Remnant scriptures on Polygamy

[TrueIntent]

TrueIntent,

TrueIntent wrote: ↑
Wed Aug 23, 2017 7:08 pm

TrueIntent wrote: ↑
Wed Aug 23, 2017 7:02 pm

gclayjr wrote: ↑
Wed Aug 23, 2017 6:42 pm

Actually...its the gospel preached by Paul and Jesus. Ever heard of them?

John 7:24 Judge not according to the appearance JST (your traditions), but judge righteous judgment.

HERE IS THE TEACHINGS OF PAUL EXPLAINING WHY WE HAVE THE LAW....I will use his words...this has JST for you.

Galatians 3:19
19 Wherefore then, the law was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made in the law given to Moses, who was ordained by the hand of angels to be a mediator of this first covenant, (the law.)
20 Now this mediator was not a mediator of the new covenant; but there is one mediator of the new covenant, who is Christ, as it is written in the law concerning the promises made to Abraham and his seed. Now Christ is the mediator of life; for this is the promise which God made unto Abraham.

Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

The law reveals our sins. this is what paul taught....do you understand. When we practice our best obedience to the law, it will reveal our sins, so that we can repent and practice a higher law (law of Christ...spirit of the law)....We can not know where we sin, without practicing the law first. The more obedient you are to laws (just like abraham sacrificing Issac)...if you do it out of fear of God, and sacrifice of a firstling of your flock which is Love...God will reveal himself to you. Im teaching you the meaning of the ordinances right here if you will see it....its the moral of the story...not the outward act.

You do seem to like having a conversation with yourself. You said nothing to either answer my question or make your incoherence coherent, so I guess I'll let you go to wander in the world of your own arrogance.

Regards,

George Clay

Yeah, I did. I countered you with the exact words of Paul and Christ from the scriptures...since you wouldn't believe my teaching of those words. But whatever. You can't understand anything I say without understanding those scriptures...Which is why you quoted me like a Pharisee...about the tithe stuff. Remove the Beam from your eye. But whatever. thats a scripture too. I didn't list all the scriptures I pulled that information from, including my original post...cuz its like...from all the scriptures. 3 witnesses in one. But whatever. counter me with some scriptures or something and then we can have some good conversation:)

[TrueIntent]

TrueIntent,

(What am I proving????....that taking your sister-in-law and making a baby with her as instructed in the law of Moses isn't because you are righteous...it is to reveal where you sin so that you can repent of your wickedness).

I can't even make any sense out of the last part of your sentence, here but, if it wasn't a law given by Jehovah, why didn't Christ admonish the Sadducees over the terrible evil and sin of polygamy instead of a more banal

9 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

??

If Polygamy was so bad, this would have been the perfect opportunity to admonish them. You throw out one Old Testament "Thus saith the Lord", and ignore time after time where it is accepted, or various blessing are given to plural marriages as if sanctioned, then imply that poor helpless God is just going along with the evil practices of men. He may punish Cain for murder, He may punish Saul for not waiting for a prophet to offer sacrifices, but heaven forbid he hurt Jacob's feelings by saying anything about his 4 wives. He will bless the world by having the descendants of Jacob bless the whole world, but he better not hurt Jacobs feelings by telling him that all this blessing of the world was done in his great sin, because God can work with that.

What poppycock!

Regards,

George Clay

You don't understand George....ALL LAWS that require outward works are designed to reveal sins. Tithes, fasting, performance of ordinances, .....there is a spiritual tithe, a spiritual fast, a spiritual ordinance, i.e.baptism of fire. The pharisee were baptized, but christ said their baptism wasn't acceptable. WHY??? Because they did the outward and not the inward. Christ taught that nothing the pharisees did was acceptable--it was all outward. They paid tithing perfectly (but they didn't keep the inward law of caring for their aging and dying parents). So it is, (if polygamy is a law)....It is an outward law. it is designed to reveal sins. Just as the story of Tamar, and all laws found within the Law of Moses. There is a higher law. It is the spiritual law. Its not...thou shalt not commit adultery...christ said....thou shalt not lust (this is the spiritual form of the law...the higher law). There are inward and outward laws. The higher law was to care for the widows and the fatherless....(*which is one of the things the saints claimed they were doing by taking wives.) They could have just done what the jews did, which was open the storehouse to the widows and fatherless (this is what was done in the old testament)...instead they had to take them as polygamist wives??????...even when they did, we can find in pioneer records that the wives weren't being cared for. We pay tithing, so that we can learn how to give when it matters...like taking care of your aging parents. We fast, so that we learn how to not let our carnal body rule our spiritual body, we perform ordinances, not so that we say we are holy or corrupt their meaning for our desires, but so that we can learn how to become holy. We perform polygamy...so that we can care for the widows????? nope....we love those in need, we pay tithes, so that when we find a widow in our midst, amongst our own families....we will choose the higher law, and care for them without any conditions....we will open our own storehouses....did you read the story of Tamar? The law of moses is holy...it came from God...to reveal those mens sins.....so that they could repent. That is the purpose of the law...to reveal sin. you wouldn't know what your sins were without the law (I'm quoting the apostle Paul when I say this)...everything Im saying is coming from the new testament...i just didn't list all the scriptures.

Btw, are you familiar with Moses being commanded to slaughter a bunch of people before they enter the promised land. You say that because something is in the Old testament that it is acceptable. Which is why you say polygamy is acceptable. But we don't we slaughter people in the church. You err in your understanding George. The scriptures are teaching lessons...not actions to be performed. if you want actions...then you are going to have to murder some people, rape some people, take wives and concubines..etc.....youre missing the message..the moral of the story...the moral of the story is to find out where we sin so that we can repent. The law reveals sin (Paul teaches this). The scriptures are used for both good and evil purposes. By you're same logic....polygamy is practiced, but not the murders???? come on now...give me something that doesnt contradict scripture or itself. Lot's daughters get him drunk and sleep with him.....we don't we teach that in the church? Come on...restoration of all things...means all things right.???? according to you...or does it just mean polygamy. You read the scriptures as outward works...I read them as lessons on Morality. You view the law as righteous because you obeyed. I view the law as righteous because it reveals to me how I sin, so that I can repent, and forsake my sins.

Sorry, I didn't see your comment about the sadducees...i will address that now. The Saducees believed in keeping a literal bloodline alive. Just like Sarah gave Hagar because she lacked faith. The Savior did condemn them for this.

JST Mathew Chapter 3:36 And think not to say within yourselves, We are the children of Abraham, and we only have power to bring seed unto our father Abraham; for I say unto you that God is able of these stones to raise up children into Abraham.


They think the power to raise up seed is only within their power, this is also how Sarah sinned....God can make children out of stones. And to top it off...this is in the Joseph Smith Translation. Joseph knew.

[TrueIntent]

I also want to add....we are all sinners....just like our forefathers.....we are blessed because we have a written record of their sins. It helps us to perfect ourselves, and root out those who seek to cover their sins and lead us into a "pit without water." I am blessed because of the records brigham young kept and his wives kept. I am blessed because of the records Abraham, Issac, and Jacob kept. They want us to know. They want us to figure it out...so we can turn our hearts toward them. They bore their sins in an ancient book of records to prevent me from committing their sins. We''re supposed to purge ourselves of these things. They loved us more than they loved themselves---they didn't hide it. We all sin. We all need Christ.

[Arenera]

TrueIntent,



I can't even make any sense out of the last part of your sentence, here but, if it wasn't a law given by Jehovah, why didn't Christ admonish the Sadducees over the terrible evil and sin of polygamy instead of a more banal



??

