re polygamy

[Stargazer]

4 hours ago, bcuzbcuz said:

You have mis-understood completely, entirely, utterly, perfectly, altogether, from beginning to end, absolutely, comprehensively, fully, wholly, unconditionally, thoroughly, utterly, exhaustively.

A man with 1000 wives will be able to have X number of children. One wife, given eternity, will be able to have X number of children. The eternity for a 1000 wives is not longer than an eternity for 1 wife and the total outcome of children will not differ. 

Well, I give you credit for understanding the mathematical concept of infinity!  As far as a mortal person can understand it, anyway.  Georg Cantor would have been pleased!

[VideoGameJunkie]

8 hours ago, Stargazer said:

It's not doctrinal because it's not practiced at this time.  President Hinckley was certainly well aware that plural marriage is alive and well, just that a man is not permitted to live in more than one active marriage at a time on this earth.  It's still an eternal principle, even though the Lord has temporarily placed it in abeyance.  Section 132 does not describe a temporary principle -- but an eternal one.  

Just because some marriages suffer from situations where one partner is unfaithful and/or abusive (and this by no means includes only unfaithful or abusive husbands!) does not invalidate marriage itself.  Just as plural marriage lived corruptly or abusively does not invalidate plural marriage itself.

It is a wrong to invalidate true principles just because human frailties and poor choices lead to some living those principles badly.  Babies and bathwater.

I note that verse 4 in that section says:

Does that sound like a principle that was not eternal?  But according to the principle set forth in Jacob 2:30:

The Lord revokes and commands as HE wills, not as we will.  As for not abiding, but rejecting that covenant -- if the Lord has revoked the practice, which He certainly has for this time, then one may still abide the covenant by accepting it in principle, even if it is not practiced.  So, it seems to me that LDS who say to themselves that if the Lord ever re-institutes the practice of plural marriage that they will refuse to participate, well, they have effectively rejected the New and Everlasting Covenant.  And thus they have also rejected their own temple sealings, at least so it seems to me.  And I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but the scripture seems entirely uncompromising in this respect.

The only puzzle I have had over all this is the matter of Jacob 2:24, wherein the Lord says:

This actually seems to directly contradict what the Lord told David, in the matter of Uriah's wife (2 Samuel 12:97,8):

The Lord said to David through Nathan His prophet that He it was who gave those wives to David -- and implies that if he had wanted more wives, the Lord would have given to him even more.  So how could his having many wives been abominable to the Lord?

That apparent contradiction puzzled me until I realized that that Jacob 2:24 says "wives AND concubines".  There is no provision in the Law of Moses, or even the Ten Commandments for a concubine.  So the Lord couldn't have objected to the wives, but definitely objected to the concubines -- and Bathsheba, Uriah's wife, was definitely a concubine.  At least until David married her, after murdering Uriah.

VGJ, your mother's husband violating her trust cannot possibly be compared to lawful plural marriage.  Any more than rape can be compared to consensual sexual relations.  Both of my wives, she who is deceased, and she who is not, understood the principle of plural marriage, and both told me that if the Lord commanded it that they would live according to the Lord's command.  If so, then my obedience to His command would be seen by them as justified -- they have consented to be governed by the will of the Lord, if this should ever be commanded.  Although I know very well that they would prefer not to be commanded to live it -- as would I so prefer.  As I have indicated in another post, I definitely believe that plural marriage will not carry the same burden that it does here, because we will not be in a fallen and carnal world.  But our obedience in this mortal life will be counted as righteousness.  However hard it might seem.

 

Ya but animal sacrifice was an eternal principle that ended and so was circumcision. I doubt either of those will be commanded again.

[JLHPROF]

10 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

Polygamy was an eternal principle for the people in the 1800s but not anymore.

[VideoGameJunkie]

47 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

What isn't 40 years eternal enough? Haha 

[Ahab]

9 hours ago, bcuzbcuz said:

You have mis-understood completely, entirely, utterly, perfectly, altogether, from beginning to end, absolutely, comprehensively, fully, wholly, unconditionally, thoroughly, utterly, exhaustively.

No I haven't.  I just explained how a man with more than 1 wife would have more children faster than a man with only 1 wife.

So, there you go.

Now give me a word and I will show you how the root of that word is Greek.

[Ahab]

9 hours ago, bcuzbcuz said:

A man with 1000 wives will be able to have X number of children. One wife, given eternity, will be able to have X number of children. The eternity for a 1000 wives is not longer than an eternity for 1 wife and the total outcome of children will not differ. 

