and commanded Joseph to enter into the law. --And also that he should administer to others.

--William Law (He had the revelation read to him and explained by Hyrum Smith) Nauvoo Expositor Vol. I, No. 1, June 7, 1844 pg. 2, Column 4. (Italics in the original.)

21 Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my law ye cannot attain to this glory [exaltation].

22 For strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the lives, and few there be that find it, because ye receive me not in the world neither do ye know me.

23 But if ye receive me in the world, then shall ye know me, and shall receive your exaltation; that where I am ye shall be also.

24 This is eternal lives â?? to know the only wise and true God, and Jesus Christ whom he hath sent. I am he. Receive ye, therefore, my law.

-- Revelation to Joseph Smith July 12, 1843 D&C 132: 21-24

Note â?? Four days later on July 16, 1843 Joseph Smith said:

"â?¦a man and his wife must enter into that covenant in the world, or he will have no claim on her in the next world. But on account of the unbelief of the people, I cannot reveal the fullness of these things at present."

But Eliza[ R. Snow]â??s conversion would go one step further [than mere acceptance]: â??As I increased in knowledge concerning the principle and design of plural marriage, I grew in love with it, and to-day esteem it a precious, sacred principle â?? necessary in the elevation and salvation of the human family â?? in redeeming woman from the curse, and the world from corruption.â? So nineteenth-century Mormons viewed polygamy as more than merely one of many restored doctrines. It was accepted as a keystone for earthly and eternal salvation â?? far more important a practice than it was for the ancient Hebrews, for whom it was simply a typical semitic custom

--Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness Signature, SLC, 1977 pg. 312

The High Council of Nauvoo was called together by the Prophet Joseph Smith, to know whether they would accept the revelation on celestial marriage or not. â?¦

Brother Hyrum was called upon to read the revelation. He did so, and after the reading said, â??Now you that believe this revelation and go forth and obey the same shall be saved, and you that reject it shall be damned.â?

--Thomas Grover, Historical Record Vol. 6, Ed. by Andrew Jenson, SLC, May 1887 pg. 226

(as quoted in Doctrines of the Kingdom by Hyrum Andrus, Bookcraft, SLC, 1973 pg. 454)

Joseph urged his closest friends in the church to follow his example [of plural marriage] at once. According to William Law, he said the Saints were ready for strong meat, not just milk any more. He told John Taylor that the church could not go on until polygamy was established, and without it the highest glory could not be attained in heaven. Very soon polygamy became a test of his followersâ?? loyalty and willingness to live by every word that issued from the mouth of the Lord, through His prophet.

-- Donna Hill Joseph Smith, The First Mormon Doubleday, Garden City, NY, 1977 pg. 345

He [Joseph Smith] urged them [men such as Wm. Marks, who opposed plural marriage] to surrender themselves to God instead of rebelling against the stepping stone of their exaltation.

--John D. Lee (winter 1842) Life and Confessions of John D. Lee, p. 147 as quoted in MHP 3:70

It was there [at a private meeting in Oct. 1843 where Hyrum Smith read the revelation on celestial marriage] told me by the same power that informed me that it was 2 oâ??clock, that that revelation was of God, and that no man could or would receive a fullness of celestial glory and eternal life, except he obeyed that law, and had more than one living wife at the same time.

--Samuel A. Woolley, â??Bishop S.A. Woolleyâ??s Testimony,â? The Historical Record 6:231, Ed. by Andrew Jenson SLC, May 1887 (see also the quote below)

More info. regarding this experience:

Fatherâ??s younger brother, Samuel [A. Woolley], was very sick upstairs but his spirit stood behind Hyrum and read the revelation over Hyrumâ??s shoulder.

