Polygamy Discussions and the LDSFF Rules

[shadow]

Actually, it makes me a little cookoo trying to figure it all out. I'm better off sticking to the future and not looking beyond the mark.

Me too.

[AI2.0]

Polygamy is an eternal principle because a Man may be sealed to more than one Woman. That doesn't necessarily mean it's necessary but it certainly means it is eternal for what is sealed on earth is sealed in heaven.

Matthew 16:19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Now in my opinion there is no way polygamy will be legalized next simply because it is an eternal principle whereas Gays marriage is the opposite. Even though conservative commentators like to cite polygamy as the next logical step as a lazy argument against gay marriage, there is no force behind it like gay marriage has had. The devil utilized the large and spacious perceptions of polygamy to fight against our church and succeeded all the way up to the white house on that front. He used the same tools to get gay marriage legalized.

Where is your unequivocal proof? Just because some people may belief this line of thinking don't mean squat. It is a Fundamentalist point of view. Please provide scriptural proof of such claims.

→Whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.← Polygamy was loosed on earth just like this scripture indicates, through the Manifesto written by WW. Read OD1

Even though gay marriage has been legalized by godless men, there is no way a man can go to the temple and have eight other men sealed to him. God would override that sealing and condemn the participants.

Men are sealed to more than one woman all the time. Women are not. Ever. The scripture I posted was the simplest example of the sealing power. I know you know the scriptures well enough that there are plenty more to choose from and many in the D&C that specifically refer to how the sealing power effectuates marriages beyond death. The logic train is about as simple as I can make it FFA. Again I'm worried about you. You contest so many posts so often that go anywhere beyond a primary understanding of the scriptures....your understanding . You don't do it politely either.

Where is my "Unequivocable proof?" That is no where near the Lord's way and sounds dangerously close to sign seeking.

The understanding here is about as plain can be. IF you believe the church is true and is lead by a living prophet as I do then why is eternal polygamy still being practiced?
Wouldn't the Lord make it impossible for a man to be sealed to more than one woman just like it is impossible for women to be sealed to more than one man?

"Men are sealed to more than one woman all the time. Women are not. Ever."

"Wouldn't the Lord make it impossible for a man to be sealed to more than one woman just like it is impossible for women to be sealed to more than one man?"

Does it matter to your conclusion if your information is wrong? Because you are wrong.

When doing proxy temple sealings for women, we seal them to all their husbands, not just the first, so your statement is incorrect. You might want to let this sink in.....

[AI2.0]

I've said it before and I'll say it again... if the roles in polygamy were reversed, we wouldn't even be having this debate/discussion. =))

Yes we would. But we would certainly have different perspectives. My wife has asked me this question--how would I feel if roles were reversed and polygamy was an eternal principle for women to be married to multiple spouses. In this case I would certainly ask the exact same questions I first posed in this thread. Why was polygamy first instituted in our church temporally? Why was it instituted eternally and still being effectuated eternally? There are answers to the questions that require the same method of learning as any other new truth. Humility - asking - seeking - pondering - praying, etc. The enemies to learning are pride and false traditions. Men and Women being exactly equal in everything is a false precept of men.

The answer is not PC and therein lies the problem. The temple is clear about the order of a household. The woman is to listen to the husband as he listens to God. Do mormons practice this? This is certainly a challenge for my wife but I know she believes it. It is a challenge because this is yet another way the devil assaults the family and the true order of heavenly families.

My point isn't that women are inferior and that's why polygamy exists. My point is that it is an eternal principle and anyone can find out why. I can't understand this for you but I can show you how to find out for yourself. Humility. Ask. Seek. Ponder. Pray. Open Heart. False traditions bad. Large and Spacious (what the devil makes socially acceptable and popular) also bad.

It's a little different when the shoe is on your foot, instead of your wife's. It seems some men are enthusiastic toward polygamy in the next life, if it means, their wife might have to welcome another woman into the marriage, but not so comfortable if it's they who might have to share their wife with some other man.

So, if the prospect of polygamy isn't as appealing under the new guidelines for you, let's hope you don't die first and your wife remarries. @-)

[AI2.0]

Well, that's somewhat false. Some women do get sealed to multiple men after their deaths.

I've never heard of that happening. From what I understand a woman has to get a sealing broken before she can be sealed to another man.