Yeah, but a man with more than 1 wife will still be able to have more children faster than a man with only 1 wife.

[bcuzbcuz]

2 minutes ago, Ahab said:

No I haven't.  I just explained how a man with more than 1 wife would have more children faster than a man with only 1 wife.

So, there you go.

Now give me a word and I will show you how the root of that word is Greek.

Word. ..........

[Ahab]

14 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

So what's the count of posters here who are pro polygamy vs anti polygamy? Is it JLHPROF and bobbie vs everyone else?

I'm pro when God commands it.

Otherwise I think it's better to not imagine it.

[VideoGameJunkie]

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I'm pro when God commands it.

Otherwise I think it's better to not imagine it.

It's sometimes hard not to imagine it when our first several prophets lived it, including the 2 most famous Joseph Smith and Brigham Young.

[Ahab]

11 minutes ago, bcuzbcuz said:

Word. ..........

Hmm. If I knew how to type Greek letters with my pocket buddy I could show you what the Greek version of the word "word" looks like, but I'll go you one better and show you how you can see any word in Greek for yourself. 

https://www.babelfish.com

[Ahab]

8 minutes ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

It's sometimes hard not to imagine it when our first several prophets lived it, including the 2 most famous Joseph Smith and Brigham Young.

I can easily imagine living it righteously, as long as all of the women I would want to marry agreed to be one of my wives and live it righteously with me, as God would want it to be if he commanded me to live it, but that's not my real life right now and I don't think it helps me and my wife now to imagine living it now.

[VideoGameJunkie]

31 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I can easily imagine living it righteously, as long as all of the women I would want to marry agreed to be one of my wives and live it righteously with me, as God would want it to be if he commanded me to live it, but that's not my real life right now and I don't think it helps me and myt wife now to imagine living it now.

Then I guess it's easier to imagine for people like me who are single and have no commitment to a girl yet.

[thesometimesaint]

1 minute ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

Then I guess it's easier to imagine for people like me who are single and have no commitment to a girl yet.

My wife is more open to it than I am. but we both agree that it is to be at Gods' command only.

[Ahab]

58 minutes ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

Then I guess it's easier to imagine for people like me who are single and have no commitment to a girl yet.

No not really.  Not easier to imagine I mean. I still remember when I was single and could imagine as easily as I do now how good it could be to married to many of the women I saw.  And for me it made it kinda hard to narrow my thoughts down to just 1.

Kinda like looking at a restaurant menu and having to pick only 1 option makes it kinda hard to figure out which one I should pick.

[ALarson]

5 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I still remember when I was single and could imagine as easily as I do now how good it could be to married to many of the women I saw.  And for me it made it kinda hard to narrow my thoughts down to just 1.

Kinda like looking at a restaurant menu and having to pick only 1 option makes it kinda hard to figure out which one I should pick.

Wow 

(Is this what you told your wife?  So romantic and touching....)

 

Edited April 27, 2016 by ALarson

[Ahab]

6 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Wow 

(Is this what you told your wife?  So romantic and touching....)

 

Yeah, or something like that.

Haven't you ever looked at a menu and thought THAT is what I want and should get?

The end result is that I got what I wanted, and I still keep coming back to her for more of her every day that I live.  And what's really interesting is that she keeps getting better and better!

I don't know how that works, exactly, but I like that it does work that way and I don't ever want it to stop.

[Stargazer]

4 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

Ya but animal sacrifice was an eternal principle that ended and so was circumcision. I doubt either of those will be commanded again.

We know that animal sacrifice was a prefigure to the Savior's Atonement.  And circumcision was a symbol of the Abrahamic covenant.  Both were fulfilled by Christ's Atonement.  Plural marriage has nothing to do with prefiguring or symbolizing the Abrahamic covenant.  More to the point, DC 132 brings plural marriage into Dispensation of the Fullness of Times, and establishes it as part of the fullness of the gospel.  If you don't like plural marriage, which was confirmed by the Lord in DC 132, then say goodbye to eternal marriage as well, for that is a part of DC 132.  They are not separable.  Unless you are of a school of thought that likes to pick and choose which scriptures and which revelation you like, and rejects the rest.  As if the gospel were a cafeteria.

