Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

D&C 132: 41


zelder

Recommended Posts

You could get the idea that heaven is a big swingers party.

Again, I think this is the reason the rest of Christianity does not believe that marriage continues after death--because then you have to address the question asked of Jesus about the woman (or man) married serially to more than one spouse during mortality. And I think that is why the revelation on plural marriage is part of the same section as sealing--if you believe in sealing then you have to address what that means for someone who has had more than one spouse.

Link to comment

Again, I think this is the reason the rest of Christianity does not believe that marriage continues after death--because then you have to address the question asked of Jesus about the woman (or man) married serially to more than one spouse during mortality. And I think that is why the revelation on plural marriage is part of the same section as sealing--if you believe in sealing then you have to address what that means for someone who has had more than one spouse.

You're probably right. Do we hide the reality of polyandry becasue men are so jealous that they can't handle it? We just can't live it so we tuck it away and hide from it?

Link to comment

Again, I think this is the reason the rest of Christianity does not believe that marriage continues after death--because then you have to address the question asked of Jesus about the woman (or man) married serially to more than one spouse during mortality. And I think that is why the revelation on plural marriage is part of the same section as sealing--if you believe in sealing then you have to address what that means for someone who has had more than one spouse.

You're probably right. Do we hide the reality of polyandry becasue men are so jealous that they can't handle it? We just can't live it so we tuck it away and hide from it?

Link to comment
You're probably right. Do we hide the reality of polyandry becasue men are so jealous that they can't handle it? We just can't live it so we tuck it away and hide from it?

I think so. It seems like people get more upset about Joseph's polyandry than his polygamy.

Link to comment
Wow, well there we have it. Mormons engage in polygyny, polyandry, group marriage etc. Indeed milk before meat is a good idea I think. Its pretty heavy stuff. You could get the idea that heaven is a big swingers party.

Just don't use this to justify a swinger's party with Sister Openminded there...

Actually, to the best of my knowledge every DNA investigation of alleged plural marriage offspring of Joseph Smith has cleared him. That which we call "plural marriage" may not have involved physical intimacy... so far at least, there is no smoking gun.

My first historical encounter with LDS polyandry was reading journal entries from the Nauvoo and early Utah Valley eras. This one name kept coming up in accounts of miraculous healing: "Zina". Her full name is Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs Smith Young. If the accounts I read are representative, she may well have been the greatest healer in all of Mormondom. And she was involved in two polyandrous marriages, one with Joseph and then later with Brigham, both while being married to Henry Jacobs.

Anyway, verse 41 is arguably the second-most interesting in section 132. Maybe what's good for the goose is good for the gander, and maybe God is no respecter of persons after all..

Imho the most interesting verse in section 132 is the last verse, which says:

"And now, as pertaining to this law, verily, verily, I say unto you, I will reveal more unto you, hereafter; therefore, let this suffice for the present."

In other words, section 132 may be just the beginning... perhaps sort of like the revelation of the Aaronic priesthood was just a beginning. Or the Kirkland temple endowment was just a beginnning.

I have been unable to find direct evidence of that follow-up revelation, but we see Joseph's focus shifting in the last year or so of his life. First he is sealed to a lot of women who are married to other men, then he starts being sealed to other men, then he allows women into the quorum of the anointed, and most interestingly he then stops entering into plural marriages altogether! During his last 8 months he entered into zero plural marriages, whereas in the preceeding 8 months he entered into fourteen.

I think that clues as to the content of that subsequent revelation may lie hidden in the mysterious quorum of the anointed, but so far my knowledge of said quorum is limited to a few snippets and anecdotes.

stYro

Link to comment

I think so. It seems like people get more upset about Joseph's polyandry than his polygamy.

We hide it because it doesn't put Joseph is a very good light. Most non-LDS that I have spoken with about his polyandry and polygamy point out that this is a pattern that many other charismatic religious leaders have followed.

Link to comment

I have been unable to find direct evidence of that follow-up revelation, but we see Joseph's focus shifting in the last year or so of his life. First he is sealed to a lot of women who are married to other men, then he starts being sealed to other men, then he allows women into the quorum of the anointed, and most interestingly he then stops entering into plural marriages altogether! During his last 8 months he entered into zero plural marriages, whereas in the preceeding 8 months he entered into fourteen.

stYro

Where can I read up on this stuff? I've never heard of the "quoram of the anointed" and I've never heard of Joseph being sealed to other men.

