Related Information to Plural Marriage: In That Day Seven Women Shall...

Plural Marriage: In That Day Seven Women Shall... - Page 68

In my estimation it is not, primarily because it is filled with flawed individuals. The Church is Christ's, but those who are called to the work are in the process of being perfected, but are not there yet.

I think the process of perfecting the People as well as setting of the Kingdom of God and his Church in its perfection is an ongoing process. The Church is without the Law of Consecration and the Law of Plural Marriage and thus is not perfected.

This would indicate that the Church also needs perfected or "set in order" which is an ongoing process

I think the Church should expect to be questioned on its past and it should answer as many questions as they are able. They should expect "Chastisement" when appropriate and work to improve when needed.

As pertaining to Plural Marriage I think the Church is trying, with imperfect men to find a balance between addressing its issues of the past and present, and moving forward in moving the Kingdom of God. I do not know how this should be done and they may be doing a crappy job of it. But I think this dispensation, as with all dispensations of the Church, are led by men who are trying their best to follow the council of the Lord. As we have seen even in the scriptures, that those in authority do make mistakes, even when led by God.

Shall Women Day That Marriage Plural

I will not go into whether the Church is perfect or not or even the definition of that as I do not believe this is the Thread for that. I do want to touch on what Dbackers said at the end. I do agree that man may try to do things as best they see fit, but I think certain things must have an exact state, especially if we believe in modern revelation. That is after all the whole idea of revelation and Prophets - clear up the confusion.

Anyone studying the topic of Plural Marriage will clearly have the same questions that have been brought up in this Thread, I do not believe we are unique in that regard. How many times was Joseph approached with direct questions and he gave answers, many of which now make up the D&C? In all the D&C where these things were brought about there was an explanation as to why it should be performed and by who, but you wll notice we are not offered the same for its discontinuance save for the manifesto brought about to appease the US Government.

Here is a question:

If the Church continued with Plural Marriage would it still have prospered as it did until today or would it have ended in the Utah desert?

If your answer is to the negative that the Church would have failed then...

Would that have been the fault of the Saints at the time or the way it was brought about and treated / handled?

Lastly, and most importantly...

PERHAPS, this is not as important as implied by the earlier Prophets since the Lord has done nothing to force his hand with it as he did the early Brethren. Strange how he made angel to appear to Joseph with drawn sword, but not with the modern ones. Again I go back to one of my original questions - why did it come about in the first place. If it was just to fulfill all times then Joseph merely had to take on one more wife to do that and it could wholly be symbolic. Thoughts?

Plural Marriage: In That Day Seven Women Shall... Studies Doctrine Mormon

Good question. I believe that the Saints failed a very important test. They decided to obey man's law, instead of God's, because they did not trust God to deliver them. And, because of that particular case, we have continued to submit to man's law.

I believe that if the Saints had been willing to trust in the Lord, the Church would not have been destroyed. I also believe that even if the Church had been destroyed, that there would have been an "underground" remnant that would have been incredibly powerful spiritually, and that Zion would have already been redeemed.

It was vital that the Principle be practiced, that the Law of Abraham be established. After that point, the people had the choice, and have chosen to reject this Law. However, I also believe that some people continue to obey this Law despite the persecution from the Church and the legal system. Whether they have the authority or not is a good question, but they are doing everything in their power to live it. Many are doing a wonderful job of it. Others are not. Some of them have gone far astray.

Read the autobiography of Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner. Joseph Smith told her that he had received revelation that she was to marry him. She rejected it, unless she got a very clear revelation for herself. That very night, an angel came to her, but she hid herself. The next day, Joseph told her that she had offended that angel, and that she should humble herself and repent, but that particular angel would not come to her again.

The next day she found the Prophet and explained that she had received revelation to marry him, that she had received another manifestation.

In other words, it wasn't just Joseph that received distinct Celestial guidance, but other men and women did also. But by 1890, almost 90% of the Saints had rejected the Law and Principle. Since then, over 95%, perhaps over 99% of the Saints who even know about them have rejected the other laws, doctrines, and ordinances associated with it.

This rejection, in my opinion, will lead to the damnation of most, if not all, of us. That is damnation in the form of blessings denied due to our pride and jealousy and refusal to seek out revelation on the subject. For others, it will be condemnation for failing to live up to the light and knowledge received.

