Teancum Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 On 7/15/2022 at 2:09 PM, juliann said: LOL. OK, I'll play. While talking about obeying the law and quoting an article of faith, Pres. Hinckley stated unequivocably that polygamy was not doctrine. I've provided a source, now you provide one of Pres Hinckley or any other prophet in this century who has called polygamy "doctrine." CFR Just read Smac's recent posts. That should cover your CFR.
Teancum Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 On 7/15/2022 at 4:53 PM, mrmarklin said: BY is entitled to his opinion, but it is not scriptural. One must take these sorts of things in the context of the audience and times it was said. D&C 132 is and it seems clear there that plural marriage is the new and everlasting covenant. By the way I doubt BY would agree with your ease of dismissing his teachings. Why should we trust more than the man who claimed to be a prophet of god?
Teancum Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 On 7/15/2022 at 5:10 PM, mrmarklin said: The first polygamist that we know of for sure was Abraham. See the quote from Wiki as to the benefit of this polygamist act. A great nation arose. Outside the bible is there any evidence that Abraham existed? On 7/15/2022 at 5:10 PM, mrmarklin said: " According to the Bible, Hagar was the Egyptian slave of Sarai, Abram's wife (whose names later became Sarah and Abraham). Sarai had been barren for a long time and sought a way to fulfill God's promise that Abram would be father of many nations, especially since they had grown old, so she offered Hagar to Abram to be his concubine.[7] Nothing like JS's plural marriage. Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham because she was barren. God did not command it. And Hagar was Sarah's property. A slave. She had no say in it. Bad example.
Teancum Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 On 7/15/2022 at 5:18 PM, mrmarklin said: I know, right? And so was the BY quote. THe BY quote is inconvenient for you not the critic. On 7/15/2022 at 5:18 PM, mrmarklin said: From a person who doesn't have much faith, if any. How do you know what her faith is? And why is faith even an issue in the discussion? On 7/15/2022 at 5:18 PM, mrmarklin said: I don't want to hear it. Too bad. On 7/15/2022 at 5:18 PM, mrmarklin said: The reality is that many on this forum take any "prophetic pronouncement" as scripture and try to use it as a club to score points. But we know that those pronouncements are just that: pronouncements and opinions. Know WE don't know that they are just opinions. And leaders opinion is the typical apologist dodge. Just call it opinion when you don't like it. But my guess is those who hear BY say this did not think it was just opinion. On 7/15/2022 at 5:18 PM, mrmarklin said: No one seems to spend any time looking into the context or the audience receiving these pronouncements. And you know this how? On 7/15/2022 at 5:18 PM, mrmarklin said: I take it all with a grain of salt, unless I can confirm it by the Holy Ghost. We have scripture and it's well known an canonized. And it's silent as to BY's opinion. 🙄
Teancum Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 On 7/15/2022 at 6:34 PM, mrmarklin said: I tease her about it all the time.:-) If you are serious I would say that is pretty cruel. 1
Tacenda Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 Here's my distinct problem with polygamy, does this still happen, or when did it change if so? https://www.the-exponent.com/mary-jane-wilford-woodruff-and-the-267-dead-wives/?fbclid=IwAR1HXM-MSUIEwbURs97if6hmloRQMIe3m_8oMYxanHszGWOiVmESt05AEcs
Teancum Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 On 7/15/2022 at 6:57 PM, mrmarklin said: I'm sure you'll have the last word, but Abraham's child with Hagar had a very specific purpose. To fulfil God's promise of great progeny. Ummm no. Sarah fulfilled that. She allegedly lacked faith thus gave her slave to Abraham. On 7/15/2022 at 6:57 PM, mrmarklin said: Realistically, it's very likely that Hagar was sealed to Abraham under the covenant, as we currently understand it. Otherwise the child would have been a *******. And there's not a hint of that in the bible. Both Ishmael and Isaac were present at Abraham's burial. Really? Nice reading into the Bible a doctrine that is uniquely LDS. Of course JS did this a lot so hey what should we expect. On 7/15/2022 at 6:57 PM, mrmarklin said: I don't know what other "benefits" may come of polygamy, but I feel you and Julianne are willfully seeing only what you want, and are ignoring the Lord's purposes. You asked for a purpose, and I gave you one. Remember, YOU don't have to be a polygamist!!!:-)
Teancum Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 On 7/15/2022 at 10:32 PM, carbon dioxide said: More people involved, more risk of divorce. Monogamy does not seem to do much better. Like 50% of marriages today end in divorce. Perhaps the best way to avoid divorce is not polygamy or monogamy but just staying single. YOu continue to bring up monogamy as a filed system. It really is a very poor argument in favor of polygamy.
Teancum Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 On 7/15/2022 at 11:03 PM, JLHPROF said: That plan survived intact until the 1920s, a good 80 years. Since then it's been slowly dismantled and altered piece by piece until very little remains of the plan. This is an amazing conclusion that I do not disagree with. I am amazed you are still an active participant given this view.
