Duncan Posted April 7, 2015 Posted April 7, 2015 Something i've wondered about is do you think their are men/women who were foreordained to be General Authorities/Auxillary leaders but through one reason or another aren't in those callings? Other than excommunication what would disqualify someone from serving?Though not the same thing but Elder Mark Petersen was called in 1944 following the excommunication of Elder Richard R. Lyman. I can't imagine God wanted Elder Lyman to be exed so does it mean then that Elder Petersen should have been called later when Elder Lyman passed away?
Sevenbak Posted April 7, 2015 Posted April 7, 2015 (edited) Was Matthias chosen by God to replace Judas? I don't imagine God wanted Judas to do what he did either. Edited April 8, 2015 by Sevenbak
JLHPROF Posted April 7, 2015 Posted April 7, 2015 Something i've wondered about is do you think their are men/women who were foreordained to be General Authorities/Auxillary leaders but through one reason or another aren't in those callings? Other than excommunication what would disqualify someone from serving?Though not the same thing but Elder Mark Petersen was called in 1944 following the excommunication of Elder Richard R. Lyman. I can't imagine God wanted Elder Lyman to be exed so does it mean then that Elder Petersen should have been called later when Elder Lyman passed away? I think you are confusing foreordination with predestination. Elder Petersen might have been chosen an apostle before coming here. But Elder Lyman still had the agency to choose good or evil. His choice of evil merely created an opportunity for Elder Petersen to receive the blessing he was always going to get.Many will make the wrong choice and lose the blessing they were foreordained to. It's not a guarantee.And all will receive every blessing they were foreordained to as long as they live worth of it.
sethpayne Posted April 7, 2015 Posted April 7, 2015 (edited) Something i've wondered about is do you think their are men/women who were foreordained to be General Authorities/Auxillary leaders but through one reason or another aren't in those callings? Other than excommunication what would disqualify someone from serving?Though not the same thing but Elder Mark Petersen was called in 1944 following the excommunication of Elder Richard R. Lyman. I can't imagine God wanted Elder Lyman to be exed so does it mean then that Elder Petersen should have been called later when Elder Lyman passed away? Wow. I hadn't realized that Elder Lyman had been carrying on his "plural marriage" for over 20 years before he was exxed. Serious question: where was the discernment? This guy must have been really smooth to fool the Prophet (several, actually) and his fellow Apostles for so long. Perhaps asking Apostles to verify their statements with provable and demonstrable evidence isn't such a bad idea. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_R._Lyman ETA: It was 18 years, not 20 Edited April 8, 2015 by sethpayne
JLHPROF Posted April 7, 2015 Posted April 7, 2015 Wow. I hadn't realized that Elder Lyman had been carrying on his "plural marriage" for over 20 years before he was exxed. Serious question: where was the discernment? This guy must have been really smooth to fool the Prophet (several, actually) and his fellow Apostles for so long. That's an assumption that they didn't know or what they knew when. If he "married" her in 1925 there was still polygamy being lived by a great many Church members. He was over 50 when it happened. Maybe there were people who knew about them who assumed he married her back when it was allowed. There wasn't a lot of knowledge as to who was married to whom during those secretive years. When it was discovered to have been neither authorized, performed correctly, nor pre-1904 and it was made public knowledge the Church had no choice. Or maybe our assumption is correct and they were really in the dark about it the whole time.
sethpayne Posted April 7, 2015 Posted April 7, 2015 That's an assumption that they didn't know or what they knew when. If he "married" her in 1925 there was still polygamy being lived by a great many Church members. He was over 50 when it happened. Maybe there were people who knew about them who assumed he married her back when it was allowed. There wasn't a lot of knowledge as to who was married to whom during those secretive years. When it was discovered to have been neither authorized, performed correctly, nor pre-1904 and it was made public knowledge the Church had no choice. Or maybe our assumption is correct and they were really in the dark about it the whole time. Good questions, JLHPROF. From the fount of all knowledge, Wikipedia, this is the timeline: Married Amy Brown - 1896Called as an Apostle - 1918"Married" Anna Jacobsen Hegsted - 1925FP discovered "plural marriage" - 1943Lyman excommunicated -- 1973 at age 73 So he certainly was way out of bounds for his second marriage. That was well after the second manifesto. And I'm assuming that had the FP known, they would have exxed him long-before 1943. Rebaptized - 1954Blessings restored (?????) - 1970
Sevenbak Posted April 8, 2015 Posted April 8, 2015 It's interesting that with his second "wife", they just secretly exchanged vows with each other. There was no officiator, no sealing, no ordinance, no marriage. I would call it more a common law polygamous marriage. The FP was correct to define it as adultery.
Storm Rider Posted April 8, 2015 Posted April 8, 2015 Plural marriage and even polygamous marriage do not apply - Brother Lyman was excommunicated for adultery. It should be described as adultery rather than cloud the issue with terms that have nothing in common for the reason he was ex'd. Discernment remains and lying remains; both function well. An idealist, a very naive one, would assume that perfection is a gift of men whether they are called of God or not.
Recommended Posts