Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Mormon history and marriage question


  • Please log in to reply
65 replies to this topic

#21 Kamperfoelie

Kamperfoelie

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 108 posts

Posted 29 July 2011 - 06:00 PM

I found the following revelation, recorded as Section 131 of the Doctrine and Covenants:

"And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power ... are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead."

i suppose i may have misinterpreted them before :confused: it happens when reading ye olde englishe :lol:

#22 Kamperfoelie

Kamperfoelie

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 108 posts

Posted 29 July 2011 - 06:07 PM

Unrelated but interesting in the same passage:
"The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which shall not be forgiven in the world nor out of the world, is in that ye commit murder wherein ye shed innocent blood,"
Is this abortion we are talking about?

#23 Dravin

Dravin

    Gneiss Guy

  • Members
  • 12976 posts
  • LocationIndiana

Posted 29 July 2011 - 06:23 PM

Something that's easy to misunderstand about "temple marriage", in the temple you're both married and sealed. A legal marriage isn't a priesthood ordinance per se nor does it last beyond this life because the authority of the person authorizing it (the state) isn't using God' authority (but it's own) and it is not sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise (what the scripture you are quoting is talking about). A sealing however is a priesthood ordinance and uses the proper priesthood authority to be recognized by the Lord and be sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise which allows it to be of effect after this life.

Sounds like you're confusing, a legal marriage isn't valid after this life (because it isn't sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise) with a legal marriage isn't valid.

Edited by Dravin, 29 July 2011 - 06:26 PM.

Hindsight is all well and good... until you trip.

#24 beefche

beefche

    The resident cow

  • Senior Moderators
  • 8336 posts
  • LocationHoosier State!

Posted 29 July 2011 - 06:34 PM

I found the following revelation, recorded as Section 131 of the Doctrine and Covenants:

"And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power ... are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead."

i suppose i may have misinterpreted them before :confused: it happens when reading ye olde englishe :lol:


Yes, that scripture is true. Any marriages performed outside the authority of God will not be in force nor have any efficacy in the next life.

That doesn't negate that marriages (outside the temple) are still in force for this life.
I say that we need to teach our people to find their answers in the scriptures...But the unfortunate thing is that so many of us are not reading the scriptures. We do not know what is in them, and therefore we speculate about things that we ought to have found in the scriptures themselves. I think that therein is one of our biggest dangers of today."
--President Harold B. Lee, December, 1972

#25 beefche

beefche

    The resident cow

  • Senior Moderators
  • 8336 posts
  • LocationHoosier State!

Posted 29 July 2011 - 06:36 PM

Unrelated but interesting in the same passage:
"The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which shall not be forgiven in the world nor out of the world, is in that ye commit murder wherein ye shed innocent blood,"
Is this abortion we are talking about?


I believe it is talking about any innocent person, whether a child or adult.
I say that we need to teach our people to find their answers in the scriptures...But the unfortunate thing is that so many of us are not reading the scriptures. We do not know what is in them, and therefore we speculate about things that we ought to have found in the scriptures themselves. I think that therein is one of our biggest dangers of today."
--President Harold B. Lee, December, 1972

#26 Kamperfoelie

Kamperfoelie

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 108 posts

Posted 29 July 2011 - 06:42 PM

Thank you for your wisdom.

Where can i find scripture pertaining to "reaching through the veil"?

#27 beefche

beefche

    The resident cow

  • Senior Moderators
  • 8336 posts
  • LocationHoosier State!

Posted 29 July 2011 - 06:46 PM

Thank you for your wisdom.

Where can i find scripture pertaining to "reaching through the veil"?


I am not aware of any scriptures with that exact phrase. Here is a link to the search feature at lds.org using the word "veil." You can look at that to see if you find what you are looking for.

