USU78 Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 1 hour ago, JLHPROF said: Just another reason the law of chastity covenant should never have been changed or the covenants for men and women combined from separate. You mean ... because of smart-alecky parseniki who disingenuously wrest language away from the speaker's/writer's plain intent?
Ahab Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 6 minutes ago, JulieM said: No, I didn't leave any words out. Those who are in a legal ssm marriage, do have a husband or a wife. Edit: I see others already beat me to giving this answer!! I agree. No missing words in that statement, just an additional word or letter. SSM refers to same sex marriage, so the phrase "ssm marriage" is a bit redundant.
JLHPROF Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 15 minutes ago, california boy said: How could Brigham Young have a civil marriage with Zina when he was already married. Certainly the state would not validate that marriage. It is also interesting that BY and Joseph were married to the same woman at the same time. I'm not sure what you are saying here - neither of these points are in the timeline I posted. 1. Brigham and Joseph were not married to Zina at the same time while all were living. 2. Zina was not Brigham's legal/civil wife.
ksfisher Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 1 minute ago, JulieM said: Which is exactly why many hope and believe there will be "continuing revelation" and change for policies about SSM. Except that God's plan for his children and the pattern whereby a man and woman are brought together to form families has been clearly taught in the scriptures since the beginning. Any move by the church towards accepting SSM would place the church in opposition to the scriptures. Continuing revelation brings us closer to Christ, not towards the values of the world. 1
JulieM Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 1 minute ago, Ahab said: No missing words in that statement, just an additional word or letter. SSM refers to same sex marriage, so the phrase "ssm marriage" is a bit redundant. Oh... Easy mistake. Easy to correct! Thanks.
JLHPROF Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 4 minutes ago, USU78 said: You mean ... because of smart-alecky parseniki who disingenuously wrest language away from the speaker's/writer's plain intent? No, I mean because there was no flaw in the original, and the change is now causing more debate over interpretation than a covenant should. 1
california boy Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 16 hours ago, JLHPROF said: There is a very good reason why society has embraced homosexuality...the fulfillment of prophecy, the ripening in wickedness of the world, and the preparation for destruction. A very good reason. Thank goodness for gay couples falling in love and wanting to marry. Rape, murder, cutting peoples heads off, burning them alive in cages, sex slaves rampant divorce, the break up of families, discrimination, pedophiles having sex with minors were all not quite enough. It gay marriage to fulfill prophecy on wickedness. I am glad I could do my little part in bring back Christ sooner rather than later. Really? You really think gay marriage is that wicked? I seriously can not understand why gays thing the Mormon church hastes them so much. They should read the church's web site. We love gays. We just think when they marry they become apostates and will single handed bring down Christ himself. 2
Ahab Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 1 hour ago, ALarson said: Yes, "husband or wife". Gays who enter into a legal and lawful SSM, do have a "husband" or a "wife". No one is claiming that a man has to qualify as a wife or that a woman has to qualify as a husband. A man who is married to another man calls him his husband. So both call each other their husband and neither one of them has a wife... unless polygamy is legal where they live and a man has a husband as well as a wife. Same principle applies to women in this world too. 2 women married to each other are both called wives...
JulieM Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 2 minutes ago, ksfisher said: Except that God's plan for his children and the pattern whereby a man and woman are brought together to form families has been clearly taught in the scriptures since the beginning. Any move by the church towards accepting SSM would place the church in opposition to the scriptures. SSM is not addressed or mentioned in scriptures. Sexual sin outside of marriage (or adultery after marriage) is. Gays who are married can avoid those sins as well as heterosexuals. 2
ksfisher Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 Just now, JulieM said: SSM is not addressed or mentioned in scriptures. Sexual sin outside of marriage (or adultery after marriage) is. Gays who are married can avoid those sins as well as heterosexuals. The pattern of man and woman being brought together as husband and wife was clearly taught in the Garden of Eden. This pattern has also been clearly taught by modern day prophets and apostles.
ALarson Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Ahab said: A man who is married to another man calls him his husband. So both call each other their husband and neither one of them has a wife... unless polygamy is legal where they live and a man has a husband as well as a wife. Same principle applies to women in this world too. 2 women married to each other are both called wives... Did you not see the word "or" (there is no "and" in there)? "Husband OR wife." Edited March 10, 2016 by ALarson
Ahab Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 15 minutes ago, JulieM said: Oh... Easy mistake. Easy to correct! Thanks. You like it. You bought it. rep point please.
