Who wants polygamy back?

[Sarah]

Im not sure that I have really thought about polygamy as a reward...doing so would give it some authority as a truth- I guess. And I dont think polygamy is true.

There are many who do refer to it as a reward though. I personally agree that more wives equalls more responsibility and burden on a man that I dont think any man can handle as well as a man with one wife.

Melissa, I don't know your level of activity in the Church, but I out of curiosity, if the Church came out and gave the ok on polygamy again, (in certain circumstances, but no one HAS to live it) how would you handle that? Would you stay a member?

We still practice polygamy currently - don't we? Every day in our temples men are sealed to multiple wives. Yes, the first wife has to have passed beyond the veil into the spirit world, but men in our church are sealed to multiple women in this church today. Many of our apostles and leaders are sealed to multiple wives.

I WISH this was all just a big mistake, but there are things we just won't understand until I am once again in my heavenly home. (but my earthly mind wants to believe it was all just a big mistake and is not ever something that was of God)

I asked my stake president this question about plural marriage in the future and he agreed it would one day be brought back during the millennium. Bruce R. McConkie also states in his book "Mormon Doctrine" that "obviously" we will once again practice it during the millennium. But isn't it true that a few of his teachings were not actually fact? and that the church leaders have taken things back that he said? And as far as the references in the scriptures (which were written by Bruce R. McConkie) concerning Seven women claiming one man in these latter days after the tribulations? I don't know. The foot notes he wrote refer it to mean marriage. . ..
Will my hubby be asked to take on seven wives? Who knows?!! (I hope not. I'd rather leave him and find a man who only wants me only!! At least that's what I told him. lol)

My stake President asked me why, in all of written scripture is our Heavenly Mother not mentioned? My answer was that (besides the fact that she is protected) there are so very many heavenly mothers? and his answer was "Yes."

Now -- I can't assume that even my stake president knows the truth on this paticular matter . . . . but my best answer that I have received it this:

Heavenly Father would never leave me, or you Michelle, unhappy. He would never leave us unhappy for eternity. He will exceed our deepest, pure, and righteous desires. He will not force us to be in a position of misery for eternity if we keep pluging along and do our best to repent and live his commandments. There are things our mortal minds can not comprehend. If all we knew was a loving and righteous Father with his many holy and righteous wives - it would not be strange because it was all we ever knew. One day all truth will be revealed. One day we will see this SO clearly.

I almost lost my testimony over the subject of polygamy. I was in a very dark and dismal place that was hard to climb out of. I got to the point where I thought God must be a horrible and evil womanizing man. I was wrong. He is all that is righteous and pure and loving.

I am choosing to doubt my doubts instead of my faith on this one - and hold onto all that I do know, and do have. I trust that he will never leave me eternally unhappy. I trust that he will exceed my deepest desires and dreams of what I picture in the eternities.

I must say though . . . . THere is a man in my ward who shared a personal story of his mother or grandmother ( I forget which.)

Her first love and eternal hubby was killed shortly after they were married. Their love was beautiful- but cut very short.
She later married her second love, and lived her mortal life with him, had children and grandchildren with him, and lived a wonderful life together.

She was approached by a couple of the brothern in authority in the chruch, and asked if she would like to be sealed to this (second) man who she loved just as much as the first . . . . which would finally seal them for eternity and also their children and grandchildren. And she was!!

I had never heard of a woman sealed to two men . . . but it happens! We will one day truly understand it all and how it works, and all the whys and it will all make sense.

Reminds me of this story.....

