Polygamy Discussions and the LDSFF Rules

[Sarah]

This is a great post. I agree with you last statement. Gordon B Hinckley didn't believe it was doctrinal, and I don't think any current leaders do either. I don't see polygamy ever coming back. I think we were scourged because of abominations that we committed, polygamy being one of them.
What you said about D&C 132 is really important. Even though I'm not in the Denver Snuffer "train", everything he said about D&C 132 really opened my mind and led me to find truth come to the same understanding you do of D&C 132.
As far as City Creek goes.. When I found out about it i was like WTH....... But I'm also not gonna go rage all over the forums and go on strikes. I sustain them, but I don't think that they always act or speak as prophets. I think that's naive to think they always make the right decision and always speak as prophets.

How do you reconcile President Nelson being sealed to his current wife.

tradition

Tradition? So do you believe in eternal marriage at all? In the sealing ordinances?

[Zathura]

Yes, I remember when Elder Oaks spoke of his second wife in Conference as his "eternal companion." After my mom died, I encouraged my Dad to remarry. He too was sealed to his second wife. Do those who think this was all a mistake think these sealings are meaningless?

I only state my opinion.

I think in the end, any confusing situation will be sorted out by God.

[Sarah]

Yes, I remember when Elder Oaks spoke of his second wife in Conference as his "eternal companion." After my mom died, I encouraged my Dad to remarry. He too was sealed to his second wife. Do those who think this was all a mistake think these sealings are meaningless?

I only state my opinion.

I think in the end, any confusing situation will be sorted out by God.

I appreciate your opinion and agree that in the end, all will be sorted out. I feel like all the opposition to plural marriage boils down to the feeling that an eternal reality of one man having many wives, and women just having one husband, could not be the reality of eternity. Therefore they have to conclude that the plurality of wives was a man-made mistake. I assume that they would envision an eternity of being sealed to only one spouse. Why not the reality of multiple spouses for men and women. It we look at that option, it explains the "problems" of Joseph Smith's marriages.

[rewcox]

This is a great post. I agree with you last statement. Gordon B Hinckley didn't believe it was doctrinal, and I don't think any current leaders do either. I don't see polygamy ever coming back. I think we were scourged because of abominations that we committed, polygamy being one of them.
What you said about D&C 132 is really important. Even though I'm not in the Denver Snuffer "train", everything he said about D&C 132 really opened my mind and led me to find truth come to the same understanding you do of D&C 132.
As far as City Creek goes.. When I found out about it i was like WTH....... But I'm also not gonna go rage all over the forums and go on strikes. I sustain them, but I don't think that they always act or speak as prophets. I think that's naive to think they always make the right decision and always speak as prophets.

How do you reconcile President Nelson being sealed to his current wife.

tradition

Sorry, weak sauce. You may not like it. We don't practice it live today, but it is still truth.

[Zathura]

This is a great post. I agree with you last statement. Gordon B Hinckley didn't believe it was doctrinal, and I don't think any current leaders do either. I don't see polygamy ever coming back. I think we were scourged because of abominations that we committed, polygamy being one of them.
What you said about D&C 132 is really important. Even though I'm not in the Denver Snuffer "train", everything he said about D&C 132 really opened my mind and led me to find truth come to the same understanding you do of D&C 132.
As far as City Creek goes.. When I found out about it i was like WTH....... But I'm also not gonna go rage all over the forums and go on strikes. I sustain them, but I don't think that they always act or speak as prophets. I think that's naive to think they always make the right decision and always speak as prophets.

How do you reconcile President Nelson being sealed to his current wife.

tradition

Sorry, weak sauce. You may not like it. We don't practice it live today, but it is still truth.

Well Gordon B Hinckley disagrees with you too. I'll side with him.

[Sarah]

I understand what your saying but how are we to know when this man may soften his heart. Love is patient and kind. Love doesnt leave because they dont get their way when they want it.

Everyone has the potential to go through hard times and many go through it in marriage. A marriage that goes through the bitter can be so sweet in time.

I think its still selfish to want to marry another man because you think you will be better off. How is this different than other things (at the surface) such as money or house or romance or looks etc.