If Polygamy was so bad, this would have been the perfect opportunity to admonish them. You throw out one Old Testament "Thus saith the Lord", and ignore time after time where it is accepted, or various blessing are given to plural marriages as if sanctioned, then imply that poor helpless God is just going along with the evil practices of men. He may punish Cain for murder, He may punish Saul for not waiting for a prophet to offer sacrifices, but heaven forbid he hurt Jacob's feelings by saying anything about his 4 wives. He will bless the world by having the descendants of Jacob bless the whole world, but he better not hurt Jacobs feelings by telling him that all this blessing of the world was done in his great sin, because God can work with that.

What poppycock!

Regards,

George Clay

You don't understand George....ALL LAWS that require outward works are designed to reveal sins. Tithes, fasting, performance of ordinances, .....there is a spiritual tithe, a spiritual fast, a spiritual ordinance, i.e.baptism of fire. The pharisee were baptized, but christ said their baptism wasn't acceptable. WHY??? Because they did the outward and not the inward. Christ taught that nothing the pharisees did was acceptable--it was all outward. They paid tithing perfectly (but they didn't keep the inward law of caring for their aging and dying parents). So it is, (if polygamy is a law)....It is an outward law. it is designed to reveal sins. Just as the story of Tamar, and all laws found within the Law of Moses. There is a higher law. It is the spiritual law. Its not...thou shalt not commit adultery...christ said....thou shalt not lust (this is the spiritual form of the law...the higher law). There are inward and outward laws. The higher law was to care for the widows and the fatherless....(*which is one of the things the saints claimed they were doing by taking wives.) They could have just done what the jews did, which was open the storehouse to the widows and fatherless (this is what was done in the old testament)...instead they had to take them as polygamist wives??????...even when they did, we can find in pioneer records that the wives weren't being cared for. We pay tithing, so that we can learn how to give when it matters...like taking care of your aging parents. We fast, so that we learn how to not let our carnal body rule our spiritual body, we perform ordinances, not so that we say we are holy or corrupt their meaning for our desires, but so that we can learn how to become holy. We perform polygamy...so that we can care for the widows????? nope....we love those in need, we pay tithes, so that when we find a widow in our midst, amongst our own families....we will choose the higher law, and care for them without any conditions....we will open our own storehouses....did you read the story of Tamar? The law of moses is holy...it came from God...to reveal those mens sins.....so that they could repent. That is the purpose of the law...to reveal sin. you wouldn't know what your sins were without the law (I'm quoting the apostle Paul when I say this)...everything Im saying is coming from the new testament...i just didn't list all the scriptures.

Btw, are you familiar with Moses being commanded to slaughter a bunch of people before they enter the promised land. You say that because something is in the Old testament that it is acceptable. Which is why you say polygamy is acceptable. But we don't we slaughter people in the church. You err in your understanding George. The scriptures are teaching lessons...not actions to be performed. if you want actions...then you are going to have to murder some people, rape some people, take wives and concubines..etc.....youre missing the message..the moral of the story...the moral of the story is to find out where we sin so that we can repent. The law reveals sin (Paul teaches this). The scriptures are used for both good and evil purposes. By you're same logic....polygamy is practiced, but not the murders???? come on now...give me something that doesnt contradict scripture or itself. Lot's daughters get him drunk and sleep with him.....we don't we teach that in the church? Come on...restoration of all things...means all things right.???? according to you...or does it just mean polygamy. You read the scriptures as outward works...I read them as lessons on Morality. You view the law as righteous because you obeyed. I view the law as righteous because it reveals to me how I sin, so that I can repent, and forsake my sins.

Sorry, I didn't see your comment about the sadducees...i will address that now. The Saducees believed in keeping a literal bloodline alive. Just like Sarah gave Hagar because she lacked faith. The Savior did condemn them for this.

JST Mathew Chapter 3:36 And think not to say within yourselves, We are the children of Abraham, and we only have power to bring seed unto our father Abraham; for I say unto you that God is able of these stones to raise up children into Abraham.


They think the power to raise up seed is only within their power, this is also how Sarah sinned....God can make children out of stones. And to top it off...this is in the Joseph Smith Translation. Joseph knew.

And Joseph followed the commandment to practice polygamy, and others.

57B61417-DB5C-4379-8F4D-718275D8FBDB-4413-000009F850563B4A.jpeg (96.99 KiB) Viewed 1172 times

[TrueIntent]

You don't understand George....ALL LAWS that require outward works are designed to reveal sins. Tithes, fasting, performance of ordinances, .....there is a spiritual tithe, a spiritual fast, a spiritual ordinance, i.e.baptism of fire. The pharisee were baptized, but christ said their baptism wasn't acceptable. WHY??? Because they did the outward and not the inward. Christ taught that nothing the pharisees did was acceptable--it was all outward. They paid tithing perfectly (but they didn't keep the inward law of caring for their aging and dying parents). So it is, (if polygamy is a law)....It is an outward law. it is designed to reveal sins. Just as the story of Tamar, and all laws found within the Law of Moses. There is a higher law. It is the spiritual law. Its not...thou shalt not commit adultery...christ said....thou shalt not lust (this is the spiritual form of the law...the higher law). There are inward and outward laws. The higher law was to care for the widows and the fatherless....(*which is one of the things the saints claimed they were doing by taking wives.) They could have just done what the jews did, which was open the storehouse to the widows and fatherless (this is what was done in the old testament)...instead they had to take them as polygamist wives??????...even when they did, we can find in pioneer records that the wives weren't being cared for. We pay tithing, so that we can learn how to give when it matters...like taking care of your aging parents. We fast, so that we learn how to not let our carnal body rule our spiritual body, we perform ordinances, not so that we say we are holy or corrupt their meaning for our desires, but so that we can learn how to become holy. We perform polygamy...so that we can care for the widows????? nope....we love those in need, we pay tithes, so that when we find a widow in our midst, amongst our own families....we will choose the higher law, and care for them without any conditions....we will open our own storehouses....did you read the story of Tamar? The law of moses is holy...it came from God...to reveal those mens sins.....so that they could repent. That is the purpose of the law...to reveal sin. you wouldn't know what your sins were without the law (I'm quoting the apostle Paul when I say this)...everything Im saying is coming from the new testament...i just didn't list all the scriptures.

Btw, are you familiar with Moses being commanded to slaughter a bunch of people before they enter the promised land. You say that because something is in the Old testament that it is acceptable. Which is why you say polygamy is acceptable. But we don't we slaughter people in the church. You err in your understanding George. The scriptures are teaching lessons...not actions to be performed. if you want actions...then you are going to have to murder some people, rape some people, take wives and concubines..etc.....youre missing the message..the moral of the story...the moral of the story is to find out where we sin so that we can repent. The law reveals sin (Paul teaches this). The scriptures are used for both good and evil purposes. By you're same logic....polygamy is practiced, but not the murders???? come on now...give me something that doesnt contradict scripture or itself. Lot's daughters get him drunk and sleep with him.....we don't we teach that in the church? Come on...restoration of all things...means all things right.???? according to you...or does it just mean polygamy. You read the scriptures as outward works...I read them as lessons on Morality. You view the law as righteous because you obeyed. I view the law as righteous because it reveals to me how I sin, so that I can repent, and forsake my sins.

Sorry, I didn't see your comment about the sadducees...i will address that now. The Saducees believed in keeping a literal bloodline alive. Just like Sarah gave Hagar because she lacked faith. The Savior did condemn them for this.

JST Mathew Chapter 3:36 And think not to say within yourselves, We are the children of Abraham, and we only have power to bring seed unto our father Abraham; for I say unto you that God is able of these stones to raise up children into Abraham.


They think the power to raise up seed is only within their power, this is also how Sarah sinned....God can make children out of stones. And to top it off...this is in the Joseph Smith Translation. Joseph knew.

