VideoGameJunkie Posted March 29, 2016 Author Posted March 29, 2016 53 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: When God speaks of "destroying" one of his children, it almost always refers to damnation. Damnation occurs whenever we refuse to follow God's plan. To me, that is what was meant by the supposed "threat of destruction" made to Emma. Simply that her progression would be halted by such a decision. But is it fair to be damned just because you don't want the love of your life sleeping with other women?
JLHPROF Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 38 minutes ago, VideoGameJunkie said: But is it fair to be damned just because you don't want the love of your life sleeping with other women? It is perfectly fair to be damned for refusing the follow the direct command of God.
VideoGameJunkie Posted March 29, 2016 Author Posted March 29, 2016 9 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: It is perfectly fair to be damned for refusing the follow the direct command of God. Why would God command such a thing for a heartbroken good woman though?
JLHPROF Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 4 minutes ago, VideoGameJunkie said: Why would God command such a thing for a heartbroken good woman though? The law is the law. This wasn't some whim of God or an attack on Emma by the Almighty. D&C 132:32 Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved. 33 But if ye enter not into my law ye cannot receive the promise of my Father, which he made unto Abraham. 34 God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises. Many laws challenge our feelings.
Popular Post JulieM Posted March 29, 2016 Popular Post Posted March 29, 2016 (edited) 30 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: It is perfectly fair to be damned for refusing the follow the direct command of God. Maybe Emma did not believe polygamy was a commandment from God. Maybe she was inspired to NOT believe in the principle. If I had to accept my husband marrying over 30 other women and sleeping with some of them, or be damned, I would not believe it was God giving me this ultimatum. I certainly wouldn't want to be with all of them throughout eternity in order to be with my husband either! Edited March 29, 2016 by JulieM 5
Glenn101 Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 21 minutes ago, VideoGameJunkie said: But is it fair to be damned just because you don't want the love of your life sleeping with other women? Joseph, in the case of the angel and the sword was the one facing damnation, because he did not want to do it. You are going to have to ask God about that one though. Go back and read the title of the thread that you started.."Let's just say the Angel with a drawn sword story is true" If that is true, then it follows that God ordered Joseph to take plural wives. If that is true, then it follows that Section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants is inspired scripture. If the practice was instituted and commanded by God, what else was Joseph to do? Calm noted that several women during those early days had revelations to the part that polygamy could play in their eternal lives and were converted to the practice. Some of those revelations were even accompanied by angelic visitations. Vilate Kimball's revelation was even more remarkable than most, because, according to her daughter Helen Mar, Vilate's revelation came as she struggled and prayed to find the reason behind her husband's recent inner turmoil about which he would not speak. It does not follow that everyone will be required to engage in plural marriages in the Celestial Kingdom. If I remember my statistics correctly, less than ten percent of the members were engaged in plural marriages in Utah. And in history, so many more that have had their work done for them in the temple have monogamous marriages. I think that maybe we are beating the proverbial dead horse with the repeated threads on this topic. We are going around in circles, endlessly. Maybe is is a compulsion. But we have received no new revelations that I know of since the Official Declaration. There have been many different articles and even books written about the subject maybe adding or even subtracting from the context. But none of those articles, essays, or books have answered that one central question, was it commanded of God? At this point in time, like Calm, I have not had a revelation on the subject. It is moot, for me, and is something that does not concern me at this time.All of our questions will be answered in due time. I do believe in the goodness of God and that He will not force us into something that we do not want. I also believe that when we are able to comprehend the rewards He has in store for us, we will look upon things just a bit differently. Until then, we will have to trust Him. I do. Glenn 1
Believing Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Many laws challenge our feelings Thank you, finally truth in five words.
JLHPROF Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 9 minutes ago, JulieM said: Maybe Emma did not believe polygamy was a commandment from God. Maybe she was inspired to NOT believe in the principle. If I had to accept my husband marrying over 30 other women and sleeping with some of them, or be damned, I would not believe it was God giving me this ultimatum. Once again, feelings don't change laws. Neither do doubts. D&C 130:20 There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated— 21 And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated. Quote I certainly wouldn't want to be with all of them throughout eternity in order to be with my husband either! Many people wouldn't. But they have just as much right to be with the husband they chose as you do. Everyone will have their agency.