SARAH ANNE FRANKS & GEORGE PADDLEY

As told by President Scott Lorimer of the Riverton Wyoming Stake
In 1991, the people of the Riverton Stake in Wyoming were very busy doing the temple work for the pioneers of the Martin and Willie handcart companies; they called this project the Second Rescue. During this time the stake presidency received about 6000 letters from people and relatives concerning the work that was under way. After a story appeared in the Church News, thousands more letters arrived. It is through such a letter that the story of Sarah Anne Franks and George Paddley was discovered.
One of President Scott Lorimer’s counselors received a call from a lady in Rexburg, Idaho asking for their help in finding the name of the fiancé of her great-grandmother. They had come from England with the Martin Company in 1856 and he had died at Martin’s Cove. In searching the ship’s log, they found Sarah Anne Franks, a single woman traveling as sort of a nanny with a family who had five children. But there was no information about a young man traveling with them. They decided to check for any single men from her hometown traveling on the ship and found there were nine. This didn’t help much so they checked to see if any of them had died at Martin’s Cove. There were three. By this time, President Lorimer was ready to send what information they had found back to the family and let them worry about which one he was, his counselors, however, wanted to finish the job, but they didn’t know where to go from there.
Four weeks later President Lorimer received a letter from a man in Johannesburg, South Africa who had also seen the article in the Church News. Enclosed was a copy of four pages of his great-grandfather’s journal. As he read the pages about 10:00 one night, a single line jumped out a him. It read, “Sarah Anne Franks is betrothed to George Paddley.” He immediately called his counselor and asked what the names of those three men were. They couldn’t remember so they left their beds and went to the stake house to check it out. George Paddley was the fourth from the last person to board the ship before it left England.
When President James E. Faust heard this story he called it the greatest love story of our time. Sarah and George were in their early 20’s. They met because some missionaries came to England to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. They were each baptized, they at tended church, met and fell in love. The wanted to be married. They had been taught about the temple and the sealing ordinances they could receive there. They chose to come to America, to Utah, to be married and sealed in the Endowment House for all eternity.
They made it across the Ocean, and then across the plains to the North Platte River where they met the blizzard of 1856. George Paddley spent most of the day in the river helping the people of his company dodge huge chunks of ice as they tried to get to the other side and continue their journey to Salt Lake. He got chilled and came down with hypothermia but he recovered and went on to Martin’s Cove another 150 to 160 miles. There the terrible conditions overcame him and he gave up his mortal life.
Sarah Anne Franks loved George Paddley, she loved him a lot. You can read in the journals how they dug trenches in the snow to bury the dead because the ground was too frozen. They did the best they could with the bodies. You can read about the snapping and growling of the wolves as they fought over and carried off the bodies. Sarah didn’t want George to be eaten by the wolves. She took what was probably one of the only things she had to stay warm, her shawl, and asked the brethren to wrap him in it and hang his body in the trees. When she got to Salt Lake and learned that in the spring the brethren were going back to retrieve supplies left behind she asked them to find George’s body and give him a proper burial. But, when they went back to Martin’s Cove the only thing they found was the shawl. They brought it back to her and her family has it still today.
Sarah had some frozen toes and fingers. She was taken to the home of Thomas Mackey where she was nursed back to health. She eventually became the third plural wife of Thomas Mackey. She raised a wonderful family and was an obedient and faithful member of the church for the rest of her life.
That was the end of the story for almost 138 years until one day President Lorimer and his counselors of the Riverton Stake had a special visitor. President James E. Faust visited Martin’s Cove and was told the story of Sarah and George. Tears rolled down President Faust’s cheeks as he listened to their story, they just wouldn’t stop. Finally he asked, “Did you seal Sarah Anne Franks to George Paddley?” The said no, they couldn’t. She had been sealed to Thomas Mackey. She had children with him and they were sealed to her. President Faust said, “You go back to the Logan Temple and seal Sarah Anne Franks to George Paddley. You give her a choice.” At that time, this kind of thing could not be done without special permission from the 1st Presidency. A woman could only be sealed to one man. It has been changed since then for certain situations. They went back and she is now sealed to both men. We don’t know how this will all work out in the eternities. President Lorimer said that he knows that Sarah Anne Franks loves George Paddley and that he loves her and her children. He knows that the only reason they were not sealed for eternity was because George gave his life to save the lives of other people in his company.
That was the end of the story again...for a while. In the year 2000, President Lorimer received another letter. It was a copy of Sarah Anne Franks Mackey’s Patriarchal Blessing. In it was a tremendous promise. Sarah did not receive her blessing until she was 72 years old. She had raised a good family, she had been endowed and sealed in the Temple. There were no other temple ordinances that she could have received yet this is what the Patriarch told her in the blessing: “Sarah, you will be allowed the privilege of returning to the House of the Lord and receiving the ordinance that awaits you.” How could that Patriarch have known that 100 years later she would be given the opportunity of being sealed to her first love, George Paddley, in the Temple of the Lord.


41 And as ye have asked concerning adultery, verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man receiveth a wife in the new and everlasting covenant, and if she be with another man, and I have not appointed unto her by the holy anointing, she hath committed adultery and shall be destroyed.