I have heard of DECEASED women being sealed to more than one man, when she had two or more husbands (not concurrently) in her mortal life. The rationale is that since there is no way to know who she would have chosen to be sealed to, which would have been her decision if she had been through the temple in her mortality, so she is sealed to all those she had married, and we are told that the choice, if the participants are worthy, will be made in the hereafter.

The above example happened to a very good temple friend of mine, in the case of her mother, and she was so confused about it all that we got a thorough explanation on it from the temple president.

That is cool - thank you for sharing. That sounds like an exception to the rule for special circumstances. The eternal principle is still the same.

It's not an exception to the rule, it's the guideline now. The belief is that we should not choose which spouse a woman would want to be sealed to, so we seal them to all their husbands and assume that they will choose ONE to remain with. That is, if women are allowed to have only one husband, but men can have many wives. And sooooo, if you have the unfortunate luck to die first, and your wife remarries, I guess she'll have to choose and one of you will be left spouseless. Better treat her right, or you may find yourself in a sorry predicament. ;)

Unless, we come to find out that some women actually have more than one husband and she doesn't have to choose, as we suppose men will not have to choose. We shall see....

[Alaris]

"Men are sealed to more than one woman all the time. Women are not. Ever."

"Wouldn't the Lord make it impossible for a man to be sealed to more than one woman just like it is impossible for women to be sealed to more than one man?"

Does it matter to your conclusion if your information is wrong? Because you are wrong.

When doing proxy temple sealings for women, we seal them to all their husbands, not just the first, so your statement is incorrect. You might want to let this sink in.....
And sooooo, if you have the unfortunate luck to die first, and your wife remarries, I guess she'll have to choose and one of you will be left spouseless. Better treat her right, or you may find yourself in a sorry predicament. ;)

Unless, we come to find out that some women actually have more than one husband and she doesn't have to choose, as we suppose men will not have to choose. We shall see....

It's a little different when the shoe is on your foot, instead of your wife's. It seems some men are enthusiastic toward polygamy in the next life, if it means, their wife might have to welcome another woman into the marriage, but not so comfortable if it's they who might have to share their wife with some other man.

So, if the prospect of polygamy isn't as appealing under the new guidelines for you, let's hope you don't die first and your wife remarries. @-)

Bear in mind you are talking about me and my wife. You really shouldn't speak about another man's wife and infer he either enjoys the idea of polygamy or should consider treating her well as you have AI2.0.

I'm willing to cut you a little slack as I understand polygamy is an emotional topic. Your comments towards me and my wife are certainly inappropriate. You may also have misjudged my statements about my wife and her feelings about the concept about me being married to more than one woman. Her feelings are my feelings because I love her and I clearly understand agency is the first factor in eternal marriage. When I call she does not have to answer. If you knew her and if you knew me you would feel silly for even having suggested ignorance at my treating her well.

It's not like I invented polygamy or our church's history. Personal attacks and saying things like "You are wrong" only hurt your case as the truth and facts do not require such to strengthen themselves. They just are.

Now if we can return to reasoning together. If women are indeed sealed to multiple husbands at the temple what is the supposition? You said it yourself--we shall see......

Here's what we know. Alive men are allowed to be sealed to more than one woman. Alive women are not. Polygamy has always been one man to many women and never the other way around. Anatomy testifies of polygamy. If you need an explanation on that one, please pm me as this is a family site. Abraham and his wives are highly symbolic of heaven and the Abrahamic covenant. Do you really think that the wives given to men by the Lord are strictly for time only? Again, humility. prayer. seek. Pride & the large and spacious are enemies to learning.

Moses 6:63 And behold, all things have their likeness, and all things are created and made to bear record of me, both things which are temporal, and things which are spiritual; things which are in the heavens above, and things which are on the earth, and things which are in the earth, and things which are under the earth, both above and beneath: all things bear record of me.

The Lord commands polygamy from time to time....in one direction. So the comments about women being sealed to multiple husbands when all parties are dead is obviously because we do not know which one she will choose. And therein lies the answer to all the questions herein. Agency is the key. No woman will be forced into any type eternal marriage.

D&C 132:39 David’s wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord.

Which power is being referring to? The power mentioned earlier in verse 19:

D&C 132:19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, that he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.

I will admit this is one of the most complicated aspects of the restoration. However, there is no need to descend to insults here. The truth is comfortable by itself and does not require people to insult others to live. Lies however do require such.

[Sarah]

"Men are sealed to more than one woman all the time. Women are not. Ever."