Scriptures Search Results
I say that we need to teach our people to find their answers in the scriptures...But the unfortunate thing is that so many of us are not reading the scriptures. We do not know what is in them, and therefore we speculate about things that we ought to have found in the scriptures themselves. I think that therein is one of our biggest dangers of today."
--President Harold B. Lee, December, 1972

#28 HiJolly

HiJolly

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2476 posts
  • LocationSalt Lake Valley

Posted 29 July 2011 - 09:02 PM

Unrelated but interesting in the same passage:
"The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which shall not be forgiven in the world nor out of the world, is in that ye commit murder wherein ye shed innocent blood,"
Is this abortion we are talking about?

This is in section 132, verse 27.

Section 132 concerns eternal marriage and the second anointing. It is not speaking of abortion. If you don't know about the second anointing & attendant law, then this section will not make much sense. Straining to understand it without any knowledge of the second anointing will lead you into error.

HJ
"All it takes is for us to get a little bit self-important and narrow-minded. Toss in a little fussiness, a bit of dogma, and a bunch of pride and you've got yourself a bunch of people who wouldn't recognize the truth if it sat on them."
-- Robert Kirby

#29 Schwesterherz

Schwesterherz

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts

Posted 14 August 2011 - 02:45 PM

It is important to me whether Joseph Smith was a prophet. And not, whether he lived in a polygamous relationship. And the most unimportant matter to me is whether this relationships were sexual or not.
„Before you echo Amen in your home or place of worship, think and remember. A child is listening.” ]--- Mary Griffith

#30 Spartan117

Spartan117

    Mormon Convert Extraordinaire

  • Members
  • 526 posts
  • LocationUtah

Posted 14 August 2011 - 03:32 PM

It is important to me whether Joseph Smith was a prophet. And not, whether he lived in a polygamous relationship. And the most unimportant matter to me is whether this relationships were sexual or not.

DNA solves a Joseph Smith mystery | Deseret News

There have been DNA tests performed on many of the descendants of the plural wives that Joseph had to see if they are in fact related to Joseph. So far every single test has proven that they are not the offspring of the prophet and the history of Smith and plural marriage presented by the church is reinforced and authenticated. Not that it needed to be, mind you. This will help to shut down anti arguments pertaining to their fictitious history about the church and Joseph character.

#31 beefche

beefche

    The resident cow

  • Senior Moderators
  • 8336 posts
  • LocationHoosier State!

Posted 14 August 2011 - 04:06 PM

This will help to shut down anti arguments pertaining to their fictitious history about the church and Joseph character.


No it won't. Proof or evidence is never needed to contradict, disagree, or flat out lie about something.
I say that we need to teach our people to find their answers in the scriptures...But the unfortunate thing is that so many of us are not reading the scriptures. We do not know what is in them, and therefore we speculate about things that we ought to have found in the scriptures themselves. I think that therein is one of our biggest dangers of today."
--President Harold B. Lee, December, 1972

#32 Schwesterherz

Schwesterherz

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts

Posted 15 August 2011 - 04:22 AM

A good friend of mine, a former member of the church, made this statement (he is an American, as you see):

"How do you square this with the words of condemnation against multiple wives in the Book of Jacob. The only justification ever given doctrinally for polygamy is to raise up seed. You can't raise seed without planting seed."


Interesting, isn't it?
„Before you echo Amen in your home or place of worship, think and remember. A child is listening.” ]--- Mary Griffith

#33 Spartan117

Spartan117

    Mormon Convert Extraordinaire

  • Members
  • 526 posts
  • LocationUtah

Posted 15 August 2011 - 06:34 AM

What's interesting is that polygamy was practiced by many prophets in the Bible, your "friend" is presenting a logical fallacy called "begging the question" in an attempt to smear the church.

Here are a few things the Old Testament has to say about polygamy ...

In Exodus 21:10, a man can marry an infinite amount of women without any limits to how many he can marry.

In 2 Samuel 5:13; 1 Chronicles 3:1-9, 14:3, King David had six wives and numerous concubines.

In 1 Kings 11:3, King Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines.

In 2 Chronicles 11:21, King Solomon's son Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines.

In Deuteronomy 21:15 "If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons...."

The argument against the church's practice of plural marriage comes on several different fronts. One of them is that "polygamy was not allowed and the Bible says so." Polygamy was practiced when the Lord allowed it, and it was stopped when the Lord forbid it. That's how it was anciently and in modern times.