She chose to marry him and if she decided to change on him then it is not at all hus fault for holding her back. She should simply live a good life and be an example and pray with her whole heart for her husband to be touched every single day!

I agree that this is what an LDS woman should do and that is what my friend is doing. I think I was thinking more of the eternal perspective (which these early LDS women probably had) and knew that at some point if she wants to have a Celestial Resurrection, she will need to be sealed. But maybe you're right in suggesting that those who are willing to wait will have a more rewarding companionship with that spouse in the end.

[Zathura]

This is a great post. I agree with you last statement. Gordon B Hinckley didn't believe it was doctrinal, and I don't think any current leaders do either. I don't see polygamy ever coming back. I think we were scourged because of abominations that we committed, polygamy being one of them.
What you said about D&C 132 is really important. Even though I'm not in the Denver Snuffer "train", everything he said about D&C 132 really opened my mind and led me to find truth come to the same understanding you do of D&C 132.
As far as City Creek goes.. When I found out about it i was like WTH....... But I'm also not gonna go rage all over the forums and go on strikes. I sustain them, but I don't think that they always act or speak as prophets. I think that's naive to think they always make the right decision and always speak as prophets.

How do you reconcile President Nelson being sealed to his current wife.

tradition

Tradition? So do you believe in eternal marriage at all? In the sealing ordinances?

I do believe that a couple can be sealed for all eternity.
I do not believe that Polygamy is Doctrinal. I'm only a faithful echo of President Hinckley when He says "I condemn it [polygamy], yes, as a practice, because I think it is not doctrinal."

[rewcox]

Well Gordon B Hinckley disagrees with you too. I'll side with him.

Who was he talking to? Do you think you can veer off, which you say with polygamy, then come back?

This is why you struggle with the church and leaders. You don't know if you are coming or going.

[Sarah]

Of course this is just my opinion cause I find the whole thing stupid. It makes zero sense and has no known reason for salvation. I cannot find anywhere in the scriptures the necessity for salvation or the reason for or the purpose of polygamy.

There are multiple reasons why plural marriage is a principle of the Kingdom. I don't know why God designed it this way, but we have some evidences as to why it has to be this way.

We have the reality of women being the weaker sex and having limitations on her ability to procreate. One of the reasons God has given for commanding this principle is to raise up seed that will have the blessings of the gospel in their lives and be part of a covenant people. JWharton has explained well I think, why this principle is necessary to take care of widows and orphans and I think that is one good reason also why this principle becomes a blessing at times to women in mortality.

One other reason, which is huge, is that a woman cannot enter into a Celestial Resurrection unless she is sealed to a man. A Man can bring multiple women into the Celestial Kingdom, but a woman does not lead, and only needs ONE man to take her on to her exaltation. This principle will have its most felt affect right after the Lord comes and we have a situation where there are lots of women mortals on the earth who are converted, and would like to be resurrected soon into Celestial Glory. The scriptures foretell a time when there aren't many choice males left who can be sealed to these ladies who would really like to have this blessing. So, plurality of wives on the surface seems unfair to women, but what it does do is make it fair for women to be equal with women, in that they all have a chance to enter Celestial Glory. Does that make sense?

[Zathura]

Well Gordon B Hinckley disagrees with you too. I'll side with him.

Who was he talking to? Do you think you can veer off, which you say with polygamy, then come back?

This is why you struggle with the church and leaders. You don't know if you are coming or going.

I don't understand what you're saying.
I don't struggle with anything. I sustain the same prophets you do ,and I follow them when the things they teach line up with the scriptures and God's doctrine.
Step 1. OUR Prophet CONDEMNS Polygamy, he says is NOT Doctrinal.
Step 2. I echo OUR prophet and condemn polygamy, and I say that it's not doctrinal.
Step 3. You tell me I struggle with church leaders and make it look like I don't follow them.

facepalm.

[Melissa]

Of course this is just my opinion cause I find the whole thing stupid. It makes zero sense and has no known reason for salvation. I cannot find anywhere in the scriptures the necessity for salvation or the reason for or the purpose of polygamy.

