teddyaware Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) The Abrahamic test is one in which a person is commanded to do the near impossible and then doesn't have to go through with it. It doesn't really pertain to polygamy. But as it is, we can pretty much insert anything in place of polygamy in your above. That's your definition. The reason why Abraham didn't have to go through with the sacrifice, in his instance, is because God (perhaps I should have used the name of a specific member of the Godhead so as to not trouble Tacenda) knew Abraham was going to take Isaac's life. Yes, he was actually going to plunge the knife into his son's heart because, as Paul testified, Abraham KNEW God would raise Isaac from the dead so that God's promise to Abraham of an innumerable posterity through the line of isaac would be fulfilled. So God counted it as if Abraham had gone through with the sacrifice because God KNEW he was going to do it. That's why he passed the test, you see. By the way, I'm not the first Church member to call the practice of LDS polygamy an Abrahamic test or sacrifice -- I took that cue from others. But if you don't like the term Abrahamic sacrifice being applied to the practice of LDS polygamy, then let's just call it a "trial of faith." The scriptures are filled to the brim with such tests of faith and Abraham's sacrifice surely fits snugly into this broader category of soul refining trials as well. In fact, all of life is a test of faith, but some tests are more difficult than others. Edited February 5, 2015 by teddyaware 4
Avatar4321 Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 Maybe those who think Joseph committed a great sin with polygamy should forgive him.and I think we should ask ourselves which we would prefer, to have a polygamist prophet or no prophet at all? 1
Popular Post KevinG Posted February 5, 2015 Popular Post Posted February 5, 2015 Abrahamic test or extreme test of faith absolutely applies to polygamy. Just read Brigham's account, or Joseph's accounts, or anyone else introduced to it's account... Which strangely enough the church has had available to members for its entire history. We're bad at hiding stuff. 6
ERayR Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) Abrahamic test or extreme test of faith absolutely applies to polygamy. Just read Brigham's account, or Joseph's accounts, or anyone else introduced to it's account... Which strangely enough the church has had available to members for its entire history. We're bad at hiding stuff. You didn't know the best hiding place is in plain sight? Edited February 5, 2015 by ERayR 1
JLHPROF Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 Maybe those who think Joseph committed a great sin with polygamy should forgive him.and I think we should ask ourselves which we would prefer, to have a polygamist prophet or no prophet at all? Or maybe they should realize that the man was approved of by God, and if we disapprove we are placing our judgement above God's.I think if God thought Joseph a good a righteous servant (and there is no indication otherwise) then he was. And if we think otherwise then we are wrong. 2
Tacenda Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 That's your definition. The reason why Abraham didn't have to go through with the sacrifice, in his instance, is because God (perhaps I should have used the name of a specific member of the Godhead so as to not trouble Tacenda) knew Abraham was going to take Isaac's life. Yes, he was actually going to plunge the knife into his son's heart because, as Paul testified, Abraham KNEW God would raise Isaac from the dead so that God's promise to Abraham of an innumerable posterity through the line of isaac would be fulfilled. So God counted it as if Abraham had gone through with the sacrifice because God KNEW he was going to do it. That's why he passed the test, you see.By the way, I'm not the first Church member to call the practice of LDS polygamy an Abrahamic test or sacrifice -- I took that cue from others.But if you don't like the term Abrahamic sacrifice being applied to the practice of LDS polygamy, then let's just call it a "trial of faith." The scriptures are filled to the brim with such tests of faith and Abraham's sacrifice surely fits snugly into this broader category of soul refining trials as well. In fact, all of life is a test of faith, but some tests are more difficult than others.I know what you say is true about polygamy being thought of as a refiner's fire. It was mentioned to be so in "The Work & Glory" series. I just don't think I can worshop that kind of God/Jesus. Therefore, everything in scripture is not always true, IMO. Sorry if you thought I was angry. It just didn't sound very Christ centered, again, sorry I'm so hard to get along with.
stemelbow Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 Abrahamic test or extreme test of faith absolutely applies to polygamy. Just read Brigham's account, or Joseph's accounts, or anyone else introduced to it's account... Which strangely enough the church has had available to members for its entire history. We're bad at hiding stuff. Yet the test of Abraham was to see if he was willing to go through with it, but not have to do it. If Joseph and Brigham resolved to go through with it but were stopped by the hand of God, then it would clearly be an Abrahamic test. But that's not what happened. Surely it can be seen as a test of faith-even an extreme test of faith if you will...I'll gladly grant that.
