Teancum Posted January 4, 2022 Posted January 4, 2022 12 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said: Intentionally ignoring verse 30 I see. Verse 30 does not give David and Solomon a pass.
Popular Post Robert F. Smith Posted January 4, 2022 Popular Post Posted January 4, 2022 13 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said: He'll have a chance to bring it up in Feb when the material does cover that time period (for Abraham at least). Just to be clear, I would not bring up the matter in a class at all. People seem to have enough difficulty with just basic Gospel issues. No need to trigger them with polygamy. It's not really part of their lives anyway. 5
bluebell Posted January 4, 2022 Posted January 4, 2022 (edited) 40 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said: Just to be clear, I would not bring up the matter in a class at all. People seem to have enough difficulty with just basic Gospel issues. No need to trigger them with polygamy. It's not really part of their lives anyway. It is a part of their relationship with God though, so in that way I think discussing it can be helpful. Edited January 4, 2022 by bluebell 2
Calm Posted January 4, 2022 Posted January 4, 2022 (edited) I think if there was a convenient and appropriate way to mention it so that those who had issues about it could know they could at least ask for a list of references…if they hadn’t read the gospel essays yet, for example, I think it would be useful for the teacher to have a list of decent resources on hand to pass out if asked for. Unfortunately not all resources are created equal, so this could cause problems if the teacher went too far afield. Best to stick with church and church recommended sources for the list given out in class. As far as people choosing for themselves, especially once they have dealt with basic answers, I don’t see a need to stick with church related sources, I just don’t think it is a good idea to potentially trigger an inference that a nonChurch recommended site is actually recommended even if a great site. I do think it is wise to prepare for it coming up just in case. Edited January 4, 2022 by Calm 2
JustAnAustralian Posted January 4, 2022 Posted January 4, 2022 6 hours ago, Teancum said: Verse 30 does not give David and Solomon a pass. Not to the level that David and Solomon ultimately ended up practicing it, but Nathaniel the Prophet gave David at least some of his wives, so that seems like an "if I will" pass to practice it to me. 3
Teancum Posted January 4, 2022 Posted January 4, 2022 1 hour ago, JustAnAustralian said: Not to the level that David and Solomon ultimately ended up practicing it, but Nathaniel the Prophet gave David at least some of his wives, so that seems like an "if I will" pass to practice it to me. Yet the BoM contradicts this. Many inconsistencies is so called scripture.
JustAnAustralian Posted January 4, 2022 Posted January 4, 2022 45 minutes ago, Teancum said: Yet the BoM contradicts this. The phrasing is "Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines". "Truly had many" gives the impression of large numbers. That's a lot different to the one wife and one concubine (see Books of Samuel) of Saul that were given to David (by Nathaniel). Now all the other wives and concubines that David took for himself, sure. The Lord said that was abominable. But I don't see any reason as to why the Lord wouldn't be ok with wives given to David by the prophet, but not wives David took for himself. 1
Rain Posted January 5, 2022 Posted January 5, 2022 On 1/3/2022 at 3:35 PM, carbon dioxide said: Polygamy is a hard issue for westerners to accept. Sadly the church took a 180 degree turn after polygamy ended to one of being strongly defended to avoided. I do believe as more people accept same sex marriage that polygamy will be accepted more as well. There is a key difference (well more than one). One of the reasons polygamy bothers people is the idea that you may have to live it to be exalted. No one says you have to a same sex marriage to be exalted so in some ways it would be much easier to accept same sex marriage than polygamy. On 1/3/2022 at 3:35 PM, carbon dioxide said: If same sex marriage does not bother someone, why should polygamy If those involved are legal age and consent to it freely bother them? I give it 10 to 20 years for polygamy to slowly cook and it will be legal and accepted in society. 2
carbon dioxide Posted January 5, 2022 Posted January 5, 2022 (edited) 34 minutes ago, Rain said: There is a key difference (well more than one). One of the reasons polygamy bothers people is the idea that you may have to live it to be exalted. Most people don’t have any understanding of exaltation. They have a problem with polygamy whether a Mormon, Muslim, or anyone else does it. They are much more tolerant if a guy has 3 or 4 girlfriends. Hugh Hefner never seemed to have a problem with the law or media. Edited January 5, 2022 by carbon dioxide 1
Rain Posted January 5, 2022 Posted January 5, 2022 6 hours ago, carbon dioxide said: Most people don’t have any understanding of exaltation. They have a problem with polygamy whether a Mormon, Muslim, or anyone else does it. They are much more tolerant if a guy has 3 or 4 girlfriends. Hugh Hefner never seemed to have a problem with the law or media. I'm confused by this reply.