sunstoned Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 22 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: The law is the law. This wasn't some whim of God or an attack on Emma by the Almighty. D&C 132:32 Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved. 33 But if ye enter not into my law ye cannot receive the promise of my Father, which he made unto Abraham. 34 God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises. Many laws challenge our feelings. What is troubling to many is that section 132 was authored by the man who was going behind his wife' back to be with other women. He couldn't even follow this "law" as it was spelled out in section 132. 4
JLHPROF Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 2 minutes ago, sunstoned said: What is troubling to many is that section 132 was authored by the man who was going behind his wife' back to be with other women. He couldn't even follow this "law" as it was spelled out in section 132. I think he followed it perfectly. I know others disagree. Perspective matters. 1
JulieM Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 (edited) 12 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Once again, feelings don't change laws. Neither do doubts. D&C 130:20 There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated— 21 And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated. Well, it comes down to feelings for you too (and everyone). You feel it's right and that it's been confirmed for you. But I feel it's wrong and I've prayed about it and have had this confirmed for me (that polygamy is not from God but from man). I believe section 132 was written by a man to justify what he wanted to do. I know you believe differently. I know you're sincere too. Edited March 29, 2016 by JulieM 4
VideoGameJunkie Posted March 29, 2016 Author Posted March 29, 2016 37 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: The law is the law. This wasn't some whim of God or an attack on Emma by the Almighty. D&C 132:32 Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved. 33 But if ye enter not into my law ye cannot receive the promise of my Father, which he made unto Abraham. 34 God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises. Many laws challenge our feelings. I thought it was Sarahs idea for Abraham to get with Hagar since Sarah thought she couldn't have children. 1
VideoGameJunkie Posted March 29, 2016 Author Posted March 29, 2016 29 minutes ago, Glenn101 said: Joseph, in the case of the angel and the sword was the one facing damnation, because he did not want to do it. You are going to have to ask God about that one though. Go back and read the title of the thread that you started.."Let's just say the Angel with a drawn sword story is true" If that is true, then it follows that God ordered Joseph to take plural wives. If that is true, then it follows that Section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants is inspired scripture. If the practice was instituted and commanded by God, what else was Joseph to do? Calm noted that several women during those early days had revelations to the part that polygamy could play in their eternal lives and were converted to the practice. Some of those revelations were even accompanied by angelic visitations. Vilate Kimball's revelation was even more remarkable than most, because, according to her daughter Helen Mar, Vilate's revelation came as she struggled and prayed to find the reason behind her husband's recent inner turmoil about which he would not speak. It does not follow that everyone will be required to engage in plural marriages in the Celestial Kingdom. If I remember my statistics correctly, less than ten percent of the members were engaged in plural marriages in Utah. And in history, so many more that have had their work done for them in the temple have monogamous marriages. I think that maybe we are beating the proverbial dead horse with the repeated threads on this topic. We are going around in circles, endlessly. Maybe is is a compulsion. But we have received no new revelations that I know of since the Official Declaration. There have been many different articles and even books written about the subject maybe adding or even subtracting from the context. But none of those articles, essays, or books have answered that one central question, was it commanded of God? At this point in time, like Calm, I have not had a revelation on the subject. It is moot, for me, and is something that does not concern me at this time.All of our questions will be answered in due time. I do believe in the goodness of God and that He will not force us into something that we do not want. I also believe that when we are able to comprehend the rewards He has in store for us, we will look upon things just a bit differently. Until then, we will have to trust Him. I do. Glenn There's been so many threads because it's a practice condemned by the church with punishment of excommunication while at the same time being a revelation in D&C 132. If one of the Apostles or First Presidency would answer the questions people have on the topic it would help settle a lot of nerves. I would love to write a letter to a member of the Q15, but I don't know how to reach any of them.
Glenn101 Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 8 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said: There's been so many threads because it's a practice condemned by the church with punishment of excommunication while at the same time being a revelation in D&C 132. If one of the Apostles or First Presidency would answer the questions people have on the topic it would help settle a lot of nerves. I would love to write a letter to a member of the Q15, but I don't know how to reach any of them. What questions do you have that have not been answered? As I noted, we have covered no new ground, asked no new questions that I can discern, and had no new answers, We know that polygamy was part of the restoration of all things. We know that the practice has been discontinued for the present time, and we know why. The lay members of the Church probably have as much information on the history of polygamy in the church as the First Presidency does. As far as polygamy in the next life, we have little information, but when the Lord wants us to know something, He will reveal that to us, through the Prophet. Glenn 1
USU78 Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 9 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said: Why would God command such a thing for a heartbroken good woman though? Why would G-do command such a thing as sacrificing a son for a heartbroken good man?
