Plural Marriage

[JaGa]

What do you mean by that? The current Prophet is misleading the true church?

Philip, all one has to do is look how the Church has progressed away from a Zion society, and towards a Babylonian one.  Our views that separated us from the other Christian sects: Plural marriage, blood atonement, Adam-God doctrine, and many more have been dismissed as being the views of misguided individuals(our prophets). 

Now, I'm not saying that all our leaders are misleading us.  With the Spirit we can tell who is and who isn't.  The scriptures say that if God did not cut short the time of man, than all would be lost.  That is not everyone but members of the Church; NO, "all would be lost".

JS-Matt:"And except those days should be shortened, there should none of their flesh be saved; but for the elect’s sake, according to the covenant, those days shall be shortened. 

If you live your religion, then you know that we are in the last times, and things are not right within the Church.  What do you think Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and John Taylor would do to those who deny the revelations that they received from God.  I know what I would do; and I know what must be done. 

What did your bishop said about your views?

I really like my bishop.  I just moved into the ward so this was actually this first time we really had the chance to discuss anything. 

He agreed with what I said about the great apostasy that is to come.  I showed him 2Nephi 28:11-14 and D&C 112:23-26; and he agreed that I was interpreting them correctly.

 As far as plural marriage was concerned, he stated:"That he knew it to be a commandment of God"

With Blood atonement I showed him D&C 134:26 and he said:"He wasn't to sure, but that the principle made sense; and my argument was justified threw scripture" He also did not deny that it was ever practiced like others have done. 

With the Adam-God doctrine I showed him Daniel 7:9-14 "Wherein the scripture states that the Ancient of Days shall give a kingdom unto the Son of Man. " We all know that the Father is the one who gives the Son the kingdom, and in Daniel it states the Ancient of Days as being such.  There is great similarities between Daniel 7:9-14 and Revelation 5.  I also showed him the hymn 'Sons of Michael'.  Needless to say, he did not argue my claims. 

I know that these things are hard to believe, but if we view things with the Spirit, and put our trust in God, God is faithful; and He will show us the truth of all things.  Let us all lengthen our strides, and pray in faith nothing wavering.

[JoePublic]

Name: Plural Marriage

Comments: So the church is in apostasy just because they're not allowing everyone to practice plural marriage? I don't get that. Plural marriage isn't necessary for salvation, but having charity is!

[JaGa]

Comments: So the church is in apostasy just because they're not allowing everyone to practice plural marriage? I don't get that.  Plural marriage isn't necessary for salvation, but having charity is!

You are not understanding what I am trying to say.  Never did I say that the Church was in apostasy do to disobedience to the practice of plural marriage, no, what I said was that most of the Church is in apostasy do to the fact that they, instead of drawing closer to God and to Zion are unfortunately pulling themselves away from Him and closer to Babylon.

Many of our leaders are discrediting those who went before, and are doubting the authority in which they themselves claim authority.  Take for instance what Joseph Smith has said:

When did I ever teach anything wrong from this stand? When was I ever confounded? I want to triumph in Israel before I depart hence and am no more seen.  I never told you I was perfect; but there is no error in the revelations which I have taught.  Must I, then, be thrown away as a thing of naught?

Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Section Six 1843 44, p. 368
(At the Stand, May 12, 1844, Nauvoo, Ill. ) HC 6:366

Yet we have members in high standings who are openly refuting the doctrines taught by our Prophet; and are claiming they do not know why such doctrines were ever taught.  Throwing away our beloved Prophet as a thing of naught.

Brigham Young said this about Plural Marriage:

The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy.  Others attain unto a glory and may even be permitted to come into the presence of the Father and the Son; but they cannot reign as kings in glory, because they had blessings offered unto them, and they refused to accept them.

Journal of Discourses, Vol. 11, p. 268 - p. 269, Brigham Young, August 19, 1866

What is necessary for our salvation all depends on what salvation you are talking about.  Remember there are three glories in the celestial kingdom.  If we take Brigham Young's speech literally(as we should) than those who do not enter into polygamy will not become Gods, or the Sons of God.

God knows all things and He knows who His children are; and He sends those who have earned their right to become the Sons of God in the generations when that opportunity is afforded to them.  We should not question the wisdom of God or His purposes. 

Now are we to take everything the prophets of this Church say as the word of God; No.  Brigham Young once stated that he does not expect anyone to just follow what he says without seeking the reassurance of the Spirit first.  The key to understanding and knowing for a surety of all things is the Spirit. 

My testimony is this: I know that the priesthood still resides in the Church today.  I know that although the Church is God's Church, many of it's members are not of God; meaning they are children of the devil. 

Take for instance what is taught in Alma 30:

42 Behold, I know that thou believest, but thou art possessed with a lying spirit, and ye have put off the Spirit of God that it may have no place in you; but the  devil has power over you, and he doth carry you about, working devices that he may destroy the children of God.
      •  •  •
  60 And thus we see the end of him who perverteth the ways of the Lord; and thus we see that the devil will not support his children at the last day, but doth speedily drag them down to hell.

Have not the members of the Church perverted the ways of God, confessing Jesus with their lips, but with their hearts denying His power.  How many times have you heard a member of the Church say: "Well I'm not perfect"? By saying and believing such we are denying the power of the atonement.

Listen to what John said:

In this the children  of God are manifest, and the children of  the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness  is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. 

The scriptures are plain on these two facts: If we are righteous then we are God's children, If we are disobedient then we are children of the devil.  It is cut and dry, there are no shades of gray.  What does God say in Revelations?

So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue  thee out of my mouth.
  17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:

I have not declared these things of myself, all one has to do is look to the scriptures; and know that all is not well in Zion. 