[Sarah]

I must say though . . . . THere is a man in my ward who shared a personal story of his mother or grandmother ( I forget which.)

Her first love and eternal hubby was killed shortly after they were married. Their love was beautiful- but cut very short.
She later married her second love, and lived her mortal life with him, had children and grandchildren with him, and lived a wonderful life together.

She was approached by a couple of the brothern in authority in the chruch, and asked if she would like to be sealed to this (second) man who she loved just as much as the first . . . . which would finally seal them for eternity and also their children and grandchildren. And she was!!

I had never heard of a woman sealed to two men . . . but it happens! We will one day truly understand it all and how it works, and all the whys and it will all make sense.

I've never heard of this happening before and this is indeed an extreme situation.
And yet another serious problem deferred to the world to come due to the lack of plural marriage here and now.
That second man she married should have been able to marry a wife to whom he could be sealed and have an eternal posterity.
There would have been no shame in him being the kinsman redeemer to the deceased man and give him eternal posterity as well.
That wife could have had all of her needs met and she could have remained chaste to her deceased husband except for child-rearing.
This would have gone a long ways to keep things less confusing and entangled where the eternal families are concerned.
This is why plural marriage is an essential tenet where young widows are concerned.

An extreme situation for a Telestial world, where there are dead men and their widows. At some point there will be no more widows and no dead men that need someone to take over their family. Then how is the family of God to be organized?

The reason for plural marriage is to bring as many of God's children into that covenant relationship. So for women, they bring as many children as they can into the covenant, and men, as many women as they can. But at some point a woman cannot bring anymore children into this covenant, and so it makes sense to me that she would have fulfilled the measure of her creation for this Telestial existence and will move on to the next level, where the bounds will be different. Kind of like how the Church restricts women from serving in the temple while they have young children, and how women are encouraged not to put off marriage in order to serve a mission. Bearing children should take priority in a woman's life.

And really, I think you would agree that there are at least some covenant marriages that are foreordained to exist throughout eternity. The spirit leads these people together, and perhaps that is what happened in the case Faith described. I had a friend who felt that her second marriage was that magical one that was always meant to be. Perhaps in the ancient days of Israel it was also of some temporal importance that a man raise up his dead brother's seed and keep the inheritance separate. I don't know. I think there is a good, better, best that we all can do, but the Lord still works with that. My brother died when he was 11. When will he have that chance to start his kingdom? The couple Faith referenced, perhaps they both understood the implied consequences of their choices, but led to take that path. Perhaps it would have been better for that man to find a bride who had not been sealed yet, and HE misses out on those blessings. But the wife, she made the sacrifice to have all those children with a man she thought she could never be sealed to. Perhaps this is HER reward for that sacrifice. And perhaps it really doesn't matter in the eternal scheme of things which parent a child is sealed to in this life. It will all get straightened out in the millennium, right?

[I'LLMAKEYAFAMOUS]

I must say though . . . . THere is a man in my ward who shared a personal story of his mother or grandmother ( I forget which.)

Her first love and eternal hubby was killed shortly after they were married. Their love was beautiful- but cut very short.
She later married her second love, and lived her mortal life with him, had children and grandchildren with him, and lived a wonderful life together.

She was approached by a couple of the brothern in authority in the chruch, and asked if she would like to be sealed to this (second) man who she loved just as much as the first . . . . which would finally seal them for eternity and also their children and grandchildren. And she was!!

I had never heard of a woman sealed to two men . . . but it happens! We will one day truly understand it all and how it works, and all the whys and it will all make sense.

I've never heard of this happening before and this is indeed an extreme situation.
And yet another serious problem deferred to the world to come due to the lack of plural marriage here and now.
That second man she married should have been able to marry a wife to whom he could be sealed and have an eternal posterity.
There would have been no shame in him being the kinsman redeemer to the deceased man and give him eternal posterity as well.
That wife could have had all of her needs met and she could have remained chaste to her deceased husband except for child-rearing.
This would have gone a long ways to keep things less confusing and entangled where the eternal families are concerned.
This is why plural marriage is an essential tenet where young widows are concerned.

An extreme situation for a Telestial world, where there are dead men and their widows. At some point there will be no more widows and no dead men that need someone to take over their family. Then how is the family of God to be organized?