ALarson Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 (edited) 10 hours ago, JulieM said: Maybe Emma did not believe polygamy was a commandment from God. Maybe she was inspired to NOT believe in the principle. If I had to accept my husband marrying over 30 other women and sleeping with some of them, or be damned, I would not believe it was God giving me this ultimatum. I certainly wouldn't want to be with all of them throughout eternity in order to be with my husband either! This is how many members feel (especially many women). I agree that from what record we have, Emma did not have a testimony of plural marriage (and who can blame her the way it was lived during that time). She was lied to and betrayed many times over. When she did finally (temporarily) give her approval and chose 2 girls (Partridges) for Joseph to marry, he even deceived her regarding that since he'd already married them. And then held a fake wedding and remarried the Partridge sisters that involved more deceit. And, as already mentioned Joseph didn't even make sure that Emma was his first wife to be sealed to, he was sealed to 25 women before her. I don't believe Emma will be forced to live polygamy after this life. Maybe she will be with Joseph and he will choose to only be with her. We just don't know how it will work for sure. But I believe there will be choices and no forcing for any of us. . Edited March 29, 2016 by ALarson
ALarson Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, Glenn101 said: What questions do you have that have not been answered? Did you read Juliann's recent thread? She was asking for recent statements from our Prophets or Apostles regarding a question many sisters have. After 21 pages, her question was still not answered for her. It is a subject that many members struggle with and especially women who wonder if they will be forced to live polygamy. So yes, there are still some unanswered questions for some. Many read what Brigham Young stated and then hear "don't worry about it, it will all be worked out", but still have questions. . Edited March 29, 2016 by ALarson
ALarson Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 (edited) 10 hours ago, Glenn101 said: If I remember my statistics correctly, less than ten percent of the members were engaged in plural marriages in Utah. This is not correct. The percentage was quite a bit higher than that: Quote Probably half of those living in Utah Territory in 1857 experienced life in a polygamous family as a husband, wife, or child at some time during their lives.21 By 1870, 25 to 30 percent of the population lived in polygamous households, and it appears that the percentage continued to decrease over the next 20 years. https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-and-families-in-early-utah?lang=eng Quote Under Young, the practice of polygamy spread among Utah Mormons for 40 years. During this time, an estimated 20 to 25 percent of adults in the LDS Church were members of polygamist households. One third of the women of marriageable age and nearly all of the church leadership were involved in the practice. - Encyclopedia of Mormonism. MacMillan (1992) p. 1095. . Edited March 29, 2016 by ALarson 1
Tacenda Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 1 hour ago, ALarson said: This is how many members feel (especially many women). I agree that from what record we have, Emma did not have a testimony of plural marriage (and who can blame her the way it was lived during that time). She was lied to and betrayed many times over. When she did finally (temporarily) give her approval and chose 2 girls (Partridges) for Joseph to marry, he even deceived her regarding that since he'd already married them. And then held a fake wedding and remarried the Partridge sisters that involved more deceit. And, as already mentioned Joseph didn't even make sure that Emma was his first wife to be sealed to, he was sealed to 25 women before her. I don't believe Emma will be forced to live polygamy after this life. Maybe she will be with Joseph and he will choose to only be with her. We just don't know how it will work for sure. But I believe there will be choices and no forcing for any of us. . What does that tell us about Joseph's character? A lot...and one of the reasons I have resistance in believing the church is true. But I believe the organization can't be beat a lot of times, and hopefully God approves, I think He does.
Glenn101 Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 15 minutes ago, ALarson said: Did you read Juliann's recent thread? She was asking for recent statements from our Prophets or Apostles regarding a question many sisters have. After 21 pages, her question was still not answered for her. It is a subject that many members struggle with and especially women who wonder if they will be forced to live polygamy. So yes, there are still some unanswered questions for some. Many read what Joseph Smith and Brigham Young stated and then hear "don't worry about it, it will all be worked out", but still have questions. Yea, I did read her thread. Her question was whether any prophet since president Hinckley had made a pronouncement on polygamy, especially in the next life. That question was answered, which is none. I did address that point also, about polygamy in the next life. There are a lot of things that we do not know about the next life. We do not know how the family structure will function in the Celestial Kingdom, just for starters. I personally have some uncertainty in my life, or rather the next phase of my life, as I have been sealed to my first wife who died and my current wife. I do not know if my first wife will accept polygamy when we all have passed through the veil. I only know that I was counseled to remarry and I was sealed to ,y second wife also. I have complete faith that the Lord will sort this all out for us and that we all will be happy, whatever the path we are instructed to take. I have put my trust in the Lord in this and all other matters that exist beyond the veil. Anyone who desires to do so may obtain the information they need by the same means that Joseph received Section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants, and through which Lucy Walker, Vilate Kimball, Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner, and others received their convictions that polygamy is an eternal principle. I think we all would do well to read the First Presidency message on revelation currently on the main LDS web site. We have to do our homework, we have to prepare ourselves to receive any revelation. The point that I was making about the thing is that we are repeating ourselves over and over in these multiple threads about polygamy. I do not recall learning anything new except that the practice was more common than I had understood from your next post. Glenn 1