And Joseph followed the commandment to practice polygamy, and others.
57B61417-DB5C-4379-8F4D-718275D8FBDB-4413-000009F850563B4A.jpeg

okay...and your point is?

[MMbelieve]

Your logic fails the Divine test. If plural marriage was improper, then we wouldn't have the Abrahamic Covenant, also renewed with Jacob/Israel. Multiple wives involved.

You have asserted this multiple times, however, you haven't demonstrated or explained why what you say is true. If plural marriage is an abomination we could (and we do) have the Abrahamic Covenant (whatever that means to you, but just using your words).

Leaders and people of every stripe, gender, culture, race, class, etc. can make horrendous mistakes and be in error.

Are you saying that because something good resulted in a condition where people practiced plural marriage, plural marriage is good? Is this what you mean or is that what you are trying to say.

Please, explain why your assertion is true.

-Finrock

God condoned plural marriage. It was no mistake. It wasn't because the people were just that way. God was not accepting flawed people. He condoned plural marriage.

What tribe are you in?

Is that proof enough?

God commanding, accepting, allowing, condoning and justifying are different. God said he "justified" them. We know what justice is right? Not equal but unfair circumstances were made right through justice God imposed.

If a man abuses a child or a wife, the law locking him up is this man's punishment in an attempt to serve justice. Justifying is having an authority make something as right as possible because what had happened wasn't ideal for the parties involved.

This is what I understand anyways. God could have said..."which actions are pleasing unto me" but he didnt.

[carbon dioxide]

Nowhere in the bible did God command polygamy, just the opposite. In deuteronomy he gives his instructions on this.

Deuteronomy 17:14–20

14 “When you come to the land that the Lord your God is giving you, and you possess it and dwell in it and then say, ‘I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are around me,’ 15 you may indeed set a king over you whom the Lord your God will choose. One from among your brothers you shall set as king over you. You may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother. 16 Only he must not acquire many horses for himself or cause the people to return to Egypt in order to acquire many horses, since the Lord has said to you, ‘You shall never return that way again.’ 17 AND HE SHALL NOT ACQUIRE MANY WIVES FOR HIMSELF, lest his heart turn away, nor shall he acquire for himself excessive silver and gold.
18 “And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. 19 AND IT SHALL BE WITH HIM,, AND HE SHALL READ IN IT ALL THE DAYS OF HIS LIFE, THAT HE MAY LEARN TO FEAR THE LORD HIS GOD BY KEEPING ALL THE WORDS OF THIS LAW AND THESE STATUES, AND DOING THEM. 20 that his heart may not be lifted up above his brothers, and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, either to the right hand or to the left, so that he may continue long in his kingdom, he and his children, in Israel.

You really can't be serious using this verse. Are you suggesting that God was against a person having more than one horse or more than one coin of silver or gold? The best you can say is that this passage is speaking about having an excessive amount of horses or wives but it was ok to have a few at least. There is a command in Deut 25:5-10 where there would be situations where a married brother must take the wife of his dead brother.

[Rensai]

Nowhere in the bible did God command polygamy, just the opposite. In deuteronomy he gives his instructions on this.

Deuteronomy 17:14–20

14 “When you come to the land that the Lord your God is giving you, and you possess it and dwell in it and then say, ‘I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are around me,’ 15 you may indeed set a king over you whom the Lord your God will choose. One from among your brothers you shall set as king over you. You may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother. 16 Only he must not acquire many horses for himself or cause the people to return to Egypt in order to acquire many horses, since the Lord has said to you, ‘You shall never return that way again.’ 17 AND HE SHALL NOT ACQUIRE MANY WIVES FOR HIMSELF, lest his heart turn away, nor shall he acquire for himself excessive silver and gold.
18 “And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. 19 AND IT SHALL BE WITH HIM,, AND HE SHALL READ IN IT ALL THE DAYS OF HIS LIFE, THAT HE MAY LEARN TO FEAR THE LORD HIS GOD BY KEEPING ALL THE WORDS OF THIS LAW AND THESE STATUES, AND DOING THEM. 20 that his heart may not be lifted up above his brothers, and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, either to the right hand or to the left, so that he may continue long in his kingdom, he and his children, in Israel.

You really can't be serious using this verse. Are you suggesting that God was against a person having more than one horse or more than one coin of silver or gold? The best you can say is that this passage is speaking about having an excessive amount of horses or wives but it was ok to have a few at least. There is a command in Deut 25:5-10 where there would be situations where a married brother must take the wife of his dead brother.

Sorry, maybe it wasn't clear, but this verse is a direct command to Israel's kings not to have many wives. I don't see how it could be more clear, yet in D&C 132, we read that Solomon and David were justified, and sinned only in the matter of uriah, never mind that Solomon had nothing to do with uriah, but the simple fact is, there is no way that that is their only sin in regards to having many wives because they had clearly been commanded not to have many wives. See what I'm saying now? Its just as Jacob said, David and solomon truly had many wives, which thing was abominable before the lord. It is clear and consistent between the BoM and the Bible.

As for the verses you mention about marrying a brother's wife, I guess I don't know that there's a really clear answer for that. Perhaps like section 132 some wicked israelites edited those verses at some point because Jacob makes it clear, his scriptures did not support polygamy in any way, nor is there ever any mention made of the nephites practicing that that I know of. I'll quote it again.

23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.

Look at what his saying and really think about it. There are 2 important thoughts there. First, the Nephites who are trying polygamy do not understand the scriptures! They try to justify polygamy because of David and Solomon, but the old testament makes it clear they were commanded not to do that! Its an abomination! He even clarifies and lays out very explicit instructions on what is allowed in verse 27.

27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;

No mention of marrying a brothers wife or anything weird like that. Secondly, he is laying out exactly what is allowed. It is as clear as can be in both the bible and BoM that David and Solomon having many wives was wrong. Compare that to D&C 132 and you have a big problem, they can't both be right. There are many other problems with D&C 132 as well and when you look at all those problems, the most logical answer in my mind is that that section is not true, at least not all of it, there is good evidence that at least some parts of it were published by Joseph, but it was greatly added to. There is a lot of evidence you can find with a little google searching to corroborate that. I won't get into all that, but again, I don't see how you can ignore Jacob or explain his clear instructions away. He says it so plainly, if you understand the scriptures, you can't justify polygamy.

[Rensai]

Nowhere in the bible did God command polygamy, just the opposite. In deuteronomy he gives his instructions on this.

Deuteronomy 17:14–20

14 “When you come to the land that the Lord your God is giving you, and you possess it and dwell in it and then say, ‘I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are around me,’ 15 you may indeed set a king over you whom the Lord your God will choose. One from among your brothers you shall set as king over you. You may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother. 16 Only he must not acquire many horses for himself or cause the people to return to Egypt in order to acquire many horses, since the Lord has said to you, ‘You shall never return that way again.’ 17 AND HE SHALL NOT ACQUIRE MANY WIVES FOR HIMSELF, lest his heart turn away, nor shall he acquire for himself excessive silver and gold.
18 “And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. 19 AND IT SHALL BE WITH HIM,, AND HE SHALL READ IN IT ALL THE DAYS OF HIS LIFE, THAT HE MAY LEARN TO FEAR THE LORD HIS GOD BY KEEPING ALL THE WORDS OF THIS LAW AND THESE STATUES, AND DOING THEM. 20 that his heart may not be lifted up above his brothers, and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, either to the right hand or to the left, so that he may continue long in his kingdom, he and his children, in Israel.

So clearly, God did not condone David or Solomon in any way. As for Abraham, the bible makes it clear having hagar as a concubine was actually sarah idea, to which abraham agreed. Their behavior on that actually shows a lack of faith in God's promise, they made a mistake and God never acknowledges Ishmael in any way. For example:

2 And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of.

17 By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son,

12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.

