Jeanne Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 5 hours ago, JLHPROF said: It's important to also remember that while Emma was Joseph's "legal" wife, once the principle of eternal marriage was restored she was NOT his first eternal companion. Joseph had over a dozen wives by the time he was sealed to Emma. Under priesthood law she wasn't the "first" wife. If we read the sealing ceremony for the law of Sarah (as described in the Seer and other places) when it came time for Emma to be sealed to Joseph he could legitimately have asked his other wives permission first and THEY could have performed the act of giving Emma to their husband. This bothers me. Why wasn't she the first??? I can't blame her for her not accepting the principle for so long. Gees..
Jeanne Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 4 hours ago, Tacenda said: I could almost let this pass me by and enjoy a first, me as the TBM! James I agree with you, I was just being sarcastic. I understand that Joseph would need a lot of breaks. But I do focus on the bad, when maybe I could try to look at the positives again. Which is why I fell hard when finding out the truth, since I may have put him right up there on a pedestal. It was my love and trust for Joseph Smith that hurt me the most.
Jeanne Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 20 minutes ago, stemelbow said: interesting. If Joseph was told he could only marry virgins and went on to marry non virgins, then how is that just doing a bad job of practicing? It seems like a blatant disrespect for the revelation itself. I mean I get the difficulty of saying something like, if Joseph was told not to think about other women romantically and did, then the he just did a bad job of it applying the teaching. But this seems more like saying Joseph was told not to iron his shirt and he did anyway. Did he just feel extra tempted to iron his shirt? And this..from a man who has seen God. I don't get that. I mean..I would follow things to the letter. 1
HappyJackWagon Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 34 minutes ago, bluebell said: It doesn't make sense to me to proclaim that if I don't know something, no one else does either. It's a philosophical question of epistemology. Philosophically I don't believe humans can have perfect knowledge of anything, let alone a post-mortal life. The church doesn't even claim complete understanding of the post mortal life, including familial relationships. Yet sometimes members or leaders feel the dogmatic need to say what is and what will never be. When they deal in absolutes like that, I ignore them.
jkwilliams Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 12 minutes ago, Jeanne said: It was my love and trust for Joseph Smith that hurt me the most. My guess is that, like me, you were taught that Joseph was pretty much perfect. It is a bit of a shock to find out he wasn't. 1
bluebell Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 5 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: It's a philosophical question of epistemology. Philosophically I don't believe humans can have perfect knowledge of anything, let alone a post-mortal life. The church doesn't even claim complete understanding of the post mortal life, including familial relationships. Yet sometimes members or leaders feel the dogmatic need to say what is and what will never be. When they deal in absolutes like that, I ignore them. I agree that we can't have a perfect knowledge of everything. That doesn't mean that someone can't know whether or not gay marriage will exist in Heaven, for example.
bluebell Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 44 minutes ago, Jeanne said: Do you think Emma should have been told? I honestly have no idea. I didn't know Emma personally. I didn't know Joseph. I don't know what kind of stress either were under. I'm not an advocate for lying to our spouses or for doing something that huge behind their back (so in that sense, yes, I absolutely believe Emma should have been told) but i know enough to know that perspective and knowledge can really change my mind on how something should be handled. And there's a whole lot of perspective and knowledge that i don't have concerning this situation. Many times have i made pronouncements about how something must be done, only to find myself doing it completely different later after i've gain more information and experience. 4
bluebell Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 (edited) 42 minutes ago, stemelbow said: To be fair he didn't say if he doesn't know something no one else does either. he said no one else knows, and neither does he. He said that no one knows for sure if polygamy exists in heaven, in example. He doesn't actually know that though. It seem like he made that pronouncement (of what other people know) based on his own experience of what he knows. Maybe i did misunderstand him though. It would be interested to know what evidence outside of his own experiences he is basing his 'no one can know that...' statement on. Edited August 5, 2016 by bluebell
thesometimesaint Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 23 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: My guess is that, like me, you were taught that Joseph was pretty much perfect. It is a bit of a shock to find out he wasn't. No knowledgeable person I know of thinks that. Not even Joseph Smith.
jkwilliams Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 2 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: No knowledgeable person I know of thinks that. Not even Joseph Smith. Ah, but there's the rub. I became knowledgeable as an adult, but growing up, I was presented with a Joseph Smith who was the kindest, most pious, athletically strongest, humblest man of his age. The only failing I ever remember being taught about was his giving the 116 pages to Martin Harris. Obviously, I learned better, but if I had just accepted what I was taught growing up, it could have been a big shock to find out some of his, well, less admirable behavior.
