Polygamy

[ttreg]

I am not trying to debate or attack Mormons. I am just asking. Why does not the LDS church support polygamy anymore?

 

[BarryK]

I am not trying to debate or attack Mormons. I am just asking. Why does not the LDS church support polygamy anymore? I rather not that people argue I just want information.

That is a good question. I too would like to hear why they no longer support what God alledgedly proclaimed.

 

[Resty]

That is a good question. I too would like to hear why they no longer support what God alledgedly proclaimed.

As a former member why?

 

[silvermoon383]

The Church does not support polygamy anymore because direct revelation decreed the end of it. (Official Declaration-1)

 

[BarryK]

The Church does not support polygamy anymore because direct revelation decreed the end of it. (Official Declaration-1)

I did not see that official declaration in the Mormon "Scripture" that is The Bible-at least the parts that are translated to suit your needs, the Book of Mormon, The book of comandments (a.k.a. Doctorines and covenants) and the Pearl of Great Price.

This is one of the many evidences that the jesus of the L.D.S. is not the Jesus of scripture

Your jesus changes his mind, My Jesus changes not.

Malachi 3:6 (KJV)
For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Hebrews 13:8 (KJV)
Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

 

[Ran77]

I am not trying to debate or attack Mormons. I am just asking. Why does not the LDS church support polygamy anymore? I rather not that people argue I just want information.

It's illegal. We believe in obeying the law of the land.

 

[Resty]

I did not see that official declaration in the Mormon "Scripture" that is The Bible-at least the parts that are translated to suit your needs, the Book of Mormon, The book of comandments (a.k.a. Doctorines and covenants) and the Pearl of Great Price.

This is one of the many evidences that the jesus of the L.D.S. is not the Jesus of scripture

Your jesus changes his mind, My Jesus changes not.

Malachi 3:6 (KJV)
For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Hebrews 13:8 (KJV)
Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

Why were so many upset in the NT with the changes to the Law of Moses?


Matter of fact in the OT Lord did change from the higher law, to the lesser Law when he saw that the children of men could not abide by them!


The Lord is always the same it is man who takes forever to grow in the Lord's ways!

 

[ttreg]

But why would it be in D&C and then later later taken down around the time it was illegal? I might understand if the church said something like "Okay it is illegal we need to stop this." Why did it have to be a revelation from God? Sorry I am just confused. I am breaking my own rule I know.

 

[Resty]

But why would it be in D&C and then later later taken down around the time it was illegal? I might understand if the church said something like "Okay it is illegal we need to stop this." Why did it have to be a revelation from God? Sorry I am just confused. I am breaking my own rule I know.

We have free agency some want to beleive it was because it was illigal that is their personal opinion I disagree!

The Church had to wait a long while before they got the proclamation from the Lord to recend Plural Marriage!

It could be for the souls the Lord wanted to be born on earth before it was finsihed.

I met some who were born in an honorable plural marriage I say honorable because it was sanction by the Church, not something one took upon themselves!

Someday I feel it will be discovered that in each dispensation that it also included plural marriage!

There are times that the Church and its people have to take the heat for a long while before the Lord release the calling.

I guess one can call it a trial for the whole Church is being tempered by the refiner's fire!

Even today there is heat over pass things and those who endure the Lord bless others who can't stand the heat leave!

One might think of it seperating the wheat from the chaff!

 

[Ran77]

But why would it be in D&C and then later later taken down around the time it was illegal? I might understand if the church said something like "Okay it is illegal we need to stop this." Why did it have to be a revelation from God? Sorry I am just confused. I am breaking my own rule I know.

I think the bolded part was answered when I stated that we no longer practice it because it is illegal. Beyond that I'm not sure I understand what is confusing about the situation. Why did it have to be a revelation from God? I don't know that it had to be. If it did all I can provide is supposition - which would be: it was originally given through revelation and may needed to be rescinded in the same manner. It may have needed that authority of revelation to convince the saints to stop a practice that they were already doing.

 

[Zechariah]

But why would it be in D&C and then later later taken down around the time it was illegal? I might understand if the church said something like "Okay it is illegal we need to stop this." Why did it have to be a revelation from God? Sorry I am just confused. I am breaking my own rule I know.

If congress passed a law that made it illegal for you to live a commandment given of God, would you automatically cease obeying that commandment, or would you endeavor to continue live as you had been commanded by God, holding the laws of God to be above those of men?

The prophet and the saints were willing to suffer whatever man might do, whatever might come to them at the hands of their enemies, in order to continue to abide by the commandment God had given them.

But - once God said the practice must cease, and revealed to the prophet what the result would be if the Church continued it, the prophet obeyed. It's just that simple.

 

[Resty]

If congress passed a law that made it illegal for you to live a commandment given of God, would you automatically cease obeying that commandment, or would you endeavor to continue live as you had been commanded by God, holding the laws of God to be above those of men?

The prophet and the saints were willing to suffer whatever man might do, whatever might come to them at the hands of their enemies, in order to continue to abide by the commandment God had given them.

But - once God said the practice must cease, and revealed to the prophet what the result would be if the Church continued it, the prophet obeyed. It's just that simple.

This bring back to mind so many episodes of The Book of Daniel....

....and one for sure the literal refiner's fire!

 

[BarryK]

It's illegal. We believe in obeying the law of the land.

Did not God decree that polygamy is to be practiced?
which takes priority, the laws of men or the comandments of God?

