Eternal polygamy rears its ugly head…again

[VideoGameJunkie]

2 hours ago, Eek! said:

Joseph Smith once said, "Could you gaze into heaven five minutes, you would know more than you would by reading all that ever was written on the subject."

I haven't gazed into heaven for five minutes, but many people have, and have recorded what they saw and heard and felt as "near-death experiences".  

Some years ago I read many studies and books and other published accounts of near-death experiences, as that's the closest I'm likely to get to gazing into heaven anytime soon.   I don't recall anything indicating that people will be required to live in relationships or situations that crush their spirits.  

If we cannot be truly happy when someone we love is truly unhappy, then in the long run, we are all in this together.  If God is good, and God is fair, and God is no respecter of persons, then assumptions that imply an unfair outcome in the next life are mistaken.  This principle applies to issues like "eternal polygamy".  

Apparently there is a pattern that includes all of Adam's descendants and it may well transcend polygamy.  We don't know what this pattern is, but apparently Joseph Smith showed it to Brigham Young in 1847.  Joseph tells us what we need do to move in the direction of restoring this pattern.  He doesn't say follow the Prophet.  He doesn't say follow the Brethren.  He doesn't say follow the Church.  He doesn't even say follow the Scriptures.  He says, follow the Spirit. 

Brigham's journal entry recording the experience is only one page long:  https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/097-86.pdf

Imo, ime, ymmv, etc. 

Do you believe near death experiences have truth to them?

[rongo]

4 hours ago, juliann said:

You do realize that he wasn't gender specific, right?

Of course I do, juliann. I've never argued that only men will have multiple sealings in the hereafter.

You of all people should know that I am on record as knowing women who have had multiple sealings authorized to different men without cancelling previous ones. 

[rongo]

3 hours ago, Sky said:

I'm more than willing to say that I don't really know one way or another that polygamy will exist in the hereafter.     

You're quoting Elder Oaks. Do you think that he believes his sealings aren't valid in the next life?

He may not know with certainty. But do you think he believes they are?

[juliann]

Just now, rongo said:

Of course I do, juliann. I've never argued that only men will have multiple sealings in the hereafter.

You of all people should know that I am on record as knowing women who have had multiple sealings authorized to different men without cancelling previous ones. 

Sorry Rongo, I just can't keep everything straight anymore. Advancing age. My point is, though, that those who push hardest for future polygamy are usually very uncomfortable with the idea of women's equality in it. We basically have two options: Polygamy is over and has served its purpose (which I think  is clearly the current position of the Brethren,) or it will be practiced as was revealed to JS with polyandry and polygyny.

[VideoGameJunkie]

1 minute ago, juliann said:

Sorry Rongo, I just can't keep everything straight anymore. Advancing age. My point is, though, that those who push hardest for future polygamy are usually very uncomfortable with the idea of women's equality in it. We basically have two options: Polygamy is over and has served its purpose (which I think  is clearly the current position of the Brethren,) or it will be practiced as was revealed to JS with polyandry and polygyny.

Well just look at the temple sealing itself. One gender gives themselves to the other while the other doesn't in return give themselves to their spouse. They receive them.

[Eek!]

3 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

Do you believe near death experiences have truth to them?

I believe that accounts of near death experiences can have a great deal of truth in them, but use your common sense.  If a person is making false claims in other areas, then I wouldn't believe their near-death experience claims.   For example, Dannion Brinkley makes what I believe to be false claims in an area that I know something about, and so I disbelieve the rest of his book. 

Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, Kenneth Ring, Melvin Morse, Raymond Moody, and P.M.H, Atwater were some of the authors whose books I found useful.   I think the first four are researchers, and Atwater is a experiencer-turned-researcher. 

I found out a little over a year ago that one of my relatives has had multiple near-death experiences, he just hadn't talked about them until after his most recent one. 

This Youtube channel doesn't seem to have an agenda beyond near-death experiencers simply telling their stories:  https://www.youtube.com/user/billsvideos123/videos

Edited July 24, 2016 by Eek!

[rongo]

6 minutes ago, juliann said:

My point is, though, that those who push hardest for future polygamy are usually very uncomfortable with the idea of women's equality in it.

I certainly want for all those who are sealed to others to remain sealed to them, if they keep their covenants. 

We basically have two options: Polygamy is over and has served its purpose (which I think  is clearly the current position of the Brethren,) or it will be practiced as was revealed to JS with polyandry and polygyny.

There is option #3: we live in an era of hyper-caution from the corporate church with PR stuff and hot-button issues. Oaks's statement you quoted was exceedingly carefully worded:

"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. Look at the significance of that."