"Wouldn't the Lord make it impossible for a man to be sealed to more than one woman just like it is impossible for women to be sealed to more than one man?"

Does it matter to your conclusion if your information is wrong? Because you are wrong.

When doing proxy temple sealings for women, we seal them to all their husbands, not just the first, so your statement is incorrect. You might want to let this sink in.....
And sooooo, if you have the unfortunate luck to die first, and your wife remarries, I guess she'll have to choose and one of you will be left spouseless. Better treat her right, or you may find yourself in a sorry predicament. ;)

Unless, we come to find out that some women actually have more than one husband and she doesn't have to choose, as we suppose men will not have to choose. We shall see....

It's a little different when the shoe is on your foot, instead of your wife's. It seems some men are enthusiastic toward polygamy in the next life, if it means, their wife might have to welcome another woman into the marriage, but not so comfortable if it's they who might have to share their wife with some other man.

So, if the prospect of polygamy isn't as appealing under the new guidelines for you, let's hope you don't die first and your wife remarries. @-)

Bear in mind you are talking about me and my wife. You really shouldn't speak about another man's wife and infer he either enjoys the idea of polygamy or should consider treating her well as you have AI2.0.

I'm willing to cut you a little slack as I understand polygamy is an emotional topic. Your comments towards me and my wife are certainly inappropriate. You may also have misjudged my statements about my wife and her feelings about the concept about me being married to more than one woman. Her feelings are my feelings because I love her and I clearly understand agency is the first factor in eternal marriage. When I call she does not have to answer. If you knew her and if you knew me you would feel silly for even having suggested ignorance at my treating her well.

It's not like I invented polygamy or our church's history. Personal attacks and saying things like "You are wrong" only hurt your case as the truth and facts do not require such to strengthen themselves. They just are.

Now if we can return to reasoning together. If women are indeed sealed to multiple husbands at the temple what is the supposition? You said it yourself--we shall see......

Here's what we know. Alive men are allowed to be sealed to more than one woman. Alive women are not. Polygamy has always been one man to many women and never the other way around. Anatomy testifies of polygamy. If you need an explanation on that one, please pm me as this is a family site. Abraham and his wives are highly symbolic of heaven and the Abrahamic covenant. Do you really think that the wives given to men by the Lord are strictly for time only? Again, humility. prayer. seek. Pride & the large and spacious are enemies to learning.

Moses 6:63 And behold, all things have their likeness, and all things are created and made to bear record of me, both things which are temporal, and things which are spiritual; things which are in the heavens above, and things which are on the earth, and things which are in the earth, and things which are under the earth, both above and beneath: all things bear record of me.

The Lord commands polygamy from time to time....in one direction. So the comments about women being sealed to multiple husbands when all parties are dead is obviously because we do not know which one she will choose. And therein lies the answer to all the questions herein. Agency is the key. No woman will be forced into any type eternal marriage.

D&C 132:39 David’s wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord.

Which power is being referring to? The power mentioned earlier in verse 19:

D&C 132:19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, that he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.

I will admit this is one of the most complicated aspects of the restoration. However, there is no need to descend to insults here. The truth is comfortable by itself and does not require people to insult others to live. Lies however do require such.

There is part of the Law that allows for a woman to be sealed to more than one husband. Sec. 132 verse 41.

Men are anointed to become Kings and Priests unto God. And right now in mortality they are ordained to be High Priests, in order to seal the great family of God together by offering themselves as a husband to as many women as they can. It is a priesthood gift only the men can offer. Women are not now given any kind of "priestess" title, but are anointed to become queens and priestesses to their husbands - but obviously that can't happen until the husbands receive their inheritances and appointments.

[freedomforall]

I don't think any sealing is etched in cement. A man and woman may get sealed together, but if the conduct by either one do not meet celestial standards, the sealing for that couple becomes is void, does it not? The one who remained true will then have a different mate in the hear after, right? A lot of the time people go through the temple and get married for time only. I had a grandmother whose first husband died in 1945 at the age of 28; married in 1917, they had been sealed for all time and eternity. She went through two subsequent men, for time only, having lived to the age of 97. All that time she looked forward to being rejoined with her first husband.

As to why I wrote this..to the best of my recollection, I don't remember.