I hope this answered the question.

Page 68 Shall Women Day That Marriage Plural

You are referring to the collective of Saints because it seems that the Brethren were willing to go to both jail and death to keep it? Even if the Saints rejected it the Apostles could have kept on living it which in fact from history we know they did.

Very familiar with this, we Discussed it a lot within this Thread.

Usually when the Church is under such damnation the Prophet is obligated to state so and what needs be for us to overcome it. I get the impression that this subject is treated as not valid for this life but important in the next where you will be instructed in the same.

Shall Women Day That Marriage Plural

Not sure but I am confident the Lord would have delivered His people after much tribulation, otherwise what is the purpose of giving them a commandment knowing they won't be able to live it?

Also did Pres. Woodruff approached the Lord or the other way around?

Plural Marriage: In That Day Seven Women Shall...

Nighthawk,
In your estimation, is the Church (and by extension its members) eternally damned for not living up to the Law of Plural marriage at this point, or is it a temporary damnation, that restricts our learning and progression in this life only?

Can we enter the celestial kingdom without practicing plural marriage in this life? And if we can, why is it necessary to go beyond the mark (Jacob 4: 14), so to speak, when it comes to following the law of Plural marriage at this particular moment?

If God has not required us to live the law of Plural marriage, how can we be damned, except in the general sense of the word, that results in us not being able to live the whole law (Law of Consecration, Celestial laws, Laws pertaining to becoming God's)? If we have not been commanded to do so at this very minute, are we not justified in refraining from living this law, until it is given to us to do so by Prophetic revelation?

I am not sure I am that worried about our inability to live this law at this moment in eternal time. I am not worried that we cannot live the Laws of Consecration, or other eternal laws that are part of the Celestial order. The truth is, I am having a difficult enough time following the laws of Tithing to perfection and being a better husband, without having the higher law thrust upon me. Right now I pray that the Lord gives me more time to prepare for these higher laws. Subconsciously I say everyday: What's the rush?

I am pretty sure I will be able to live the laws that are required of me, when I have the capacity to do so. I am fine with having the preparatory laws that we have now.

I am not sure, but I may be way off base, that it is moral or even right to try to follow a law that God has not asked to live, especially one that has been prohibited in scripture on occasion (Jacob 2: 27,
D&C 49: 16, 1 Tim. 3: 2, 12)

Rather off topic, but... It is my opinion that the Church would have died,or would have been seriously limited in in its command to usher in the Second coming of Christ (The earth being utterly wasted at his coming) , had Polygamy continued during the Political climate of the 19th and 20th Centuries. I definitely would not be a member of the Church as my Great grandfather would probably not have joined the Church and I would be damned more then I am now. Those members I taught in Hungary would not have joined the Church and it would have never spread to South America, Trinidad, Europe, Africa, etc. And I believe that the Priesthood would have never been extended to Righteous Black men. The Church would be like the Amish, who are isolated, and unable to extend beyond a certain region, with limited ability to spread the Gospel of repentance, baptism, and the gift of the Holy Ghost. Of course this is speculation, but It seems likely that a religion that practiced Polygamy in the 19th and 20th Centuries would not have been able to discuss the doctrines of the Articles of Faith, as Polygamy would be the main focus of the discussion. Is it a stretch to say that the Lord wanted to bring as many people unto him, that could at least follow a Terrestrial/Celestial law(Baptism ,Repentance, The gift of the Holy Ghost) , in preparing them to someday follow the Celestial Laws (Plural Marriage, Law of Consecration, Becoming priests and Priestesses kings and Queens.) Would he limit the bulk of Humanity because they could not automatically accept the practice of Polygamy (a practice that is a social pariah). I do not believe that God is that Cruel.

Plural Marriage That Day Women Shall... - Page 68

I can only go by what the Prophets prior to Heber J. Grant said. They taught very clearly that in order for us to attain exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom, it was necessary to live the law of plural marriage. They all taught that when the Church stopped people from living this law, it would be in apostasy. So, to that extent, it appears that the Church and all in it are damned (stopped) to the lower levels of the Celestial Kingdom.