God only acknowledges Isaac as Abrahams son, never Ishmael in any way.

Similarly, God never commands polygamy in the BoM, just the opposite.

Why did you skip Jacob? Little tougher.

And why do you blame a woman with Abraham? Abraham was much stronger than you think. God did condone polygamy, stop skipping scriptures that do tell, like D&C 132.

I skip section 132 because the parts supporting polygamy are false and didn't come from God. Tons of evidence on that. Read the link I posted or go do some research with google. As for Jacob, he isn't that tough, he was tricked into polygamy, otherwise he would have probably done the same as his father Isaac and not practiced it.

As far as blaming a woman with Abraham, its right in the bible. God told them Sarah would have a child, their faith wasn't strong enough so she offered her hand maid and Abraham accepted. Pretty straight forward story. Maybe go read it again more carefully. No where does God command or tell Abraham its ok to take Hagar and as I pointed out already, he completely refuses to acknowledge her child Ishmael as Abrahams son, which only further proves God never gave his permission to it.

1 Now Sarai Abram’s wife bare him no children: and she had an handmaid, an Egyptian, whose name was Hagar.
2 And Sarai said unto Abram, Behold now, the Lord hath restrained me from bearing: I pray thee, go in unto my maid; it may be that I may obtain children by her. And Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai.
3 And Sarai Abram’s wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife.

[carbon dioxide]

Nowhere in the bible did God command polygamy, just the opposite. In deuteronomy he gives his instructions on this.

Deuteronomy 17:14–20

14 “When you come to the land that the Lord your God is giving you, and you possess it and dwell in it and then say, ‘I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are around me,’ 15 you may indeed set a king over you whom the Lord your God will choose. One from among your brothers you shall set as king over you. You may not put a foreigner over you, who is not your brother. 16 Only he must not acquire many horses for himself or cause the people to return to Egypt in order to acquire many horses, since the Lord has said to you, ‘You shall never return that way again.’ 17 AND HE SHALL NOT ACQUIRE MANY WIVES FOR HIMSELF, lest his heart turn away, nor shall he acquire for himself excessive silver and gold.
18 “And when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself in a book a copy of this law, approved by the Levitical priests. 19 AND IT SHALL BE WITH HIM,, AND HE SHALL READ IN IT ALL THE DAYS OF HIS LIFE, THAT HE MAY LEARN TO FEAR THE LORD HIS GOD BY KEEPING ALL THE WORDS OF THIS LAW AND THESE STATUES, AND DOING THEM. 20 that his heart may not be lifted up above his brothers, and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, either to the right hand or to the left, so that he may continue long in his kingdom, he and his children, in Israel.

You really can't be serious using this verse. Are you suggesting that God was against a person having more than one horse or more than one coin of silver or gold? The best you can say is that this passage is speaking about having an excessive amount of horses or wives but it was ok to have a few at least. There is a command in Deut 25:5-10 where there would be situations where a married brother must take the wife of his dead brother.

Sorry, maybe it wasn't clear, but this verse is a direct command to Israel's kings not to have many wives.

The word many refers to a large number of something. What exactly is a large number? If a man has 3 or 5 wives, is that really "many wives" or a few? The passage does not define what the limit is. There is simply nothing in the passage that suggest the king could only have one horse. The passage does suggest that he could have at least a few horses. So if the king could have a few horses, why not a few wives? There is simply nothing in the English or the Hebrew limits the king to just one wife. The passage leave the question open to what constitutes "many" but very few people on this planet would equate "many" to mean more than one. If you pay attention to the Old Testament account of Solomon, NOTHING is stated in the text that Solomon married too many wives.


1 Kings 11:1-4,9: "But Solomon Loved many strange women, together with the daughters of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites. Of the nations concerning which the Lord said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Soloman clave unto these in love. and he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart. For it came to pass, when Soloman was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father ... And the Lord was angry with Soloman, because his heart was turned from the Lord God of Israel, which had appear unto him twice."

The Lord was angry with Solomon in this passage but the anger is not directed really at the number of his wives but that Solomon took wives that lead to his heart being turned away from the Lord as Deuteronomy 17:17 warned the kings about. The number of wives is not the big problem but what the wives would do. Had Solomon married just one woman who was outside of the nation of Israel and she turned Solomon's heart from God, then the situation still remains the same and the Lord would still have been just as angry with Solomon. There is nothing to suggest that if he married a 100 women from the House of Israel and they caused his heart to stay with God that it would have been a problem.

[Finrock]

Nowhere in the bible did God command polygamy, just the opposite. In deuteronomy he gives his instructions on this.

You really can't be serious using this verse. Are you suggesting that God was against a person having more than one horse or more than one coin of silver or gold? The best you can say is that this passage is speaking about having an excessive amount of horses or wives but it was ok to have a few at least. There is a command in Deut 25:5-10 where there would be situations where a married brother must take the wife of his dead brother.

Sorry, maybe it wasn't clear, but this verse is a direct command to Israel's kings not to have many wives.

The word many refers to a large number of something. What exactly is a large number? If a man has 3 or 5 wives, is that really "many wives" or a few? The passage does not define what the limit is. There is simply nothing in the passage that suggest the king could only have one horse. The passage does suggest that he could have at least a few horses. So if the king could have a few horses, why not a few wives? There is simply nothing in the English or the Hebrew limits the king to just one wife. The passage leave the question open to what constitutes "many" but very few people on this planet would equate "many" to mean more than one. If you pay attention to the Old Testament account of Solomon, NOTHING is stated in the text that Solomon married too many wives.


1 Kings 11:1-4,9: "But Solomon Loved many strange women, together with the daughters of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians, and Hittites. Of the nations concerning which the Lord said unto the children of Israel, Ye shall not go in to them, neither shall they come in unto you: for surely they will turn away your heart after their gods: Soloman clave unto these in love. and he had seven hundred wives, princesses, and three hundred concubines: and his wives turned away his heart. For it came to pass, when Soloman was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods: and his heart was not perfect with the Lord his God, as was the heart of David his father ... And the Lord was angry with Soloman, because his heart was turned from the Lord God of Israel, which had appear unto him twice."

The Lord was angry with Solomon in this passage but the anger is not directed really at the number of his wives but that Solomon took wives that lead to his heart being turned away from the Lord as Deuteronomy 17:17 warned the kings about. The number of wives is not the big problem but what the wives would do. Had Solomon married just one woman who was outside of the nation of Israel and she turned Solomon's heart from God, then the situation still remains the same and the Lord would still have been just as angry with Solomon. There is nothing to suggest that if he married a 100 women from the House of Israel and they caused his heart to stay with God that it would have been a problem.

One person influencing you versus hundreds of voices trying to influence you, particularly hundreds of voices with whom you are having intimate and sexual relations, you are taking care of them, and they are providing for you. Seems clear to me that the number of wives and concubines that Solomon had directly contributed to his final condition and it seems clear to me had he just one wife and no concubines, the influence to go after other gods would have been so much smaller and less potent.

Read that verse again without any assumptions. What in that description or what in that verse describing Solomon sounds good, righteous, and holy? Think about the reality of that situation and how does any of that come across as someone who has mastered their passions or who has subjected the flesh to the spirit?

-Finrock

[Arenera]

About Abraham

And, finding there was greater happiness and peace and rest for me, I sought for the blessings of the fathers, and the right whereunto I should be ordained to administer the same; having been myself a follower of righteousness, desiring also to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge, and to be a father of many nations, a prince of peace, and desiring to receive instructions, and to keep the commandments of God, I became a rightful heir, a High Priest, holding the right belonging to the fathers.

