Stay Strong Saints

[_gdemetz]

Yes, sometimes not understanding church doctrines can be a big problem. Some people have left the church because they didn't understand polygamy. That's sad! My grandmother was so against me joining the chuch for that very reason. So, I proceeded to explain to her the 12th chapter of Numbers which gives an account of a revelation Moses received to marry another wife, and Moses sister Miriam spoke against it, just as many spoke agaist the revelation Joseph Smith received to practice polygamy! I then ask my grandmother; what do you think? Do you think God just woke up from a sleep one day and decided that this is a good day for polygamy? Or, perhaps you think that God had to repent for allowing polygamy when He was a younger God and didn't know any better? The real truth is that God knows what is best for us, and whether or not it is the right time for polygamy, and as the scriptures state, He will reveal it to His servants the prophets if it is His will for us to practice it (see Amos 3:7). Some people have left the church when they have found out that the prophets have taught that the "virgin birth" was, basically, not true (see "Mormon Doctrine", "Son of God"), and that is also sad! One can not be saved in ignorance, and if someone does not understand the doctrines and practices of the church, such as many in the temple (Weren't many strange things done in Moses' time in and around the tabernacle?), they should not just give up and quit, which is exactly what Satan wants! Instead, they should council with their leaders, study the scriptures, pray, remain faithful, and trust in God to reveal all things to them in time!

[_Themis]

Can you identify what bothers some members about what Joseph was doing in regards to polygamy? Your explanations seem geared towards the non-LDS instead of LDS.

[_Yoda]

As a member, for me, personally, the problem with polygamy is the concept of what an eternal marriage should be. There is an intimacy between an husband and wife that is vastly different from any other type of bond. I am not talking about physical intimacy, although that is part of it.

In reading about plural marriages, one of the things that seemed to be missing was the emotional intimacy. In many cases, there seemed to be a greater amount of emotional intimacy amongst the sister wives than actually between the husband and wife(wives).

I read in a journal a while ago that one plural wife in the Brigham Young era treated her husband as a "cherished visitor". Love, at least the intimate type of emotional and physical love that you often think of, is non-existent in these types of marriages. The wives seem more like single parents. This is not a situation that I would find happy or fulfilling, if plural marriage is truly an eternal law that should be lived by all.

[_Yoda]

Bumping for our new board member, gdemetz, subgenius, bc, and any other apologists who would care to comment on my take on polygamy. I welcome your thoughts.

[_Darth J]

I read in a journal a while ago that one plural wife in the Brigham Young era treated her husband as a "cherished visitor". Love, at least the intimate type of emotional and physical love that you often think of, is non-existent in these types of marriages. The wives seem more like single parents. This is not a situation that I would find happy or fulfilling, if plural marriage is truly an eternal law that should be lived by all.

Oh, look. One of the commodities thinks she is entitled to a happy or fulfilling marriage. Let's just pat her head and tell her not to worry her pretty little self about executive decisions.

[_Yoda]

I read in a journal a while ago that one plural wife in the Brigham Young era treated her husband as a "cherished visitor". Love, at least the intimate type of emotional and physical love that you often think of, is non-existent in these types of marriages. The wives seem more like single parents. This is not a situation that I would find happy or fulfilling, if plural marriage is truly an eternal law that should be lived by all.

Oh, look. One of the commodities thinks she is entitled to a happy or fulfilling marriage. Let's just pat her head and tell her not to worry her pretty little self about executive decisions.

I know that you are simply trying to parody things here, Darth, but in this case, you are actually correct. When I have brought up this point before, I have not gotten a straight forward response. I am hoping that bringing it up once again will allow the apologists here a chance to do so.

[_Darth J]

I know that you are simply trying to parody things here, Darth, but in this case, you are actually correct. When I have brought up this point before, I have not gotten a straight forward response. I am hoping that bringing it up once again will allow the apologists here a chance to do so.

Let us not forget the holy and righteous Hobson's choice that the Lord gives Emma in D&C 132:54.

And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.


And as we learn in verses 62 and 63, the man gets to be with untold numbers of polygamous wives and not commit adultery, but the wives only get to be with him. Sounds pretty fair to me.

62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.

63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.

But what really seals the deal (no pun intended) is how the man gets whatever he wants. If he tells wife #1 that he's going to marry some more women, then she has to accept it. But if she doesn't accept it, then he gets to do it anyway.

64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law.

65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law, for him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take Hagar to wife.

[_gdemetz]

You are right Darth J. When the God's laws, including polygamy, are given, He expects all, both male and female to abide by them.

[_Themis]

You are right Darth J. When the God's laws, including polygamy, are given, He expects all, both male and female to abide by them.

So what is it that bothers members about Joseph's polygamy, and why they think it might not be from God? Do you even know? If you want to discuss things with people who may not share your particular beliefs it might help if you understand where they are coming from.

[_gdemetz]

Yes, Themis, I think I do. Joseph, I think for obvious reasons, wanted to keep the practice of polygamy secret, and it was kept secret, for the most part for many years. Perhaps, this was necessary for the survival of the church itself. Of course, as you may imagine, when this was finally revealed to the church after it was practiced already for a number of years, it led to a problem, and as if that wasn't bad enough, since polygamy itself was and is a controversial subject, this also added fuel to the fire.