Public statements by the Prophets and other leaders prior to President Grant indicate that they never intended to stop individuals from practicing plural marriage. They intended for the Church to stop the practice, but to leave it up to individuals to make the choices for themselves. That is why they used various measures such as establishing colonies outside the US where people could enter into plural marriages. However, when Heber J. Grant became President of the Church, he actively began to excommunicate people who lived plural marriage, even if they had entered their marriages before 1890. He publicly stated that one of his priorities was to have the polygamists prosecuted and sent to prison. He had some leaders actually provide names of people who refused to take an oath against polygamy to Mohave County officials that led to the Short Creek Raid.

Sorry, got a little off-subject there.

Ok, if you believe that God does not require you to live the law, then are you condemned? Good question. What is damnation? What is condemnation? I guess that I have been using these words to indicate a that a person cannot receive a blessing. I guess that you are right. If you are not required to live a law, then you probably aren't under condemnation.

So, if you are not required to live a law, does that mean that you get the blessing that you would have if you went ahead and lived it?

Can you live the Law of Consecration without it being required? Can you live it while the Church doesn't? Can you live it without the United Order?

Can you live the law of Abraham (Celestial Plural Marriage) without it being required? Can you live it while the Church doesn't? Can you live it without the official sanction of the State?

That is where it appears we differ. I believe that the Church is there to help us, not rule us. I believe that it is up to us to learn the laws and live them. I believe that it is wrong to cast someone out of the Church for believing and living a Law that was given in the Restoration, especially when it was so clearly taught to be vital to our exaltation. It is fine if the Church wants to repudiate it as an official doctrine of the Church, but it is wrong to "condemn" someone for believing and/or practicing it.

This goes back to D&C 130:20-21. We need to find out from the Lord whether He wants us, individually, to live these Laws. As far as I can tell, it is ALWAYS moral and right to live up to the greatest amount of knowledge that we have. It isn't always legal or socially acceptable, so you have to decide whether or not you equate "moral and right" with "legal and socially acceptable."

"Official" explanations have already answered your use of those "prohibiting" scriptures.

I do not think that your "offtopic" comment is OT at all.

That is entirely possible, since close to 90% of the membership wanted this Law to be "rescinded" so that they could be part of the World. They not only did not have faith that God would fight their battles for them, they didn't want Him to do so.

An interesting point is that based upon Joseph Smith's statement about the possibility that he would see the Lord in the flesh, if he had lived, that would have happened by 1890. Anti-Mormons use that statement (which is in the D&C, but I don't remember where) to show that Joseph had made a false prophecy.

However, what if the Saints had NOT wanted to give up this law. What if they had been firm in their desire to live up to EVERY law given by God? Would the Second Coming have happened in that time period? Would the World have reached a "fullness" of wickedness at that time, and the cleansing period begun in earnest?

Well, we will not know the answers to those questions for some time yet. Personally, I believe that if the Saints had stood firm, God would have gone before them, and things would have been far more glorious than we could ever imagine. But the Saints gave up (the majority, as there were very many who resisted to the extent of their abilities).

Is this really what you meant? This is the same argument that anti-Mormons use concerning the Book of Mormon and the Priesthood, not to mention Joseph Smith and the Church in general! He limits the bulk of Humanity because they refuse to accept Jesus Christ as the Saviour and Redeemer. He limits the bulk of Christianity because they deny the Book of Mormon and the Restoration. He limits the bulk of the Church because we don't live up to our covenants. I guess that maybe He actually IS that cruel.

Actually, the majority of the cultures on earth either embrace polygamy or allow it. It is only the descendants of Rome, especially the descendants of the Roman Catholic Church that hold polygamy in contempt. In fact, polygamy is NOT a social pariah, even in the US, unless a man specifically says that he will marry, support, and sustain more than one wife. If he wants to have a wife and 3 mistresses, the vast majority of the Western World won't even care. It is only when he undertakes to raise children with them that people get up in arms.

Maybe the Church would be MORE successful in Africa and Asia if men with more than one wife knew that they would have to abandon all but one in order to join the Church. Maybe it could make inroads into the Muslim world eventually if the common Muslim people could see that it would respect their cultural practices more than other Christian churches.

Plural Marriage That Day Women Shall... Mormon Doctrine Studies - Page 68

On August 13th, 2009 Elder Ballard gave a speech at BYU concerning members of the Church and how defensive they get when they reply questions about the Church. He gave a few tips and mentioned Polygamy:

Source 1

Thoughts?