There are multiple reasons why plural marriage is a principle of the Kingdom. I don't know why God designed it this way, but we have some evidences as to why it has to be this way.

We have the reality of women being the weaker sex and having limitations on her ability to procreate. One of the reasons God has given for commanding this principle is to raise up seed that will have the blessings of the gospel in their lives and be part of a covenant people. JWharton has explained well I think, why this principle is necessary to take care of widows and orphans and I think that is one good reason also why this principle becomes a blessing at times to women in mortality.

One other reason, which is huge, is that a woman cannot enter into a Celestial Resurrection unless she is sealed to a man. A Man can bring multiple women into the Celestial Kingdom, but a woman does not lead, and only needs ONE man to take her on to her exaltation. This principle will have its most felt affect right after the Lord comes and we have a situation where there are lots of women mortals on the earth who are converted, and would like to be resurrected soon into Celestial Glory. The scriptures foretell a time when there aren't many choice males left who can be sealed to these ladies who would really like to have this blessing. So, plurality of wives on the surface seems unfair to women, but what it does do is make it fair for women to be equal with women, in that they all have a chance to enter Celestial Glory. Does that make sense?

It makes sense in the situations you have stated but we also dont know exactly what the real situation will be or how everything will work. For example, women have been given a promise that they will be able to raise their young decessed children in the next life. To me, I get it but I dont.

What im talking about is the actual priciple of multiple wives being for my salvation, or my husband salvation. We have been given every promise as a couple based on our worthiness- together. So if he is required then that means I am required and thus "we" as a couple are required to take more women. And I just dont get that being a requirement. Why are more needed aside from any social welfare type charity type reasons?
Im not talking about the whole of all Gods children but the saving ordinances for the individual. There is zero scripture or talk in the church about plurality of women in a sealing being required for exaltation. I see baptism, inititory, endowment, marriage etc but not sharing my spouse with a less fortunate woman.

Not trying to sound selfish because im talking about ones own salvation, I do hope you see what im trying to say.

By the way in order to acheive the celestial kingdom you do not need to be sealed. I also dont think that married couples will be immediately be placed in the highest kingdom and begin creating. I believe we will be hard pressed to even make the lowest level of the CK and then we will have a serious amount of knowledge to obtain before "our creations" ever come about. All this sealing and pairing off for those who never had the chance will be figured out, maybe during this time?

[braingrunt]

I look at it like this:
polygamy without mandate is not doctrinal
we don't have the mandate
therefore polygamy is not doctrinal

But, when there's the mandate, you can't come to the same conclusion.
Hinkley perhaps used a little misdirection. I didn't love it but I don't condemn it either. The fact that he was using misdirection was proved by the other thing they talked about in those interviews, the idea that man could become a god. He said,

"I don't know that we teach it."

He must have gotten a fair amount of attempts to educate him, because he later responded:
"I know the doctrines and history very well." or something similar

[Sarah]

Of course this is just my opinion cause I find the whole thing stupid. It makes zero sense and has no known reason for salvation. I cannot find anywhere in the scriptures the necessity for salvation or the reason for or the purpose of polygamy.

There are multiple reasons why plural marriage is a principle of the Kingdom. I don't know why God designed it this way, but we have some evidences as to why it has to be this way.

We have the reality of women being the weaker sex and having limitations on her ability to procreate. One of the reasons God has given for commanding this principle is to raise up seed that will have the blessings of the gospel in their lives and be part of a covenant people. JWharton has explained well I think, why this principle is necessary to take care of widows and orphans and I think that is one good reason also why this principle becomes a blessing at times to women in mortality.

One other reason, which is huge, is that a woman cannot enter into a Celestial Resurrection unless she is sealed to a man. A Man can bring multiple women into the Celestial Kingdom, but a woman does not lead, and only needs ONE man to take her on to her exaltation. This principle will have its most felt affect right after the Lord comes and we have a situation where there are lots of women mortals on the earth who are converted, and would like to be resurrected soon into Celestial Glory. The scriptures foretell a time when there aren't many choice males left who can be sealed to these ladies who would really like to have this blessing. So, plurality of wives on the surface seems unfair to women, but what it does do is make it fair for women to be equal with women, in that they all have a chance to enter Celestial Glory. Does that make sense?