As far as raising seed and planting seed, it is true Joseph Smith did not father children with any of his wives but Emma, but the theological function of polygamy could have been to "raise up" groups of people that would be faithful to God. He also adopted children, and according to your "friend" that doesn't meet his criteria for raising seed either. While Joseph is an exception, there were plural marriages in which the husband multiplied and replenished with all of his wives.

I'll never understand why when someone has a question about the church their first stop is an anti-site or anti-book or a former member who has an ax to grind. It's never the church website or missionaries. I think people have the notion that information from a church related source or outlet is biased or that the church is in the habit of hiding or changing their history. These ideas come from the anti-mormon community, who apparently aren't biased at all. If you wanted to learn about the United States, would your first stop be al-Qaeda's website? Would you avoid asking an American questions about his/her country because they don't know the "real" America? Would you take information from an al-Qaeda affiliated website and post it on forums and youtube videos, demanding that the United States or Americans refute or explain it? Now THAT is interesting.

I'm not lumping you into this group, schwesterherz. You had a question that seemed legitimate at first glance and you came to the right place to ask it. I hope I was able to clarify the issue for you.

If you don't mind me asking, what were the circumstances around your friend becoming a former member of the church? You don't have to answer, I'm just curious is all.

#34 HiJolly

HiJolly

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2476 posts
  • LocationSalt Lake Valley

Posted 15 August 2011 - 06:56 AM

oops - already said my piece...

Edited by HiJolly, 15 August 2011 - 06:58 AM.

"All it takes is for us to get a little bit self-important and narrow-minded. Toss in a little fussiness, a bit of dogma, and a bunch of pride and you've got yourself a bunch of people who wouldn't recognize the truth if it sat on them."
-- Robert Kirby

#35 Schwesterherz

Schwesterherz

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts

Posted 15 August 2011 - 02:51 PM

Another good friend of mine, a former member from Italy, wrote this to me today:

Mormons denied that Joseph “always horny” Smith have had any SEXUAL RELATIONSHIP. They said, that he were married to one wife, Emma, and the other wives were sealed to him because it was a “spiritual” relation. But, if it were SPIRITUAL, why then one of his wives told this:

... the Prophet Joseph and his wife Emma offered us a home in their family, and they treated us with great kindness.... I was married to Joseph Smith on the 4th of March 1843.... My sister Eliza was also married to Joseph a few days later. This was done without the knowledge of Emma Smith. Two months afterward she consented to give her husband two wives, providing he would give her the privilege of choosing them. She accordingly chose my sister Eliza and myself, and to save family trouble Brother Joseph thought it best to have another ceremony performed. Accordingly on the 11th of May, 1843, we were sealed to Joseph Smith a second time, in Emma's presence.... From that very hour, however, Emma was our bitter enemy. We remained in the family several months after this, but things went from bad to worse until we were obligated to leave the house and find another home (Historical Record, vol. 6, p.240).

Why this secrecy, if this marriage were only “spiritual”?
And why is this at D&C:

"Verily, thus saith the Lord ... you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants ... David and Solomon, ... as touching the principle and doctrine of having many wives and concubines ... David's wives and concubines were given unto him of me ..."(132: 1,39)

Just “spiritual”?
Joseph Smith “NEVER had sex with one of his “spiritual” wives? LOL!


I think I should break off the contact to her. Because it seems to be a lie to me. or what do you think about it?

Edited by Schwesterherz, 15 August 2011 - 05:39 PM.

„Before you echo Amen in your home or place of worship, think and remember. A child is listening.” ]--- Mary Griffith

#36 Suzie

Suzie

    Wonder Woman

  • Members
  • 2728 posts
  • LocationThemyscira

Posted 15 August 2011 - 06:53 PM

it is true Joseph Smith did not father children with any of his wives but Emma


As far as we know.

http://www.lds.net/f...ph-smith-3.html

Schwesterherz, please check that link as well. I made mention of the Partridge sisters somewhere in that thread.