[Alaris]

I don't think any sealing is etched in cement. A man and woman may get sealed together, but if the conduct by either one do not meet celestial standards, the sealing for that couple becomes is void, does it not? The one who remained true will then have a different mate in the hear after, right? A lot of the time people go through the temple and get married for time only. I had a grandmother whose first husband died in 1945 at the age of 28; married in 1917, they had been sealed for all time and eternity. She went through two subsequent men, for time only, having lived to the age of 97. All that time she looked forward to being rejoined with her first husband.

As to why I wrote this..to the best of my recollection, I don't remember.

This is precisely why the holy spirit of promise is essential. I married my first wife in the temple and there was nothing. I married my second wife temporarily and it was by far the most spiritual experience of my life.

[freedomforall]

I don't think any sealing is etched in cement. A man and woman may get sealed together, but if the conduct by either one do not meet celestial standards, the sealing for that couple becomes is void, does it not? The one who remained true will then have a different mate in the hear after, right? A lot of the time people go through the temple and get married for time only. I had a grandmother whose first husband died in 1945 at the age of 28; married in 1917, they had been sealed for all time and eternity. She went through two subsequent men, for time only, having lived to the age of 97. All that time she looked forward to being rejoined with her first husband.

As to why I wrote this..to the best of my recollection, I don't remember.

This is precisely why the holy spirit of promise is essential. I married my first wife in the temple and there was nothing. I married my second wife temporarily and it was by far the most spiritual experience of my life.

To my understanding based on my divorce years ago, if your first wife remarries the sealing becomes void. If she were to remain single, well, we'll let God sort it out.
My first wife and I are divorced, having been sealed; she has not remarried, and we remain friends. After all, she is the mother of my children. Those type of memories and facts cannot be erased. She went through hard times bringing those kids into the world. As to our sealing, I'll let God sort it out.

[AI2.0]

"Men are sealed to more than one woman all the time. Women are not. Ever."

"Wouldn't the Lord make it impossible for a man to be sealed to more than one woman just like it is impossible for women to be sealed to more than one man?"

Does it matter to your conclusion if your information is wrong? Because you are wrong.

When doing proxy temple sealings for women, we seal them to all their husbands, not just the first, so your statement is incorrect. You might want to let this sink in.....
And sooooo, if you have the unfortunate luck to die first, and your wife remarries, I guess she'll have to choose and one of you will be left spouseless. Better treat her right, or you may find yourself in a sorry predicament. ;)

Unless, we come to find out that some women actually have more than one husband and she doesn't have to choose, as we suppose men will not have to choose. We shall see....

It's a little different when the shoe is on your foot, instead of your wife's. It seems some men are enthusiastic toward polygamy in the next life, if it means, their wife might have to welcome another woman into the marriage, but not so comfortable if it's they who might have to share their wife with some other man.

So, if the prospect of polygamy isn't as appealing under the new guidelines for you, let's hope you don't die first and your wife remarries. @-)

Bear in mind you are talking about me and my wife. You really shouldn't speak about another man's wife and infer he either enjoys the idea of polygamy or should consider treating her well as you have AI2.0.

I'm willing to cut you a little slack as I understand polygamy is an emotional topic. Your comments towards me and my wife are certainly inappropriate. You may also have misjudged my statements about my wife and her feelings about the concept about me being married to more than one woman. Her feelings are my feelings because I love her and I clearly understand agency is the first factor in eternal marriage. When I call she does not have to answer. If you knew her and if you knew me you would feel silly for even having suggested ignorance at my treating her well.

It's not like I invented polygamy or our church's history. Personal attacks and saying things like "You are wrong" only hurt your case as the truth and facts do not require such to strengthen themselves. They just are.

Now if we can return to reasoning together. If women are indeed sealed to multiple husbands at the temple what is the supposition? You said it yourself--we shall see......

Here's what we know. Alive men are allowed to be sealed to more than one woman. Alive women are not. Polygamy has always been one man to many women and never the other way around. Anatomy testifies of polygamy. If you need an explanation on that one, please pm me as this is a family site. Abraham and his wives are highly symbolic of heaven and the Abrahamic covenant. Do you really think that the wives given to men by the Lord are strictly for time only? Again, humility. prayer. seek. Pride & the large and spacious are enemies to learning.

Moses 6:63 And behold, all things have their likeness, and all things are created and made to bear record of me, both things which are temporal, and things which are spiritual; things which are in the heavens above, and things which are on the earth, and things which are in the earth, and things which are under the earth, both above and beneath: all things bear record of me.