--Hyrum Smith, Patriarch by Pearson H. Corbett Deseret, SLC 1976, p. 304

Farming near Nauvoo, [Joseph] Holbrook knew of Josephâ??s revelation on polygamy and wished to accept it but hesitated because he could not fully understand the reasons for it. One day, while working in the field, he was overcome with a vision. The heavens opened before him, he said, and he saw endless suns and planets moving in their orbits, vast systems waiting only to be filled and governed. This, a voice told him, was the reward to all eternity for those accepting the principle. Waking from the trance, he was yet cutting grain with his scythe, the rhythm of the task unbroken. But, he said, he never after doubted plurality, expecting its rewards, both for himself and his children, to be an endless exaltation.

--B. Carmon Hardy, Solemn Covenant Univ. of Illinois Press, Chicago, 1992, p. 10 (taken from The Life of Joseph Holbrook, 1:40 [typewritten copy] LDSCHD)

The condition of affairs in Nauvoo are very critical. Josephâ??s enemies are increasing; apostasy enlarging its numbers. Polygamy is trying many and is understood only by a few in its true light and character. [John C.] Bennett, the [Chauncy and Francis M.] Higbees, [William and Wilson] Laws and others take advantage of their knowledge, using it illegally, making evil of what God designed for salvation and exaltation hereafter.

--Edward Stevenson, The Autobiography of Edward Stevenson, 1820-1897 ed. by Joseph Grant Stevenson, Stevensonâ??s Genealogical Center, Provo, UT 1986, p.99

[kamenraider]

More quotes:

As the gospel with all its fullness had been restored to the earth through the Prophet Joseph Smith. Of course all the former ordinances were restored; also among other things celestial marriage was restored, and the ordinances thereunto were performed in the temple just alluded to. So when my husband and myself had this doctrine explained and taught to us in its true light by those that had a right to teach it, we both saw the propriety of the same, and believed it to be true and essential to our future glory and exaltation hereafter. We accepted the same, and like old Sarah of old, I had in that temple given to my husband four other wives, which were sealed to him in that temple by the Holy Order of God by one having authority to do the same.

--Sarah Rich Autobiography, typescript, Harold B. Lee Library Special Collections, BYU, pgs. 43-44.

Maney may think it verry strainge that I would consent for my dear husband [,] whome I loved as I did my own life and lived with him for years [,] to take more wives. This I could not have done if I had not believed it to be right in the sight of god, and believed it to be one principal of his gospel once again restored to earth, that those holding the preasthood of heaven might by obeying this order attain to a higher glory in the eternal world.

--Sarah Rich, quoted in Charles C. Rich -- Mormon General and Western Frontiersman by Leonard J. Arrington, Provo UT: BYU Press 1974, pg. 288.

I heard the Prophet give instructions concerning plural marriage; he counselled the sisters not to trouble themselves in consequence of it, that all would be right, and the result would be for their glory and exaltation.

--Bathsheba Smith Autobiography, typescript, Harold B. Lee Library Special Collections, BYU, pg. 9.

Before her [Vilate Kimball] was illustrated the order of celestial marriage, in all its beauty and glory, together with the great exaltation and honor it would confer upon her in that immortal and celestial sphere, if she would accept it and stand in her place by her husband's side. She also saw the woman he had taken to wife and contemplated with joy the vast and boundless love and union which this order would bring about, as well as the increase of her husband's kingdoms, and the power and glory extending throughout the eternities, worlds without end.

She related the scene to me and to many others and said her soul was satisfied, for she was filled with the Spirit of God.

--Helen Mar Whitney, Why We Practice Plural Marriage, SLC, UT: Juvenile Instructor Office 1884, pgs. 58-59. (See also Life of Heber C. Kimball by Orson F. Whitney, pg. 327)

[Plural marriage was a] life-sacrifice for the sake of an everlasting glory and exaltation.

--Helen Mar Whitney, in Guide to Mormon Diaries and Autobiographies by Davis Bitton, Provo UT: BYU Press 1977, p. 379.

