Mormons "getting Their Own Planet" (Merged)

[Sanpitch]

The "get your own planet" doctrine simply refers to us doing as Heavenly Father does - creating new worlds for our spirit offspring.  It is found in scripture, prophetic teachings, and Church manuals.  Yes, they make new worlds.  Again, it comes down to whether or not you believe that we will become just like our Heavenly Father is now, which is a key tenet of Mormonism (or at least was until Pres. Hinckley said we don't know much about it.)

 

"there is the dilution factor that after a few generations your offspring are descended from other parents and have almost no connection to you"

Not sure what this has to do with the doctrine.  Our spirit children in a new creation are ours, just as our children in the mortality are ours.  First generation, no further descent.

 

But sure, there are generations forward and backwards. God has a father.  God will have grandchildren.  Not really connected to whether we create worlds or not.

 

OK, I can see a little more clearly if you are stating that your direct offspring are yours and the further descendants are not directly yours but their parents.  In my OP I was dealing with counting the offspring of my parents that the siblings carefully count and my feelings were that they are also offspring of hundreds of others.  That's where I originally came from.

[JLHPROF]

I have a problem with the polyandry and eternity sealings of other men's wives. That's stealing their wives for eternity. That's worse than a physical affair could ever be. I mean didn't Joseph already have enough wives, why did he need other men's?

 

So women are possessions in eternity that can be stolen from men, they have no say in who they want to be with in your view?

 

The highest final ordinance given to man in mortality involves a woman claiming her husband (aka HER choice) in the resurrection.  Not the other way round.

[VideoGameJunkie]

The women are committing adultery and betraying their husbands is what they're doing. Did their first husbands mean nothing to them? Polygamy and polyandry destroys love. Where did I say women are possessions?

[JLHPROF]

The women are committing adultery and betraying their husbands is what they're doing. Did their first husbands mean nothing to them? Polygamy and polyandry destroys love. Where did I say women are possessions?

 

Absolutely not.

Name ONE woman who was sealed for eternity to Joseph Smith and to her husband in mortality.

In the eternities they belong to just one man.

[ERayR]

So personal revelation does not work in this case? Maybe we do know, but it hurt to accept the reason. We accept David's infidelities and sexual sins...but we refuse to accept Joseph's? Could it be his sexual sins led to his death? What he did is either right or wrong, if it is right we should embrace it, if it is wrong we should accept it, but to just say we do not know why, and then criticize others for bringing it to light is not dealing with it very well, and least in my box.

 

What if I said I believe he sinned, and I know this by personal revelation, or if I, as one poster said on this thread, I believe it is okay, again by personal revelation? My point is we need some leadership on these issues by those that hold the keys. I used to use the excuse that they were too busy, I no longer believe there are more urgent issues than teaching us the truths our brothers and sisters are leaving the church over.

 

It is not easy to say this, and even harder to think this way, but I now far too many people who are giving up on the church.

 

I marvel that you have been able to jump to so many conclusions from what I posted. 

 

My point is that we do not need leaders to take positions on this. What we need to do is for each of us to decide whether or not we accept the restoration and the Book of Mormon.  Whether Joseph Smith or Brigham Young or some other leader erred and sinned is not important.  As you say we accept David's and other biblical prophets shortcomings so if the leaders of this dispensation sinned that is their problem not ours.  If you accept that Joseph was the prophet of the restoration the rest shouldn't matter to you.

[Ahab]

The highest final ordinance given to man in mortality involves a woman claiming her husband (aka HER choice) in the resurrection. Not the other way round.

Oooh. I like that. Never thought about it that way.

And the men also have their own say so as to who they will accept as their woman.

[Ahab]

OK, I can see a little more clearly if you are stating that your direct offspring are yours and the further descendants are not directly yours but their parents. In my OP I was dealing with counting the offspring of my parents that the siblings carefully count and my feelings were that they are also offspring of hundreds of others. That's where I originally came from.

We can say our children are ours as long as we don't limit the people we refer to when we say ours, as people often mean when they say they are "their own" children.