It makes sense in the situations you have stated but we also dont know exactly what the real situation will be or how everything will work. For example, women have been given a promise that they will be able to raise their young decessed children in the next life. To me, I get it but I dont.

What im talking about is the actual priciple of multiple wives being for my salvation, or my husband salvation. We have been given every promise as a couple based on our worthiness- together. So if he is required then that means I am required and thus "we" as a couple are required to take more women. And I just dont get that being a requirement. Why are more needed aside from any social welfare type charity type reasons?
Im not talking about the whole of all Gods children but the saving ordinances for the individual. There is zero scripture or talk in the church about plurality of women in a sealing being required for exaltation. I see baptism, inititory, endowment, marriage etc but not sharing my spouse with a less fortunate woman.

Not trying to sound selfish because im talking about ones own salvation, I do hope you see what im trying to say.

By the way in order to acheive the celestial kingdom you do not need to be sealed. I also dont think that married couples will be immediately be placed in the highest kingdom and begin creating. I believe we will be hard pressed to even make the lowest level of the CK and then we will have a serious amount of knowledge to obtain before "our creations" ever come about. All this sealing and pairing off for those who never had the chance will be figured out, maybe during this time?

I too don't know how everything will work out and I've always wondered about how raising deceased children in millennium would work. Should be thrilling to have all things revealed in the millennium so we won't have to be in the dark.

But as far as your salvation and whether or not it is a requirement. Obviously, it is not a requirement now, at least we have gotten to a certain point as a church, and can go no further until further instructions. But I believe it has something to do with the parable of the talents. There is story that Joseph in one of his sermons conveyed to a certain man (I'd have to look up the account) that the parable of the talents applied to marriage. Your destiny is to increase, and if you refused to increase your talents, you will be stopped, or damned, from receiving any more. In fact the message is that what you have received will be taken away. So if the marriage order of Heaven dictates multiple spouses/families (at least that is my opinion), and you and your husband say you just want each other and no one else, you both basically are saying you don't want to increase your family relationships. You're also saying you don't want to live the Law of the Celestial Kingdom (Law of Consecration) and share your spouse with another.

[Zathura]

“When incorporating Smith's journal into the History of the Church, church leaders, under Brigham Young's direction, deleted ten key words from this significant passage and added forty-nine others so that it now reads:
"Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives; for, according to the law, I hold the keys of this power in the last days; for there is never but one on earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred and I have constantly said no man shall have but one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise." (Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy)

[Zathura]

“Inasmuch as this church has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy; we declare that we believe that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband.” -Book of Commandments 1835 edition

[Melissa]

Of course this is just my opinion cause I find the whole thing stupid. It makes zero sense and has no known reason for salvation. I cannot find anywhere in the scriptures the necessity for salvation or the reason for or the purpose of polygamy.

There are multiple reasons why plural marriage is a principle of the Kingdom. I don't know why God designed it this way, but we have some evidences as to why it has to be this way.

We have the reality of women being the weaker sex and having limitations on her ability to procreate. One of the reasons God has given for commanding this principle is to raise up seed that will have the blessings of the gospel in their lives and be part of a covenant people. JWharton has explained well I think, why this principle is necessary to take care of widows and orphans and I think that is one good reason also why this principle becomes a blessing at times to women in mortality.

One other reason, which is huge, is that a woman cannot enter into a Celestial Resurrection unless she is sealed to a man. A Man can bring multiple women into the Celestial Kingdom, but a woman does not lead, and only needs ONE man to take her on to her exaltation. This principle will have its most felt affect right after the Lord comes and we have a situation where there are lots of women mortals on the earth who are converted, and would like to be resurrected soon into Celestial Glory. The scriptures foretell a time when there aren't many choice males left who can be sealed to these ladies who would really like to have this blessing. So, plurality of wives on the surface seems unfair to women, but what it does do is make it fair for women to be equal with women, in that they all have a chance to enter Celestial Glory. Does that make sense?

It makes sense in the situations you have stated but we also dont know exactly what the real situation will be or how everything will work. For example, women have been given a promise that they will be able to raise their young decessed children in the next life. To me, I get it but I dont.