Edited by Suzie, 15 August 2011 - 06:56 PM.


#37 Schwesterherz

Schwesterherz

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts

Posted 16 August 2011 - 07:10 AM

Schwesterherz, please check that link as well. I made mention of the Partridge sisters somewhere in that thread.


I have had checked it out, and I found nothing that PROOVED that Joseph Smith have had sex with the other women.
I, however, think about a question all the time. Why did Joseph Smith marry women who were already married to other men? Can anybody give me an answer from you on this?
„Before you echo Amen in your home or place of worship, think and remember. A child is listening.” ]--- Mary Griffith

#38 HiJolly

HiJolly

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2476 posts
  • LocationSalt Lake Valley

Posted 16 August 2011 - 07:23 AM

Schwesterherz,

I'll give you my opinion. You're not likely to find anything more substantial on this issue (Polyandry), since the participants didn't choose to share their experience with the world.

The Church used to have a teaching called the Doctrine of Adoption. This was discontinued (by either President Taylor or President Woodruff). Study up on it, if you'd like.

Joseph had a vision of Heaven where he saw all the people there connected in family/priesthood ties (sealings). Joseph's effort to bring the order of Heaven to earth after that included sealing himself & his family to other people, both male & female. Joseph's calling as a prophet had caused him to attempt restoring the Kingdom of God to the earth, and this was another related aspect of that mission.

HiJolly
"All it takes is for us to get a little bit self-important and narrow-minded. Toss in a little fussiness, a bit of dogma, and a bunch of pride and you've got yourself a bunch of people who wouldn't recognize the truth if it sat on them."
-- Robert Kirby

#39 Spartan117

Spartan117

    Mormon Convert Extraordinaire

  • Members
  • 526 posts
  • LocationUtah

Posted 16 August 2011 - 09:57 AM

Another good friend of mine, a former member from Italy, wrote this to me today:

Why this secrecy, if this marriage were only “spiritual”?
And why is this at D&C:

"Verily, thus saith the Lord ... you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants ... David and Solomon, ... as touching the principle and doctrine of having many wives and concubines ... David's wives and concubines were given unto him of me ..."(132: 1,39)

Just “spiritual”?
Joseph Smith “NEVER had sex with one of his “spiritual” wives? LOL!

Read the whole record of David and Solomon to find the whole truth. Or mix-and-match scriptures to create whatever you want

David, as a polygamist, did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord until he took the wife of Uriah, according to both the Bible and the Doctrine and Covenants. The Bible says,

Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite (I Kings 15:5).

The Bible tells us that David's wives were given to him by the Lord through his prophet, Nathan, who is also mentioned in Doctrine and Covenants 132:39. David, however, sinned greatly in the case of Uriah, so much that the scriptures tell us he has fallen from his exaltation (D & C 132:39).

In the case of Solomon (1 Kings 11:1-6), his situation was truly an abomination because he took unauthorized, non-Israelite, pagan wives and concubines. The result was that his wives turned his heart against God and toward pagan gods, in spite of the fact that God had appeared to Solomon twice:

But King Solomon loved many strange women, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of the Moabites, Ammonies, 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; Solomon 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 Solomon 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.

For Solomon went after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom the abomination of the Ammonites.

And Solomon did evil in the sight of the Lord, and went not fully after the Lord, as did David his father (1 Kings. 11:1-6).

The Doctrine and Covenants agrees with the Bible. The Lord, in speaking to Jacob in the Book of Mormon, knew the minds of the people and that they were excusing their own sins by comparing themselves to David and Solomon. Why, out of all the Biblical kings and prophets who were polygamists, were David and Solomon singled out for criticism by the Lord? Because they sinned in the taking of unlawful wives, i.e., David in the case of Bathsheba (1 Kings 15:5) and Solomon with his foreign wives.

This "thing," the taking of unauthonzed wives, was the sin and abomination Jacob warned of, not the marrying of additional wives given by the Lord's prophets.

I think I should break off the contact to her. Because it seems to be a lie to me. or what do you think about it?