Kevin Christensen Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 This has my nomination for post of the year. Of course, the year is still very new, but I doubt there will be anything come along to top it. Thanks for the kind words. As you say, the year is still very new. Best, Kevin C. Canonsburg, PA
JLHPROF Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 Yet the test of Abraham was to see if he was willing to go through with it, but not have to do it. If Joseph and Brigham resolved to go through with it but were stopped by the hand of God, then it would clearly be an Abrahamic test. But that's not what happened. Surely it can be seen as a test of faith-even an extreme test of faith if you will...I'll gladly grant that. The Abrahamic test was about being willing to sacrifice EVERYTHING we hold most dear. That's it, that's all. For Abraham it was his son. For Heber C. Kimball and John Taylor it was their wives. For Joseph Smith it could be called many things - even to his life. The Abrahamic test goes with the 6th Lecture on Faith. Let us here observe, that a religion that does not require the sacrifice of all things, never has power sufficient to produce the faith necessary unto life and salvation; for from the first existence of man, the faith necessary unto the enjoyment of life and salvation never could be obtained without the sacrifice of all earthly things: it was through this sacrifice, and this only, that God has ordained that men should enjoy eternal life; and it is through the medium of the sacrifice of all earthly things, that men do actually know that they are doing the things that are well pleasing in the sight of God. When a man has offered in sacrifice all that he has, for the truth's sake, not even withholding his life, and believing before God that he has been called to make this sacrifice, because he seeks to do his will, he does know most assuredly, that God does and will accept his sacrifice & offering, & that he has not nor will not seek his face That's the Abrahamic sacrifice, regardless of whether God makes them go through with it or not. Placing ALL on the altar. That's what the Abraham AND Joseph Smith did. 2
teddyaware Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 (edited) I know what you say is true about polygamy being thought of as a refiner's fire. It was mentioned to be so in "The Work & Glory" series. I just don't think I can worshop that kind of God/Jesus. Therefore, everything in scripture is not always true, IMO. Sorry if you thought I was angry. It just didn't sound very Christ centered, again, sorry I'm so hard to get along with. That's OK, Kiddo. When someone says "I'm ottta here" that usually means they're upset. I'm happy you really weren't as upset as it may have seemed. There's a decided disadvantage to faceless communication because, as they say, most of what we communicate is perceived through body language and facial expressions. But that being said, my heart really does go out to you in your predicament. I was severely emotionally traumatized over a decade ago and after all this time I'm still felling the aftershocks. All the best to you. Edited February 5, 2015 by teddyaware 1
stemelbow Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 The Abrahamic test was about being willing to sacrifice EVERYTHING we hold most dear. That's it, that's all. For Abraham it was his son. For Heber C. Kimball and John Taylor it was their wives. So taking on more wives was sacrificing their previous wives? First wife? Really, what was being sacrificed by the men for practicing polygamy?
Calm Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 Yet the test of Abraham was to see if he was willing to go through with it, but not have to do it. If Joseph and Brigham resolved to go through with it but were stopped by the hand of God, then it would clearly be an Abrahamic test. But that's not what happened. Surely it can be seen as a test of faith-even an extreme test of faith if you will...I'll gladly grant that.There are those who see the ram in the thicket as not having to live it in the eternities...
Mars Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 So taking on more wives was sacrificing their previous wives? First wife?Really, what was being sacrificed by the men for practicing polygamy? I'm not 100% on board with the Abrahamic Test metaphor with respect to polygamy, but I'm pretty sure that if I were asked to practice it, I'd run a heavy risk of losing my wife or losing my faith. They were already in 100% - sold land, farms, wealth, etc... The early Saints weren't perfect, and I know that, but they were trying to dodge mobs and violence and all kinds of harm. They gave up their old faith, their old way of life, their money, their land. This feels like the last thing to give up. Carnally speaking, the idea of a 2nd mate is - obviously - a fun idea. But at the risk of losing out what I have with my wife? Having to trust that she's not going to be N days into it and throw her hands up in the air and quit? I dunno... that'd be tough - carnal pleasures and all notwithstanding.
