Through my searching I found a clip from Pres. Hinckley on Larry King Live that was somewhat troubling to me as a Latter-Day Saint. If you forward to 3:20 in the clip you hear him say "it" is not doctrinal. Well there's two ways to take what "it" is. "It" is either the practice of polygamy in general OR the continued practice by the FLDS-type groups. You can make an argument either way. What is disheartening is that I'm unaware of any clarification provided that would help distinguish which he actually was referring to.
It's things like this that annoy me. It's no surprise so many members, when asked if polygamy is part of the LDS gospel, respond that it was a mistake, etc... Well if you believe it was a mistake, I don't see how you can have a testimony of Joseph Smith. And taking that a step further, the Book of Mormon in general. So why are you even a member of the LDS faith? That makes zero sense to me. It was intentional and the church fought hard to continue its' practice.
Anyway, the video is linked below. It's posted by an obvious anti-Mormon but if you just listen to the actual audio it's somewhat interesting.
If you couldn't notice I've been doing a lot of my research on polygamy based on LDS gospel recently. I figure I need to first determine if it's something God ordains, the current LDS church stance and REASONING behind prohibiting polygamy, and go from there.
My wife joked around with her best friend just yesterday that I'd make a good husband for both of them (her friend is having marital issues right now) but she couldn't share the sex part. That took me completely off guard. Maybe watching Big Love together (her idea) is rubbing off on her after all ;-)
Watch Video
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Go to -
ReplyDeletehttp://fallofreynolds.blogspot.com/2009/02/families-or-felons.html
Just a few comments:
ReplyDeletePlural marriage is the universal norm. It is more complex and challenging than simple monogamy, so men fear it and women dread it. It is not for the faint-of-heart or for the immoral. So many LDS believe that God gave some sort of revelation to Wilford Woodruff in 1890 to halt plural marriages. This is a horrible lie. There was no such revelation. Woodruff got a revelation in Nov'1889 telling him to make no more concessions concerning plural marriage. When he did finally publish the Manifesto (a document that had been being edited for five years), only three of the 15 apostles would even sign it. Most of the G.A.'s were still polygamous in 1904. Woodruff added a plural wife in 1896. There was NEVER a revelation halting polygamy. In fact, the 1889 revelation was the last one Woodruff received. In it, the Lord promised him that, were he to relent on plural marriage, the heavenly manifestations would cease; and cease they did.
Many LDS cite the purported 1978 "revelation". It would be great if we could discover that God had forgiven the saints and condescended to speak again after 88 years, but sadly no one has been able to get a copy of the text of that revelation. I will pay anyone $1,000 in cash for a copy of the words of a revelation to a President of the Church after 1890 in which Heavenly Father is doing the speaking. Such a thing does not exist. Read D&C 101.
D&C speaks of the light breaking forth, the light of the fullness of the Gospel, and the Saints rejecting that light. This is typical of all dispensations. We saints like to think of ourselves as angels, but the truth is - the Saints in Joseph's day were persecuted and driven largely because of their unwillingness to faithfully observe the higher laws.
----------------------------------
September 27, 1886
Words of God to Pres. John Taylor:
My son John: You have asked me concerning the New and Everlasting Covenant and how far it is binding upon my people.
Thus saith the Lord All commandments that I give must be obeyed by those calling themselves by my name unless they are revoked by me or by my authority and how can I revoke an everlasting covenant.
For I the Lord am everlasting and my covenants cannot be abrogated nor done away with; but they stand forever.
Have I not given my word in great plainness on this subject?
Yet have not great numbers of my people been negligent in the observance of my law and the keeping of my commandment, and yet have I borne with them these many years and this because of their weakness because of the perilous times. And furthermore it is more pleasing to me that men should use their free agency in regard to these matters.
Nevertheless I the Lord do not change and my word and my covenants and my law do not.
And as I have heretofore said by my servant Joseph all those who would enter into my glory must and shall obey my law.
And have I not commanded men that if they were Abraham's seed and would enter into my glory they must do the works of Abraham.
I have not revoked this law nor will I for it is everlasting and those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof, even so Amen.