Joseph [smith] told Benjamin [F. Johnson] that he would preach a sermon in the evening, the esoteric meaning of which only he, Benjamin, would understand. That night Smith explicated the parable of the talents in his address: to him who had (talents) more would be given; but if a man had only one, that one would be taken away from him. By Smith's interpretation, this parable is a radical critique of monogamy as something inherently inferior and less than sacred.

--Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith, SLC UT: Signature 1997, pg. 296.

From him [Joseph Smith] I learned that the doctrine of plural and celestial marriage is the most holy and important doctrine ever revealed to man on the earth, and that without obedience to that principle, no man can ever attain to the fullness of exaltation in celestial glory.

(signed) William Clayton

Salt Lake City, February 16th, 1874

--An Intimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton ed. by George D. Smith, SLC UT: Signature 1995 (see also Historical Record 6 (May 1887): 224-26.

The same God that has thus far dictated me and directed me and strengthened me in this work, gave me this revelation and commandment on celestial and plural marriage and the same God commanded me to obey it. He said to me that unless I accepted it and introduced it, and practiced it, I, together with my people, would be damned and cut off from this time hence forth. And they say if I do so, they will kill me. O what shall I do? If I do not practice it, I shall be damned with my people. If I do teach it, and practice it, and urge it, they say they will kill me, and I know they will. But we have got to observe it. It is an eternal principle and was given by way of commandment and not by way of instruction.

--Joseph Smith, The Contributor, Vol. 5 (October 1883-September 1884), SLC: LDS Church, pg. 259.

Being thoroughly convinced, as well as my husband, that the doctrine of plurality of wives was from God, and having a fixed determination to attain to Celestial glory, I felt to embrace the whole Gospel, and that it was for my husband's exaltation that he should obey the revelation on Celestial Marriage [D&C 132], that he might attain to kingdoms, thrones, principalities and powers, firmly believing that I should participate with him in all his blessings, glory and honor.

--Bathsheba Smith Autobiography, typescript, Harold B. Lee Library Special Collections, BYU, pg. 11.

6.

The man that has got ten fair wives,

TEN worlds may create;

And he that has got less than this,

Will find a bitter fate.

The one or two that he might have,

He'll be deprived of then;

And they'll be given as TALENTS were

To him who has got TEN.

--Anonymous, Buckey's Lamentations for the Want of More Wives, Warsaw Message, Feb. 7, 1844, pg. 2.

[bennett criticizes those in the LDS Church who] ...set at naught the counsels of God; and are teaching as a celestial law that the highest degree of celestial glory is only to be obtained by marrying three, five, seven, ten, or more wives.

--S. Bennett, [sidney Rigdon's] Latter-day Saint's Messenger and Advocate, Pittsburgh: Dec. 2, 1844, 3:38-40.

Feb. 1, 1849 First counselor Heber C. Kimball tells Sunday meeting that plural marriage "would end he said when the Church had gon to the Devil or the priesthood taken from this people then God would give it to another people.

--D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy Vol. 2: Extensions of Power, SLC: Signature 1996, pg. 747.

The Great Jehovah, the Everlasting Father, the Creator of the heavens and the earth, and all that dwell therein, hath uttered His voice and revealed unto His servant Joseph Smith the principles whereby mankind may obtain salvation and exaltation in His glorious presence; and the principle of plurality of wives, in connexion with the eternity of the marriage covenant by the seal of the Lord, is one of the greatest, and most important, doctrines that has emanated from the heavens, elevating man to Deity.

--Samuel W. Richards, Millennial Star Vol.15 (1853):61 supplement, editorial.

In reply we will show you that it is incorporated as a part of our religion, and necessary for our exaltation to the fulness of the Lord's glory in the eternal world.

--Orson Pratt, Aug. 29, 1852, Journal of Discourses Vol. 1, Liverpool: Richards 1854, pg. 54.