The reason for plural marriage is to bring as many of God's children into that covenant relationship. So for women, they bring as many children as they can into the covenant, and men, as many women as they can. But at some point a woman cannot bring anymore children into this covenant, and so it makes sense to me that she would have fulfilled the measure of her creation for this Telestial existence and will move on to the next level, where the bounds will be different. Kind of like how the Church restricts women from serving in the temple while they have young children, and how women are encouraged not to put off marriage in order to serve a mission. Bearing children should take priority in a woman's life.

And really, I think you would agree that there are at least some covenant marriages that are foreordained to exist throughout eternity. The spirit leads these people together, and perhaps that is what happened in the case Faith described. I had a friend who felt that her second marriage was that magical one that was always meant to be. Perhaps in the ancient days of Israel it was also of some temporal importance that a man raise up his dead brother's seed and keep the inheritance separate. I don't know. I think there is a good, better, best that we all can do, but the Lord still works with that. My brother died when he was 11. When will he have that chance to start his kingdom? The couple Faith referenced, perhaps they both understood the implied consequences of their choices, but led to take that path. Perhaps it would have been better for that man to find a bride who had not been sealed yet, and HE misses out on those blessings. But the wife, she made the sacrifice to have all those children with a man she thought she could never be sealed to. Perhaps this is HER reward for that sacrifice. And perhaps it really doesn't matter in the eternal scheme of things which parent a child is sealed to in this life. It will all get straightened out in the millennium, right?

Interesting post. We should be careful not to try and judge celestial principles through telestial lenses.

[Faith]

Melissa, I don't know your level of activity in the Church, but I out of curiosity, if the Church came out and gave the ok on polygamy again, (in certain circumstances, but no one HAS to live it) how would you handle that? Would you stay a member?

We still practice polygamy currently - don't we? Every day in our temples men are sealed to multiple wives. Yes, the first wife has to have passed beyond the veil into the spirit world, but men in our church are sealed to multiple women in this church today. Many of our apostles and leaders are sealed to multiple wives.

I WISH this was all just a big mistake, but there are things we just won't understand until I am once again in my heavenly home. (but my earthly mind wants to believe it was all just a big mistake and is not ever something that was of God)

I asked my stake president this question about plural marriage in the future and he agreed it would one day be brought back during the millennium. Bruce R. McConkie also states in his book "Mormon Doctrine" that "obviously" we will once again practice it during the millennium. But isn't it true that a few of his teachings were not actually fact? and that the church leaders have taken things back that he said? And as far as the references in the scriptures (which were written by Bruce R. McConkie) concerning Seven women claiming one man in these latter days after the tribulations? I don't know. The foot notes he wrote refer it to mean marriage. . ..
Will my hubby be asked to take on seven wives? Who knows?!! (I hope not. I'd rather leave him and find a man who only wants me only!! At least that's what I told him. lol)

My stake President asked me why, in all of written scripture is our Heavenly Mother not mentioned? My answer was that (besides the fact that she is protected) there are so very many heavenly mothers? and his answer was "Yes."

Now -- I can't assume that even my stake president knows the truth on this paticular matter . . . . but my best answer that I have received it this:

Heavenly Father would never leave me, or you Michelle, unhappy. He would never leave us unhappy for eternity. He will exceed our deepest, pure, and righteous desires. He will not force us to be in a position of misery for eternity if we keep pluging along and do our best to repent and live his commandments. There are things our mortal minds can not comprehend. If all we knew was a loving and righteous Father with his many holy and righteous wives - it would not be strange because it was all we ever knew. One day all truth will be revealed. One day we will see this SO clearly.

I almost lost my testimony over the subject of polygamy. I was in a very dark and dismal place that was hard to climb out of. I got to the point where I thought God must be a horrible and evil womanizing man. I was wrong. He is all that is righteous and pure and loving.

I am choosing to doubt my doubts instead of my faith on this one - and hold onto all that I do know, and do have. I trust that he will never leave me eternally unhappy. I trust that he will exceed my deepest desires and dreams of what I picture in the eternities.

I must say though . . . . THere is a man in my ward who shared a personal story of his mother or grandmother ( I forget which.)

