LDS ABSOLUTELY NOT TRUE!

mmksparbud said:

It does not say anything about any marriage covenant continuing,
Mat_22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.
In the resurrection--when Jesus returns and all are resurrected--they neither marry nor given in marriage--but are as the angels in heaven. Angels are not married. This never says ---except for those married in the Mormon church by a Mormon priest--except those sealed in an eternal marriage--it makes no exceptions. The question asked was which if the 7 husbands would be hers in heaven. She was legally, by Jewish law in the eyes of God married to all 7. The answer is simple---there is no marriage after the resurrection.

Click to expand...

Earthly marriage has always ended upon death. The typical marriage covenant is "until death do you part." Nothing Jesus said forbade that covenant extending. It is true angels are not married, but they remain messengers under the new covenant, and cannot be elohim. They cannot enter the house of Elohim. What Jesus is saying is that in the resurrection, judgment has passed, and one cannot have an increase - one cannot get married in heaven.

mmksparbud said:

That verse must be taken in context. This has been divided from the rest of the previous verses and should not be--there were no verses and chapters in the Hebrew.

Isa 3:16 Moreover the LORD saith, Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet:
Isa 3:17 Therefore the Lord will smite with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of Zion, and the LORD will discover their secret parts.
Isa 3:18 In that day the Lord will take away the bravery of their tinkling ornaments about their feet, and their cauls, and their round tires like the moon,
Isa 3:19 The chains, and the bracelets, and the mufflers,
Isa 3:20 The bonnets, and the ornaments of the legs, and the headbands, and the tablets, and the earrings,
Isa 3:21 The rings, and nose jewels,
Isa 3:22 The changeable suits of apparel, and the mantles, and the wimples, and the crisping pins,
Isa 3:23 The glasses, and the fine linen, and the hoods, and the vails.
Isa 3:24 And it shall come to pass, that instead of sweet smell there shall be stink; and instead of a girdle a rent; and instead of well set hair baldness; and instead of a stomacher a girding of sackcloth; and burning instead of beauty.
Isa 3:25 Thy men shall fall by the sword, and thy mighty in the war.
Isa 3:26 And her gates shall lament and mourn; and she being desolate shall sit upon the ground.
Isa 4:1 And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.

This was not in any way shape or form an invitation to a wedding. These once haughty women would be left destitute and without men--to be unmarried was considered a shame, to be barren was a shame. There are 2 ways this is looked at---one is that these women still wanted to do their own thing, but be called a wife as a sign of status, the other was that they would so want a husband as all the men had been killed, that they would not ask to be supported and taken care but take care of themselves. In no way was this ever considered as a sign of a good wedding. Married women were often not taken as slaves and captives, but left as widows. The single women were the ones that were led captive.

Click to expand...

You are missing the import of my reference to this scripture. It is not speaking of earthly marriage between a man and wives. It is a prophecy. Indeed it refers to the seven churches of Rev 2-4. That is "celestial marriage" as I am using the scripture for. And I disagree with you. It is very much an invitation to a wedding - the wedding supper of the lamb. SDAs haven't gotten that far in correct interpretation of Revelation yet.

RevelationTestament said:

If you want to go there, where are your bishops and apostles? Was Ellen White an apostle? Her prophecies of Yeshua's return did not come to pass - twice. Yet, SDAs eat up all her words plagiarized from so many other Christians. Your Church has no bishops and no apostles, so those scriptures you reference cannot apply to them. You are merely applying your personal opinion to a discontinued LDS practice. The way polygamy is practiced around the world is usually not even marriage since a child cannot consent to such a relationship - thus there is not covenant in God's eyes, and the man is either committing adultery or fornication or both. Yet you pretend to compare that to legal relationships between adults who consent and commit to it. I agree that the practice of polygamy around the world is usually filth, and do not condone the practice of taking unwilling and unconsenting children to commit their crimes, and find your attempt to smear my comments this way to be in bad taste to say the least.
Your comments have smeared some of the greatest patriarchs of the Judeo-Christian tradition - including Israel himself, and the parents of Samuel. Why God would even talk to such as you believe were guilty of such sin is a mystery.