Link to comment

Where can I read up on this stuff? I've never heard of the "quoram of the anointed" and I've never heard of Joseph being sealed to other men.

From what I have read and heard in lectures the early saints were being sealed to each other without regard to gender or relationship. The sealing was thought of as something beyond mere uniting of husband and wife and had to do with eternal binding of relationships. It was only later that it became more organized and followed certain rules. I really couldn't say if the earlier sealings were wrongly done because the saints didn't have a full understanding or if it was later changed so as to reduce any confusion or controversy. I think we don't fully understand the importance of sealings and how they will work in eternity. We do know however that it is a key element in the restoration and necessary for our eternal relationship with God.

D&C 138:

47The Prophet Elijah was to plant in the hearts of the children the promises made to their fathers,

48Foreshadowing the great work to be done in the temples of the Lord in the dispensation of the fulness of times, for the redemption of the dead, and the sealing of the children to their parents, lest the whole earth be smitten with a curse and utterly wasted at his coming.

This last phrase makes a very powerful statement as to why families must be sealed and the dead redeemed.

Link to comment

I really couldn't say if the earlier sealings were wrongly done because the saints didn't have a full understanding or if it was later changed so as to reduce any confusion or controversy.

It seems that the latter is true since they still seal women to multiple husbands but in a hush hush manner.

daz2: BTW, one of the things the reviewer did not like on one of my earlier proposed answers about polygamy was my reference to the policy of permitting women to be sealed to all of their husbands. "Milk before meat" they wrote.

they want to keep it top secret for now because they figure we can't handle it.

Link to comment

they want to keep it top secret for now because they figure we can't handle it.

"Top secret"? Seriously, you need to get a grip. And who is "we"? Generally such things are personal and between the parties, their ecclesiastical authority and God.

Link to comment

Yes, I have noticed many who cannot handle it =/.

I think their decision is wise for now, indeed I do.

You're probably right. I'm not critical of the decision but at the same time i'm relieved to know about it. A lot of women have serious issues with polygamy and struggle with feelings of resentment because they feel there is a double standard. My wife's friend and step mom both have problems polygamy and say that its not fair.....well now I can tell them, God is fair and just and treats women the same as men. It will be good news for them and a load off their spiritual shoulders.

Link to comment

You're probably right. I'm not critical of the decision but at the same time i'm relieved to know about it.

Yah, same here, I'm glad I know about it. When I first learned about it, I struggled with it alot... it took me two months to finally get it down =P. It was not easy.

A lot of women have serious issues with polygamy and struggle with feelings of resentment because they feel there is a double standard. My wife's friend and step mom both have problems polygamy and say that its not fair.....well now I can tell them, God is fair and just and treats women the same as men.

Yes, that will be good... although that also might make them more confused =P. I would hope not. Another thing you might bring up is that it is also so that every person worthy of exaltation can participate... that also makes it very fair =)... but that reason probably only matters to those who are not married yet XP.

It will be good news for them and a load off their spiritual shoulders.

I truly hope you will be able to help them with this issue =).

Best of luck =D.

TAO

Link to comment

zelder, I wouldn't actually say it is the order of heaven - that much hasn't been revealed yet. However, it has been said that when by the 'holy anointing' (in D&C 132 terms), wives may need to be given to others.

I trust the Lord has a good reason for it =). Wouldn't call it an order of heaven though - I don't know if the 'holy anointing' was used all that commonly.

Were these women not sealed to their husbands "for time and all eternity?" How is that not a revelation? Do you make the same argument about baptisms for the dead--that it has not yet been revealed whether or not the dead actually need them? If you dismiss the celestial marriages of the first half of the Church, what of anything do we know is in effect?

Link to comment

Were these women not sealed to their husbands "for time and all eternity?" How is that not a revelation?

What I meant is that it is not shown whether or not polygamy is something that is very common in the celestial kingdom. We know it exists, but we don't know the degree to which it exists.

Do you make the same argument about baptisms for the dead--that it has not yet been revealed whether or not the dead actually need them?

We know that we will be given all the names eventually, so why does that really matter?

If you dismiss the celestial marriages of the first half of the Church, what of anything do we know is in effect?

I wasn't. I was saying that they aren't necessarily common in heaven. I don't know if they are or not. I know they are needed for justice though.

Link to comment

Zelder, the policy is in the handbook (to which I understand we are not allowed to refer--sorry about that) but it is also found on familysearch.org and is described at this publicly accessible website: http://familyhistorylab.byu.edu/Lesson1.php

Deceased women married more than once

You may have a deceased woman sealed to all men to whom she was legally married. However, if she was sealed to a husband during her life, all her husbands must be deceased before she can be sealed to a husband to whom she was not sealed during life.

