Bill Reel's Sunstone Presentation and a Path to the Disavowal of D&C 132

[juliann]

5 hours ago, ALarson said:

But DB is right to make this claim.  When did you last hear a leader speak about the polygamy that was lived and taught?  When have you seen a lesson on it for the general membership of the church? How about a statement regarding our current doctrine or teachings about how we may be asked to live it after this life?  I could go on and on, but DB is correct to state what he did.  The topic of polygamy is definitely avoided and is taboo to bring up at church for discussion.

I think Juliann has an unanswered CFR issued for anyone to produce a statement regarding current teachings on polygamy from our recent Prophets or Apostles.  

.

To be more precise, a CFR for polygamy advocates to produce a statement from modern (or living) prophets supporting their claim that polygamy will return.  

 

. 

[ksfisher]

53 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I would imagine you're accountable for following section 132, though.

I'm accountable today for doing what I'm asked to do today.

[Scott Lloyd]

24 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

But Brigham Young's statement was to the effect that, practicing or not, it was required of members to uphold the truth of the principle.

I do uphold the truth of it -- for the time and setting in which it was commanded and instituted.

[Scott Lloyd]

24 minutes ago, Calm said:

This is made clear in Elder Nash's talk I link to above.  Plural marriage is the exception and only when authorized/commanded.

Thank you. I look forward to your link.

[ALarson]

7 minutes ago, juliann said:

To be more precise, a CFR for polygamy advocates to produce a statement from modern (or living) prophets supporting their claim that polygamy will return.  . 

Thanks juliann for clarifying exactly what type of statement you are asking for here

 Who are you referring to when you state "their claim" that "polygamy will return"?  (Who is included in the "their")?

ETA:

I think I get what you're stating.  You are referring to the "polygamy advocates"?   I guess I'm still not clear regarding who that includes.  Any current leaders?  Or just members here such as JLHPROF?

.

Edited August 3, 2016 by ALarson

[Calm]

Polygamy advocates (I know that part well  )

Edited August 3, 2016 by Calm

[Scott Lloyd]

23 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

So, it's OK to disagree privately, but not publicly. Is that what you're saying?

I think I was quite clear.

[jkwilliams]

So, the consensus seems to be that polygamy applies only to the past practice and is not applicable going forward, even in the celestial kingdom. Am I understanding you correctly? 

[6EQUJ5]

4 hours ago, smac97 said:

> Someone needs to take a deep breath and reread my post.  I will overlook and forgive your nasty tone.  I must have certainly hit a nerve but it wasn't intentional.  

==You publicly disparaged the LDS Church and its leaders, accusing it of dishonesty and hypocrisy.  That it could not hold a TR.  This, in your view, "wasn't intentional?"

> Let's start over and see if we can address this "failure to communicate". 

==I suppose.  

.....

Thanks,

-Smac

Hey Smac -- this is one of those times you *appear* to be trying to win just to win.  You asked me to point it out the next time I saw it.... sorry....

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Thank you. I look forward to your link.

I am not sure that means you saw it and are going to read it later or you missed my link and understand me to mean I am posting it later.  If the latter, I will post it again just in case:

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2015/12/the-new-and-everlasting-covenant?lang=eng

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, 6EQUJ5 said:

Hey Smac -- this is one of those times you *appear* to be trying to win just to win.  You asked me to point it out the next time I saw it.... sorry....

Yeah, this one was probably a bridge too far.  Thanks for the reality check.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Scott Lloyd]

11 minutes ago, juliann said:

To be more precise, a CFR for polygamy advocates to produce a statement from modern (or living) prophets supporting their claim that polygamy will return.  

 

. 

To my knowledge, there is no official Church doctrine or statement that polygamy will return.

[jkwilliams]

3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think I was quite clear.

OK. You seemed to be saying that public disagreement was unacceptable, like airing your family's dirty laundry. Just wasn't sure if that's what you meant. 

[Scott Lloyd]

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

I am not sure that means you saw it and are going to read it later or you missed my link and understand me to mean I am posting it later.  If the latter, I will post it again just in case:

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2015/12/the-new-and-everlasting-covenant?lang=eng

I see now that I misread your post. I understood you to say you were going to link to it. So I understood that to mean it would be coming later.

But no matter, I'm glad to have it now.

Edited to add:

I am taking the liberty of copying and pasting a portion of it below:

 

Quote

 

After revealing the law and covenant of eternal marriage between one man and one woman, the Lord taught Joseph Smith that a man can in righteousness marry more than one wife within the covenant of eternal marriage when authorized or commanded by the Lord through His duly ordained prophet (who holds the relevant priesthood keys).³⁶ The authorization and command to practice plural marriage, given by the Lord to Abraham and other prophets of antiquity,³⁷ was likewise given to the Prophet Joseph Smith: “I gave unto thee, my servant Joseph, an appointment, and restore all things.”³⁸

Years later, the Lord rescinded His authorization and command for Church members to enter the practice of plural marriage (in other words, be sealed to more than one living spouse) when President Wilford Woodruff (1807–98) issued the Manifesto of 1890.³⁹ This led to the end of the practice of plural marriage, meaning no member of the Church could be married or sealed to more than one living spouse. Notably, the Manifesto does not preclude any worthy man who has been sealed to a wife now deceased from being sealed to another, living spouse. The foregoing is consistent with the revealed doctrine that monogamy is the Lord’s standard for marriage unless He declares and authorizes otherwise through His duly appointed representative, meaning the President and prophet of the Church.⁴⁰