What im talking about is the actual priciple of multiple wives being for my salvation, or my husband salvation. We have been given every promise as a couple based on our worthiness- together. So if he is required then that means I am required and thus "we" as a couple are required to take more women. And I just dont get that being a requirement. Why are more needed aside from any social welfare type charity type reasons?
Im not talking about the whole of all Gods children but the saving ordinances for the individual. There is zero scripture or talk in the church about plurality of women in a sealing being required for exaltation. I see baptism, inititory, endowment, marriage etc but not sharing my spouse with a less fortunate woman.

Not trying to sound selfish because im talking about ones own salvation, I do hope you see what im trying to say.

By the way in order to acheive the celestial kingdom you do not need to be sealed. I also dont think that married couples will be immediately be placed in the highest kingdom and begin creating. I believe we will be hard pressed to even make the lowest level of the CK and then we will have a serious amount of knowledge to obtain before "our creations" ever come about. All this sealing and pairing off for those who never had the chance will be figured out, maybe during this time?

I too don't know how everything will work out and I've always wondered about how raising deceased children in millennium would work. Should be thrilling to have all things revealed in the millennium so we won't have to be in the dark.

But as far as your salvation and whether or not it is a requirement. Obviously, it is not a requirement now, at least we have gotten to a certain point as a church, and can go no further until further instructions. But I believe it has something to do with the parable of the talents. There is story that Joseph in one of his sermons conveyed to a certain man (I'd have to look up the account) that the parable of the talents applied to marriage. Your destiny is to increase, and if you refused to increase your talents, you will be stopped, or damned, from receiving any more. In fact the message is that what you have received will be taken away. So if the marriage order of Heaven dictates multiple spouses/families (at least that is my opinion), and you and your husband say you just want each other and no one else, you both basically are saying you don't want to increase your family relationships. You're also saying you don't want to live the Law of the Celestial Kingdom (Law of Consecration) and share your spouse with another.

I have to very strongly disagree with your last few lines! Saying we dont want to increase? Children mean anything?

So the parable of the talents only applies to men?

[Sarah]

So to finish my thought, the brethren that BY was talking to, they could not enter their exaltation if they refused to take more wives because they were offered talents which they refused. We are not now offered those "talents." So Pres. Hinkley was just stating what is doctrinal now.

[Sarah]

There are multiple reasons why plural marriage is a principle of the Kingdom. I don't know why God designed it this way, but we have some evidences as to why it has to be this way.

We have the reality of women being the weaker sex and having limitations on her ability to procreate. One of the reasons God has given for commanding this principle is to raise up seed that will have the blessings of the gospel in their lives and be part of a covenant people. JWharton has explained well I think, why this principle is necessary to take care of widows and orphans and I think that is one good reason also why this principle becomes a blessing at times to women in mortality.

One other reason, which is huge, is that a woman cannot enter into a Celestial Resurrection unless she is sealed to a man. A Man can bring multiple women into the Celestial Kingdom, but a woman does not lead, and only needs ONE man to take her on to her exaltation. This principle will have its most felt affect right after the Lord comes and we have a situation where there are lots of women mortals on the earth who are converted, and would like to be resurrected soon into Celestial Glory. The scriptures foretell a time when there aren't many choice males left who can be sealed to these ladies who would really like to have this blessing. So, plurality of wives on the surface seems unfair to women, but what it does do is make it fair for women to be equal with women, in that they all have a chance to enter Celestial Glory. Does that make sense?

It makes sense in the situations you have stated but we also dont know exactly what the real situation will be or how everything will work. For example, women have been given a promise that they will be able to raise their young decessed children in the next life. To me, I get it but I dont.

What im talking about is the actual priciple of multiple wives being for my salvation, or my husband salvation. We have been given every promise as a couple based on our worthiness- together. So if he is required then that means I am required and thus "we" as a couple are required to take more women. And I just dont get that being a requirement. Why are more needed aside from any social welfare type charity type reasons?
Im not talking about the whole of all Gods children but the saving ordinances for the individual. There is zero scripture or talk in the church about plurality of women in a sealing being required for exaltation. I see baptism, inititory, endowment, marriage etc but not sharing my spouse with a less fortunate woman.