If a person is allowed to marry more than one spouse for the eternities, why does the church have such a strong position on "one man one woman" marriage. Shouldn't a more accurate church doctrine be "one man, one woman at a time on earth but multiple wives in heaven" Or "we believe in plural marriage, just not here on earth".

Am I missing something here?

Link to comment

If a person is allowed to marry more than one spouse for the eternities, why does the church have such a strong position on "one man one woman" marriage. Shouldn't a more accurate church doctrine be "one man, one woman at a time on earth but multiple wives in heaven" Or "we believe in plural marriage, just not here on earth".

Am I missing something here?

It seems to me that "multiple spouses in heaven/monogomy on earth" is the doctrine. I'm assuming they put total focus on what is allowed now (monogomy) because its easier that way. If church leaders went out of their way to tell us we can have multiple spouses in heaven then it could raise a PR problem and also a problem within the church of people wanting multiple spouses now.

Link to comment
I just had an idea. Is is possible that these women are being sealed to all so that she can be given the choice as to which one she wants to be with?

Perhaps. Many people believe that a woman can only have one husband for all eternity, that a man can have more than one, and that the new policy on proxy sealings (it dates to about 1998) does not change that--it just allows a woman to pick a different husband to be with for eternity than the one she was sealed to in mortality.

Of course, some people believe that even a man can only have one wife for all eternity, even those who practice polygamy on earth, and therefore there will need to be a choice made.

To my knowledge, there is no official statement made on these issues in correlated times. That way, we all can think what we want without feeling out of step with official teaching.

Link to comment

It seems to me that "multiple spouses in heaven/monogomy on earth" is the doctrine. I'm assuming they put total focus on what is allowed now (monogomy) because its easier that way. If church leaders went out of their way to tell us we can have multiple spouses in heaven then it could raise a PR problem and also a problem within the church of people wanting multiple spouses now.

That policy seems a bit deceptive to me. The church should have no problem publicly declaring its doctrine. "Doubt not, fear not"

Link to comment
That policy seems a bit deceptive to me. The church should have no problem publicly declaring its doctrine. "Doubt not, fear not"

I don't think the Brethren are in agreement on what the order of heaven will be with respect to monogamy, polygamy, polyandry, polyamory.

Link to comment

I don't think the Brethren are in agreement on what the order of heaven will be with respect to monogamy, polygamy, polyandry, polyamory.

So what do you think that agreement is? I am beginning to be confused by the mixed message. Is there doctrine on it or is that doctrine becoming opinion like so many other doctrinal issues that I grew up believing were doctrine.

Link to comment

The agreement is that every marriage on earth is sealed by proxy in a temple. The nonagreement is what that means in the hereafter.

The closest I know of to a statement on the status of blended families (which is where the issue most often would arise) is this one:

"Family members need not worry about the sealing situation of blended families as it might be in the next life. Our concern is to live the gospel now and to love others, especially those in our family. If we live the gospel to the best of our ability, the Lord in His love and mercy will bless us in the next life and all things will be right. . . . We are not concerned about who will be sealed to whom. We simply trust in the Lord

Link to comment

The agreement is that every marriage on earth is sealed by proxy in a temple. The nonagreement is what that means in the hereafter.

The closest I know of to a statement on the status of blended families (which is where the issue most often would arise) is this one:

"Family members need not worry about the sealing situation of blended families as it might be in the next life. Our concern is to live the gospel now and to love others, especially those in our family. If we live the gospel to the best of our ability, the Lord in His love and mercy will bless us in the next life and all things will be right. . . . We are not concerned about who will be sealed to whom. We simply trust in the Lord

Link to comment

Perhaps. Many people believe that a woman can only have one husband for all eternity, that a man can have more than one, and that the new policy on proxy sealings (it dates to about 1998) does not change that--it just allows a woman to pick a different husband to be with for eternity than the one she was sealed to in mortality.

Of course, some people believe that even a man can only have one wife for all eternity, even those who practice polygamy on earth, and therefore there will need to be a choice made.

To my knowledge, there is no official statement made on these issues in correlated times. That way, we all can think what we want without feeling out of step with official teaching.

Yes, your right, it is sort of open ended. I guess all we can do is wait for more revelation on the subject.

Link to comment

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...