Gray Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 5 minutes ago, ksfisher said: The pattern of man and woman being brought together as husband and wife was clearly taught in the Garden of Eden. This pattern has also been clearly taught by modern day prophets and apostles. Seems kind of arbitrary to take random stories from the Bible and say that everyone has to do it the way it was done in the story. 1
ksfisher Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 1 minute ago, Gray said: Seems kind of arbitrary to take random stories from the Bible and say that everyone has to do it the way it was done in the story. How is the story of Adam and Eve random?
california boy Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 (edited) 23 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: I'm not sure what you are saying here - neither of these points are in the timeline I posted. 1. Brigham and Joseph were not married to Zina at the same time while all were living. 2. Zina was not Brigham's legal/civil wife. But were Henry and Joseph were married to Zina at the same time?? And Brigham marries Zina while she is married toJoseph. Hey I am the first to admit I am a bit confused by what God allows and what God does not allow. It seems like anything was possible if you wanted to sleep with another woman. You just had to add her to your marriage list, even if she was already married. Honestly, it makes gay marriage look pretty civil. On March 9, 2016 at 8:34 AM, JLHPROF said: On March 9, 2016 at 8:34 AM, JLHPROF said: March 1841 - Zina marries Henry in civil marriage October 1841 - Zina marries Joseph for time and eternity June 1844 - Joseph dies June 1845 - Zina conceives her last child with Henry Probable late 1845 - Zina admitted to anointed quorum and placed under covenant of chastity (no relations except with priesthood husband) January 1846 - Zina is reendowed in Nauvoo temple and placed under covenant of chastity a second time (no relations except with priesthood husband)February 1846 - Zina is resealed to Joseph for eternity in Nauvoo temple and Brigham for time in a Levirate marriage March 1846 - Zina and Henry have their last child Edited March 10, 2016 by california boy 1
Ahab Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 12 minutes ago, JulieM said: SSM is not addressed or mentioned in scriptures. Sexual sin outside of marriage (or adultery after marriage) is. Gays who are married can avoid those sins as well as heterosexuals. You seem to have a more narrow view of what scripture is than I do. And no scriptural justification for your more narrow view. There is enough scripture in the Bible alone to teach us that scripture is what holy men write as they are moved upon by the Holy Spirit, so on that basis scripture is what holy men write as they are moved upon by the Holy Spirit. Or maybe you just don't consider the prophets and apostles of our Lord in his Church to be holy men who have written on this particular topic as they were moved upon by the Holy Spirit.
Ahab Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 16 minutes ago, ALarson said: Did you not see the word "or" (there is no "and" in there)? "Husband OR wife." So basically you agree with me. You could have just said that.
ALarson Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 (edited) 24 minutes ago, ksfisher said: The pattern of man and woman being brought together as husband and wife was clearly taught in the Garden of Eden. They were also having no sex in the Garden of Eden. Is that also a pattern "clearly taught" that we are to follow regarding a husband and wife? Edited March 10, 2016 by ALarson 2
ALarson Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 2 minutes ago, Ahab said: So basically you agree with me. You could have just said that. I didn't say it because you were wrong. Those in a SSM have a husband OR a wife (exactly the same wording as is in the Law of Chastity).
Jeanne Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 3 minutes ago, ALarson said: They were also having no sex in the Garden of Eden. Is that also a pattern "clearly taught" that we are to follow regarding a husband and wife? 3 minutes ago, ALarson said: They were also having no sex in the Garden of Eden. Is that also a pattern "clearly taught" that we are to follow regarding a husband and wife? Good point. (Don't know why the quote posted twice) 2
ERMD Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 44 minutes ago, JulieM said: Why thank you! What I stated was true. (I'm not sure where you thought any words were left out of my original post?) That darned "reading" thing again, right?
JulieM Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 42 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: I'm not sure what you are saying here - neither of these points are in the timeline I posted. 1. Brigham and Joseph were not married to Zina at the same time while all were living. 2. Zina was not Brigham's legal/civil wife. Zina was also not Brigham's eternal wife. So, not his legal wife or his sealed to him for eternity wife. Why did Brigham need to marry her then? Also, they had a daughter (Zina & Brigham). Is she sealed to Joseph, not Brigham (for her father)?
ksfisher Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 29 minutes ago, ALarson said: They were also having no sex in the Garden of Eden. Is that also a pattern "clearly taught" that we are to follow regarding a husband and wife? I'm sure that you're familiar with the story, which is repeated every day in temples throughout the world. Other than saying that their children were born after they left the Garden it doesn't seem proper to speculate on the intimate lives of others. 1
Jeanne Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 24 minutes ago, JulieM said: Zina was also not Brigham's eternal wife. So, not his legal wife or his sealed to him for eternity wife. Why did Brigham need to marry her then? Also, they had a daughter (Zina & Brigham). Is she sealed to Joseph, not Brigham (for her father)? I am so confused..yeah..what a mess! So much easier just to fall in love and marry huh? Yet..love is never mentioned in all of this. Kudos for people who just love. 1
ALarson Posted March 10, 2016 Posted March 10, 2016 7 minutes ago, ksfisher said: I'm sure that you're familiar with the story, which is repeated every day in temples throughout the world. Other than saying that their children were born after they left the Garden it doesn't seem proper to speculate on the intimate lives of others. Sounds like you are the one making assumptions and speculating, not I. (And yes, I attend the temple often....what's your point with that?) If you want to believe there were sexual relations between Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, you can believe that.
Recommended Posts