It's one thing to take the carefully-worded statements from the Brethren at face value. Maybe they really don't know for sure whether there will be any polygamy at all in the hereafter. I thing it's more likely that they are overly-cautious in their statements at this juncture in history. At the very least, engaging in hereafter-polygamous sealings (like Elder Oaks and President Nelson), if they really in their hearts "don't know," would be more than odd. I think it's clear through their own actions that they at least believe and expect that their sealings twill be valid in the hereafter (which may not be the same thing as knowing for sure), but that's like almost all things with our individual testimonies, too.  

Even when and where we don't know for certain, our actions reveal our hopes, expectations, and beliefs. And if they don't, then we are living with a facade. 

[rongo]

44 minutes ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

Do you believe near death experiences have truth to them?

I think that some/many do, although like Eek! said, don't take all of them at face value. Use your own reason and the Spirit to discern and distinguish.

An excellent book you would like is Duane Crowther's "Life Everlasting." Lots of LDS ones, from journals that weren't written for public consumption. The modern update to his book includes non-LDS ones, and the interesting thing to me is that it appears from these (LDS and non-LDS) that we experience the spirit world pretty much how we expect it to be, based on our background. This seems to support what Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff, and others have said ---- that entering the spirit world won't be a big "Aha!" moment where everyone realizes that the Mormons were right, and missionary work will continue as it is here ---- with many alternate voices and claims. It's probably just as hard to convert people there as it is here!

[JLHPROF]

5 hours ago, juliann said:

JLH, did you notice the church itself ties itself to  "modern prophets" in those above quotes?  I'm still waiting for that CFR......

And I already provided modern enough.

But since that wasn't good enough for you and CURRENT prophets have remained silent, I am going with "We never inquire at the hand of God for special revelation only in case of their being no previous revelation to suit the case."

Since our "modern" prophets have said nothing on future polygamy other than "not comfortable" I will stick with the previous revelation in the form of prophetic teachings and conference discourses on the subject.  And I won't be expecting any special revelation to change that.

[juliann]

16 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

And I already provided modern enough.

But since that wasn't good enough for you and CURRENT prophets have remained silent, I am going with "We never inquire at the hand of God for special revelation only in case of their being no previous revelation to suit the case."

Since our "modern" prophets have said nothing on future polygamy other than "not comfortable" I will stick with the previous revelation in the form of prophetic teachings and conference discourses on the subject.  And I won't be expecting any special revelation to change that.

Other than the modern/living prophets like Pres.Hinckley. Or the recent essays.  And the Proclamation on the Family.  That is before we go to the Apostles and other leaders you consider credible as long as they are long dead and from another era. You are boxing yourself into a position that modern leaders are at best tricking people and at worst, out and out lying. 

 

 

[JLHPROF]

51 minutes ago, juliann said:

Other than the modern/living prophets like Pres.Hinckley. Or the recent essays.  And the Proclamation on the Family. 

NONE of which address the topic of future polygamy or past polygamy or eternal polygamy, the topic at hand. 
They only address the present when it has been temporarily revoked by common consent.
Only the " long dead and from another era" and D&C 132:28-34 have said anything about polygamy being eternal or the Millennial period.
Current leaders have said exactly nothing.

It is you who are looking to current leaders on a topic only Elder Oaks has ever addressed and he made no committment or official position.
It is you who are in the "box" since you are choosing to ignore the only statements by any prophets or apostles (who we revere as prophets) in favor of the absence of statements and non-statements.
But I am don't see much purpose in arguing with someone who wants a smörgåsbord gospel, where past revelation can be ignored in favor of picking and choosing the things preferred regardless of a lack of statement to support it.

You might as well throw out any teaching the a current living prophet hasn't managed to get around to addressing.  I wonder what other doctrines we can discard because our current GA's haven't mentioned it recently...
 

Edited July 24, 2016 by JLHPROF

[thesometimesaint]

17 hours ago, juliann said:

Sorry Rongo, I just can't keep everything straight anymore. Advancing age. My point is, though, that those who push hardest for future polygamy are usually very uncomfortable with the idea of women's equality in it. We basically have two options: Polygamy is over and has served its purpose (which I think  is clearly the current position of the Brethren,) or it will be practiced as was revealed to JS with polyandry and polygyny.

I'm not comfortable at all with polygamy. However if God tells me I have to practice it. I'll do it.

[juliann]

4 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

 

You might as well throw out any teaching the a current living prophet hasn't managed to get around to addressing.  I wonder what other doctrines we can discard because our current GA's haven't mentioned it recently...
 

Using your reasoning, every single practice/policy/doctrine that does not specifically mention heaven. Seriously?

 And go back to the Church's use of "modern prophet." It means modern day, not just "living" prophets. No fair moving the goal posts when you have backed yourself into a corner. 

 

[Tacenda]

10 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

I'm not comfortable at all with polygamy. However if God tells me I have to practice it. I'll do it.

I wish I had that kind of obedience. I'll probably go to hell.

[thesometimesaint]

6 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I wish I had that kind of obedience. I'll probably go to hell.