Not trying to sound selfish because im talking about ones own salvation, I do hope you see what im trying to say.

By the way in order to acheive the celestial kingdom you do not need to be sealed. I also dont think that married couples will be immediately be placed in the highest kingdom and begin creating. I believe we will be hard pressed to even make the lowest level of the CK and then we will have a serious amount of knowledge to obtain before "our creations" ever come about. All this sealing and pairing off for those who never had the chance will be figured out, maybe during this time?

I too don't know how everything will work out and I've always wondered about how raising deceased children in millennium would work. Should be thrilling to have all things revealed in the millennium so we won't have to be in the dark.

But as far as your salvation and whether or not it is a requirement. Obviously, it is not a requirement now, at least we have gotten to a certain point as a church, and can go no further until further instructions. But I believe it has something to do with the parable of the talents. There is story that Joseph in one of his sermons conveyed to a certain man (I'd have to look up the account) that the parable of the talents applied to marriage. Your destiny is to increase, and if you refused to increase your talents, you will be stopped, or damned, from receiving any more. In fact the message is that what you have received will be taken away. So if the marriage order of Heaven dictates multiple spouses/families (at least that is my opinion), and you and your husband say you just want each other and no one else, you both basically are saying you don't want to increase your family relationships. You're also saying you don't want to live the Law of the Celestial Kingdom (Law of Consecration) and share your spouse with another.

I have to very strongly disagree with your last few lines! Saying we dont want to increase? Children mean anything?

So the parable of the talents only applies to men?

No I personally believe it can/will apply to women who have entered their glory. Men and women will be equal in this regard. I kind of feel like HCK was on to something when he said this.

“Supposing that I have a wife or a dozen of them…. Suppose that I lose the whole of them before I go into the spirit world, but that I have been a good, faithful man all the days of my life, and lived my religion, and had favour with God, and was kind to them, do you think I will be destitute there [the “spirit-world”]? No, the Lord says there are more [females] there than there are here…. In the spirit world there is an increase of males and females, there are millions of them, nad if I am faithful all the time, and continue right along with brother Brigham, we will go to brother Joseph [Smith] and say, ‘Here we are brother Joesph’…. He will say to us,…. ‘Where are you wives?’ ‘They are back yonder; they would not follow us.’ ‘Never mind,’ says Joseph, ‘here are thousands, have all you want.’ Perhaps some do not believe that, but I am just simple enough to believe it…. I am looking for the day, and it is close at hand, when we will have a most heavenly time, one that will be romantic, one with all kinds of ups and downs, which is what I call romantic, for it will occupy in full all the time.”
- Apostle Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, v. 4, p. 209

In that above quote he says "thousands," Brigham stated once that he could have millions of wives. How would that work if each man had millions of wives and women only had one husband. Doesn't make a lick of sense to me.

[Sarah]

“Inasmuch as this church has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy; we declare that we believe that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband.” -Book of Commandments 1835 edition

The Lord did not intend it to be a law for the whole church at that time. For one thing it was against the law of the state. They had to move out west before it could be a law for the church.

“Polygamy in the ordinary and Asiatic sense of the term, never was and is not now a tenet of the Latter-day Saints. That which Joseph and Hyrum denounced... was altogether different to the order of celestial marriage including a Plurality of wives.... Joseph and Hyrum were consistent in their action against the false doctrines of polygamy and spiritual wifeism, instigated by the devil and advocated by men who did not comprehend sound doctrine nor the purity of celestial marriage which God revealed for the holiest of purposes.”
- Deseret News, May 20, 1866, Prophet Joseph F. Smith, editor, is most likely the author of this statement

[Zathura]

“Inasmuch as this church has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy; we declare that we believe that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband.” -Book of Commandments 1835 edition

The Lord did not intend it to be a law for the whole church at that time. For one thing it was against the law of the state. They had to move out west before it could be a law for the church.