This second "friend" of yours is repeating arguments from the anti-community that have already been addressed, refuted, and dismissed by the apologetics community. Your "friend" was cherry picking scriptures and combining them with her erroneous ideas about Joseph Smith and his character, then draws conclusions on on the two and presents it in a neat little package as if it proved something. She may be laughing out loud at the end but I just feel sorry for her.

Also, I've never heard of that account she posted concerning those sisters, nor of the book they came from called "history Records" so I can't address that. If you can provide a link I would be happy to look into it.

As far as "secrecy" goes, that is a misunderstanding on her part. The best way I can describe this is that when the revelation first came to Joseph Smith about initiating plural marriage, it was taught privately at first. There are many suggested reasons for that, but something isn't a secret if you start telling people. In a roundabout way, the common answer to questions about temple ceremonies could be used as a helper to understand; "It's not secret, it's sacred." Now this is not entirely accurate in comparison to early plural marriage and is not the answer either. So don't take that too far, just keep that idea. Joseph did at first attempt to introduce plural marriage to the whole church all at once. That would have lead to further persecution of the early Saints (concrete evidence of that is that is exactly what happened when the doctrine was taught openly) and there was strong resistance from a lot of the people who he did teach about plural marriage.

My end conclusion is not that it was a not a secret, it was taught slowly throughout the church, line upon line, precept upon precept. The total amount of pioneer Mormons who actually practiced it is hard to find a definite answer on, I've seen everything from 5%-30%. It was only openly taught for about 50 years and standardly each man had only 2-3 wives. You also had to have permission from the prophet to enter into plural marriage.

As far as Joseph never having sex with his "spiritual wives" as she calls them, she can invent moral qualities about Joseph all day long, but we know different. Every person that has come forward with claim to being a direct descendant of Joseph Smith through one of his plural wives has been been dismissed by DNA testing. I again feel sorry for your friend. She is also an idiot.



As far as we know.

http://www.lds.net/f...ph-smith-3.html

Schwesterherz, please check that link as well. I made mention of the Partridge sisters somewhere in that thread.

Every person that has come forward with claim to being a direct descendant of Joseph Smith through one of his plural wives has been been dismissed by DNA testing.



I have had checked it out, and I found nothing that PROOVED that Joseph Smith have had sex with the other women.
I, however, think about a question all the time. Why did Joseph Smith marry women who were already married to other men? Can anybody give me an answer from you on this?

Polygamy book/Polyandry - FAIRMormon
Sealing creates new, eternal families, and "as each new family came into being, it became another link in the chain of families stretching back to Adam, who was linked to God. Thus the 'family of God' became more than metaphor." It is but a short step from sealing existing families to extending that privilege outward. Since many, if not most, of the saints would have family outside the church (during this time) there was an understandable anxiety that they be included in the new, eternal family being forged by Joseph.

Later in Church history, this was accomplished by adoption, where faithful members would serve as surrogate parents in the divine order. This practice was not without its problems, as many surrogates began to look on their adoption of others as a route to glory and power, both spiritual and temporal, rather than as a service for the family of heaven. Adoption by living non-relatives was eventually replaced by the present practice of sealing members to deceased ancestors, with the expectation that definitive resolution of such matters can await the millennial years.

Hope all this helps.

#40 Suzie

Suzie

    Wonder Woman

  • Members
  • 2728 posts
  • LocationThemyscira

Posted 16 August 2011 - 10:40 AM

I have had checked it out, and I found nothing that PROOVED that Joseph Smith have had sex with the other women.
I, however, think about a question all the time. Why did Joseph Smith marry women who were already married to other men? Can anybody give me an answer from you on this?


Proved? I don't think there is a way to prove it unless some of the future DNA evidence confirms he had a child with one of these wives but you know, it can only proves offspring NOT whether or not these marriages involved intimacy. After all, there are a lot of couples who are intimate and yet have no children.

Personally, I really don't know why for some people it's a big deal. I lean towards the thought that he was intimate with some of these wives.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

IPB Skin By Virteq