The Lord commands polygamy from time to time....in one direction. So the comments about women being sealed to multiple husbands when all parties are dead is obviously because we do not know which one she will choose. And therein lies the answer to all the questions herein. Agency is the key. No woman will be forced into any type eternal marriage.

D&C 132:39 David’s wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord.

Which power is being referring to? The power mentioned earlier in verse 19:

D&C 132:19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s Book of Life, that he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.

I will admit this is one of the most complicated aspects of the restoration. However, there is no need to descend to insults here. The truth is comfortable by itself and does not require people to insult others to live. Lies however do require such.

No need to be offended, if you know that you are not hoping for polygamous wives, and you don't ever give your wife the impression that you do, then my advice is not something you need to worry about. Since you were not aware of this, I was simply making sure you know that women are sealed to more than one husband (and if it is as you believe, then they will have to choose which one they want to remain with) and you are also wrong that it never happens while the woman is living--THAT is a special circumstance, but I am aware of a couple of situations where a woman was allowed to be sealed to her second husband, while they were alive. To me, it's a matter of faith and trust in God that he knows what is right and best.

I'm certain that the reason for this change was to simply do the sealing work and let Heavenly Father sort it out. You seem so certain about your pronouncements on a subject which is actually very uncertain as for it's eternal implications. Especially when, as you say, 'it's biology'--then it's a mortal thing, to raise up seed, but not necessarily always with eternal ramifications, IMO. Do you really think resurrected bodies have to gestate 9 months? I think actually there's a whole lot we don't know and can't comprehend in this life--but yet we still insist on trying to understand an infinite and eternal realm --attempting to make it fit within the limited perception of the box of a finite, mortal paradigm.

Another thing for you to think about; Joseph Smith was sealed to women who had husbands, men they lived an entire, loving life with--raising children, and while they may not have been sealed in this life, I'm positive the temple work was done to seal them--is it fair to think these righteous women might have to decide between the man they chose in life or an eternal association with the Prophet Joseph? I hope not, I'd rather assume that the Lord has something in mind which we don't yet know or comprehend...Personally, I'm just not so sure we know exactly how things work in the next life.

I can't help but think of Mormon's comments that a person who believed that God would send little unbaptized children to hell, were in the 'gall of bitterness', unthinking, uncaring lacking compassion for the plight of others. To me, I personally feel those who think women will be forced to choose between two men they loved dearly, are in that same 'gall of bitterness', especially when you realize they think only women will be forced to make this agonizing choice, but men will not?? It doesn't sound like the loving God I know, to imagine such a scenario.

[AI2.0]

I don't think any sealing is etched in cement. A man and woman may get sealed together, but if the conduct by either one do not meet celestial standards, the sealing for that couple becomes is void, does it not? The one who remained true will then have a different mate in the hear after, right? A lot of the time people go through the temple and get married for time only. I had a grandmother whose first husband died in 1945 at the age of 28; married in 1917, they had been sealed for all time and eternity. She went through two subsequent men, for time only, having lived to the age of 97. All that time she looked forward to being rejoined with her first husband.

As to why I wrote this..to the best of my recollection, I don't remember.

This is precisely why the holy spirit of promise is essential. I married my first wife in the temple and there was nothing. I married my second wife temporarily and it was by far the most spiritual experience of my life.

To my understanding based on my divorce years ago, if your first wife remarries the sealing becomes void. If she were to remain single, well, we'll let God sort it out.
My first wife and I are divorced, having been sealed; she has not remarried, and we remain friends. After all, she is the mother of my children. Those type of memories and facts cannot be erased. She went through hard times bringing those kids into the world. As to our sealing, I'll let God sort it out.

Actually, if your wife wishes to remarry, she will need a cancellation of sealing, to be sealed in the temple to her next husband. The sealing does not 'become void' simply because she remarries. Also, she can receive a cancellation of sealing now, if she chooses. They used to not give these unless a woman wanted to remarry in the temple, but they do now. But, I believe that if she requests one, you would be notified.

[Kitkat]

“Verily,verily, I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery; and whoso shall marry her who is divorced committeth adultery.” -3 Nephi 12:31-32 (Matt. 5:31-32)

[freedomforall]

“Verily,verily, I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery; and whoso shall marry her who is divorced committeth adultery.” -3 Nephi 12:31-32 (Matt. 5:31-32)

After my divorce, I had nothing to do with fornication. Yet, when I attended many singles dances, there were men seeking women so they could. well, you know. However, if the women were willing, then that is on their heads. Promiscuity is a two way proposition. Allowing ones brains to not govern and control below the belt is not wise.