Now, let us enquire, what will become of those individuals who have this law taught unto them in plainness, if they reject it? [A voice in the stand, "they will be damned."] I will tell you: they will be damned, saith the Lord God Almighty, in the revelation He has given. Why? Because where much is given, much is required; where there is great knowledge unfolded for the exaltation, glory, and happiness of the sons and daughters of God, if they close up their hearts, if they reject the testimony of His word, and will not give heed to the principles He has ordained for their good, they are worthy of damnation, and the Lord has said they shall be damned. This was the word of the Lord to His servant Joseph the Prophet himself. With all the knowledge and light he had, he must com ply with it, or, says the Lord unto him, you shall be damned; and the same is true in regard to all those who reject these things.

--Orson Pratt, Aug. 29, 1852, Journal of Discourses Vol. 1, Liverpool: Richards 1854, pg. 64.

What does the Lord intend to do with this people? He intends to make them a kingdom of Kings and Priests, a kingdom unto Himself, or in other words, a kingdom of Gods, if they will hearken to His law. There will be many who will not hearken; there will be the foolish among the wise, who will not receive the new and everlasting covenant in its fulness; and they never will attain to their exaltation; they never will be counted worthy to hold the sceptre of power over a numerous progeny, that shall multiply themselves without end, like the sand upon the sea shore.

--Orson Pratt, Aug. 29, 1852, Journal of Discourses Vol. 1, Liverpool: Richards 1854, pg. 65.

For the first ten years the new doctrine was kept pretty well under wraps, and it was not until the fall of 1852 that it was openly avowed and the Saints were told that only those who embraced it could hope for the highest exaltation in the resurrection.

--Stanley S. Ivins, "Notes on Mormon Polygamy" in The New Mormon History: Revisionist Essays on the Past, ed. by D. Michael Quinn, SLC: Signature 1992, pg. 169.

Abby--But dear cousin, the great question is this--will we unite with the plurality Order of Ancient Patriarchs, or will we consent voluntarily to be doomed to eternal celibacy? This is the true division of the question. One or the other we must choose. We cannot be married to our husbands for eternity, without subscribing to the law that admits a plurality of wives. * * *

Nelly--Do you mean to say that a female cannot have any husband for the next world or for all the eternities to come, unless she is agreeable to the same law of marriage by which Sarah and Rachel were governed?

Abby--Yes, cousin, I understand it in this light. * * * The order of plurality of wives is an everlasting and ceaseless order, designed to exalt the choicest men and women to the most superlative excellence, dominion, and glory.

--"Nelly and Abby--A Conversation Between Two Cousins", Millennial Star Vol. 15 (April 1853):226.

It is all connected with the exaltation of man, showing how he becomes exalted to be a king and a Priest, yea, even a God, like his Father in heaven. Without the doctrine that this Revelation reveals, no man on earth ever could be exalted to be a God.

--Brigham Young (at the conf. where plural marriage was first announced, Aug. 29, 1852) Millennial Star Vol.15 (1853):32 supplement.

[Olavarria]

"Celestial marriage--that is, marriage for time and eternity--and polygamous or plural marriage are not synonomous terms. Monogamous marriages for time and eternity, solemnized in our temples in accordance with the word of the Lord and the laws of the Church, are Celestial marriages."

Heber J. Grant

Anthony W. Ivins,

J. Reuben Clark, Jr.

James R. Clark, Messages Of The First Presidency, 5:329.

Blue= I agree. Muslim plural marriages arnt celestial for they are not for eternity, unless of course work for the dead and post mortal acceptance kicks in. A "till death" marriage is by definition not celestial no matter how many are involved.

Red=I agree. No one is debating that. However, this does nothing to tell us about the requirment/or lack of requirment of plural marriage for exaltation.

[kamenraider]

A few more quotes:

From the foregoing Revelation, given through Joseph, the Seer, it

will be seen that God has actually commanded some of His servants to take

more wives, and has pointed out certain duties in regard to the marriage

ceremony, showing that they must be married for time and for all eternity,

and showing the advantages to be derived in a future state by this eternal

union, and showing, still further, that, if they refused to obey this

command, after having the law revealed to them, they should be damned.