stemelbow Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 19 minutes ago, bluebell said: He said that no one knows for sure if polygamy exists in heaven, in example. He doesn't actually know that though. It seem like he made that pronouncement (of what other people know) based on his own experience of what he knows. Maybe i did misunderstand him though. It would be interested to know what evidence outside of his own experiences he is basing his 'no one can know that...' statement on. It seems he's assuming no one has seen how it will work after this world. it may be that someone has, but it doesn't seem so. We're all just guessing. I don't think he's saying anything near, "well if I don't know it, then no one else does." So I commented as that seemed unfairly summarized.
HappyJackWagon Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 (edited) 44 minutes ago, bluebell said: I agree that we can't have a perfect knowledge of everything. That doesn't mean that someone can't know whether or not gay marriage will exist in Heaven, for example. I disagree. I think it requires extreme hubris to make an absolute declaration about what will be in heaven and what will not. For anyone who proclaims such knowledge I have a number of questions for them. Very quickly we will see a break down in how little they really know beyond a couple of popular talking points. I believe in and hope for many things in the next life but I don't have a knowledge of anything. Edited August 5, 2016 by HappyJackWagon
Calm Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 1 hour ago, VideoGameJunkie said: What would your response be if I say I do desire plural marriage, but not in this fallen Telestial world, but waiting for the Millennium and CelestialKingdom where there is no jealousy. I've had dreams where I've lived plural marriage ordained of God and it was some of the best dreams I had and I felt in my dreams a load of outgoing and outpouring love. So to answer your question again do I desire plural marriage? Mostly yes, but only if God aproves it. I can well understand why someone who lacks the deep commitment and intimacy of love not only dreams of it, but dreams of it in such a way to maximize the dream experience. My best dreams are the ones that take my ordinary abilities to help others and turn them into something truly miraculous, healing children with cancer, saving people from car crashes, etc. And while I certainly wouldn't turn down that level of ability, I have plenty of opportunity in the here and now to fill the joy of caring for others I feel in my dreams...there is a huge difference though in that because it is a dream without the clutter of real life, the experience can feel more intense, but it is also very transitory. The reality leaves me with memories I can treasure for eternities. What you need to realize is those feelings you experience in your dream you don't need 4 or whatever women to get though it may seem that way. Having a deep, loving relationship with one woman will give you infinite love and comfort. The biggest problem I see in nurturing a desire for plural marriage, even if you confine it to the Celestial world, is it will likely prevent you from being solely and fully present with the woman you are with and she will notice that and likely not be willing to fully commit to someone who doesn't appear to be fully committing to her. Think about it. If you were on a date with a woman and she was looking at other guys at the same time speculating what it would be like to be dating these other guys, how would you feel? Instead of planning for multiple wives, you would do better imo to treasure up the idea of having one person to completely give yourself to. The more you focus and prepare for that, the more likely when it happens you will be ready for it. 3
JLHPROF Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 25 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: No knowledgeable person I know of thinks that. Not even Joseph Smith. I resent that remark. I know as much about Joseph Smith as anyone on this board and I agree fully with John Taylor - D&C 135:3 Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it. Not perfect - he was mortal after all, but close enough. At least on a par with Moses, Peter, Abraham, Paul, Isaiah, and dare I say - Melchizedek.
bluebell Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 14 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: I disagree. I think it requires extreme hubris to make an absolute declaration about what will be in heaven and what will not. For anyone who proclaims such knowledge I have a number of questions for them. Very quickly we will see a break down in how little they really know beyond a couple of popular talking points. I believe in and hope for many things in the next life but I don't have a knowledge of anything. I don't think it's an example of hubris to believe that God could easily tell His prophet whether or not gay marriage exists in Heaven (or someone else to, for that matter). It's not extreme hubris for someone to say that they know Jesus is the Christ, right? Why would any other declaration of fact automatically be extreme hubris? I think it's kind of funny that you think you could very quickly cause a prophet or an apostle to break down how little they really know. Isn't that an example of hubris? From your last line though it does seem to me that you are saying because you don't have a knowledge of anything, no one else does either. 2
thesometimesaint Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 22 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: Ah, but there's the rub. I became knowledgeable as an adult, but growing up, I was presented with a Joseph Smith who was the kindest, most pious, athletically strongest, humblest man of his age. The only failing I ever remember being taught about was his giving the 116 pages to Martin Harris. Obviously, I learned better, but if I had just accepted what I was taught growing up, it could have been a big shock to find out some of his, well, less admirable behavior. I joined as an adult(20 years old) in 1971. Not even JS claimed such. I am truly sorry if you were taught such. I never was. I don't claim he was anything but a man living in his age. That he did what he believed his God told him to do as best he could.