Acts 5:29 (KJV)
Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

 

[BarryK]

If congress passed a law that made it illegal for you to live a commandment given of God, would you automatically cease obeying that commandment, or would you endeavor to continue live as you had been commanded by God, holding the laws of God to be above those of men?

without a doubt, look at the words of Peter in Acts Chapter 5. verse 29

The prophet and the saints were willing to suffer whatever man might do, whatever might come to them at the hands of their enemies, in order to continue to abide by the commandment God had given them.

This is why the word we translate as "witness" is synomnous with the word "Mayrter" in the orginal greek

But - once God said the practice must cease, and revealed to the prophet what the result would be if the Church continued it, the prophet obeyed. It's just that simple.

There appears to be a need for you and your brothers to be in one accord, there are some who say that it is not practiced any more because it is the "law of the land"
James 1:8 (KJV)
A double minded man is unstable in all his ways

 

[Ran77]

Did not God decree that polygamy is to be practiced?
which takes priority, the laws of men or the comandments of God?

Acts 5:29 (KJV)
Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

Obeying the law of the land is a commandment of God. So let me ask you, which takes priority obeying the decree to practice polygamy or obeying the commandment of God to abide by the laws of the nation?


27 And when they had brought them, they set [them] before the council: and the high priest asked them,

28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.

29 Then Peter and the [other] apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

Peter makes his comment in response to the charges of the high priest, who was teaching the gospel of man rather than Christ. As far as I can see, there is no law being broken here by Peter.


Col. 3: 22

22 Servants, obey in all things [your] masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God:

Servants were told to obey their masters out of the fear of God. Why is that? Because we are to obey the laws of the land and at that time it was legal to be owned as a slave.


Titus 3: 1

1 PUT them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work,

There it is, be subject to pricipalities and powers. Translation: obey the law of the land.


Heb. 13: 17

17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that [is] unprofitable for you.

Again, obey those who rule over you. Or in other words obey the laws of the land.


The verse you provided, when read in context, does not conflict with the verses I provided or the view I have expressed.

 

[Zechariah]

There appears to be a need for you and your brothers to be in one accord,

There appears to be some confusion on your part, then, as if two things that are true, cannot be compatible.

So which, then, do you disagree with? That God has commanded man to obey the laws of the land? Or that man is to hold God's laws higher than the laws of men?

there are some who say that it is not practiced any more because it is the "law of the land" James 1:8 (KJV)
A double minded man is unstable in all his ways

 

[Jerubbaal]

Malachi 3:6 (KJV)
For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Hebrews 13:8 (KJV)
Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

God's commands to mankind change all the time! Just because his commands change does not mean that He changes.

As for your statements to the effect that we discontinued polygamy to please man rather than God, these statement from Wilford Woodruff about the matter should clarify things:

The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for . . . any of the men in this temple at Logan; for all ordinances would be stopped throughout the land of Zion. Confusion would reign throughout Israel, and many men would be made prisoners. This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we should have been compelled to stop the practice. Now, the question is, whether it should be stopped in this manner, or in the way the Lord has manifested to us, and leave our Prophets and Apostles and fathers free men, and the temples in the hands of the people, so that the dead may be redeemed. A large number has already been delivered from the prison house in the spirit world by this people, and shall the work go on or stop? This is the question I lay before the Latter-day Saints. You have to judge for yourselves. I want you to answer it for yourselves. I shall not answer it; but I say to you that that is exactly the condition we as a people would have been in had we not taken the course we have.
. . . I saw exactly what would come to pass if there was not something done. I have had this spirit upon me for a long time. But I want to say this: I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me. I went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. . . .

 

[Swart]

Read Jacob chapter 2.

Unless Plural marriage is specifically commanded by God for a specific purpose, the earthly practice of it is an abomination to God.

There was a time for it. That time has passed.

 

[BarryK]

God's commands to mankind change all the time! Just because his commands change does not mean that He changes.:

If your god ( who your "prophet" and his "spostles" claim is nothing more than a "changed" that is "evolved" man) is a changable god, the he changes his mind as well.

 

[4godslove]

let me see if i can help you understand a bit more about how this works, but i'm not going to do your homework for you. if you want to find information on this, it should be readily available.

one of the things we learn as part of the restoration is the eternally continuing nature and potential of the family unit which includes wives and husbands. i am thankful for that as i certainly wouldn't want it any other way.

in the bible, we see examples of polygamy or actually polygyny i.e. a man having more than one wife.

with the institution of this practice in this dispensation it occurs to me that we had the chance to learn about this and we can see the wisdom of instituting the practice early in the history of the restored church. when you consider the importance lds place on marrying in the church, but women greatly outnumbered men at a time that also included tough conditions.

Another thing i see as being of value in the practice is the requirement of the ability for the participants to rise above human weaknesses and develop a higher degree of Christlike qualities relying more on God's help to be able to manage the situation; without that problems could develop and i am sure there were a lot of things to deal with not the least of which would be jealousies which would only be normal of course.

it is my understanding that as part of the revelation that discontinued the practice, wilford woodruf was shown what would happen to the church if the practice was not discontinued and it wasn't good.

so to sum up, actually to say that the church does not support polygamy is not actually true. the practice was just discontinued except in the case of men who have a deceased wife(wives) and remarries again in the temple wherin they are sealed for time and all eternity so he could actually have multiple wives but only one living at the time so in that sense polygamy is still a current practice.