Abraham was a powerful individual. He sought the blessings of the fathers. God condoned Abraham having more than one wife. How do we know? Because of the Abrahamic Covenant. You certainly want to be part of that.

[TrueIntent]

About Abraham

And, finding there was greater happiness and peace and rest for me, I sought for the blessings of the fathers, and the right whereunto I should be ordained to administer the same; having been myself a follower of righteousness, desiring also to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge, and to be a father of many nations, a prince of peace, and desiring to receive instructions, and to keep the commandments of God, I became a rightful heir, a High Priest, holding the right belonging to the fathers.

Abraham was a powerful individual. He sought the blessings of the fathers. God condoned Abraham having more than one wife. How do we know? Because of the Abrahamic Covenant. You certainly want to be part of that.

Your understanding of scripture is twisted based on what YOU WANT the scriptures to mean....You want to have the opportunity to take extra wives, which is why you choose to interpret it that way. Problem is so many scriptures contradict what you are trying to teach. AND I WILL GIVE YOU A COUPLE...can you understand these scriptures...they completely contradict your teachings.....


Joseph Smith Translation of Mathew 3:36 And think not to say within yourselves, We are the children of Abraham, and we only have power to bring seed unto our father Abraham; for I say unto you that God is able of these stones to raise up children into Abraham.

Heres another....
JST...Mathew 23:34-35 Verily, I say unto you, all these things shall come upon this generation...Ye bear testimony against your fathers, when ye, yourselves are partakers of the same wickedness. Behold your fathers did it through ignorance, but ye do not;wherefore, their sins shall be upon your heads.


We have these records (The scriptures contain the sins of our fathers...even those of Abraham, Issac and Jacob), so that we know not to make the same mistakes...and yet we use it to justify our sins. It says it right there...what they did they did in ignorance.. Just because they took wives doesnt mean it wasn't a sin....what they did they did in ignorance. All though scripture...THE LIE IS THAT GOD CANNOT PRODUCE THE SEED, and we must do it ourselves......EVE believed the lie (that she and adam had to SIN and Die to do it) Sarah Believed the lie....GUESS WHO DIDNT believe the lie...MARY, a virgin who conceived. Jesus says in those versus, that God is able of these stones to "raise up children into Abraham".....He doesnt need us to take a bunch of wives. He can made children from stones...just like he made adam from dust. We don't need to commit adultery to produce seed. We need someone like Mary--a virgin...pure and underlied (which can mean more than just sexually pure...to be spotless means something greater). The scriptures can teach us where we sin....we need to stop using them to justify our sins.

[Arenera]

About Abraham

And, finding there was greater happiness and peace and rest for me, I sought for the blessings of the fathers, and the right whereunto I should be ordained to administer the same; having been myself a follower of righteousness, desiring also to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge, and to be a father of many nations, a prince of peace, and desiring to receive instructions, and to keep the commandments of God, I became a rightful heir, a High Priest, holding the right belonging to the fathers.

Abraham was a powerful individual. He sought the blessings of the fathers. God condoned Abraham having more than one wife. How do we know? Because of the Abrahamic Covenant. You certainly want to be part of that.

Your understanding of scripture is twisted based on what YOU WANT the scriptures to mean....You want to have the opportunity to take extra wives, which is why you choose to interpret it that way. Problem is so many scriptures contradict what you are trying to teach. AND I WILL GIVE YOU A COUPLE...can you understand these scriptures...they completely contradict your teachings.....


Joseph Smith Translation of Mathew 3:36 And think not to say within yourselves, We are the children of Abraham, and we only have power to bring seed unto our father Abraham; for I say unto you that God is able of these stones to raise up children into Abraham.

Heres another....
JST...Mathew 23:34-35 Verily, I say unto you, all these things shall come upon this generation...Ye bear testimony against your fathers, when ye, yourselves are partakers of the same wickedness. Behold your fathers did it through ignorance, but ye do not;wherefore, their sins shall be upon your heads.


We have these records (The scriptures contain the sins of our fathers...even those of Abraham, Issac and Jacob), so that we know not to make the same mistakes...and yet we use it to justify our sins. It says it right there...what they did they did in ignorance.. Just because they took wives doesnt mean it wasn't a sin....what they did they did in ignorance. All though scripture...THE LIE IS THAT GOD CANNOT PRODUCE THE SEED, and we must do it ourselves......EVE believed the lie (that she and adam had to SIN and Die to do it) Sarah Believed the lie....GUESS WHO DIDNT believe the lie...MARY, a virgin who conceived. Jesus says in those versus, that God is able of these stones to "raise up children into Abraham".....He doesnt need us to take a bunch of wives. He can made children from stones...just like he made adam from dust. We don't need to commit adultery to produce seed. We need someone like Mary--a virgin...pure and underlied (which can mean more than just sexually pure...to be spotless means something greater). The scriptures can teach us where we sin....we need to stop using them to justify our sins.

Doing yoga does not mean you are a contortionist. Were you a stone?

It was not a sin because God did condone it. Fornication and adultery surely is a sin. Polygamy condoned by God is not a sin. Joseph was commanded and he obeyed the commandment, so did Brigham Young and the others. Approval from God stopped around 1900.

If we tried to do polygamy, it would be considered a sin since God does not condone it today. See Jacob 2.

Abraham and Jacob were spotless on this item, hence they became great sons of God. Jacob even had a ladder named after him.

[TrueIntent]

About Abraham

And, finding there was greater happiness and peace and rest for me, I sought for the blessings of the fathers, and the right whereunto I should be ordained to administer the same; having been myself a follower of righteousness, desiring also to be one who possessed great knowledge, and to be a greater follower of righteousness, and to possess a greater knowledge, and to be a father of many nations, a prince of peace, and desiring to receive instructions, and to keep the commandments of God, I became a rightful heir, a High Priest, holding the right belonging to the fathers.

Abraham was a powerful individual. He sought the blessings of the fathers. God condoned Abraham having more than one wife. How do we know? Because of the Abrahamic Covenant. You certainly want to be part of that.

Your understanding of scripture is twisted based on what YOU WANT the scriptures to mean....You want to have the opportunity to take extra wives, which is why you choose to interpret it that way. Problem is so many scriptures contradict what you are trying to teach. AND I WILL GIVE YOU A COUPLE...can you understand these scriptures...they completely contradict your teachings.....


Joseph Smith Translation of Mathew 3:36 And think not to say within yourselves, We are the children of Abraham, and we only have power to bring seed unto our father Abraham; for I say unto you that God is able of these stones to raise up children into Abraham.

Heres another....
JST...Mathew 23:34-35 Verily, I say unto you, all these things shall come upon this generation...Ye bear testimony against your fathers, when ye, yourselves are partakers of the same wickedness. Behold your fathers did it through ignorance, but ye do not;wherefore, their sins shall be upon your heads.


We have these records (The scriptures contain the sins of our fathers...even those of Abraham, Issac and Jacob), so that we know not to make the same mistakes...and yet we use it to justify our sins. It says it right there...what they did they did in ignorance.. Just because they took wives doesnt mean it wasn't a sin....what they did they did in ignorance. All though scripture...THE LIE IS THAT GOD CANNOT PRODUCE THE SEED, and we must do it ourselves......EVE believed the lie (that she and adam had to SIN and Die to do it) Sarah Believed the lie....GUESS WHO DIDN'T believe the lie...MARY, a virgin who conceived. Jesus says in those versus, that God is able of these stones to "raise up children into Abraham".....He doesn't need us to take a bunch of wives. He can made children from stones...just like he made Adam from dust. We don't need to commit adultery to produce seed. We need someone like Mary--a virgin...pure and undefiled (which can mean more than just sexually pure...to be spotless means something greater). The scriptures can teach us where we sin....we need to stop using them to justify our sins.