jkwilliams Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 1 minute ago, thesometimesaint said: I joined as an adult(20 years old) in 1971. Not even JS claimed such. I am truly sorry if you were taught such. I never was. I don't claim he was anything but a man living in his age. That he did what he believed his God told him to do as best he could. I don't worry about it. My dad taught me to expect flaws in church leaders, so it never bothered me. I'm just saying I empathize with Jeanne.
Calm Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 Another example or two, VGJ. It would not be the least bit surprising for an only child who wants a sibling to dream of having a dozen of them. But if that then becomes his ideal and what he focuses on, then when his parents have another one, but only one, that child may find it very difficult to take joy in the one sibling and find contentment and fulfillment in the love that could exist between them. I have actually seen this happen with some mothers. For some reason (mostly because of someone they admired or a family they had wished their own was more like) they have fixed on before marriage a perfect number of children for their ideal family and it has caused them to be always looking for the next one, more eager to get pregnant again than to establish a deep, personal bond with the child that is in their arms. The fathers in these families generally end up feeling more like the sperm donor with a paycheck than a companion working to a common goal. Rather than looking at numbers to give one experiences, it is better to focus on the quality that one desires...as in I want to feel this type of all encompassing love in my marriage...and then work to make that a reality by finding one relationship which can give you that...because if you can't find it in the one loving relationship, you won't find it in others no matter how many you have.
HappyJackWagon Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 4 minutes ago, bluebell said: I don't think it's an example of hubris to believe that God could easily tell His prophet whether or not gay marriage exists in Heaven (or someone else to, for that matter). It's not extreme hubris for someone to say that they know Jesus is the Christ, right? Why would any other declaration of fact automatically be extreme hubris? I think it's kind of funny that you think you could very quickly cause a prophet or an apostle to break down how little they really know. Isn't that an example of hubris? From your last line though it does seem to me that you are saying because you don't have a knowledge of anything, no one else does either. You're right. There may be a bit of hubris on my part too. But I've heard apostles state that they don't know how certain things work in the next life. If they don't have a basic and clear understanding of how those things work (X), then why should I think they have a perfect understanding of (Y)? They don't demonstrate an understanding beyond stating a specific claim like "there will never be gay marriage in the eternal world." Really? They have a perfect understanding of that and know that God would NEVER reveal anything contrary? That is extreme hubris. For me, its kind of like thinking we understand God's precise words for ordinances to the point that they must be over if they are not precisely in accordance with that; be it a sacrament prayer or a temple ordinance. Yet then the wording of a temple ordinance changes. In fact the church is so certain about ordinances that the fact that the Catholic church has changed baptism to sprinkling is evidence that they have apostatized from the correct ordinance. Because we all know a priesthood ordinance couldn't change, right? But then the temple ordinances change. The extreme hubris comes when we think we have a perfect understanding and that God will NEVER reveal anything different. When we think we have all of God's word and aren't open to additional words. Quote 2 Nephi 29:6 Thou fool, that shall say: A Bible, we have got a Bible, and we need no more Bible. Have ye obtained a Bible save it were by the Jews? I've said this many times before, but in a church dependent on the claims of continuing revelation, it is absurd to think we ever have a perfect understanding of God, His words, or His will. When we say God will "NEVER" then we have shut off to continuing revelation. And it doesn't matter to me if it is Joe Blow in Gospel Doctrine saying something will NEVER happen or if it's the prophet or an apostle. Things have changed too much to believe anyone knows well enough to claim an absolute like "NEVER". Quote Article of Faith 9- We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. Are you claiming that anyone...anywhere...as a complete foreknowledge of what God will reveal in the future? I don't believe it. In fact, if we already have God's complete word we really have no need for prophets and apostles beyond simple administration. 1
bluebell Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 3 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Are you claiming that anyone...anywhere...as a complete foreknowledge of what God will reveal in the future? I don't believe it. In fact, if we already have God's complete word we really have no need for prophets and apostles beyond simple administration. No, i'm not claiming that. I'm claiming that just because we can't know everything, doesn't mean we can't know anything.