On behalf of the First Presidency and in response to the question “Is plural or celestial marriage essential to a fulness of glory in the world to come?” President Charles W. Penrose (1832–1925) wrote: “Celestial marriage is essential to a fulness of glory in the world to come, as explained in the revelation concerning it; but it is not stated that plural marriage is thus essential.”⁴¹

In 1933 the First Presidency declared: “Celestial marriage—that is, marriage for time and eternity—and polygamous or plural marriage are not synonymous terms. Monogamous marriages for time and eternity, solemnized in our temples in accordance with the word of the Lord and the laws of the Church, are Celestial marriages.”⁴²

Consistent with these statements, Elder Bruce R. McConkie (1915–85) of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles wrote: “Plural marriage is not essential to salvation or exaltation. Nephi and his people were denied the power to have more than one wife and yet they could gain every blessing in eternity that the Lord ever offered to any people. In our day, the Lord summarized by revelation the whole doctrine of exaltation and predicated it upon the marriage of one man to one woman. (D&C 132:1–28.) Thereafter he added the principles relative to plurality of wives with the express stipulation that any such marriages would be valid only if authorized by the President of the Church. (D&C 132:7, 29–66.)”⁴³

Today, as directed by the Lord through His prophet, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints no longer practices plural marriage, and individuals who do practice it are not allowed to join the Church or remain members of it. The Church affirms that monogamy is God’s standard for marriage except when He authorizes or commands otherwise through His prophet. The Church does not teach that participation in plural marriage is necessary for exaltation.

 

 

Edited August 3, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[jkwilliams]

13 minutes ago, juliann said:

To be more precise, a CFR for polygamy advocates to produce a statement from modern (or living) prophets supporting their claim that polygamy will return.  

The thought of polygamy returning makes my stomach hurt. 

[Calm]

6 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Thanks juliann for clarifying exactly what type of statement you are asking for here

 Who are you referring to when you state "their claim" that "polygamy will return"?  (Who is included in the "their")?

ETA:

I think I get what you're stating.  You are referring to the "polygamy advocates"?   I guess I'm still not clear regarding who that includes.  Any current leaders?  Or just members here such as JLHPROF?

.

No current leaders are advocating or we would be able to find current statements saying it would return.

[Scott Lloyd]

10 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yeah, this one was probably a bridge too far.  Thanks for the reality check.

Thanks,

-Smac

For the record, I quite disagree with 6EQ's observation.

I think Smac was being ganged up on and, except for my own efforts, for a while there appeared to be no one to take his part.

I also believe he has made some very sound -- and important -- arguments.

Edited August 3, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

7 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

So, the consensus seems to be that polygamy applies only to the past practice and is not applicable going forward, even in the celestial kingdom. Am I understanding you correctly? 

not me.  My position is we (as in absolutely no one, even BY described it as indescribable) don't have a clue on what relationships are going to be like.  I don't think it will be plural or monogamous or anything else we've seen but something much more wondrrful.  

We need to be obedient to the best of our ability to the law we are given (not that given before or after our time).  That is our part...that and loving God and loving our fellowman and fellowwoman.  God will let us know the rest when we are grow up enough to understand.

[6EQUJ5]

6 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I also believe he has made some very sound arguments.

I agree with this 1000%.

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

When I read your post, I understood you to say you were going to link to it. So I understood that to mean it would be coming later.

But no matter, I'm glad to have it now.

Edited to add:

I am taking the liberty of copying and pasting a portion of it below:

 

 

Thank you, I can't copy from most of LDS.org now.

[ksfisher]

14 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

So, the consensus seems to be that polygamy applies only to the past practice and is not applicable going forward, even in the celestial kingdom. Am I understanding you correctly? 

My  understanding is that their were people asked to live this law in the past, I'm not asked to today, and if the Lord wants His people to do so in the future he'll let them know (whether that's in this life or the next).  I trust that the Lord would not ask anything of His people that was not for their benefit. 

[Scott Lloyd]

Just now, ksfisher said:

My  understanding is that their were people asked to live this law in the past, I'm not asked to today, and if the Lord wants His people to do so in the future he'll let them know (whether that's in this life or the next).  I trust that the Lord would not ask anything of His people that was not for their benefit. 

Or ultimate joy.

[Scott Lloyd]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

Thank you, I can't copy from most of LDS.org now.

Is it because you are posting on a mobile, or is there a problem with your browser?

[Johnnie Cake]

Deleted

Edited August 3, 2016 by Johnnie Cake

[ALarson]

19 minutes ago, Calm said:

No current leaders are advocating or we would be able to find current statements saying it would return.

Well yeah, that makes sense  

I guess I don't know then who is advocating for polygamy to return (other than a very few on here and maybe just one that I'm aware of).  Who are these "polygamy advocates" that juliann is referring to (you stated above that you know this part "well")?  I've not seen any in my local area as I know most would dread its return!  

Edited August 3, 2016 by ALarson