Doing yoga does not mean you are a contortionist. Were you a stone?

It was not a sin because God did condone it. Fornication and adultery surely is a sin. Polygamy condoned by God is not a sin. Joseph was commanded and he obeyed the commandment, so did Brigham Young and the others. Approval from God stopped around 1900.

If we tried to do polygamy, it would be considered a sin since God does not condone it today. See Jacob 2.

Abraham and Jacob were spotless on this item, hence they became great sons of God. Jacob even had a ladder named after him.

They became spotless...Abram married Hagar...Hagar is cast out.....and then sometime later, he takes on a new name and become Abraham---THIS WAS AFTER HAGAR. The new name was symbolic of his change of being. The scriptures are the pattern of how to become spotless...become like christ. Same for the new testament. Same for the book of mormon.....It lists the prophets failures and ignorance.....all things they did were not holy--but all things they did led to them becoming holy....there is a difference. By the mouth of two or three witnesses. 2 or 3 books of scripture must confirm this the way you teach it. They don't. Section 132 was added in secret many many years after the saints had been practicing it---if God commanded it, its only because the Saints were willing participants. Basically how we write scripture, and then how we interpret it will condemn future generations and the sins will be on there heads. The way you teach scripture reveals who you are...otherwise we wouldn't need "restorers" like Christ and Joseph Smith, and Moses. Traditions and cultures of men blind them, and men cling to culture more than they do correct teachings in scripture. Just because you believe God commanded something--doesn't mean He did. So who is God? the restorers tell us who he is. Those who follow tradition are the ones who teach a different version of God...the same scripture can be interpreted three different ways--which is why Joseph went to God in the first place. Those with Urim and Thumimim were seers. Abraham, Joseph---they could see things others couldn't. We should lean on those who had interpreters, and the scriptures. That doesn't mean they were perfect, but what it does mean is that they figured out the path.

Joseph Smith was supposed to be a restorer of correct truths--as was Jesus Christ in the New Testament. God commanded things of Abraham and Sarah, and they didn't always obey him. We see instances of people breaking God's commands all the time. Joseph was commanded not to give the lost pages to Martin Harris---but he did. Why all of the sudden if God commands polygamy do a whole group of men submit to it in secret against the knowledge of theirs wives. Whoever loves and makes a lie is of the devil (how do you explain that all the lying that went on is of God, when lying is condemned in the scriptures). People lie in the scriptures--but the lie was never holy....what you may become or learn from a lie may make you holy though--but that doesnt me you should have ever sinned or needed to sin to know so....you never had to take a concubine to bear children. You ignore so many different scriptures.

It's so funny to me how people will break commandments on a daily basis...lie a little here, sin a little there, BUT if God commands polygamy...we've just got to obey. Cant you see your wickedness??? Ignorance is one thing...the scriptures teach something different. The scripture even teach how men distort them....but you ignore that. The pharisees had "oral tradition" that they added to the scriptures....they saw through the lens of their own beliefs. Before a man could ever have a bunch of wives in the highest degree of the celestial kingdom (don't you think he would have to first learn how to not be a liar)? Strain a gnat, and swallow a camel. These guys couldn't even live the word of wisdom...BUT THEY COULD LIVE THE HIGHEST LAW of the celestial kingdom. Sounds like pride to me....WE can't possibly be adulterers because we live the laws of polygamy highest degree (even though we can't live anything else).

Soddom and Gomorrah....in my footnotes, the church has that the sins of soddom and Gomorra were Homosexuality. BUT I disagree. because in my scriptures, its listed in the book of Ezekiel that the sins of Sodom and Gomorra were idleness in which they were blessed but they didn't care for the poor and needy AND, they were adulterers and fornicaters. That is the first sin the nephites commit after Christ appears to them...they live the law of consecration for a time, and there is no poor among them, and THEN...they break that law first. The saints broke that law a long time ago (law of consecration is an individual law to be lived first...the saints administered the law as a way of teaching it). There is also a special Joseph Smith Translation Section about Lot and his daughters that adds information. It wasn't Homosexuality per say, adultery is a completely different sin in which an individual has made a covenant with GOD to honor his wife. Adultery is a much greater sin than homosexuality ever was...because it involved a covenant made with God. HENCE, the symbol of circumsion is a cleansing that takes place, a change. Why else would they cut off the foreskin of a penis? Is the foreskin of the penis not symbolic in the same way we baptize by immersion. It symbolizes something.

God never condones sin. We do. And so he provided us a way to rid ourselves of it to enter back into his presence. He can not allow the least degree of it in his presences. He may command things---But we do them...so we are the wicked ones. He commands us not to lie--but we do anyway, and then maybe he commands polygamy (maybe), and we obey it. Shows who we serve...which isn't the God of Love. What we obey reveals us.

[Arenera]

Ok, let's have the scholars help us:

Joseph Smith and his papers, an Introduction

Joseph Smith’s overflowing affection for his people was one reason for their loyalty. He entered long exclamations of gratitude in his diary when the Latter-day Saints cut wood for him in the winter, and he often laid his hands on his clerks’ heads to give them personal blessings. “Fri[e]ndship,” he told his people, “is the gr[a]nd fundamental prniple [principle] of Mormonism, to revolution[ize] [and] civilize the world.— pour forth love.”43 In prison following the Missouri war, chained to six of his companions in two-foot intervals, Smith wrote cheerily to Emma:

Brother Robison is chained next to me he has a true heart and a firm mind, Brother Whight, is next, Br. Rigdon, next, Hyram, next, Parely, next, Amasa, next, and thus we are bound together in chains as well as the cords of everlasting love, we are in good spirits and rejoice that we are counted worthy to be persicuted for christ sake.

In the same letter he wrote to his wife and children:

Oh my affectionate Emma, I want you to remember that I am a true and faithful friend, to you and the children, forever, my heart is intwined around you[r]s forever and ever, oh may God bless you all, amen I am your husband and am in bands and tribulation.44

Sadly, in the end, the bands between the couple were tried to the breaking point.

At times revelation became a burden as well as a blessing, at no time more than when plural marriage was revealed. Plural marriage was the final component of the logic of restoration. Smith had prayed for an understanding of Old Testament polygamy and was commanded to do the “works of Abraham.”45 Although he hated adultery and was deeply loyal to his wife Emma, he believed he was to take additional wives as had the ancient patriarchs. He went about it carefully, one woman at a time, usually approaching her relatives first and going through a prescribed wedding ceremony. During his lifetime, he was married to approximately thirty women.46 Although conjugal relations were apparently involved, he spent little time with these women, the need for secrecy and the demands on his time keeping them apart. At first aghast at what her husband was doing, Emma eventually agreed to a few of the plural marriages but then pulled back. She oscillated between hesitant submission and outright opposition to the practice, but according to Maria Jane Johnston Woodward, who worked for a time as a servant in the Smith household, Emma told her, “The principle of plural marriage is right. . . . t is from our Father in Heaven.”47 After her husband’s death, Emma refused to go west, where plural marriage would be practiced. She never admitted to her children that their father had been involved.

To add to his unpopularity, in the final six months of his life Joseph Smith set out on a course of political action that outraged his critics. In January 1844, he announced his candidacy for president of the United States and a few months later organized a shadow government called the Kingdom of God, which may have been envisioned as a prototype of Christ’s millennial government of the earth. Whether or not he believed he could win the presidency, he spoke optimistically, as candidates do in the beginning of a campaign. Certainly his patience with government had run out. The Mormons had been abused many times with no compensation for confiscated property from any level of government, and in 1844 they felt the tide of hatred rising again. Smith could not understand why the Constitution did not compel the government to protect the rights of Mormons. His platform defended all downtrodden people of his time: slaves, whom he felt should be purchased from their masters with revenues from public lands; prisoners held under cruel and unsanitary conditions; court-martialed soldiers; and sailors, whose suffering at the hands of tyrannical ship captains was attracting the sympathy of reformers. To all, he promised justice.