Teancum Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 On 7/15/2022 at 11:28 PM, JLHPROF said: What happened after those that served with Joseph died is no different than what happened after Christ's apostles died out. So you think the dispensation of the fullness of times in in apostasy? I thought that was not supposed to happen.
Teancum Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 On 7/17/2022 at 10:43 AM, mrmarklin said: You’re correct. Her opposition to polygamy is completely out of line. Disobeying God’s commands is totally wrong. Oh, you meant………….🤫 Wow. What a jerk you are.
Teancum Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 On 7/17/2022 at 2:12 PM, JLHPROF said: Monogamy was institutionalized by the Greeks and Romans. It was "western civilization" that made monogamy the traditional marriage. No such normalcy existed until the pagan nations mandated it. And in Christ's day they were under Roman and Greek rule. Prior to that influence there was no prohibition, nothing offensive. Well sure. Since humans evolved it makes sense that a man would want to spread his seed among as many women as possible. You know a genetic winner type of thing. That is inbred in men. On the other hand women need stability and evolution wise needed a man to stick around and care for her and her offspring. Polygamy brings us back to our hunter gatherer roots.
mrmarklin Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 8 hours ago, Teancum said: So Brigham Young was wrong when he said: The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy I answered this in a previous post.
mrmarklin Posted July 18, 2022 Posted July 18, 2022 1 hour ago, Teancum said: Wow. What a jerk you are. Wow, another person without faith believing BY! He's having a good day! My reply the BY quote was made to a person who has professed on this forum a lack of faith many times. Actually, so have you. I had an Atheistic period, so I'm very familiar with your arguments or I should say, lack thereof. Since you believe in nothing, it's easy to take potshots at those who do. I totally get it. But there's not much in it for me. I don't reply to Trolls, normally, and unless you say something constructive in the future I won't reply to you, jerk. -1
carbon dioxide Posted July 19, 2022 Posted July 19, 2022 6 hours ago, Teancum said: YOu continue to bring up monogamy as a filed system. It really is a very poor argument in favor of polygamy. I just find that often arguments against polygamy can be used against monogamy.
JLHPROF Posted July 19, 2022 Posted July 19, 2022 7 hours ago, Teancum said: This is an amazing conclusion that I do not disagree with. I am amazed you are still an active participant given this view. It's an issue of priesthood authority. The keys restored to Joseph remain in the Church. Where else would I go? 7 hours ago, Teancum said: So you think the dispensation of the fullness of times in in apostasy? I thought that was not supposed to happen. All that was promised was that the apostasy wouldn't be complete. The priesthood authority was restored for the final time. There are plenty of prophecies that the Church or its members would go off course prior to the return of Christ. 3 hours ago, Teancum said: Well sure. Since humans evolved it makes sense that a man would want to spread his seed among as many women as possible. You know a genetic winner type of thing. That is inbred in men. On the other hand women need stability and evolution wise needed a man to stick around and care for her and her offspring. Polygamy brings us back to our hunter gatherer roots. Reducing human motivation to the lowest denominator. No surprise that's how you'd see it. 2
webbles Posted July 19, 2022 Posted July 19, 2022 9 hours ago, Tacenda said: Here's my distinct problem with polygamy, does this still happen, or when did it change if so? https://www.the-exponent.com/mary-jane-wilford-woodruff-and-the-267-dead-wives/?fbclid=IwAR1HXM-MSUIEwbURs97if6hmloRQMIe3m_8oMYxanHszGWOiVmESt05AEcs No, that doesn't happen anymore. It's basically a form of the Law of Adoption which ended in 1894 by President Woodruff. Before then, the idea was that you needed to be sealed to people you knew where going to make it to the Celestial Kingdom. It also included the idea that the more people sealed to you (either as a wife or as a child), the bigger the kingdom. But President Woodruff came to understand it differently and by 1894, announced that he would no longer allow sealings of that sort. The Law of Adoption and the ideas around it are definitely extremely strange to us now. If you look at how the pioneers understood sealings and compare it to how we understand sealings, there is a fairly large difference. But I see it as learning "line upon line" on how sealings are supposed to work. All of the women that President Woodruff had sealed to him have now been sealed to their proper husband (if they had one). 1
Kenngo1969 Posted July 19, 2022 Posted July 19, 2022 11 hours ago, Teancum said: YOu continue to bring up monogamy as a filed system [sic]. ... Really? What's it filed under? (Sorry. Couldn't resist! Carry on!)