What would be necessary to bring about the results nearest the hearts of the opponents of Mormonism? Simply to renounce, abrogate, or apostatize from the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage in its fullness. Were the Church to do that as an entirety, God would reject the Saints as a body. The authority of the Priesthood would be withdrawn with its gifts and powers and there would be no more heavenly recognition of the administrations. The heavens would permanently withdraw themselves, and the Lord would raise up another people of greater valor and stability, for his work must, according to his unalterable decrees, go forward; for the time of the second coming of the Savior is near, even at the doors. (President John Taylor, Des. News, April 23, 1885)
ReplyDeleteOne of the things a lot of people simply don't grasp about this life (or plural marriage in this life) is that this life is an apprenticeship - and, for the children of the Lord's House, it is an apprenticeship for Godhood. God is a polygamist and, for that matter, a darned good one. We are supposed to train hard at becoming just like Him. Lance Armstrong doesn't procrastinate training for the Tour De France until his grandchildren can watch him.
ReplyDeleteI have a vision of a group of LDS men filing up to the pearly gates to meet with St. Peter and Joseph Smith. The first LDS guy says, "Okay, so now are you going to introduce me to my plural wives?". Joseph says, "We were rather hoping you would introduce your wives to us. There's a shortage of valiant sisters this month."
The whole point of plural marriage is not to provide companionship to a bunch of post-war widows. It is not simply to pump out an innumerable chain of offspring. It is an integral part of the process of sanctification and glorification - becoming like God - becoming A GOD (/GODDESS).
Men and women who faithfully practice plural marriage gain "in-the-trenches" day-to-day, hands on experience in transcending pettiness. They learn patience, justice, mercy and compassion, and how to conquer adversity without cursing God. The men learn to bridle their passions, and the women learn to sublimate their jealousies for the collective good.
The galling travesty perpetrated by the new corporate Church is that it has trained the people to despise and repudiate the very exalting doctrine of this last dispensation. Millions are raised to harbor deep malice towards its faithful practitioners and to shudder at the example of Joseph Smith.
In reference to the New and Everlasting Covenant, the word "exalt" is found eleven times in the entire canon of scripture. All eleven of those instances are in D&C 132.
Another source of confusion is the saints' utter inability to grasp that Heavenly Father foresaw this backsliding and apostasy thousands of years ago and even previewed it for Ezekiel, Daniel, Isaiah, Moroni and John the Revelator. We "Lost Ten Tribes" are more in denial than we are "lost".
There are so many good comments here it's amazing. You all have no idea how very much I appreciate them. I will try and think in-depth on each of them and reply. I don't know if it matters, but I know I always appreciate knowing someone actually thought about or considered what I have to say. Thanks again.
ReplyDeleteOne quick note, that last comment (Jan 15 @ 2:15PM) is SO timely. I quite literally was just talking to my wife about this and she stated specifically, "i just dont understand why plural marriage would be godly??". I mentioned a few thoughts and then went to talk to a coworker of mine I confide in sometimes (he knows I'm interested in the subject, but not the extent). Your comment was exactly what I was looking for and expands on the things I had already come up with through my own thinking. Thanks so much!
Another pervasive misunderstanding plaguing the people of this dispensation is the identity of the members of the Godhead and the purpose of the deployment of a "church".
ReplyDeleteThe saints are instructed to gather, not so that they can eat green Jell-O or play basketball, or even reverence octogenarians in dark blue suits. The purpose of the gathering is to build the extended Israelite family kingdom and rehearse the godly principles of stewardship and common consent.
Joseph Smith was delegated to "restore" three principal organizations. (1) The Church of Jesus Christ (the Son, the Mediator, the Savior, Yeshua Meshiach); (2) The Church of the Firstborn or the Church of Michael, the Father (Yahovah [YHVH = MAN-WOMAN-COVENANT-WOMAN], the Creator): and (3) the Council of Fifty (the Political Kingdom of God).
Org' #1 was the church unto salvation, comprehending the "First Principles" of the Gospel of Jesus, namely - Faith, Repentance, Baptism, Holy Ghost and enduring to the end. This church is ONLY a preparation for the higher law, the higher gospel and the higher church. The portion of the Book of Mormon we currently possess is specifically "geared" towards the gospel of SALVATION. In it there is scant little mention of plural marriage, consecration, adoption, and temple ordinances. The missionary work and the propagation of the Book of Mormon can hardly be expected to further the practice of the "Higher Laws". What is controversial, however, is the Church's tendency to persecute those who try to "graduate" and progress.