Every biological parent in both directions (past or forward) remains a parent to all of their children through all generations of time and throughout all of eternity, or at least that is the case of every parent included in the welding links we refer to as sealings, and that because all sealings are connected that means every child is sealed to multiple parents who are sealed to their children. With no child left behind with no sealing to any parent. Just as our Father in heaven is sealed to all of his children. Additional links binding smaller groupings of family members don't nullify the larger more encompassing sealing connections. So none of us are alone or on our own or restricted to only some of our parent's kingdoms. We're all connected in some way to multiple parents whether or not we choose or have chosen to be.

[ERayR]

The highest final ordinance given to man in mortality involves a woman claiming her husband (aka HER choice) in the resurrection.  Not the other way round.

 

Would you please post references for that?

Thanks.

[VideoGameJunkie]

Absolutely not.

Name ONE woman who was sealed for eternity to Joseph Smith and to her husband in mortality.

In the eternities they belong to just one man.

Where is the proof they will belong to just one man in the eternities? Women who have more than one husband throughout their life are sealed to all their husbands in the temple after their death.

[Calm]

The women are committing adultery and betraying their husbands is what they're doing. Did their first husbands mean nothing to them? Polygamy and polyandry destroys love. Where did I say women are possessions?

The word "stealing" connotes a possession. How can one actually "steal" another's love (what people really mean is that the 'stolen' lover preferred someone else, they shift the responsibilty to the other, nothing they did merited their exloved one leaving them....good way to avoid any possible blame for srewing up a relationship)? Force someone to love them? Stealing can only occur when there is no choice.

So in your view men can have multiple wives if they remarry, but women cannot have multiple husbands if they remarry even though they are sealed to all of their husbands once they are dead even if they were sealed to one of their husbands while living? Or is it both? No matter how young when the spouse dies and whether or not the children could use another parent or if being single condemns a single parent and the children to poverty, there should be no remarriage ever?

If a woman is a widow, she cannot remarry no matter what or it will be her betraying her first husband?

And a man cannot remarry as he is betraying his first wife?

Edited November 26, 2015 by Calm

[Calm]

Where is the proof they will belong to just one man in the eternities? Women who have more than one husband throughout their life are sealed to all their husbands in the temple after their death.

So why were you suggesting they were committing betrayal before? Edited November 26, 2015 by Calm

[JLHPROF]

Would you please post references for that?

Thanks.

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Mysteries-Godliness-History-Worship/dp/1560851767

John 12:3-7

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp.../sbi/.../Dialogue_V16N01_12.pdf (pg 26-27)

[ERayR]

http://www.amazon.com/The-Mysteries-Godliness-History-Worship/dp/1560851767

John 12:3-7

https://www.dialoguejournal.com/wp.../sbi/.../Dialogue_V16N01_12.pdf (pg 26-27)

 

Thanks

[Tony Frank]

So personal revelation does not work in this case? Maybe we do know, but it hurt to accept the reason. We accept David's infidelities and sexual sins...but we refuse to accept Joseph's? Could it be his sexual sins led to his death? What he did is either right or wrong, if it is right we should embrace it, if it is wrong we should accept it, but to just say we do not know why, and then criticize others for bringing it to light is not dealing with it very well, and least in my box.

 

What if I said I believe he sinned, and I know this by personal revelation, or if I, as one poster said on this thread, I believe it is okay, again by personal revelation? My point is we need some leadership on these issues by those that hold the keys. I used to use the excuse that they were too busy, I no longer believe there are more urgent issues than teaching us the truths our brothers and sisters are leaving the church over.

 

It is not easy to say this, and even harder to think this way, but I now far too many people who are giving up on the church.

 

The historical record may or may not be accurate, but either way, it is not relevant to my salvation. It is not relevant to anyone's salvation. Jesus Christ restored His gospel through the prophet Joseph Smith, and Jesus Christ has always led His only true and living Church through His chosen prophet. People need to focus on their own salvation, living temple worthy, and being valiant in the testimony of Jesus Christ.

 

FYI, Moses once killed a guy, but obsessing about that would be a mistake, just like obsessing about Joseph Smith's wives is a mistake.

