Members who reject the Family Proclamation

[JLHPROF]

40 minutes ago, juliann said:

But as we can see, thanks to this thread, there are maybe even more members as devout TBMs as they come, that would never accept a prophet and apostle saying polygamy is over.  I think this speaks to a much bigger problem.

Because it is impossible in Mormonism for polygamy to be over.

[rockpond]

19 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I agree that President Hinckley was only referring to the here and now. 

I remember how great we thought it was that President Hinckley was doing interviews with the media back in the late 90's.  Looking back, however, it seems that he made some very controversial and even problematic statements that have been picked over, analyzed, defended, etc. for almost two decades now.

In the Larry King interview he made the comment about polygamy being "behind us" and not doctrinal.  He also made some comments regarding women not having the priesthood at the present time.  And not asking for it... comments that have been cited by the OW movement.

In his 1997 interview he commented on the Lorenzo Snow couplet regarding the King Follet Discourse doctrine.  That one has certainly generated much heated discussion.

[ksfisher]

1 minute ago, rockpond said:

I remember how great we thought it was that President Hinckley was doing interviews with the media back in the late 90's.  Looking back, however, it seems that he made some very controversial and even problematic statements that have been picked over, analyzed, defended, etc. for almost two decades now.

In the Larry King interview he made the comment about polygamy being "behind us" and not doctrinal.  He also made some comments regarding women not having the priesthood at the present time.  And not asking for it... comments that have been cited by the OW movement.

In his 1997 interview he commented on the Lorenzo Snow couplet regarding the King Follet Discourse doctrine.  That one has certainly generated much heated discussion.

I believe he did a very good job for the situation.  He probably wasn't imagining that his words would still be generating discussion today.  I hope no one ever does the same with anything I've said.

[juliann]

8 minutes ago, provoman said:

 

Elder Oaks, 2007, national tv,

" I have perfect faith in the doctrine [polygamy] and will understand more about it in time to come."

 

Elder Oaks called it Doctrine.

 

14 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

IGNORE WINDOW I CAN'T GET RID OF

Source? Link?
 

Quote

 

HW: There still is some confusion that polygamy is definitively and unequivocally disallowed in this world. What will happen in the next? There is a perception that polygamy is part of the afterlife. Could you talk a little about that?

DHO: If I talked about that I’d be making doctrinal statements where the prophet has not chosen to make doctrinal statements, so I think I shouldn’t say anything except to affirm that a lot of people, myself included, are in multiple-marriage situations.

 

 

15 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

You are intellectually dishonest. 

OK, but you still have no official statement overriding the official quotes I have provided.

[juliann]

9 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Because it is impossible in Mormonism for polygamy to be over.

Source.... from this century?

[VideoGameJunkie]

Juliann, when will you address what prophet Gordon B Hinckley said at Inis Hunter's funeral in 2007 about the matter?

President Hinckley affirmed the eternal nature of the marriage between Sister [Inis] Hunter and the former church president, whose first wife, Claire Jeffs, died after a long battle with Alzheimer's disease and is now buried beside him in the Salt Lake Cemetery.

Inis Hunter "will now be laid to rest on the other side," he said. "They were sealed under the authority of the Holy Melchizedek Priesthood for time and for all eternity," he said, recalling the marriage ceremony he performed for them in the Salt Lake Temple in April 1990. ("Sister Hunter's humor and cheerfulness remembered as she is laid to rest," Deseret News, Oct. 22, 2007).

Edited February 18, 2016 by VideoGameJunkie

[juliann]

7 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I remember how great we thought it was that President Hinckley was doing interviews with the media back in the late 90's.  Looking back, however, it seems that he made some very controversial and even problematic statements that have been picked over, analyzed, defended, etc. for almost two decades now.

In the Larry King interview he made the comment about polygamy being "behind us" and not doctrinal.  He also made some comments regarding women not having the priesthood at the present time.  And not asking for it... comments that have been cited by the OW movement.

In his 1997 interview he commented on the Lorenzo Snow couplet regarding the King Follet Discourse doctrine.  That one has certainly generated much heated discussion.

And he didn't step back from any of them.  Why are you?

[Mystery Meat]

1 minute ago, juliann said:

Source? Link?
 

 

OK, but you still have no official statement overriding the official quotes I have provided.

I disagree with your interpretation of those quotes and don't think they say what you think they do. Others here (including some that are not fans of polygamy) agree with me. In other words there is nothing to override. Nothing. D&C 132 is still canon. You are the one who has provided any official statement overriding our doctrine of eternal polygamy or the divine origin of polygamy in early period of this dispensation.

[rockpond]

4 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I believe he did a very good job for the situation.  He probably wasn't imagining that his words would still be generating discussion today.  I hope no one ever does the same with anything I've said.

Don't take that the wrong way... I loved his interviews as well.  I wish more of the 15 would follow his lead.