Org'#2 is the Church unto exaltation. It was much more covert than the Church of Jesus Christ because few were ready to rise to its requirements. Joseph had not accomplished all that he had hoped to by the time of his death, nevertheless, those who practiced plural marriage in Joseph and Brigham's day did so, not under the auspices of their membership in the Savior's Church, but rather by virtue of their membership in the Father's church. It was this arrangement that gave Lorenzo Snow and Joseph F. Smith SO MUCH plausible deniability. This organization has all but disappeared, leaving a true seeker at the mercy of his own ability to get guidance and inspiration.
The scriptures are replete with prohecies of this time of gross apostasy (Jer. 23, Isa 28, Deut. 28). You can think of virgins with lamps, or milk vs. meat or other metaphors, but my favorite is D&C 87:6 which promises " . . . . until the consumption decreed hath made a full end of ALL nations". Obama is not running the show - the "show" is running him. Powerful people have deliberate plans for this land. Not long after the pilgrims came ashore and dedicated the 13 colonies(/tribes) as the footstool of Jesus Christ, the Venetian Nobility planted the Bourne Stone nearby to trump the pilgrims' claim and turn this land over to Satan.
The recent plundering of 24 trillion dollars from the (already bankrupt) U.S. Treasury was a prelude to the imminent and abrupt dismantling of this Constitutional Republic. Time is short. I promise you that the time will soon come when the astonished memebers of the Church will turn to their ecclesiastical leaders for answers and refuge - and they will be disappointed. Safety (economic or doctrinal) is not found in a group of men with rank or in a FEMA camp with MRE's. This was the Savior's biggest argument while He was in Jerusalem challenging the Pharisees and Sadducees and elders of the mainstream church in His day.
During the Millennium, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints will no longer exist. It is NOT scheduled to be "set in order". There will come a time (VERY SOON) when you, yourself, will be the ONLY ecclesiastical leader on whom you can count. It will be essential for your wife(-ves) and children to see it the same way. That is why you must be BEYOND REPROACH. It does no good for your wife to view you as a fallen sinner, or pathetic loser or deranged fanatic. You will be required to take several "leaps-of-faith". In doing so, you will build your spiritual "muscle" and you will have the strength not only to move in the right direction, but to guide some of those around you in times of chaos and conflict.
ReplyDeleteA friend of mine and I were faced with this dilemma in 1986. We prayed and asked God if we were going off the rails. He answered our prayers and we were reassured.
In answer to your wife's remark, I will say that all men, whether lecherous or godly, are by nature polygamous. Women like to snag a husband and pretend that he NEVER has thoughts for another woman. That is just lying to oneself. It is a recipe for disappointment - sooner or later. Some women dread the introduction of another wife to the family because they remember all the magic sparkles of romance an libido that accompanied their own courtship and honeymoon. No wife should be denied that period of joy and affirmation. Naturally it mellows into the ordinary day-to-day business of married life. The key is that no woman should join the family without building true love (no, not sexual) with the existing wife or wives. That kind of sisterhood can be as enduring as the bond between blood sisters (if not more).
I always cringe when I see those cross-stitch placards championing, "Families are Forever". If you stop and think about it, the anatomy of the family unit that achieves the Celestial Kingdom is the man and his wives - that is the PERMANENT unit (before we talk about the topic of man-to-man adoption). The kids are no longer "kids" and must, of course, find their own way.
When a woman fears plural marriage, there are a handful of possible primary causes:
1. She has a deep distrust of men because of traumatic childhood experiences.
2. She has deep insecurities or an entitlement complex which would keep her from being a good sister-wife.
3. She has weaknesses left over from the pre-existence which interfere with her ability to seek or obtain an abiding testimony of the truth of "The Principle".
4. She believes she "owns" her husband and WILL NOT share him.
5. She never really got a witness of the truth of the Restored Gospel (and the mission of Joseph Smith).
Men are admonished to do their due diligence in supporting their wives through the process of embracing (or ultimately rejecting) plural marriage.
http://www.juvenileinstructor.org/a-mexican-missionary-takes-a-plural-wife-and-breaks-the-news-to-wife-1-in-a-letter/
ReplyDeleteHOW NOT TO MARRY . . . . . . .