[Kitkat]

“Verily,verily, I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery; and whoso shall marry her who is divorced committeth adultery.” -3 Nephi 12:31-32 (Matt. 5:31-32)

After my divorce, I had nothing to do with fornication. Yet, when I attended many singles dances, there were men seeking women so they could. well, you know. However, if the women were willing, then that is on their heads. Promiscuity is a two way proposition. Allowing ones brains to not govern and control below the belt is not wise.

I should have proposed a question with that scripture. What is divorce in the Lord's view but the excuse that two can't get along? Isn't one causing adultery if ANYONE puts away their wife save it be for fornication and that wife then remarries? The sin be on the spouse's head who put her away? Isn't the Lord's point... divorce is always either pride or fornication?

Have we not all somehow in some way, at some point in our lives, divorced the Lord? Yet he still wants us and remains ever faithful to us, patient with our quirks, mishaps, stupidity, ignorance, naiveness, etc.? If two can't get along, and they put one another away (aka divorce) and marry another who was put away, is that not adultery (PERIOD) in the Lord's view, clear and plain? That's my question.

Isn't the Lord stating the only reason one should divorce their first wife is for infidelity on her part, otherwise he causes her to commit adultery if she re marries whatsoever?

[AI2.0]

“Verily,verily, I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery; and whoso shall marry her who is divorced committeth adultery.” -3 Nephi 12:31-32 (Matt. 5:31-32)

After my divorce, I had nothing to do with fornication. Yet, when I attended many singles dances, there were men seeking women so they could. well, you know. However, if the women were willing, then that is on their heads. Promiscuity is a two way proposition. Allowing ones brains to not govern and control below the belt is not wise.

I should have proposed a question with that scripture. What is divorce in the Lord's view but the excuse that two can't get along? Isn't one causing adultery if ANYONE puts away their wife save it be for fornication and that wife then remarries? The sin be on the spouse's head who put her away? Isn't the Lord's point... divorce is always either pride or fornication?

Have we not all somehow in some way, at some point in our lives, divorced the Lord? Yet he still wants us and remains ever faithful to us, patient with our quirks, mishaps, stupidity, ignorance, naiveness, etc.? If two can't get along, and they put one another away (aka divorce) and marry another who was put away, is that not adultery (PERIOD) in the Lord's view, clear and plain? That's my question.

Isn't the Lord stating the only reason one should divorce their first wife is for infidelity on her part, otherwise he causes her to commit adultery if she re marries whatsoever?

Well, then does that mean that if a woman wants to leave a marriage, she should 'fornicate', or she can never remarry without being guilty of adultery? I sure hope not, but that's what that interpretation causes one to conclude.

The catholic church took a strict stance on divorce--they don't recognize it and it's caused many problems for it's members. I'm glad to say the LDS church allows for divorce and remarriage and does not teach that a remarried woman is committing adultery.

[freedomforall]

“Verily,verily, I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery; and whoso shall marry her who is divorced committeth adultery.” -3 Nephi 12:31-32 (Matt. 5:31-32)

After my divorce, I had nothing to do with fornication. Yet, when I attended many singles dances, there were men seeking women so they could. well, you know. However, if the women were willing, then that is on their heads. Promiscuity is a two way proposition. Allowing ones brains to not govern and control below the belt is not wise.

I should have proposed a question with that scripture. What is divorce in the Lord's view but the excuse that two can't get along? Isn't one causing adultery if ANYONE puts away their wife save it be for fornication and that wife then remarries? The sin be on the spouse's head who put her away? Isn't the Lord's point... divorce is always either pride or fornication?

Have we not all somehow in some way, at some point in our lives, divorced the Lord? Yet he still wants us and remains ever faithful to us, patient with our quirks, mishaps, stupidity, ignorance, naiveness, etc.? If two can't get along, and they put one another away (aka divorce) and marry another who was put away, is that not adultery (PERIOD) in the Lord's view, clear and plain? That's my question.

Isn't the Lord stating the only reason one should divorce their first wife is for infidelity on her part, otherwise he causes her to commit adultery if she re marries whatsoever?

Deuteronomy 24
1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.
2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife.

Does this clear things up?