This revelation, then, makes it a matter of conscience among all the

Latter-Day Saints; and they embrace it as a part and portion of their

religion, and verily believe that they cannot be saved and reject it. Has

Congress power, then, to pass laws, "prohibiting" the Church of Jesus

Christ of Latter Day Saints, "the free exercise" of this article of their

religion? Have any of the States or Territories a constitutional right to

pass laws "prohibiting the free exercise of the religion" which the church

of the Saints conscientiously and sincerely believe to be essential to

their salvation? Unto: they have no such right.

--Orson Pratt, from "Celestial Marriage"(in Vol. 1 No. 1, Jan. 1853), The Seer, SLC: Seagull 1993, pg. 13.

According to Jesus Christ and the Apostles, then, the only way to be saved

is to be adopted into the great family of polygamists, by the Gospel, and then

strictly follow their examples.

--Belinda Marden Pratt (wife of Parley P. Pratt), from a Jan. 12, 1854 letter to her sister in Nashua, New Hampshire, published in Millennial Star Vol. 14:468-477

Let us with one accord lift up our voices in behalf of this great principle which our Heavenly Father has revealed for the exaltation of the Human Family. I know by the revelations of his Holy Spirit that he has given unto me that this principle is true and emanated from Him.

To me, when I first received the Gospel it was another testimony that Joseph Smith was a Prophet of God. Inasmuch as our Fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were Polygamists and we hope to sit down with them in the Kingdom of Heaven, so should we be willing to make the sacrifice, for it is a sacrifice if we enter into this Holy Order by the right Spirit. We should with all our influence uphold it. I have lived in it for many years and can truly say, I never saw the time I would exchange places with anyone.

--Belinda Marden Pratt, January 18, 1879, Belinda Marden Pratt Account Book, transcribed by David Grow, Feb. 2007, posted at http://jared.pratt-family.org/parley_famil...n-comments.html

As [brigham] Young saw it, polygamy connected the holders of this final dispensation with the Creator and with the recipients of the six earlier ones. Elijah himself had come to earth and empowered [Joseph] Smith to link the living to the heavenly. But to attain glory man must follow Adam, who had once been human but had grown powerful and exalted. Lorenzo Snow, the brother of a wife of both Smith and Young and later a church president, colorfully summarized this doctrine: "As man is, God once was; and as God is, man may become". Aided by Eve, his first wife, Adam governed heaven, a community of faithful families organized as the Mormon church was on earth. The celestial order of marriage put mortals on the road to godhood and goddesshood and prepared them for the day they would live with Adam, Abraham, and Christ.

--The Lion of the Lord: A Biography of Brigham Young, by Stanley P. Hirshson, NY: Knopf 1969, pg. 47.

As to a man having more wives than one, this is startling indeed to the traditions of the people. With regard to it being the law of the Lord for a man to have only one wife, or for a man to have no wife[,] it is no such thing, all that rests in the traditions of the people, and in the doings of legislative bodies; that is all there is about wives in the world as to their having many or none.

--Brigham Young, October 8, 1854, Teachings of President Brigham Young, Vol. 3, ed. by Fred C. Collier, SLC: Collier's 1987, pg. 365.

Plurality of wives is not designed to afflict you nor me, but is puposed for our exaltation in the kingdoms of God.

--Brigham Young, July 14, 1855, Journal of Discourses Vol. 3, Liverpool: Pratt 1856, pg. 266.

Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned; and I will go still further and say, take this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord has given, and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that you will be damned.

But the Saints who live their religion will be exalted, for they never will deny any revelation which the Lord has given or may give, though, when there is a doctrine coming to them which they cannot comprehend fully, they may be found saying, "The Lord sendeth this unto me, and I pray that He will save and preserve me from denying anything which proceedeth from Him, and give me patience to wait until I can understand it for myself."