[Sanpitch]

Absolutely not.

Name ONE woman who was sealed for eternity to Joseph Smith and to her husband in mortality.

In the eternities they belong to just one man.

I have been curious about this statement and so did a little reading.  Does this apply?

 

In "Sacred Loneliness" by Todd Compton, page 71.

 

"On February 2 1846, in an inner room in the Nauvoo temple, Zina Huntington Jacobs stood by the side of Brigham Young, presiding apostle and de facto president of the Mormon church. Near Young was Heber C. Kimball, his first counselor.  Somewhat apart stood Henry B. Jacobs, whom Zina had married in a civil ceremony in March 1841.  She was now seven months pregnant with their second child, who would be named Henry Chariton Jacobs.  That Henry Bailey was inside the temple shows that he was considered a faithful, worthy Latter-day Saint.

 

Zina and Brigham turned toward each other and Kimball sealed (married ) Zina to Joseph Smith for eternity, Brigham stood proxy for the dead prophet, answering in his stead  ....................."

[VideoGameJunkie]

The word "stealing" connotes a possession. How can one actually "steal" another's love (what people really mean is that the 'stolen' lover preferred someone else, they shift the responsibilty to the other, nothing they did merited their exloved one leaving them....good way to avoid any possible blame for srewing up a relationship)? Force someone to love them? Stealing can only occur when there is no choice.

So in your view men can have multiple wives if they remarry, but women cannot have multiple husbands if they remarry even though they are sealed to all of their husbands once they are dead even if they were sealed to one of their husbands while living? Or is it both? No matter how young when the spouse dies and whether or not the children could use another parent or if being single condemns a single parent and the children to poverty, there should be no remarriage ever?

If a woman is a widow, she cannot remarry no matter what or it will be her betraying her first husband?

And a man cannot remarry as he is

betraying his first wife?

What I'm saying is Joseph Smith was getting sealed to women who were already married to men who were living. That's selfish on Josephs part. And I'm actually not okay with men being with multiple women either. I'm not okay with polygamy in general it's the worst thing to happen to the church. 1 man 1 woman should be how the eternities go together as one flesh.

[ERayR]

What I'm saying is Joseph Smith was getting sealed to women who were already married to men who were living. That's selfish on Josephs part. And I'm actually not okay with men being with multiple women either. I'm not okay with polygamy in general it's the worst thing to happen to the church. 1 man 1 woman should be how the eternities go together as one flesh.

 

Fact pattern:  A man is sealed with his wife.  After a few years wife dies.  Man then takes a second wife again being sealed with second wife.

 

Question:  Is it wrong for this man to go into the eternities with two woman?

[Randall57]

I marvel that you have been able to jump to so many conclusions from what I posted. 

 

My point is that we do not need leaders to take positions on this. What we need to do is for each of us to decide whether or not we accept the restoration and the Book of Mormon.  Whether Joseph Smith or Brigham Young or some other leader erred and sinned is not important.  As you say we accept David's and other biblical prophets shortcomings so if the leaders of this dispensation sinned that is their problem not ours.  If you accept that Joseph was the prophet of the restoration the rest shouldn't matter to you.

Talk about jumping context.

 

We discuss David's and Noah's sin etc, and form lessons from them, yet we ignore those of the modern day prophets. We need to establish  what is error and sin so others do not make the same mistakes. And clear the error so members are not so confused. Just look at the different opinions on this thread.

 

If you accept that Joseph was the prophet of the restoration the rest shouldn't matter to you.

 

 

Then why go to SS, why come here?

[Randall57]

The historical record may or may not be accurate, but either way, it is not relevant to my salvation. It is not relevant to anyone's salvation. Jesus Christ restored His gospel through the prophet Joseph Smith, and Jesus Christ has always led His only true and living Church through His chosen prophet. People need to focus on their own salvation, living temple worthy, and being valiant in the testimony of Jesus Christ.

 

FYI, Moses once killed a guy, but obsessing about that would be a mistake, just like obsessing about Joseph Smith's wives is a mistake.