Her first love and eternal hubby was killed shortly after they were married. Their love was beautiful- but cut very short.
She later married her second love, and lived her mortal life with him, had children and grandchildren with him, and lived a wonderful life together.

She was approached by a couple of the brothern in authority in the chruch, and asked if she would like to be sealed to this (second) man who she loved just as much as the first . . . . which would finally seal them for eternity and also their children and grandchildren. And she was!!

I had never heard of a woman sealed to two men . . . but it happens! We will one day truly understand it all and how it works, and all the whys and it will all make sense.

Reminds me of this story.....

SARAH ANNE FRANKS & GEORGE PADDLEY

As told by President Scott Lorimer of the Riverton Wyoming Stake
In 1991, the people of the Riverton Stake in Wyoming were very busy doing the temple work for the pioneers of the Martin and Willie handcart companies; they called this project the Second Rescue. During this time the stake presidency received about 6000 letters from people and relatives concerning the work that was under way. After a story appeared in the Church News, thousands more letters arrived. It is through such a letter that the story of Sarah Anne Franks and George Paddley was discovered.
One of President Scott Lorimer’s counselors received a call from a lady in Rexburg, Idaho asking for their help in finding the name of the fiancé of her great-grandmother. They had come from England with the Martin Company in 1856 and he had died at Martin’s Cove. In searching the ship’s log, they found Sarah Anne Franks, a single woman traveling as sort of a nanny with a family who had five children. But there was no information about a young man traveling with them. They decided to check for any single men from her hometown traveling on the ship and found there were nine. This didn’t help much so they checked to see if any of them had died at Martin’s Cove. There were three. By this time, President Lorimer was ready to send what information they had found back to the family and let them worry about which one he was, his counselors, however, wanted to finish the job, but they didn’t know where to go from there.
Four weeks later President Lorimer received a letter from a man in Johannesburg, South Africa who had also seen the article in the Church News. Enclosed was a copy of four pages of his great-grandfather’s journal. As he read the pages about 10:00 one night, a single line jumped out a him. It read, “Sarah Anne Franks is betrothed to George Paddley.” He immediately called his counselor and asked what the names of those three men were. They couldn’t remember so they left their beds and went to the stake house to check it out. George Paddley was the fourth from the last person to board the ship before it left England.
When President James E. Faust heard this story he called it the greatest love story of our time. Sarah and George were in their early 20’s. They met because some missionaries came to England to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ. They were each baptized, they at tended church, met and fell in love. The wanted to be married. They had been taught about the temple and the sealing ordinances they could receive there. They chose to come to America, to Utah, to be married and sealed in the Endowment House for all eternity.
They made it across the Ocean, and then across the plains to the North Platte River where they met the blizzard of 1856. George Paddley spent most of the day in the river helping the people of his company dodge huge chunks of ice as they tried to get to the other side and continue their journey to Salt Lake. He got chilled and came down with hypothermia but he recovered and went on to Martin’s Cove another 150 to 160 miles. There the terrible conditions overcame him and he gave up his mortal life.
Sarah Anne Franks loved George Paddley, she loved him a lot. You can read in the journals how they dug trenches in the snow to bury the dead because the ground was too frozen. They did the best they could with the bodies. You can read about the snapping and growling of the wolves as they fought over and carried off the bodies. Sarah didn’t want George to be eaten by the wolves. She took what was probably one of the only things she had to stay warm, her shawl, and asked the brethren to wrap him in it and hang his body in the trees. When she got to Salt Lake and learned that in the spring the brethren were going back to retrieve supplies left behind she asked them to find George’s body and give him a proper burial. But, when they went back to Martin’s Cove the only thing they found was the shawl. They brought it back to her and her family has it still today.
Sarah had some frozen toes and fingers. She was taken to the home of Thomas Mackey where she was nursed back to health. She eventually became the third plural wife of Thomas Mackey. She raised a wonderful family and was an obedient and faithful member of the church for the rest of her life.
That was the end of the story for almost 138 years until one day President Lorimer and his counselors of the Riverton Stake had a special visitor. President James E. Faust visited Martin’s Cove and was told the story of Sarah and George. Tears rolled down President Faust’s cheeks as he listened to their story, they just wouldn’t stop. Finally he asked, “Did you seal Sarah Anne Franks to George Paddley?” The said no, they couldn’t. She had been sealed to Thomas Mackey. She had children with him and they were sealed to her. President Faust said, “You go back to the Logan Temple and seal Sarah Anne Franks to George Paddley. You give her a choice.” At that time, this kind of thing could not be done without special permission from the 1st Presidency. A woman could only be sealed to one man. It has been changed since then for certain situations. They went back and she is now sealed to both men. We don’t know how this will all work out in the eternities. President Lorimer said that he knows that Sarah Anne Franks loves George Paddley and that he loves her and her children. He knows that the only reason they were not sealed for eternity was because George gave his life to save the lives of other people in his company.
That was the end of the story again...for a while. In the year 2000, President Lorimer received another letter. It was a copy of Sarah Anne Franks Mackey’s Patriarchal Blessing. In it was a tremendous promise. Sarah did not receive her blessing until she was 72 years old. She had raised a good family, she had been endowed and sealed in the Temple. There were no other temple ordinances that she could have received yet this is what the Patriarch told her in the blessing: “Sarah, you will be allowed the privilege of returning to the House of the Lord and receiving the ordinance that awaits you.” How could that Patriarch have known that 100 years later she would be given the opportunity of being sealed to her first love, George Paddley, in the Temple of the Lord.