Teancum Posted July 19, 2022 Posted July 19, 2022 (edited) 16 hours ago, mrmarklin said: Wow, another person without faith believing BY! He's having a good day! Ad hominem. 16 hours ago, mrmarklin said: My reply the BY quote was made to a person who has professed on this forum a lack of faith many times. Actually, so have you. I had an Atheistic period, so I'm very familiar with your arguments or I should say, lack thereof. Since you believe in nothing, it's easy to take potshots at those who do. I totally get it. But there's not much in it for me. I don't reply to Trolls, normally, and unless you say something constructive in the future I won't reply to you, jerk. Ad hominem. I am not trolling. I am discussing. I have been on this board quite some time. You can view what I say as constructive or not but I will say your arguments ring hollow and if faith is all you have to go on well, meh. Carry on. Edited July 19, 2022 by Teancum
Teancum Posted July 19, 2022 Posted July 19, 2022 15 hours ago, carbon dioxide said: I just find that often arguments against polygamy can be used against monogamy. Your argument makes no sense.
Teancum Posted July 19, 2022 Posted July 19, 2022 14 hours ago, JLHPROF said: It's an issue of priesthood authority. The keys restored to Joseph remain in the Church. Where else would I go? Well if you believe the church has the priesthood I guess nowhere. 14 hours ago, JLHPROF said: All that was promised was that the apostasy wouldn't be complete. The priesthood authority was restored for the final time. There are plenty of prophecies that the Church or its members would go off course prior to the return of Christ. Reducing human motivation to the lowest denominator. No surprise that's how you'd see it. It is simple science, biology and evolution. We want to leave progeny and man mating with as many women as possible increases that chance that his genetics will increase. That is how nature made us, or God. Supporters of polygamy are the ones returning us to what you snarkily call the lowest denominator. Monogamy and getting past the animal urge to spread our seed is what I support. That is the noble path.
Teancum Posted July 19, 2022 Posted July 19, 2022 10 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said: Really? What's it filed under? (Sorry. Couldn't resist! Carry on!) 😁
JLHPROF Posted July 23, 2022 Posted July 23, 2022 On 7/15/2022 at 9:37 PM, Rain said: For example if you have 10 women in monogamous marriages and they each have 5 kids (50 total) and you have 10 women in polygamous marriages and the each have 4 kids (40 total). On 7/19/2022 at 9:35 AM, Teancum said: It is simple science, biology and evolution. We want to leave progeny and man mating with as many women as possible increases that chance that his genetics will increase. That is how nature made us, or God. Supporters of polygamy are the ones returning us to what you snarkily call the lowest denominator. Monogamy and getting past the animal urge to spread our seed is what I support. That is the noble path. We often refer to the idea that polygamy is to increase the number of children which is then countered with each wife has more children in monogamy than polygamy. I came across the article below today and I found it interesting. In a religion that teaches that marriage is a requirement for exaltation the Church has hit a 50% single adult female threshold. Obviously this number includes divorced women and single mothers who do have children. But surely less kids is more than no kids. Doesn't every one of God's children deserve the opportunity to be a mother or father to an eternal family? Does the less kids in polygamy vs monogamy argument hold any water when so many have no kids or even no opportunity? Thoughts? https://www.ldsliving.com/sister-steven ... al/s/84962 "I don't know if you are aware that we've reached a point in the Church now where more than half of our women are single," Sister Stephens shared. "Women in Relief Society 18 years and older, just about 51 percent are single." 2
Calm Posted July 23, 2022 Posted July 23, 2022 (edited) Why are these women single? Perhaps because they would rather be single than married to someone they don’t really desire just to have children with or a marriage to as what is the percentage of single men in the Church? Assuming polygamy is going to fix things, that the majority or even a significant amount of women would choose plural marriage in order to have kids and a husband at least in name (whether or not he contributes to support of her family) rather than women walking out of the Church because they see plural marriage as a contradiction to the Church’s teaching “all are alike unto God” and therefore at best the Church is hypocritical and at worst a fraud with false prophets caring more about men and numbers than the women and girls in the Church…can you predict which position actually provides more children growing up in the Church? The current one or plural marriage where enough women accept it to increase numbers or plural marriage where enough women and men and families for that matter walk in rejection of the Church, thus leading to less? Plus as you say, many of these single women may be divorced or widowed and already have children. How many would actually want more? Again this would lead to a smaller increase of children resulting from instituting plural marriage when calculating the likely overall change. Edited July 27, 2022 by Calm 3
Calm Posted July 23, 2022 Posted July 23, 2022 “Also, the majority of adult church members are now unmarried, widowed, or divorced. This is a significant change. It includes more than half our Relief Society sisters, and more than half our adult priesthood brothers.” If more than half of the brothers are also currently unmarried (though as noted in the article widowed or divorced may not be currently single), the solution seems less likely to be plural marriage than somehow changing attitudes towards marriage or making it easier for singles to make connections in larger areas (maybe we should start have older single adult only education weeks or regional get togethers). https://www.timesandseasons.org/index.php/2021/05/are-half-of-all-church-members-in-the-us-single/ 3
Recommended Posts