One close associate said after a meeting to organize the Kingdom of God, “It seems like heaven began on earth, and the power of God is with us.”48 But Joseph Smith’s enemies in the church and the surrounding towns could see nothing noble in his program. A number of onetime believers, some who had been high in the church’s hierarchy, took plural marriage as evidence that he had fallen as a prophet. They organized to remove him from office and return the church to its pre-polygamy and pre–Kingdom of God course. When they published a newspaper to rally the opposition, Smith, fearful the paper would incite mob violence, had the press shut down by city authorities and destroyed. Nearby citizens were infuriated. When Smith went to Carthage, the county seat, for trial, a mob attacked him in jail. He was shot through an open window, fell to the ground, and died on 27 June 1844.49

"The principle of plural marriage is right. . . . t is from our Father in Heaven.”47" when God condones it.

[TrueIntent]

Ok, let's have the scholars help us:

Joseph Smith and his papers, an Introduction

Joseph Smith’s overflowing affection for his people was one reason for their loyalty. He entered long exclamations of gratitude in his diary when the Latter-day Saints cut wood for him in the winter, and he often laid his hands on his clerks’ heads to give them personal blessings. “Fri[e]ndship,” he told his people, “is the gr[a]nd fundamental prniple [principle] of Mormonism, to revolution[ize] [and] civilize the world.— pour forth love.”43 In prison following the Missouri war, chained to six of his companions in two-foot intervals, Smith wrote cheerily to Emma:

Brother Robison is chained next to me he has a true heart and a firm mind, Brother Whight, is next, Br. Rigdon, next, Hyram, next, Parely, next, Amasa, next, and thus we are bound together in chains as well as the cords of everlasting love, we are in good spirits and rejoice that we are counted worthy to be persicuted for christ sake.

In the same letter he wrote to his wife and children:

Oh my affectionate Emma, I want you to remember that I am a true and faithful friend, to you and the children, forever, my heart is intwined around you[r]s forever and ever, oh may God bless you all, amen I am your husband and am in bands and tribulation.44

Sadly, in the end, the bands between the couple were tried to the breaking point.

At times revelation became a burden as well as a blessing, at no time more than when plural marriage was revealed. Plural marriage was the final component of the logic of restoration. Smith had prayed for an understanding of Old Testament polygamy and was commanded to do the “works of Abraham.”45 Although he hated adultery and was deeply loyal to his wife Emma, he believed he was to take additional wives as had the ancient patriarchs. He went about it carefully, one woman at a time, usually approaching her relatives first and going through a prescribed wedding ceremony. During his lifetime, he was married to approximately thirty women.46 Although conjugal relations were apparently involved, he spent little time with these women, the need for secrecy and the demands on his time keeping them apart. At first aghast at what her husband was doing, Emma eventually agreed to a few of the plural marriages but then pulled back. She oscillated between hesitant submission and outright opposition to the practice, but according to Maria Jane Johnston Woodward, who worked for a time as a servant in the Smith household, Emma told her, “The principle of plural marriage is right. . . . t is from our Father in Heaven.”47 After her husband’s death, Emma refused to go west, where plural marriage would be practiced. She never admitted to her children that their father had been involved.

To add to his unpopularity, in the final six months of his life Joseph Smith set out on a course of political action that outraged his critics. In January 1844, he announced his candidacy for president of the United States and a few months later organized a shadow government called the Kingdom of God, which may have been envisioned as a prototype of Christ’s millennial government of the earth. Whether or not he believed he could win the presidency, he spoke optimistically, as candidates do in the beginning of a campaign. Certainly his patience with government had run out. The Mormons had been abused many times with no compensation for confiscated property from any level of government, and in 1844 they felt the tide of hatred rising again. Smith could not understand why the Constitution did not compel the government to protect the rights of Mormons. His platform defended all downtrodden people of his time: slaves, whom he felt should be purchased from their masters with revenues from public lands; prisoners held under cruel and unsanitary conditions; court-martialed soldiers; and sailors, whose suffering at the hands of tyrannical ship captains was attracting the sympathy of reformers. To all, he promised justice.

One close associate said after a meeting to organize the Kingdom of God, “It seems like heaven began on earth, and the power of God is with us.”48 But Joseph Smith’s enemies in the church and the surrounding towns could see nothing noble in his program. A number of onetime believers, some who had been high in the church’s hierarchy, took plural marriage as evidence that he had fallen as a prophet. They organized to remove him from office and return the church to its pre-polygamy and pre–Kingdom of God course. When they published a newspaper to rally the opposition, Smith, fearful the paper would incite mob violence, had the press shut down by city authorities and destroyed. Nearby citizens were infuriated. When Smith went to Carthage, the county seat, for trial, a mob attacked him in jail. He was shot through an open window, fell to the ground, and died on 27 June 1844.49

"The principle of plural marriage is right. . . . t is from our Father in Heaven.”47" when God condones it.

If Christ didn't need scribes, then I don't need scholars. I'd rather take direction from the Holy Ghost. There are no direct quotes either from Joseph Smith teaching plural marriage...only quotes of quotes. There are public quotes of him denying it. If quotes of quotes are acceptable, then I can find some where people claimed Joseph said he was deceived....even from the mouth of Brigham Young. Either way. You miss the point all day long....prophets aren't always righteous. The pattern in scripture is that they find they path (sometimes sinning in ignorance) by holding to the word of god. And where they find they sin, they repent and record their sins and repentance. I think that you believe that because something is given as a command...that makes it okay???? The actual Hebrew definition of sin is "missing the mark." Jesus Christ was the mark. Anytime we sin it's because we did something that doesn't point us to Christ. By their fruits he shall know them. You don't understand sin and what causes sin. You know a sin by the fruits it produces. And you know the spirit you followed, whether it was peace, joy, patience etc.....or. Lavicousneas, etc. there are many ways to sin. When u discover it, the question is, will u repent?

[Col. Flagg]

So that makes it OK or acceptable?

When the Lord says so, yes.

And what was the one common theme/element in every situation where a man of high political/religious office took more than one wife for himself?

Happiness?

Falling.

[Col. Flagg]

Has anyone ever stopped to consider for a moment that polygamy is the only so-called 'doctrine' that is both an abomination and a commandment to the Lord? =))

[Finrock]

This is likely what is happening psychologically in my opinion: As opposed to taking the data (whatever that data might be) and allowing the data to form our conclusions (whatever those conclusions may be), people have formed a foregone conclusion and then they are attempting to shape the data to fit the foregone conclusion because the conclusion(s) which is or may be derived from the data is not always positive or faith promoting or fit the foregone conclusions already believed.

Many Mormons live in this box and everything has to fit inside of this box. If it doesn't fit in the box, you cut it off, ignore it, brush it away, or you do whatever you must so that the box doesn't get violated. Everything must fit in the box. So, scripture, data, history, facts, and all of this data is essentially made, one way or the other, to fit inside the box even when it doesn't, can't, or it is impossible.

-Finrock

[TrueIntent]

Has anyone ever stopped to consider for a moment that polygamy is the only so-called 'doctrine' that is both an abomination and a commandment to the Lord? =))

Sins of Soddam and Gomorra

49 Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. 50 They were haughty and did an abomination before me. So I removed them, when I saw it.