JLHPROF Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 So taking on more wives was sacrificing their previous wives? First wife?Really, what was being sacrificed by the men for practicing polygamy? I'll let you think about that for a second... Ok, you finished? I could list several dozen ways men sacrificed to keep plural marriage alive. Here's just one of the biggest -Their freedom: 1
KevinG Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 Yet the test of Abraham was to see if he was willing to go through with it, but not have to do it. If Joseph and Brigham resolved to go through with it but were stopped by the hand of God, then it would clearly be an Abrahamic test. But that's not what happened. Surely it can be seen as a test of faith-even an extreme test of faith if you will...I'll gladly grant that. The test was a test to see if Abraham would sacrifice that thing most dear to him at the request of God. Polygamy was an even more severe test in ways for both husbands and wives. Sacrificing privacy, sacrificing time, sharing the closest relationship in their lives with an additional person. giving up selfish wants for the larger family... all great ongoing sacrifices. And sacrifices that come with great blessings if done well. Those who accepted those sacrifices and lived faithfully often had descendants who now lead the church. Their faithfulness being tested in great ways solidified their families in the Gospel in unique ways. This is very much a parallel to Abraham's willing sacrifice (he didn't know God would stay his hand) and receiving in turn a righteous posterity. 2
JLHPROF Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 I'm not 100% on board with the Abrahamic Test metaphor with respect to polygamy, but I'm pretty sure that if I were asked to practice it, I'd run a heavy risk of losing my wife or losing my faith. They were already in 100% - sold land, farms, wealth, etc... The early Saints weren't perfect, and I know that, but they were trying to dodge mobs and violence and all kinds of harm. They gave up their old faith, their old way of life, their money, their land. This feels like the last thing to give up. Carnally speaking, the idea of a 2nd mate is - obviously - a fun idea. But at the risk of losing out what I have with my wife? Having to trust that she's not going to be N days into it and throw her hands up in the air and quit? I dunno... that'd be tough - carnal pleasures and all notwithstanding. And this is an example of NOT why the early saints were living plural marriage... 1
KevinG Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 If anyone things polygamy is all fun for the man and all torture for the woman, I worry about their ability to be a successful monogamist. 4
stemelbow Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 I'm just saying if polygamy was commanded of God, was a divine principle perhaps we should see it as Heber did, in that it brought more blessings to those who practiced it then we could even imagine. if so, the sacrifice wasn't much--indeed, the sacrifice was only to replace that which was lost with far far more, no?
Kenngo1969 Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 A figment of his imagination.I'm sure. I prefer to imagine a world of strawberry fields, and pansies, and meadows of clover (with blossoms of blue), and teddy bears over one of angels with drawn swords ... But, to each, his or her own.
Kenngo1969 Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 There are those who see the ram in the thicket as not having to live it in the eternities...In any event, as I've said so many times before, an Omnipotent, All-Loving God's not going to have to tell any of us, if we're faithful, "I know you were hoping for something more, or better, or different, but ... This is the best I could do. Sorry." 2
KevinG Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 I'm just saying if polygamy was commanded of God, was a divine principle perhaps we should see it as Heber did, in that it brought more blessings to those who practiced it then we could even imagine. if so, the sacrifice wasn't much--indeed, the sacrifice was only to replace that which was lost with far far more, no? Yes. But faith precedes the miracle. Many of the blessings were not even realized in that generation. Sacrifice was very real - and the characterization of polygamy as some kind of selfish error, or worse plot by the leaders of the early Saints is unfair to those who gave that sacrifice. It degrades the women as though they had no intelligence to respond, and degrades the men, as though they were driven by lusts and selfish desires. 3
KevinG Posted February 5, 2015 Posted February 5, 2015 I just realized I'm contributing to the derail of this topic. Its not polygamy it's John Dehlin on NPR... sorry.
rockpond Posted February 6, 2015 Posted February 6, 2015 I just realized I'm contributing to the derail of this topic. Its not polygamy it's John Dehlin on NPR... sorry. Has anyone created a "Godwin's Law" type name for the fact that nearly every thread here will eventually go down the rabbit hole of either polygamy, race, or gay marriage? 3
ksfisher Posted February 6, 2015 Posted February 6, 2015 Has anyone created a "Godwin's Law" type name for the fact that nearly every thread here will eventually go down the rabbit hole of either polygamy, race, or gay marriage? Perhaps you just did. Would you like to claim the honor of naming it?
Kenngo1969 Posted February 6, 2015 Posted February 6, 2015 I just realized I'm contributing to the derail of this topic. Its not polygamy it's John Dehlin on NPR... sorry. Has anyone created a "Godwin's Law" type name for the fact that nearly every thread here will eventually go down the rabbit hole of either polygamy, race, or gay marriage? Perhaps you just did. Would you like to claim the honor of naming it?Rockpond's Law?
Recommended Posts