--Brigham Young, July 14, 1855, Journal of Discourses Vol. 3, Liverpool: Pratt 1856, pg. 266.

The Bishop then arose ...said that [he] held in his hand a Letter Addressed to Prest J. D. Lee but that he would read it as it concerned all the Saints which reads thus

March 2, 1856

To Presidents, Bishop, and brethren in the counties of Iron and Washington:

I write to inform you that the persons who can get their endowments must be those who pay their tithmony from year to year, who live the lives of Saints from day to day; setting good examples before their neighbors; men and women, boys and girls over sixteen years of age who are living the lives of Saints, believe in plurality, do not speak evil of the Authorities of the Church, and posess true integrity towards their friends, can come up after their spring crops are sown, and their case will be attended to.

Brigham Young

Heber C. Kimball

J. M. Grant

p.s. Send us word ten days before you send your company, that we may have the rooms vacant for them.

--Rachel Lee Diary (John D. Lee's wife), March 10, 1856, John Doyle Lee: Zealot, Pioneer Builder, Scapegoat, by Juanita Brooks, Logan, UT: USU Press 1992, pg. 192.

[Lee]

Ok, so my bud asks me if in the next life we have to enter plural marriage in order to be exalted. I said, "I dont have the foggiest idea, but it would be nice. Assuming I make it into the CK that is."

So, whats the deal?

I want quotes, legitamate ones from past and living prophets. No opnions please, unless you are interpreting a quote.

Mods-please do me the favor of blocking any stupid sexual innuendo laden responses

Plural marriage is not required of me today and I'm glad of it, had hard enough time getting one wife! Having taken all the covenants available I'm going to worry more about getting my home teaching done.

[Olavarria]

Plural marriage is not required of me today and I'm glad of it, had hard enough time getting one wife! Having taken all the covenants available I'm going to worry more about getting my home teaching done.

Best answer so far

[kamenraider]

Plural marriage is not required of me today and I'm glad of it, had hard enough time getting one wife! Having taken all the covenants available I'm going to worry more about getting my home teaching done.

Last time I looked, the thread was about whether "The Principle" is necessary for exaltation (I want sources people!!!!!!!!!!), hence the quotes. Whether it's practice is required by the LDS Church today would be a topic for another thread, but the answer is clear enough already that it'd be pointless.

edit: It's also kind of funny to me that in spite of the request "no opnions please", a number of people have expressed their "opnions".

[Gillebre]

I think out of everyone's quoting of people...Prophets, whatnot, this is the most important to note - and it come from SOREN! OMG

As he quoted Brigham Young,

"It is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to you, and all the world, that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained. This is as true as that God lives."

The one thing above all else, when referring to polygamy and Brigham Young, that anti-mormons fail to mention I think, is the part where Brigham said 'at least in faith'.

If we don't have the faith to live polygamy, were God to call us into such a lifestyle...then how big is our faith, honestly?

Just something I noticed and thought to point out.

[Lee]

Last time I looked, the thread was about whether "The Principle" is necessary for exaltation (I want sources people!!!!!!!!!!), hence the quotes. Whether it's practice is required by the LDS Church today would be a topic for another thread, but the answer is clear enough already that it'd be pointless.

edit: It's also kind of funny to me that in spite of the request "no opnions please", a number of people have expressed their "opnions".

You are right I did express my opnion. However, after reading Official Declaration -1 I don't see how Plural Marriage could be a requirement for Exaltation for anyone after 1890 when the declaration was given. Right another opnion, however, check the source quoted below.

OFFICIAL DECLARATIONâ??1

To Whom It May Concern:

Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes, from Salt Lake City, which have been widely published, to the effect that the Utah Commission, in their recent report to the Secretary of the Interior, allege that plural marriages are still being solemnized and that forty or more such marriages have been contracted in Utah since last June or during the past year, also that in public discourses the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamyâ??