ALarson Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Glenn101 said: Yea, I did read her thread. Her question was whether any prophet since president Hinckley had made a pronouncement on polygamy, especially in the next life. That question was answered, which is none. I did address that point also, about polygamy in the next life. There are a lot of things that we do not know about the next life. We do not know how the family structure will function in the Celestial Kingdom, just for starters. I personally have some uncertainty in my life, or rather the next phase of my life, as I have been sealed to my first wife who died and my current wife. I do not know if my first wife will accept polygamy when we all have passed through the veil. I only know that I was counseled to remarry and I was sealed to ,y second wife also. I have complete faith that the Lord will sort this all out for us and that we all will be happy, whatever the path we are instructed to take. I have put my trust in the Lord in this and all other matters that exist beyond the veil. Anyone who desires to do so may obtain the information they need by the same means that Joseph received Section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants, and through which Lucy Walker, Vilate Kimball, Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner, and others received their convictions that polygamy is an eternal principle. I think we all would do well to read the First Presidency message on revelation currently on the main LDS web site. We have to do our homework, we have to prepare ourselves to receive any revelation. The point that I was making about the thing is that we are repeating ourselves over and over in these multiple threads about polygamy. I do not recall learning anything new except that the practice was more common than I had understood from your next post. Glenn Fair enough (and I agree with most of what you wrote above). Although I do believe that many members have questions and are searching for answers. The essays have helped some find the answers and have caused more questions for others. Many believe it has been revealed to them that plural marriage came from man and not from God (as posted by others on this thread). I'm also in that category after much study and prayer on this topic. Like you said above, we just need to have faith that the Lord will sort it all out. . Edited March 29, 2016 by ALarson
Tacenda Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 (edited) 12 hours ago, JulieM said: Well, it comes down to feelings for you too (and everyone). You feel it's right and that it's been confirmed for you. But I feel it's wrong and I've prayed about it and have had this confirmed for me (that polygamy is not from God but from man). I believe section 132 was written by a man to justify what he wanted to do. I know you believe differently. I know you're sincere too. I can't help but wonder if Joseph Smith hadn't inquired of God if polygamy should be lived as it is in the Bible, if Mormonism would be a different church today. What made JS even think it was okay to live it, it wasn't commanded in the Bible. God gave them their free agency, but it was frowned upon mostly. It's just never sat well with me that JS asked first, no angel or anything brought it up first. Let's see...what else should he have asked about needing to restore to the church that was in the Bible, hmm. So if the church is to be an evolving one, why go back in time and bring things back too? Edited March 29, 2016 by Tacenda 1
VideoGameJunkie Posted March 29, 2016 Author Posted March 29, 2016 4 hours ago, USU78 said: Why would G-do command such a thing as sacrificing a son for a heartbroken good man? Abraham was spared having to sacrifice his son. He didn't actually kill Isaac. He was provided an escape.
Teancum Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 On 3/28/2016 at 1:08 PM, USU78 said: Adultery? Ridiculous. Emma agreed to live the principle, going to the extent of choosing wives for Joseph. Then she reneged. And she expected that her unilateral act, which involved seeking to compel Joseph against his will to go back on his word, would be effective to stop the train after it had already left the station. How is her unilateral act not a passive-aggressive [at least] act of bullying? Polygamy was illegal in Illinois at the time. Thus legally JS committed adultery. Emma agreed to plural marriages by being compelled. Joseph withheld the temple endowment from her unless she agreed. Then there is the convenient revelation where God allegedly threatens her with destruction. So Emma agrees after Joseph has entered into many polyandrous and plural marriages. Emma then gets to choose some wives for Joseph and she chooses the Partridge sisters. But Joseph does not tell Emma he was already sealed to them so they do another sham ceremony. Yet you view Emma as being passive aggressive and a bully? Simply astounding. 2
Teancum Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 15 hours ago, JLHPROF said: When God speaks of "destroying" one of his children, it almost always refers to damnation. Damnation occurs whenever we refuse to follow God's plan. To me, that is what was meant by the supposed "threat of destruction" made to Emma. Simply that her progression would be halted by such a decision. So simply saying damned rather than destroyed is supposed to make it all better? But you are changing what the words are in the alleged revelation and they mean different things. It is not your right to do so. 1
Recommended Posts