Click to expand...

LOL! Deflection is fun, isn't it? If You want to go there--open a thread of your own about SDA--or just wait a while--someone will. Or just look up old ones, there's a ton of them. This thread is about Mormonism. Nice try, though.

Yes, legally 15 year olds can not sign contracts today -- and that is what it ends up as getting into--young teenagers, and eventually to younger. JS youngest was 15--but he was just getting started. Brigham Young's youngest was also 15---as far as is known. He didn't care much what age they were. And for both, they married women who were already married to other men. You can argue consenting adults all you want--marrying another man's wife (while the man is living)is not in any way, shape or form biblical.
What God winked at before in the OT has nothing to do with NT testament regulation mandating that leaders of the church have only 1 Wife. I've repeatedly asked if marrying a close relative is also OK just because it was done in the OT--Abraham being married to his half-sister and just about all the old Patriarchs were married at least to cousins. And all of Adam and Eve's children married each other. And after the flood--same thing. It was only with Moses that this changed and God said no more---so with multiple wives, came a time when God said no more--and contrary to Mormonism---He doesn't go back and forth and repeated attempts trying to show where He has---have failed.

RevelationTestament said:

Earthly marriage has always ended upon death. The typical marriage covenant is "until death do you part." Nothing Jesus said forbade that covenant extending. It is true angels are not married, but they remain messengers under the new covenant, and cannot be elohim. They cannot enter the house of Elohim. What Jesus is saying is that in the resurrection, judgment has passed, and one cannot have an increase - one cannot get married in heaven.

Click to expand...

Than at least on of those 7 husbands He was referencing should have been her husband after the resurrection. Each was done within the Jewish law, binding and legal in His eyes. His answer was there is no marriage after the resurrection---no qualifiers at all. Nothing Jesus says,nothing in the OT either, says there is any marriage covenant extension after the resurrection. You can put an end to this whole discussion by stating a verse that says it does exist. There is nothing about having an increase after the resurrection.
The angels can never be elohim---as no creation can. God is God for the simple reason He was never created---He is God by right of who He is, not by right of having worked His way to Godhood. The same for Jesus.
I was under the impression that in Mormonism--Once given the title of angel, you stayed one permanently. Am I wrong?

RevelationTestament said:

You are missing the import of my reference to this scripture. It is not speaking of earthly marriage between a man and wives. It is a prophecy. Indeed it refers to the seven churches of Rev 2-4. That is "celestial marriage" as I am using the scripture for. And I disagree with you. It is very much an invitation to a wedding - the wedding supper of the lamb. SDAs haven't gotten that far in correct interpretation of Revelation yet.

Click to expand...

Nothing in the passage has a single thing to do with the 7 churches anymore than the 7 husbands of that woman did. It is clear what this is about---
sa 3:16 Moreover the LORD saith, Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, and walk with stretched forth necks and wanton eyes, walking and mincing as they go, and making a tinkling with their feet:
Isa 3:17 Therefore the Lord will smite with a scab the crown of the head of the daughters of Zion, and the LORD will discover their secret parts.

It is an indictment against those women--Isa 3:25 "Thy men shall fall by the sword, and thy mighty in the war." That has nothing to do with a wedding supper.

There is no commentary, except a Mormon one, that goes into this having anything to do with the 7 churches. Of course, no Jewish commentary would see at as anything but a prophecy regarding Zion. It is JS that never got the memo about the correct interpretation of Revelation---nor of Isaiah. The 7 churches were not all reprimanded, one wasn't. And each one was also praised, and there were a remnant in each that did do what they should. The 7 churches has nothing to do with any of them grabbing JS and asking him to be their leader.