Now if a guy wants to divorce his wife so he can chase other women and fornicate, this is where the problem arises.

[onefour1]

How do we know Gordon B. Hinckley was speaking as a prophet or a man?

If he was speaking as a prophet, would it put Elder Turley in awkward position for teaching it is as a belief, contrary to what a Prophet declared on TV?

From the Swedish Rescue

Just last month Elder Turley participated in a fireside about apostasy, yet he has publicly declared that the church believes in polygamy even though Hinckley declared it is not doctrinal. So was Hinckley speaking as a man or prophet?

Is there room on the forum for different views on the matter, and situations like this? Or does Hinckley trump all on the issue, and all debate is settled on the matter?

Although debate can lead to understanding of truth in many cases, we should be careful that we are not speaking evil of the Lord's anointed or making anyone an offender for a word. We should also be careful to not have contention among us regarding the points of our Lord's doctrine.

2 Nephi 27:32
32 And they that make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of naught.

3 Nephi 11:28-29
28 And according as I have commanded you thus shall ye baptize. And there shall be no disputations among you, as there have hitherto been; neither shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been.
29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.

[freedomforall]

How do we know Gordon B. Hinckley was speaking as a prophet or a man?

If he was speaking as a prophet, would it put Elder Turley in awkward position for teaching it is as a belief, contrary to what a Prophet declared on TV?

From the Swedish Rescue

Just last month Elder Turley participated in a fireside about apostasy, yet he has publicly declared that the church believes in polygamy even though Hinckley declared it is not doctrinal. So was Hinckley speaking as a man or prophet?
Is there room on the forum for different views on the matter, and situations like this? Or does Hinckley trump all on the issue, and all debate is settled on the matter?

Although debate can lead to understanding of truth in many cases, we should be careful that we are not speaking evil of the Lord's anointed or making anyone an offender for a word. We should also be careful to not have contention among us regarding the points of our Lord's doctrine.

2 Nephi 27:32
32 And they that make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, and turn aside the just for a thing of naught.

3 Nephi 11:28-29
28 And according as I have commanded you thus shall ye baptize. And there shall be no disputations among you, as there have hitherto been; neither shall there be disputations among you concerning the points of my doctrine, as there have hitherto been.
29 For verily, verily I say unto you, he that hath the spirit of contention is not of me, but is of the devil, who is the father of contention, and he stirreth up the hearts of men to contend with anger, one with another.

Right now polygamy is not practiced nor has been practiced for about 120 years. So President Hinckley was correct.

Doctrine and Covenants 56:4
4 Wherefore I, the Lord, command and revoke, as it seemeth me good; and all this to be answered upon the heads of the rebellious, saith the Lord.

So for anyone STILL pushing for polygamy they must be among the rebellious. Who are any of us to keep trying to speak for God? Forget polygamy, it does not effect my salvation, today, one iota.

[BackBlast]

I don't think any sealing is etched in cement. A man and woman may get sealed together, but if the conduct by either one do not meet celestial standards, the sealing for that couple becomes is void, does it not?

Your understanding is more or less generally correct in the final sum but somewhat in error in how it comes about.

Sealings are only an ordinance. Which is to say that it isn't binding in the next life until it has also has been sealed by the Holy Spirit. It can be a little confusing because of the use of the word seal, sealing power, and the eternal view of the ordinance; but a sealing still must be sealed by the Spirit to be valid. Another mortal does not and can not do this for you. The participant(s) must be fully qualified before that will be granted and fundamentally we, as mortals, can't of ourselves see to the hearts of others.

[freedomforall]

I don't think any sealing is etched in cement. A man and woman may get sealed together, but if the conduct by either one do not meet celestial standards, the sealing for that couple becomes is void, does it not?

Your understanding is more or less generally correct in the final sum but somewhat in error in how it comes about.

Sealings are only an ordinance. Which is to say that it isn't binding in the next life until it has also has been sealed by the Holy Spirit. It can be a little confusing because of the use of the word seal, sealing power, and the eternal view of the ordinance; but a sealing still must be sealed by the Spirit to be valid. Another mortal does not and can not do this for you. The participant(s) must be fully qualified before that will be granted and fundamentally we, as mortals, can't of ourselves see to the hearts of others.

You are correct. Your complete point is what I hoped to convey, but did a rather lousy job of it in not mentioning the Holy Spirit of Promise, which is the Holy Ghost.