Proverbs chapter 6 lists the things God finds to be an Abomination....It appears to be Pride, lying, .....adultery

I will summarize...




16 ¶ These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him:

17 A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

18 An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,

19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.

For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light; and reproofs of instruction are the way of life:

24 To keep thee from the evil woman, from the flattery of the tongue of a strange woman.

6 For by means of a whorish woman a man is brought to a piece of bread: and the adulteress will hunt for the precious life.

27 Can a man take fire in his bosom, and his clothes not be burned?

28 Can one go upon hot coals, and his feet not be burned?

29 So he that goeth in to his neighbour’s wife; whosoever toucheth her shall not be innocent.

32 But whoso committeth adultery with a woman lacketh understanding: he that doeth it destroyeth his own soul.

[Arenera]

Introduction

Beginnings

As a personality of the nineteenth century, Joseph Smith stands out as extraordinary. While many writers have been critical of him and his teachings, most are impressed with at least some of his accomplishments.

He published a five hundred-page book of scripture, organized a new religion, dictated more than a hundred revelations, founded at least three cities, built one temple and began others, and revealed a remarkable theological framework that both expanded and contradicted Christian thinking of the era.

Of all of these endeavors, establishing the practice of plural marriage has been the most controversial. In the years following his death, both critics and believers alike have questioned his reasons for practicing polygamy.

Unfortunately, Joseph Smith, who was the only individual who could definitively explain his motives and intentions, left no personal record about these matters. Some clues can be found in his revelations, sermons, and a hodge-podge of statements collected from newspapers, memoirs, affidavits, and notebooks, but most sources are second-hand, late, and may suffer from reliability issues.

A Reluctant Polygamist?

Critics balk at the suggestion that Joseph Smith reluctantly established plural marriage. But in doing so, they rely on their own intuition while ignoring statements from many of Joseph’s contemporaries that attest to his hesitancy.

Some of Joseph’s closest associates wrote late-in-life that an angel commanded him to marry plural wives, and he initially resisted that directive.

Benjamin F. Johnson remembered that Joseph “put it off” and “waited until an Angel with a drawn Sword Stood before him and declared that if he longer delayed fulfilling that Command he would Slay him.”

Lorenzo Snow recalled that the Prophet “hesitated and deferred from time to time” and that he “foresaw the trouble that would follow and sought to turn away from the commandment.”

Erastus Snow reported that the angel accused the Prophet of “being neglectful in the discharges of his duties” and spoke “of Joseph having to plead on his knees before the Angel for his Life.”

According to Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner, an angel was required to visit Joseph three times between 1834 and 1842 before he fully complied:

An angel came to him [Joseph Smith] and the last time he came with a drawn sword in his hand and told Joseph if he did not go into that principle, he would slay him. Joseph said he talked to him soberly about it, and told him it was an abomination and quoted scripture to him. He said in the Book of Mormon it was an abomination in the eyes of the Lord, and they were to adhere to these things except the Lord speak. … [The Prophet reported that] the angel came to me three times between the years of 1834 and 1842 and said I was to obey that principle or he would slay me.

Three of Joseph Smith’s plural wives described similar reluctance. Eliza R. Snow characterized Joseph as “afraid to promulgate it.”

Helen Mar Kimball Whitney remembered that she had been told,

Had it not been for the fear of His displeasure, Joseph would have shrunk from the undertaking and would have continued silent, as he did for years, until an angel of the Lord threatened to slay him if he did not reveal and establish this celestial principle.”

She also said that “Joseph put off the dreaded day as long as he dared.”

Lucy Walker reported that Joseph “had his doubts about it for he debated it in his own mind.”

Practicing Polygamy was Challenging

The Prophet’s contemporaries recorded that Joseph Smith reacted to the command to practice polygamy with dismay, and he afterwards sympathized with the challenge that plural marriage represented to church members.

Bathsheba B. Smith remembered that he [Joseph Smith] recognized that it would be a “troubling” doctrine. She wrote:

I heard the Prophet give instructions concerning plural marriage; he counseled the sisters not to trouble themselves in consequence of it, that all would be right … the result would be for their glory and exaltation.”
Bathsheba also related: “I heard him [Joseph Smith] tell the sisters one time not to feel worried, — that all was right … all will be well in the end.”

To help his potential plural brides overcome their initial disgust at the thought of polygamy, the Prophet promised several of them that they could receive their own spiritual confirmation that polygamy was divinely sanctioned. Divine manifestations were later reported by some of these women, confirming to them the correctness of the principle.

The practice of polygamy in the Mormon Church unfolded at a time when some religious fringe groups experimented with marital dynamics, including polygamy, as they reinvented the image of religion. Eyewitnesses, however, give us no indication that Joseph Smith instituted this marital innovation for any reason other than that he was commanded to do so.

To continue this brief narrative of the unfolding of the practice of polygamy in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, proceed to the section on Joseph’s Proposals.

[gclayjr]

Truintent,

If Christ didn't need scribes, then I don't need scholars. I'd rather take direction from the Holy Ghost.

Sure you're equal to Christ himself. It is interesting how each of you who part from the Church and choose to follow the "Holy Ghost" instead, find that the "Holy Ghost" tells each of you something different, and it always turns out to be what you want to hear!

Regards,

George Clay

[TrueIntent]

Truintent,

If Christ didn't need scribes, then I don't need scholars. I'd rather take direction from the Holy Ghost.

Sure you're equal to Christ himself. It is interesting how each of you who part from the Church and choose to follow the "Holy Ghost" instead, find that the "Holy Ghost" tells each of you something different, and it always turns out to be what you want to hear!

Regards,

George Clay

I knew you would reply with that...so let me give you the counter to what I knew you would reply with, and I will give it to you from the scriptures. Here are the scriptures!

Romans 8:17 And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.
(He wants us to be equal with him, thats his gift..its what the temple ceremony is teaching us...to commune with him directly in his presence).

In mathew, referring to Jesus...25 And he served under his father, and he spake not as other men, neither could he be taught; for he needed not that any man should teach him.

Jesus was different; he “taught them as one having authority from God, and not as having authority from the Scribes.” (JST, Matt. 7:37; italics added.)

Note.....The Joseph Smith translation of 7:37 is not found on the LDS Joseph Smith Translation section of LDS.org for some reason (hopefully it is an innocent error). I had to pull it from a 1986 talk....my scriptures do have this version though. You will see that this JST indicates that Joseph believed authority, as do I, comes from God--if you need a scholar or scribe to interpret for you...well....there's your scripture. The church just has an organized system in which priesthood authority (the power of God) should flow through. There is a great quote from Boyd K. Packer acknowledging this.

I don't claim to be a Christ or anything for that matter other than a mom and a wife who strives to be a joint-heir....but I do claim to be someone his strives to be lead by the Holy Ghost--imperfectly because I am flesh. One usually knows if they have received it. Those of us who have the spirit and teach by it don't teach truths differently, you just perceive our words differently, OR sometimes we err in how we communicate a truth through language....but its not because we don't understand it. If you don't agree with me...teach me from the scriptures...I love to be taught and corrected....thats how I correct my own understanding of the truth. All truth can be circumscribed into one great whole. Please teach me from the scriptures--if you can find that truth in all three witnesses, i will probably believe you. I do this to myself...when I a scripture I understand contradicts a scripture another scripture...I usually ask, what am I not understanding correctly? It leads us to higher truths to ask these questions. I don't care if Im right....I care to know and understand truth.

[Seek the Truth]

Has anyone ever stopped to consider for a moment that polygamy is the only so-called 'doctrine' that is both an abomination and a commandment to the Lord? =))

Fornication is an abomination but we are commanded to multiply and replenish. Sounds like you have issues with God.