VideoGameJunkie Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 2 hours ago, ksfisher said: I would hope that most men would realize that the reality of being married to multiple wives is probably a lot different than the dream. Being married to one person can be difficult enough at times (not saying at all that it isn't worth it). Trying to be a husband and father to multiple wives and children in multiple households, holding down a full time job and a church calling, seems like way more stress than I want to deal with. But when you're exalted it can be done. Just not on this Telestial world. So wait until the Millennium and you'll see how it can work.
HappyJackWagon Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 20 minutes ago, bluebell said: No, i'm not claiming that. I'm claiming that just because we can't know everything, doesn't mean we can't know anything. Are you claiming that anyone...anywhere...has a complete foreknowledge of what God will reveal in the future about any specific policy/procedure/practice or doctrine? Choose X, Y, or Z and tell me how someone has a perfect knowledge of what God will say or do in the future. Every time someone says God will NEVER or he will ALWAYS anything, I have to ask myself if that person is God. If not, how can he/she be certain?
VideoGameJunkie Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 50 minutes ago, Calm said: Another example or two, VGJ. It would not be the least bit surprising for an only child who wants a sibling to dream of having a dozen of them. But if that then becomes his ideal and what he focuses on, then when his parents have another one, but only one, that child may find it very difficult to take joy in the one sibling and find contentment and fulfillment in the love that could exist between them. I have actually seen this happen with some mothers. For some reason (mostly because of someone they admired or a family they had wished their own was more like) they have fixed on before marriage a perfect number of children for their ideal family and it has caused them to be always looking for the next one, more eager to get pregnant again than to establish a deep, personal bond with the child that is in their arms. The fathers in these families generally end up feeling more like the sperm donor with a paycheck than a companion working to a common goal. Rather than looking at numbers to give one experiences, it is better to focus on the quality that one desires...as in I want to feel this type of all encompassing love in my marriage...and then work to make that a reality by finding one relationship which can give you that...because if you can't find it in the one loving relationship, you won't find it in others no matter how many you have. But I'm saying I could never live plural marriage in our fallen Telestial state, but think I could pull it off after being resurrected for the Millennium and in the Celestial Kingdom where someone like God could pull it off.
bluebell Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 9 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said: Are you claiming that anyone...anywhere...has a complete foreknowledge of what God will reveal in the future about any specific policy/procedure/practice or doctrine? Choose X, Y, or Z and tell me how someone has a perfect knowledge of what God will say or do in the future. Every time someone says God will NEVER or he will ALWAYS anything, I have to ask myself if that person is God. If not, how can he/she be certain? Some things are pretty basic, so simple statements of fact--irrelevant of further revelation--are not that hard to think of. My previous statement of 'Jesus is the Christ' is one such statement of fact that continuing revelation won't ever negate, for example. Another one is gay marriage. If God told someone 'there is gay marriage in heaven' or 'there isn't gay marriage in heaven', i don't see how the doctrine of continued revelation would ever impact that. We may not know how it would work, where it would work, or all the particulars, but we could still know that it either exists or doesn't. Don't get hung up on having to have a 'perfect' knowledge. You can still know things without knowing everything.
HappyJackWagon Posted August 5, 2016 Posted August 5, 2016 2 minutes ago, bluebell said: Some things are pretty basic, so simple statements of fact--irrelevant of further revelation--are not that hard to think of. My previous statement of 'Jesus is the Christ' is one such statement of fact that continuing revelation won't ever negate, for example. Another one is gay marriage. If God told someone 'there is gay marriage in heaven' or 'there isn't gay marriage in heaven', i don't see how the doctrine of continued revelation would ever impact that. We may not know how it would work, where it would work, or all the particulars, but we could still know that it either exists or doesn't. Don't get hung up on having to have a 'perfect' knowledge. You can still know things without knowing everything. So NO gay marriage in heaven is just as basic and sure as Jesus is the Christ? One of the problems is I don't believe God told anyone "there is no gay marriage in heaven". I believe those claims are the results of time and culture among those leading the church. I haven't seen any revelation where God appeared or spoke directly to the prophet saying "there is no gay marriage in heaven." The brethren reason it out in their mind based on their understandings of other doctrines and principles. Nothing wrong with that, but it's far from an absolute certainty from the lips of God. If it's not a "perfect knowledge" then it's a belief. I don't have a problem with anyone claiming they believe something. My problem is with people stating absolute, unchanging fact, which is really only a belief.
Recommended Posts