“Polygamy in the ordinary and Asiatic sense of the term, never was and is not now a tenet of the Latter-day Saints. That which Joseph and Hyrum denounced... was altogether different to the order of celestial marriage including a Plurality of wives.... Joseph and Hyrum were consistent in their action against the false doctrines of polygamy and spiritual wifeism, instigated by the devil and advocated by men who did not comprehend sound doctrine nor the purity of celestial marriage which God revealed for the holiest of purposes.”
- Deseret News, May 20, 1866, Prophet Joseph F. Smith, editor, is most likely the author of this statement

I like this quote.
I know that we don't have a complete understanding of Celestial Marriage. This is why Brigham asked Joseph more about it when Joseph appeared to him after his death.
I think that polygamy as we know it, is an abomination. I would never take a second wife while I have my first wife. I don't even want a second one if my first one dies.

I think the most important aspect of sealings were never revealed before Joseph died.

It is unimportant to me, as I will never be asked to live it in this life time. God will sort out everything that we don't understand now as mortals.

All I know is that we must all be born of God and experience a change of heart.

[Melissa]

So to finish my thought, the brethren that BY was talking to, they could not enter their exaltation if they refused to take more wives because they were offered talents which they refused. We are not now offered those "talents." So Pres. Hinkley was just stating what is doctrinal now.

I still disagree. And thats fine.
The only time I have ever heard of the talents refered to as women is from people who are pro-polygamy in thought.

Its a shame that a parable has been perverted.

[passionflower]

In all this talk about polygamy being an eternal principle or law, I thought I would bring up the following point, something I thought everybody knew who ever took a biology class.

There is a constant belief expressed here, as a premise for the necessity of polygamy, that there will be more women than men in the CK, but consider this:

For every 100 females born there are 103-105 males born. This is a biological fact and it has always been true, and is because sperm that carries the Y chromosome are faster and more aggressive than the sperm that carries the X chromosome. Among certain Asian populations, the ratio has been known to go as high as 114 males to 100 females.

In our modern society, by the time males and females reach adulthood, about twice as many boys as girls have died, most of them dying under the age of 10. It seems the infant male is especially more vulnerable to disease, birth defects, etc, than his female counterpart. After infancy, the leading cause of death in males seems to always have been accidents, with disease being second place. And we all know that adult men generally die younger than women, leaving more widows than widowers.

When visiting a hospital nursery, it doesn't seem to make much difference to see, on most days, an extra boy or two. But if we visited all the hospital nurseries world wide on any given day, it becomes obvious that many MANY more boys are born than girls. And if you checked out the local cemetery, you would also see these same boys don't live as long. If I included wars and other catastrophes, the self sacrificing nature of your average male comes through, as you see a nearly incalculable number of young men with their lives cut short, most of them never having married.

If we went back through time, the ratios of dead baby boys to dead baby girls goes through the roof. Mortality rates and disease prevention have been deplorable in the past, with boys, once again, being the most vulnerable. It is amazing how many people have lived on this earth. We could make a very conservative estimate by saying, throughout known civilizations, the number of boys who died before the age of 10 out numbers the deaths of girls of the same age by the quadrabillions. Easily and no kidding. And if we brought war into the picture, just think how many unmarried men died in the Civil War, and both WW1 and WW2.

Now just imagine the astronomical numbers of men who will inherit the CK because they died before the age of accountability, and who never had the chance for marraige. We know that females have been promised that they will marry sometime, if denied that opportunity in this world, so surely all these men will be given this opportunity, too.

And no, women dying in childbirth does not bridge this gap. Neither does all the baby girls who have been drowned in China, etc. Not by a long long LONG shot.

Heavenly Father has a great deal many more sons than daughters. And it doesn't look like He will run out of them any time soon. Anybody who can count should be able to see what I am saying here.

Looks like it isn't men, but celestial women who are the real "red hot commodity" here.

[Melissa]

At least we all know that Heavenly Fathers plan is perfect and he works in mysterious ways.

[passionflower]

At least we all know that Heavenly Fathers plan is perfect and he works in mysterious ways.

Yes. He is Almighty God, for heavens sake! and he doesn't run out of sons. Every vision of Him on his throne shows Him surrounded by hosts and hosts of angels ( these are all male ) guarding Him and singing praises. And we know Jesus Christ will come with legions of angels when He returns.