 I learn from mistakes, how can we learn if we do not even admit they were mistakes. We discuss Moses killing a guy, and it is part of scripture. It's time to be honest with ourselves.

[JLHPROF]

I have been curious about this statement and so did a little reading.  Does this apply?

 

In "Sacred Loneliness" by Todd Compton, page 71.

 

"On February 2 1846, in an inner room in the Nauvoo temple, Zina Huntington Jacobs stood by the side of Brigham Young, presiding apostle and de facto president of the Mormon church. Near Young was Heber C. Kimball, his first counselor.  Somewhat apart stood Henry B. Jacobs, whom Zina had married in a civil ceremony in March 1841.  She was now seven months pregnant with their second child, who would be named Henry Chariton Jacobs.  That Henry Bailey was inside the temple shows that he was considered a faithful, worthy Latter-day Saint.

 

Zina and Brigham turned toward each other and Kimball sealed (married ) Zina to Joseph Smith for eternity, Brigham stood proxy for the dead prophet, answering in his stead  ....................."

 

No.  Henry was never sealed to Zina.

Henry was her civil husband, never sealed by priesthood authority.  Joseph was her eternal companion.

Edited November 26, 2015 by JLHPROF

[VideoGameJunkie]

Fact pattern:  A man is sealed with his wife.  After a few years wife dies.  Man then takes a second wife again being sealed with second wife.

 

Question:  Is it wrong for this man to go into the eternities with two woman?

Yes it is wrong. The 2nd marriage should be for time only. The Bible and Book of Mormon teach it should be 1 man 1 woman cleaving to each other as one flesh and plural marriage is an abomination in the Lords eyes. I can't accept that the Lord changes His mind on something so serious. When Adam and Eve were meant to populate the world it was just them. That would have been the perfect time for polygamy but God went with 1 man and 1 woman. After the flood it was just Noah and his 1 wife and the others with 1 wife. That would have been the other perfect time for polygamy but no it was 1 man 1 woman couples. I also find it interesting how an angel with a drawn sword threatens Joseph if he doesn't introduce polygamy since it's so important from God yet there's no angelic intervention when the US threatens Utahs statehood or from the manifesto.

[JLHPROF]

Yes it is wrong. The 2nd marriage should be for time only. The Bible and Book of Mormon teach it should be 1 man 1 woman cleaving to each other as one flesh and plural marriage is an abomination in the Lords eyes. I can't accept that the Lord changes His mind on something so serious. When Adam and Eve were meant to populate the world it was just them. That would have been the perfect time for polygamy but God went with 1 man and 1 woman. After the flood it was just Noah and his 1 wife and the others with 1 wife. That would have been the other perfect time for polygamy but no it was 1 man 1 woman couples. I also find it interesting how an angel with a drawn sword threatens Joseph if he doesn't introduce polygamy since it's so important from God yet there's no angelic intervention when the US threatens Utahs statehood or from the manifesto.

 

Wrong based on what other than tradition? 

What if we find out that Brigham Young was exactly right and polygyny is both required and the only kind of marriage in heaven?

Do we storm out of heaven because we just can't accept it?

 

What other laws might be worth leaving heaven over because we don't like them?  Lucifer and 1/3 part left because they didn't like a rule.  Didn't exactly work out for them.

[VideoGameJunkie]

If it's the rule it wouldn't have been abandoned in 1890 and cause of excommunication in the church today.

[VideoGameJunkie]

Here's an article from Greg Trimble about why polygamy may not be in heaven. http://www.gregtrimble.com/what-every-mormon-really-needs-to-know-about-polygamy/

[Bobbieaware]

Wrong based on what other than tradition? 

What if we find out that Brigham Young was exactly right and polygyny is both required and the only kind of marriage in heaven?

Do we storm out of heaven because we just can't accept it?

 

What other laws might be worth leaving heaven over because we don't like them?  Lucifer and 1/3 part left because they didn't like a rule.  Didn't exactly work out for them.

Some have the ability to see and understand Joseph Smith was a true prophet, while most others don't. I wouldn't beat my head against a brick wall over it.