I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.

One case has been reported, in which the parties allege that the marriage was performed in the Endowment House, in Salt Lake City, in the Spring of 1889, but I have not been able to learn who performed the ceremony; whatever was done in this matter was without my knowledge. In consequence of this alleged occurrence the Endowment House was, by my instructions, taken down without delay.

Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.

There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey any such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.

Wilford Woodruff

President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

President Lorenzo Snow offered the following:

â??I move that, recognizing Wilford Woodruff as the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the only man on the earth at the present time who holds the keys of the sealing ordinances, we consider him fully authorized by virtue of his position to issue the Manifesto which has been read in our hearing, and which is dated September 24th, 1890, and that as a Church in General Conference assembled, we accept his declaration concerning plural marriages as authoritative and binding.â?

The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous.

Salt Lake City, Utah, October 6, 1890.

[kamenraider]

I don't see how Plural Marriage could be a requirement for Exaltation for anyone after 1890 when the declaration was given.

Plural mariages actually ended before OD 1, the "manifesto", in March of 1887, yet continued to be performed long after it.

Here's an excerpt from Solemn Covenant: The Mormon Polygamous Passage by B. Carmon Hardy (from pgs. 138-140):

Another couple of interesting quotes from a speech by D. Michael Quinn on August 11, 1991:

(the spelling and punctuation of this transcription [foundHERE] leave a lot to be desired, btw)

On the day the Manifesto was accepted in October of 1890. He personally approved 7 new plural marriages, to be performed in Mexico. He also approved polygamous ceremonies for a couple of Mexican residents as early as 1891. He delegated George Q. Cannon, his first counselor, to give approval for plural marriages from 1892 to 1898. That approval was in the form of written letters. In this way, President Woodruff himself could avoid personal knowledge. He could claim he had no personal knowledge of these authorized plural marriages.

President Woodruff told a Temple meeting of the First Presidency and the Apostles in 1894 that due to the Manifesto, men "will be justified in concubinage by sacred vows," even without a polygamous ceremony in order to raise a righteous posterity." In 1894, President Woodruff gave his approval for Apostle Abraham H. Cannon to marry a new plural wife as a proxy for Apostle Cannon's deceased brother. And Apostle Cannon actually did this in 1896 while President Woodruff was still alive.

President Woodruff himself married a new Plural Wife in 1897, Lydia Mountford, who was a Jew, born in Palestine and had lectured widely throughout the United States on Palestine. He married her in September of 1897 on a steamship on the Pacific Ocean, between San Francisco and Portland; and he arranged for an Apostle to perform plural marriages on steamships a month later, and also four months later.

Pres. Woodruff doesn't seem to have regarded his own advice in OD 1 enough to have followed it himself.

The next one's an example of an Apostle who still preached that polygamy is necessary for exaltation even after OD 1.

Francis M. Lyman was an Apostle until his death in 1916. He performed a plural marriage a day before the Quorum of Twelve voted to sustain the recently published Manifesto as binding. In his legalistic mind, this was not a violation of the Manifesto because it had not been ratified by the Quorum of Twelve. From 1891 onward, he was opposed to new plural marriages. But he was not entirely consistent. He favored allowing men with plural wives to marry a new plural wife civilly after the death of the legal wife, even though in actuality this was a new plural marriage. Lyman performed one such de facto plural marriage in the Salt Lake Temple for a stake president in 1894.

He publicly preached as late as that same year, "No man can obtain exaltation without living plural marriage in this life." And as late as 1909, Apostle Lyman would not allow men to become members of local prayer circles unless they believed in plural marriage. There is an obvious inconsistency, because at the same time he was hunting down men who were entering into plural marriage after the Manifesto and having to excommunicate them. I'm not sure how he could reconcile in his own mind, saying no one could be exalted without polygamy, and at the same time he was excommunicating man who were doing the only thing he said was necessary for them to obtain exaltation.

