Inconceivable wrote:Thanks Ray, if I were to hang my hat on something at this moment, these concepts would be at the very core of my beliefs.
And yes, in my limited perspective, polygamy has no place at the end of this long journey. It is more like what goes down the drain after a long overdue bath.
God bless. I do wish you the best in your journey of discovery. I hope for your happiness. You deserve it! The truth shall make you free.
Thank you for your kind words. My friends would say that you're in the right direction to finding yours. It is a good hope and I would like to believe them.
It seems that identifying with the NDE is about the only thing that will calm my nerves, begin to re-define my sense of purpose, and give me hope where not so long I had little.
Inconceivable wrote: Thank you for your kind words. My friends would say that you're in the right direction to finding yours. It is a good hope and I would like to believe them.
It seems that identifying with the NDE is about the only thing that will calm my nerves, begin to re-define my sense of purpose, and give me hope where not so long I had little.
What I have studied, and learned through much experience, has made me change my beliefs even more. A God who condemns never made any sense to me. I cannot even conceive of such a God.
You're a choice human being. I wish more were like you. You are indeed, on the right track. I hope you'll forgive me if I ever hurt you.
LDS belief is that the fullness of the gospel has been on the earth a number of times... first with Adam and Eve, Noah, Abraham, etc. Christ "restored" the true gospel and it once again vanished from the Earth. Joseph Smith was the last and final restorer if you will.
In other words, Joseph Smith restored the true Church Christ set up, which was the same as the church set up by Adam and Eve and other prophets throughout history.
Does that make sense?
~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
Just a little thought that goes along with what Ray has suggested...
Even as a believer, the idea of marriage in heaven seemed odd.
It seemed to me (based on personal study and answers to prayers), that at some point, if we were to become Gods and Goddesses, would we not have complete and perfect love for everyone? How could love be limited in any sense of the word? Certainly, infinite and eternal love would encompass the depths of love I feel for my loved ones and extend toward all and everything.
I could not see it any other way.
The idea of loving some spirits more than others from an eternal, divine, perfectly infinite and complete perspective didn't fit.
I obviously no longer believe LDS doctrine (I guess I didn't even as a believer... smile), but my current personal spiritual journey has expanded my earlier thoughts and awareness that in oneness, unity, perfect infinite love the ideas of anything even remotely like polygamy do not exist... not even a flickering thought of such a thing.
The practice and the heavenly carrot for a man to have a divine harem was started by less than holy men for whom women were to provide sexual pleasure. Nothing more.
~dancer~
"The search for reality is the most dangerous of all undertakings for it destroys the world in which you live." Nisargadatta Maharaj
liz3564 wrote: The bottom line is, I think that God would want his children to be happy, and to be with people they love. The problem I have with polygamy as it exists in the Old Testament, is, as TD has pointed out, it is based on the wealth of men, and their "ownership" of women.
And of course power was part of it in the 19th century attempt by the LDS Church. If not why would Joseph marry other men's wives? And in fact Brigham taught that women could leave current husband for a man of higher rank or authority in the priesthood. Ideas such as having more wives and children in this life put you ahead in starting your own kingdom in the eternities were also part of this.
So, my response, is that polygamy did seem based on power and wealth. Women were chattel and property and viewed pretty much that way. There is no commandment in the Old Testament to practice polygamy and no requirement of it for some better position in the eternities. This idea seems unique to the LDS practice. So if God was involved at all he tolerated it. It is an error for LDS apologists to defend LDS 19th century polygamy with the Old Testament.
Inconceivable wrote: Thank you for your kind words. My friends would say that you're in the right direction to finding yours. It is a good hope and I would like to believe them.
It seems that identifying with the NDE is about the only thing that will calm my nerves, begin to re-define my sense of purpose, and give me hope where not so long I had little.
What I have studied, and learned through much experience, has made me change my beliefs even more. A God who condemns never made any sense to me. I cannot even conceive of such a God.
You're a choice human being. I wish more were like you. You are indeed, on the right track. I hope you'll forgive me if I ever hurt you.
On a side note, I'm probably not much different than many here were I post at the begining or end of a long day. Makes for a somewhat abrasive atmosphere. I've posted on the edge. Honestly I'm sorry for most of the angry things. :p
liz3564 wrote:Since the Chastity Thread has seemed to focus in a new direction, I thought I would start a new topic.
This is the current question being asked/debated:
Did God command polygamy, or was it a cultural norm that was tolerated by God? Good men whom he chose to be prophets participated in this culture, but was it commanded?
Uh, excuse the intrusion from a know-nothing never-Mo. What possible difference could it make to Mormonism (which is supposed to be the restoration of the Early CHRISTIAN Church, I.e., New Testament era) if God in the Old Testament did or didn't command polygamy?
If Joseph Smith brought about the restoration of the Early CHRISTIAN Church, why would he "restore" an Old Testament practice?
How does that make sense?
Jersey Girl
Joseph's restoration of all things is not just for the New Testament Christian Church but ended up in an attempt to cover all dispensations of time and bring into one all things from Adam to the latter days. Thus you see ideas of the gospel being had pre flood, issues about Enoch and tieing in Zion to the city of Enoch and other such interesting doctrines. I know you have mentioned you have read Bushman's RSR. He discusses how Joseph's message expanded beyond just New Testament Christianity to cover all time. If you have the book you may want to poke around for such discussions.
Jersey Girl wrote:If Joseph Smith brought about the restoration of the Early CHRISTIAN Church, why would he "restore" an Old Testament practice?
How does that make sense?
Jersey Girl
Joseph didn't claim he was restoring the "Christian Church". His additions in the JST show that he was claiming to restore "lost truth" (which includes books of the Old Testament), which included the remaining (lost) portions 50th chapter of Genesis.
Excuse me...are you saying that Joseph Smith didn't claim the Great Apostacy and the restoration of the Primitive 1st century church?
That is not what Ray was saying. He claimed restore Christianity as well as all things pertaining to all dispensations of time. This includes things from the Old Testament as well.
Jason wrote:Joseph's restoration of all things is not just for the New Testament Christian Church but ended up in an attempt to cover all dispensations of time and bring into one all things from Adam to the latter days. Thus you see ideas of the gospel being had pre flood, issues about Enoch and tieing in Zion to the city of Enoch and other such interesting doctrines. I know you have mentioned you have read Bushman's RSR. He discusses how Joseph's message expanded beyond just New Testament Christianity to cover all time. If you have the book you may want to poke around for such discussions.
Jason, do you think this is where the idea of animal sacrifices being restored came from? That topic probably deserves it's own thread, too. LOL
Jason wrote:Joseph's restoration of all things is not just for the New Testament Christian Church but ended up in an attempt to cover all dispensations of time and bring into one all things from Adam to the latter days. Thus you see ideas of the gospel being had pre flood, issues about Enoch and tieing in Zion to the city of Enoch and other such interesting doctrines. I know you have mentioned you have read Bushman's RSR. He discusses how Joseph's message expanded beyond just New Testament Christianity to cover all time. If you have the book you may want to poke around for such discussions.
Jason, do you think this is where the idea of animal sacrifices being restored came from? That topic probably deserves it's own thread, too. LOL