The Nehor Posted January 5, 2022 Posted January 5, 2022 6 hours ago, carbon dioxide said: Most people don’t have any understanding of exaltation. They have a problem with polygamy whether a Mormon, Muslim, or anyone else does it. They are much more tolerant if a guy has 3 or 4 girlfriends. Hugh Hefner never seemed to have a problem with the law or media. Hugh Hefner wasn’t saying he was a prophet of God or was commanded by God to have a lot of girlfriends either. People have always gotten away with crazy stuff if they have the right kind of power or money. Changing the religious standards though is not so easily done. 2
Teancum Posted January 5, 2022 Posted January 5, 2022 16 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said: The phrasing is "Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines". "Truly had many" gives the impression of large numbers. That's a lot different to the one wife and one concubine (see Books of Samuel) of Saul that were given to David (by Nathaniel). Now all the other wives and concubines that David took for himself, sure. The Lord said that was abominable. But I don't see any reason as to why the Lord wouldn't be ok with wives given to David by the prophet, but not wives David took for himself. Here are the relevant versus from Jacob 2: 24 Behold, David and aSolomon truly had many bwives and concubines, which thing was cabominable before me, saith the Lord. 25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a arighteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph. 26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old. 27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any aman among you have save it be bone cwife; and concubines he shall have none; 28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the achastity of women. And bwhoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts. 29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or acursed be the land for their sakes. 30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up aseed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things. IT seems to me that a plain read is fairly condemning of David and Solomon. As noted this contradicts a passage in D&C 132 as well as the OT verse you pointed out.
carbon dioxide Posted January 5, 2022 Posted January 5, 2022 4 hours ago, Teancum said: Here are the relevant versus from Jacob 2: 24 Behold, David and aSolomon truly had many bwives and concubines, which thing was cabominable before me, saith the Lord. 25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a arighteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph. 26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old. 27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any aman among you have save it be bone cwife; and concubines he shall have none; 28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the achastity of women. And bwhoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts. 29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or acursed be the land for their sakes. 30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up aseed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things. IT seems to me that a plain read is fairly condemning of David and Solomon. As noted this contradicts a passage in D&C 132 as well as the OT verse you pointed out. Often people fail to notice that Jacob identifies the two examples who violated messed up in the practice of polygamy. David has sex with another mans wife, finds a way to get the husband killed and takes this unauthorized woman to be his wife. Solomon married a bunch of women from other nation. Jacob does not reference Abraham or Jacob whose wives we all legit. 1
Teancum Posted January 6, 2022 Posted January 6, 2022 3 hours ago, carbon dioxide said: Often people fail to notice that Jacob identifies the two examples who violated messed up in the practice of polygamy. David has sex with another mans wife, finds a way to get the husband killed and takes this unauthorized woman to be his wife. Solomon married a bunch of women from other nation. Jacob does not reference Abraham or Jacob whose wives we all legit. Two egregious examples. As for Abraham and Jacob your argument is one of silence. Jacob gave two examples. Perhaps that sufficed to make his point. He could have gone through the whole OT prophet list I guess. But he didn't.