And I'm sure he wasn't imagining his words would still be discussed today.  Just shows how much weight the prophet's words carry -- even when delivered away from a pulpit.

[rockpond]

1 minute ago, juliann said:

And he didn't step back from any of them.  Why are you?

Why do you think I've stepped back from them?

[JLHPROF]

4 minutes ago, juliann said:

Source.... from this century?

Common sense.  From right now.

You can't keep setting up CFRs for things that don't exist and shouldn't exist.
Polygamy continues because marriage is eternal.  NO quotes are needed from modern prophets to confirm that.

Edited February 18, 2016 by JLHPROF

[juliann]

13 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

I think what is so upsetting about this thread is the fact that I held you in high regard. Now, it is clear that you are nothing more than a hypocrite. I am reminded of this piece you and Cal wrote not too long ago (http://blog.fairmormon.org/2014/03/26/these-are-our-sisters/) in which you warned against mischaracterizing. The fact that you continue to make claims like the one above, is blatant mischaracterizing, ignore posts and is downright rude (which is ironic, considering the thread last week in which you said that men tend to silence women in conversation) to those who disagree with you, even to the point of making accusations about character that no one can substantiate. Any credibility you had with me is gone. I don't care if the mods think I have crossed a line with this post. I think you have crossed plenty. I find your behavior here hypocritical, ugly and wanting in personal integrity and character.

OK. I still am requesting a source.

[juliann]

Just now, JLHPROF said:

Common sense.  From right now.

CFR please.

[smac97]

6 minutes ago, juliann said:

Source? Link?

Here's the link.

[ksfisher]

3 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Don't take that the wrong way... I loved his interviews as well.  I wish more of the 15 would follow his lead.

And I'm sure he wasn't imagining his words would still be discussed today.  Just shows how much weight the prophet's words carry -- even when delivered away from a pulpit.

No, wasn't taking it wrong.

[VideoGameJunkie]

2 minutes ago, juliann said:

CFR please.

I'm going to post this again so you can acknowledge it.

President Hinckley affirmed the eternal nature of the marriage between Sister [Inis] Hunter and the former church president, whose first wife, Claire Jeffs, died after a long battle with Alzheimer's disease and is now buried beside him in the Salt Lake Cemetery.

Inis Hunter "will now be laid to rest on the other side," he said. "They were sealed under the authority of the Holy Melchizedek Priesthood for time and for all eternity," he said, recalling the marriage ceremony he performed for them in the Salt Lake Temple in April 1990. ("Sister Hunter's humor and cheerfulness remembered as she is laid to rest," Deseret News, Oct. 22, 2007).

Edited February 18, 2016 by VideoGameJunkie

[JLHPROF]

2 minutes ago, juliann said:

CFR please.

You want to CFR common sense?
Your stubbornness on this is up there with the best anti-Mormon critics.

Edited February 18, 2016 by JLHPROF

[ALarson]

3 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Polygamy continues because marriage is eternal. 

Marriages can be eternal and not involve any polygamy.

[bluebell]

27 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

You are intellectually dishonest. 

From my perspective, she's not being dishonest in the least.  

[JLHPROF]

Just now, ALarson said:

Marriages can be eternal and not involve any polygamy.

So you are declaring all polygamous sealings invalid in the eternities.

That's pretty arrogant.

[VideoGameJunkie]

Just now, bluebell said:

From my perspective, she's not being dishonest in the least.  

She claims to not see any posts to go against her position and then ignores my posts where I respond with prophet quotes on the matter. That is being dishonest.

[JLHPROF]

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

From my perspective, she's not being dishonest in the least.

At the very least she is requesting proof texts for something that is not required to be proven.
And she knows it.

[smac97]

30 minutes ago, Mystery Meat said:

You are intellectually dishonest. 

I think there are strong opinions about this issue, and strong statements being made.  But we can and should refrain from personal insults.  They do not advance the discussion.

And with that I've fulfilled my daily quote of net-nannying.

Thanks,

-Smac

[smac97]

5 minutes ago, bluebell said:

From my perspective, she's not being dishonest in the least.  

I don't think we need to make this a discussion about Juliann.  Let's stick with the topic.

That said, it sure would be nice if good faith questions were addressed.  This is why I am frustrated with this thread.  

Thanks,

-Smac

[ALarson]

9 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

So you are declaring all polygamous sealings invalid in the eternities.

That's pretty arrogant.

Nope.  I'm just stating that we don't know.  Women and men may be able to choose which ONE they want to be with for eternity.  We do not know that all those who have been sealed to multiple partners will be forced to live polygamy.  That doesn't invalidate the sealing anymore than in other circumstances where members have been told they will have a choice.

Monogamy may be what is actually lived in the Celestial Kingdom, rather than polygamy.  Just because there are eternal marriages, that does not mean there will be polygamy.

.

Edited February 18, 2016 by ALarson