[Lee]

Plural mariages actually ended before OD 1, the "manifesto", in March of 1887, yet continued to be performed long after it.

Here's an excerpt from Solemn Covenant: The Mormon Polygamous Passage by B. Carmon Hardy (from pgs. 138-140):

Another couple of interesting quotes from a speech by D. Michael Quinn on August 11, 1991:

(the spelling and punctuation of this transcription [foundHERE] leave a lot to be desired, btw)

Pres. Woodruff doesn't seem to have regarded his own advice in OD 1 enough to have followed it himself.

The next one's an example of an Apostle who still preached that polygamy is necessary for exaltation even after OD 1.

Thanks for the information it is interesting. It has little if any baring on my situation. If I were called into the bishops office and called to practice Polygamy I would give it some thought, but being called to take a second wife is't going to happen to me any time soon. God will say when Polygamy is necessary for Exaltion and when it's not and that's good enough for me. For now there is home teaching, sunday school lessons, and bunch of other things that need doing so Polygamy is way down on the list of things that need doing.

[kamenraider]

Thanks for the information it is interesting. It has little if any baring on my situation. If I were called into the bishops office and called to practice Polygamy I would give it some thought, but being called to take a second wife is't going to happen to me any time soon. God will say when Polygamy is necessary for Exaltion and when it's not and that's good enough for me. For now there is home teaching, sunday school lessons, and bunch of other things that need doing so Polygamy is way down on the list of things that need doing.

Have you read this revelation to John Taylor before?

September 27, 1886

My son John: You have asked me concerning the New and Everlasting Covenant and how far it is binding upon my people.

Thus saith the Lord All commandments that I give must be obeyed by those calling themselves by my name unless they are revoked by me or by my authority and how can I revoke an everlasting covenant.

For I the Lord am everlasting and my covenants cannot be abrogated nor done away with; but they stand forever.

Have I not given my word in great plainness on this subject?

Yet have not great numbers of my people been negligent in the observance of my law and the keeping of my commandment, and yet have I borne with them these many years and this because of their weakness because of the perilous times. And furthermore it is more pleasing to me that men should use their free agency in regard to these matters.

Nevertheless I the Lord do not change and my word and my covenants and my law do not.

And as I have heretofore said by my servant Joseph all those who would enter into my glory must and shall obey my law.

And have I not commanded men that if they were Abraham's seed and would enter into my glory they must do the works of Abraham.

I have not revoked this law nor will I for it is everlasting and those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof, even so Amen.

You know, it is possible to believe that polygamy is necessary for exaltation and do your home teaching?

I'm able to do it.

[Lee]

Have you read this revelation to John Taylor before?

You know, it is possible to believe that polygamy is necessary for exaltation and do your home teaching?

I'm able to do it.

Thank you again for the information. Your right it is possible to believe in polygamy and do your home teaching. If you wish to believe polygamy is necessary for exaltation you can do that.

I choose not to.

Please consider this quote from the Current Lving President of the Church, Gordon B. Hinckley.

"If any of our members are found to be practicing plural marriage, they are excommunicated, the most serious penalty the Church can impose. Not only are those so involved in direct violation of the civil law, they are in violation of the law of this Church. An article of our faith is binding upon us. It states, â??We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the lawâ? (A of F 1:12). One cannot obey the law and disobey the law at the same time.

There is no such thing as a â??Mormon Fundamentalist.â? It is a contradiction to use the two words together.

More than a century ago God clearly revealed unto His prophet Wilford Woodruff that the practice of plural marriage should be discontinued, which means that it is now against the law of God. Even in countries where civil or religious law allows polygamy, the Church teaches that marriage must be monogamous and does not accept into its membership those practicing plural marriage."

Larry King interview.

I guess I'm not very good at following dead prophets. More into following the Living Prophet.