CV75 Posted January 6, 2022 Posted January 6, 2022 On 1/3/2022 at 5:02 PM, Robert F. Smith said: You may have noticed that the Book of Mormon harshly condemns David and Solomon for their many wives and concubines, and that Lehi insisted on monogamy for the Nephites. Both Sunday School and Elders Quorum classes could reasonably have a worthwhile discussion of that, without being disagreeable. There are a number of other sensitive issues which could be addressed, but which some may not consider suitable for polite company. When we had regular discussions of controversial topics in Elders Quorum, I noticed that attendance grew over time. I am waiting for a revelation clarifying the Church's position on the OT practice of onanism.
carbon dioxide Posted January 7, 2022 Posted January 7, 2022 On 1/5/2022 at 4:07 PM, Teancum said: Two egregious examples. As for Abraham and Jacob your argument is one of silence. Jacob gave two examples. Perhaps that sufficed to make his point. He could have gone through the whole OT prophet list I guess. But he didn't. He could have given more examples but they would have not been effective examples.
nuclearfuels Posted January 9, 2022 Author Posted January 9, 2022 On 1/3/2022 at 4:23 PM, bluebell said: Does polygamy come up in those chapters? I don't think it will come up in any of the Come Follow Me lessons. Doesn't bother me - I simply find it interesting from a doctrinal perspective. It was right then it was right when Joseph and others practiced it.
nuclearfuels Posted January 9, 2022 Author Posted January 9, 2022 On 1/3/2022 at 4:28 PM, smac97 said: First, I would encourage you to not disparage people who struggle with polygamy by calling them "sophists." A spade is a spade, bruh Sophistry is recognizable by the very few who resort to if and feed off of each other's comments. Polygamy is one of any number of topics they attempt to use to deflate and dilute the Spirit present in the lessons.
nuclearfuels Posted January 9, 2022 Author Posted January 9, 2022 On 1/3/2022 at 5:04 PM, Robert F. Smith said: He may be disappointed that that issue was not addressed. I appreciate the sacrifice these and other prophets made to live the celestial law of marriage via polygamy, and the things their offspring were able to accomplish. 1
nuclearfuels Posted January 9, 2022 Author Posted January 9, 2022 On 1/3/2022 at 5:35 PM, carbon dioxide said: I do believe as more people accept same sex marriage that polygamy will be accepted more as well. If same sex marriage does not bother someone, why should polygamy If those involved are legal age and consent to it freely bother them? I give it 10 to 20 years for polygamy to slowly cook and it will be legal and accepted in society. 100% I imagine when the Church reinstitutes the practice, certain geographical areas will be more in favor and the areas loosing people who vote with thier feet will continue doing so
nuclearfuels Posted January 9, 2022 Author Posted January 9, 2022 On 1/3/2022 at 5:39 PM, The Nehor said: And probably still get your name removed from our records. I kind of miss calling it excommunication. he'd get ex'd for claiming something that may happen 10-20 years from now?
The Nehor Posted January 9, 2022 Posted January 9, 2022 50 minutes ago, nuclearfuels said: he'd get ex'd for claiming something that may happen 10-20 years from now? No, if polygamy gets legalized it is likely people will have their names removed from Church records if they practice it. 2
carbon dioxide Posted January 9, 2022 Posted January 9, 2022 2 hours ago, nuclearfuels said: 100% I imagine when the Church reinstitutes the practice, certain geographical areas will be more in favor and the areas loosing people who vote with thier feet will continue doing so I have no reason to believe the Church will restart it. What is preventing the Church from practicing it in places that it is legal? Maybe it will happen but its not on my radar. 1
carbon dioxide Posted January 9, 2022 Posted January 9, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, The Nehor said: No, if polygamy gets legalized it is likely people will have their names removed from Church records if they practice it. True because God's commands and sin are not based on what is legal or not legal. Just because something is legal does not mean to do it and just because something is not legal does not mean its wrong in the moral sense. Edited January 9, 2022 by carbon dioxide 1
Robert F. Smith Posted January 9, 2022 Posted January 9, 2022 9 hours ago, nuclearfuels said: I appreciate the sacrifice these and other prophets made to live the celestial law of marriage via polygamy, and the things their offspring were able to accomplish. I have several ancestors who were polygamists, and their descendants seem quite normal. 9 hours ago, nuclearfuels said: 100% I imagine when the Church reinstitutes the practice, certain geographical areas will be more in favor and the areas loosing people who vote with thier feet will continue doing so The LDS Church will not likely reinstitute polygamy, even if it becomes legal in the USA -- which is likely. However, the Muslims will likely practice it broadly. 1
Recommended Posts