[Suzie_Su]

JaGa I hear you loud and clear and I agree with you to a certain extent you know what am I saying? The only thing I think I disagree is that you seem to believe every word coming out of the mouth of a prophet as the word of G-d and I don't think that's the case. They are men just like everyone else and they aren't perfect.

[JaGa]

JaGa I hear you loud and clear and I agree with you to a certain extent you know what am I saying? The only thing I think I disagree is that you seem to believe every word coming out of the mouth of a prophet as the word of G-d and I don't think that's the case.  They are men just like everyone else and they aren't perfect. 

They are not just men, Suzie_Su, they are men sent from God to guide His children in these latter-days.  Are they perfect?No.  Do they make mistakes?Yes. 

Take for instance what James said:

5:17Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months. 

So though prophets are men of passion, we must always keep in mind they are men of God, sent here to lead and guide His children; and therefore have power with God.  If a prophet says he had a revelation, and we know him to be a prophet, then we'd better listen to what he says.

[JoePublic]

Name: Jane

Comments: I don't think we will see or hear anything about plural marriage until the next life. We live in a different world now.

[JaGa]

Name: Jane

Comments: I don't think we will see or hear anything about plural marriage until the next life. We live in a different world now.

Jane, I'm sorry to be so blunt; but I don't think you understand the dispensation of the fullness of times, wherein all things must be restored before Christ returns to claim His kingdom. Of course plural marriage will be practiced again. Even though it will take the fall of this great nation, and all hell to go through, plural marriage will be restored; and those who are faithful will have to enter therein.

You know, those who chose not to follow the gospel always say:"We live in a different world now". As though God is not capable of raising a Zion society in today's world. Has God changed? Is the world now not fit for God and His purposes? Is He not capable of establishing His kingdom here on this different world? Has His arm be shortened? Did He not create heaven and earth?

Mark my words: "Plural Marriage will be instituted again, and those who prove themselves faithful will have to enter therein". Even though it may cause 2/3 of those now active in His Church to fall away, God's will will be done.

Prepare you hearts to receive what may be asked of you. Those who call themselves Latter-day Saints, will have to live as such, meaning they will have to obey all of God's commandments, not just the ones they feel comfortable with. Only by doing this will they receive the Divine protection that will keep them alive in the days to come.

[Saint]

I believe that there is a definite agenda to move us as a church from over here (typical funny peculiar mormon believes) to over there (fit in nicely with the rest of the christian churches).    So all of these early doctrines that made us peculiar, are not to be discussed anymore.    Some members were exed because they talked about heavenly mother.    Adam-God as taught in conferences as well as in the endowment sessions have all been dropped like hot potatoes.    So, James Talmage stated it is not a required principle of the gospel, Pres Hinckley stated it is not doctrine and not required anymore.    Pres Holland states:  I do not know nor understand why the saints were asked to live this.    To me this is very problematic.    Either the early brethren were teaching false doctrines, like Adam-God, plural marriage is an essential celestial requirement, 2nd anointings, etc etc or .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .    Personally I would prefer to hear, well, the brethren were wrong.    Or it was doctrine for their period of time.    I just don't like this:  Probably miss quoted by his secretary stuff.    I have no problem with the brethren stating:  We cannot live plural marriage anymore because we are not allowed, but to state it is not doctrinal, or I do not know why we even did this is problematic.    Pres B.  Young plainly taught in the temple that Adam came to this earth with a celestial body and brought one of his wives, Eve with him.    Seems like an eternal principle to me.    People have been exed just by talking about it.    That is even more scary.    George Q.  Cannon in a conference talk stated that there were people in this congregation that were direct disendants from the original 12 and even of the Lrd Jesus Christ.    The profit then stood up and confirmed the truth and correctness of this.    WOW.    What they just said was that Jesus was married and had kids.    Nothing new here really except that we don't want to talk about that either.    Lastly Cornelius Celsus wrote a letter complaining about the many wives Jesus had.    Oh my!  And who said it was not an eternal principal.    We have had a number of manifestos.    But we only read the 1890.    Most of the apostles refused to accept it initially as revelation.    It was never signed by the prophets counselors.    Several apostles were exed because they rejected it.    Pres Joseph F.  Smith took another plural wife aster the manifesto and in front of the Smoot hearings under oath admitted to actively live plural marriage.    He was the prophet!  It is sad that we cannot talk about our proud heritage without having to be afraid of sitting in front of our bishops.   

Out of pure curiousness I'd like to see all of the references for the information / quotes your state here.    When I have time I like to try and read up.    That'd be great!    

In relation to Pres.   Hinckleys' comment, he said.  .  .  .   

" I condemn it, yes, as a practice, because I think it is not doctrinal.   It is not legal.   And this church takes the position that we will abide by the law.   We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, magistrates in honoring, obeying and sustaining the law.  "

In my opinion, this statement makes perfect sense:
  
Doctrine is a particular principle, position, or policy taught or advocated.    We have been commanded by God to not practice polygamy, therefore we do not currently actively teach the polygamy lifestyle or advocate it as doctrine   If we are not to practice it, why would we teach it as a current doctrine?  The same could be said about animal sacrifice.    Although it did exist, and did serve a purpose, we do not teach it as a current doctrine to participate in because the Lord removed that. 

Theology is described as the field of study and analysis that treats of God and of God's attributes and relations to the universe; study of divine things or religious truth; divinity.     So the theology of polygamy will still exist in the history of the church and in past written doctrine, because it was a definite principle that was once taught and lived.    (Same with animal sacrifice.  )
Polygamy is not current doctrine/not taught/not lived, hence Pres.   Hinckley statement.    He was not denying anything, he simple knew exactly what he meant.       

Although, at first, I didn't understand his words either I have thought about them, and feel comfortable with his response.    I trust in Pres Hinckley's statement, and I personally think we should be cautious in being overly critical.   



Peace