And besides, animal sacrifice will in fact resume.  Israel is prepared to do so, when the time is right.  When John the Baptist conferred the authority to baptize upon Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, he said (DC 13):

Quote

Upon you my fellow servants, in the name of Messiah I confer the Priesthood of Aaron, which holds the keys of the ministering of angels, and of the gospel of repentance, and of baptism by immersion for the remission of sins; and this shall never be taken again from the earth, until the sons of Levi do offer again an offering unto the Lord in righteousness.

Apparently it's coming back at some point.

And your next attempt to quibble away this principle of the Gospel will be...?

[cinepro]

2 hours ago, Ahab said:

No I haven't.  I just explained how a man with more than 1 wife would have more children faster than a man with only 1 wife.

So, there you go.

Now give me a word and I will show you how the root of that word is Greek.

Are the feelings of the woman factored into your math, or is their rate of production a fixed constant?

[Stargazer]

1 hour ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

Then I guess it's easier to imagine for people like me who are single and have no commitment to a girl yet.

I don't see how.  You have to have one wife before you can practice plural marriage.  So this means you stand at an infinite distance from having to worry about it.

[Stargazer]

16 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Yeah, or something like that.

Haven't you ever looked at a menu and thought THAT is what I want and should get?

The end result is that I got what I wanted, and I still keep coming back to her for more of her every day that I live.  And what's really interesting is that she keeps getting better and better!

I don't know how that works, exactly, but I like that it does work that way and I don't ever want it to stop.

And that, in a nutshell, is marital bliss.  I've been finding more of that lately, too.

I have a double portion of it, in fact.  My dear departed wife still rests lovingly in my heart, and my living, breathing wife rests lovingly in my arms!  I don't know which one I love more!  It's quite marvelous, actually.

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

We know that animal sacrifice was a prefigure to the Savior's Atonement.  And circumcision was a symbol of the Abrahamic covenant.  Both were fulfilled by Christ's Atonement.  Plural marriage has nothing to do with prefiguring or symbolizing the Abrahamic covenant.  More to the point, DC 132 brings plural marriage into Dispensation of the Fullness of Times, and establishes it as part of the fullness of the gospel.  If you don't like plural marriage, which was confirmed by the Lord in DC 132, then say goodbye to eternal marriage as well, for that is a part of DC 132.  They are not separable.  Unless you are of a school of thought that likes to pick and choose which scriptures and which revelation you like, and rejects the rest.  As if the gospel were a cafeteria.

And besides, animal sacrifice will in fact resume.  Israel is prepared to do so, when the time is right.  When John the Baptist conferred the authority to baptize upon Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, he said (DC 13):

Apparently it's coming back at some point.

And your next attempt to quibble away this principle of the Gospel will be...?

That's what doesn't add up, why did JS have to restore the church, when what needed to happen happened, it should be extended from that not put back.  Why restore polygamy?  

[Ahab]

2 hours ago, cinepro said:

Are the feelings of the woman factored into your math, or is their rate of production a fixed constant?

I'm figuring that any number isn't fixed until that one is born and that it will take about 9 months for delivery once the woman is pregnant. 

So even if it took a million years for me and all my wives to have 999 children it would still take only about 9 months once she was pregnant with her 1000th child. 

So the time to have 1000 children would still be only about 9 months.

I was also kinda figuring that some people would pick up on my sense of humor.

And maybe a few other intelligent thoughts from what I said. 

[Ahab]

2 hours ago, Stargazer said:

And that, in a nutshell, is marital bliss.  I've been finding more of that lately, too.

I have a double portion of it, in fact.  My dear departed wife still rests lovingly in my heart, and my living, breathing wife rests lovingly in my arms!  I don't know which one I love more!  It's quite marvelous, actually.

Same answer if people asked which of your children you love the most,  I suppose.

In French I think the thought is...

Viva la difference! 

I don't French very well, by the way. 

I just know that I already love everybody... even all  wonderful women!

[JulieM]

2 hours ago, Ahab said:

 I still remember when I was single and could imagine as easily as I do now how good it could be to married to many of the women I saw.  And for me it made it kinda hard to narrow my thoughts down to just 1.

Kinda like looking at a restaurant menu and having to pick only 1 option makes it kinda hard to figure out which one I should pick.

Women are not items on a menu for you to just point at and pick.  They have a choice in all of this too. I think this is a poor comparison.

[consiglieri]

4 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

My wife is more open to it than I am. but we both agree that it is to be at Gods' command only.

Could you let your wife know I just received a command from God?