Doesn't look like heaven has a male shortage going on, or is nearly so female dominated as most believe.

If men can have many wives in the hereafter, it isn't because there will be more women than men. That simply is not mathmatically possible.

[Ezra]

In all this talk about polygamy being an eternal principle or law, I thought I would bring up the following point, something I thought everybody knew who ever took a biology class.

There is a constant belief expressed here, as a premise for the necessity of polygamy, that there will be more women than men in the CK, but consider this:

For every 100 females born there are 103-105 males born. This is a biological fact and it has always been true, and is because sperm that carries the Y chromosome are faster and more aggressive than the sperm that carries the X chromosome. Among certain Asian populations, the ratio has been known to go as high as 114 males to 100 females.

In our modern society, by the time males and females reach adulthood, about twice as many boys as girls have died, most of them dying under the age of 10. It seems the infant male is especially more vulnerable to disease, birth defects, etc, than his female counterpart. After infancy, the leading cause of death in males seems to always have been accidents, with disease being second place. And we all know that adult men generally die younger than women, leaving more widows than widowers.

When visiting a hospital nursery, it doesn't seem to make much difference to see, on most days, an extra boy or two. But if we visited all the hospital nurseries world wide on any given day, it becomes obvious that many MANY more boys are born than girls. And if you checked out the local cemetery, you would also see these same boys don't live as long. If I included wars and other catastrophes, the self sacrificing nature of your average male comes through, as you see a nearly incalculable number of young men with their lives cut short, most of them never having married.

If we went back through time, the ratios of dead baby boys to dead baby girls goes through the roof. Mortality rates and disease prevention have been deplorable in the past, with boys, once again, being the most vulnerable. It is amazing how many people have lived on this earth. We could make a very conservative estimate by saying, throughout known civilizations, the number of boys who died before the age of 10 out numbers the deaths of girls of the same age by the quadrabillions. Easily and no kidding. And if we brought war into the picture, just think how many unmarried men died in the Civil War, and both WW1 and WW2.

Now just imagine the astronomical numbers of men who will inherit the CK because they died before the age of accountability, and who never had the chance for marraige. We know that females have been promised that they will marry sometime, if denied that opportunity in this world, so surely all these men will be given this opportunity, too.

And no, women dying in childbirth does not bridge this gap. Neither does all the baby girls who have been drowned in China, etc. Not by a long long LONG shot.

Heavenly Father has a great deal many more sons than daughters. And it doesn't look like He will run out of them any time soon. Anybody who can count should be able to see what I am saying here.

Looks like it isn't men, but celestial women who are the real "red hot commodity" here.

You can't count the men who died in wars as making it the the ck. only the ones who died befor 8.
I don't know of many men going to war befor 8 years of age.

The line between righteous and unrighteous war is very defined. Not many wars are just at all. So most men who fight and die or kill in wars will be judged for their sins in being there in the first place without a commandment from God.

Plus the millennium all those boys and girls who died will live again during that time and be able to be married then. Soooo??? You can't really count them anyways.

In my mind and from my understanding. I believe there will be many more women then men in the celestial kingdom because there will simply be much more righteous women then men.

I believe that at judgement day it won't be Jesus who sends us away because we were not righteous enough. We will send ourselfs away because we are not comfortable there. And will want to be with those who we are comfortable with.

I believe the savior will be pleading for us to stay. To repent. To change our ways.

But we will leave to be where we feel comfortable.
Men being much more war like and much more mean spirited for the most part won't feel comfortable and leave to be with his bros hommies. Thugs. Down in the terrestrial or lower kingdoms.

Women who are much more caring kind nurturing and loving will feel comfortable to be in gods presence because they lived a more celestial life on earth.

If we live a celestial life here we will feel comfortable being with celestial being there. If we don't we won't.

Just like here on earth currently. It's why so many clicks form. We congregate with those we are comfortable are similar too.

Put a unrighteous person in with a bunch of righteous and they want out of there because they are not like them.

That's why I believe more women will be in the celestial kingdom. They are generally more celestial in their life's here on earth then men.