Only if that is where you want to go. God judges by the intents of our hearts.

[JLHPROF]

Quote

 And go back to the Church's use of "modern prophet." It means modern day, not just "living" prophets. No fair moving the goal posts when you have backed yourself into a corner. 

I moved no goal post.
The question here, indeed the topic of the thread, is the eternal (and therefore future) nature of polygamy.
The issue is not the current prohibition.  The issue is not even requirement for exaltation.  The issue is one question only - is polygamy an eternal law and condition?

I have presented prophets and scripture showing this to be the case.
You have presented only prophetic silence on polygamy (except in the case of immediate present) as evidence against future polygamy.

You are absolutely the one in the corner as all you have is an absence of teaching and wishful thinking.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I wish I had that kind of obedience. I'll probably go to hell.

Heaven and hell are not the only two options.
 

[VideoGameJunkie]

I'd have the biggest problem if God ever brought back animal sacrifice. 

[rchorse]

To me, the clearest evidence that polygamy is the exception, not the rule, is that Adam only had one wife. As Adam and Eve were the first married couple and example for all of us, I'd expect multiple wives for Adam if polygamy were required or even preferred for exaltation. 

It's clearly allowed by the Lord in certain situations and for his own reasons, but I think the vast majority of marriages in the eternities will be monogamous.

[Robert F. Smith]

Just out by Carol Lynn Pearson:

The Ghost of Eternal Polygamy: Haunting the Hearts and Heaven of Mormon Women and Men. Walnut Creek: Pivot Point Books, 2016. Paperback. 226pp. $19.95.

Quote

“The soft statements by leaders today that the Lord’s standard for marriage is monogamy unless he directs otherwise are no match for what has been writ large and in granite in our history, our discourse, and our psyches for nearly two centuries,” the author writes. “The electrifying, secret whispers of the Prophet Joseph and the loud sermons of Brigham Young still echo through chapels, temples, homes, and hearts, assuring the Saints that we are not yet finished with polygamy.” This, the author claims, leads large numbers of loyal members—especially women—to fear heaven, to withhold love in marriages, to doubt their own worth, to lose faith in God, and often to leave the church. In researching this book Ms. Pearson reached out to Mormons and former Mormons via social media in March 2014, asking for their feelings on eternal polygamy and the unequal sealing policies that reflect it. On the first day, more than 2400 people took the survey, and within four weeks the number of respondents exceeded 8000. The results, along with Pearson’s own personal narrative and dramatic glimpses into history, weave a story that has never before been told.

“Rarely in the history of Mormonism has a literary work become a proximate cause of a shift in the way the institutional church views itself, interprets its past or charts its future, with Juanita Brooks’s Mountain Meadows Massacre and Lester Bush’s “Mormonism’s Negro Doctrine: An Historical Overview” being on the very short list. The Ghost of Eternal Polygamy has the potential of joining that list. Blending her personal passion and insights with the voices of the respondents to her massive survey, Carol Lynn Pearson has hit a home run in her quest to illuminate both the damage that Mormonism’s de facto practice of polygamy continues to inflict, and the route to a better, more humane place.”  
--Dr. Gregory A. Prince,

Has anyone read it yet?  Would be interested in your opinions.

[Calm]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

The issue is not even requirement for exaltation.  

Do you believe it is required for exaltation?  If so, why?  If not, why not?

(I am curious if you apply the same standard to this that you apply to the concept of eternal polygamy)

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, rchorse said:

To me, the clearest evidence that polygamy is the exception, not the rule, is that Adam only had one wife. As Adam and Eve were the first married couple and example for all of us, I'd expect multiple wives for Adam if polygamy were required or even preferred for exaltation. 

It's clearly allowed by the Lord in certain situations and for his own reasons, but I think the vast majority of marriages in the eternities will be monogamous.

Maybe Adam has a wife on several planets. Just as polygamist men have several wives living in different homes.

[Calm]

3 hours ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

I'd have the biggest problem if God ever brought back animal sacrifice. 

Are you a vegetarian?

[VideoGameJunkie]

Just now, Calm said:

Are you a vegetarian?

I'm a vegetarian and animal rights supporter and donator to animal causes.

[Tacenda]

You know, I wonder if women aren't really lauded much because of polygamy because they were kept hidden during certain times in the history of the church. We don't know any of the prophets wives really, except for the more recent wives that weren't polygamist. Or it's true, the women aren't equal to the men in our church and we don't get much air time, or read and lesson time such as the Presidents of the Church do. For instance how they aren't mentioned much in the manuals, especially if polygamists. 

I'm sure there are a couple of books about some of these women, I remember a book of prophets' mothers, but they are talking about their sons. I don't mean this to turn into a feminist post, but this is really sticking out to me. Thinking polygamy caused some to go into the shadows.