41 And as ye have asked concerning adultery, verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man receiveth a wife in the new and everlasting covenant, and if she be with another man, and I have not appointed unto her by the holy anointing, she hath committed adultery and shall be destroyed.

OH my goodness!! Amazing story. Im pondering life all the more now . . . .
We truly just never know the details of what God has in store for us. One day he will sort it all out and it will make complete sense!

[Sirocco]

I have a lot of questions for the Lord lol
And of course, critiques about the, well sub par job I felt he did with me.
I'm like a bad deck with a nice paintjob and a clock built in for some reason.

[passionflower]

My mother, who is dead, is presently sealed to four husbands.

In spite of sentiments to the contrary, there is nothing in the scriptures or the temple sealing ordinance that implies that its' goal is to create "ideal" romantic companionships. The purpose is to seal children to fathers and fathers to children. The blessings of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob point clearly to the obtaining of eternal increase. I don't know where it states anywhere that the sealing ordinance is really about forever and ever living with your own one true love(except in some peoples' minds)

In every strong ancient culture around the world, the purpose of marraige was to bring posterity into the world( which IMO lines up with scripture), not about the personal romantic gratification of two people. The so-idealized modern romantic companionship type marraige of today is simply a modern day construct. Back in the bible days, someone who "fell in love"was considered insane, as people "in love" are totally out of reality regarding who they are "in love" with, ( don't parents today worry about this all the time?) and in some kind of la-la land about everything else. They often can't eat, sleep or concentrate. In the ancient middle east, not only was romantic love considered crazy, it was looked down on, with the story of Jacob and Rachael being just one of the many typical ancient middle eastern tales of the quarrels, contentions, favoritism, and hurt feelings it caused. A man in love was no longer his own man, could not think clearly, and was almost seemingly "possessed". This of course applies to women, as well.

The scriptures do say a man should love his wife. But this is meant to be a religious, christ like type love, which is a lot more enduring than the romantic type.

As for me, I was sealed to my husband very shortly after my mission, and I didn't even like him. But Heavenly Father loved him a great deal, and he literally gave me to him in marraige, with my own marraige dreams being sacrificed, no matter how idealic or dear. This was a very spiritual experience for both of us, with real romantic bonds formed. However, we are very deeply important to each other ) I strongly believe that my submission to a sealing ordinance to my husband proves to Heavenly Father that it is Him I love, as I did this so I could eternally be with Him. I only want to "be with my family forever" because He wants me to, and it is the only way to live with Him forever. As far as my marraige was concerned, it was a literal " Behold the handmaid of the Lord. Be it unto me according to thy will."

Maybe one day I could tell this story on my Story Hour. It was very intense experience for my husband.

[butterfly]

I agree that traditionally, marriage has been more about economics and posterity than romantic love.
I feel incredibly blessed to have romantic love in my marriage. I guess that if I didn't, polygamy would be easier to accept.
However the Lord has commanded us that they twain shall become one flesh. Maybe that's only for when you have found your eternal companion, but before then, you marry different individuals as part of progression.
But the Lord has told me that I won't have to participate in a polygamous marriage and I am so grateful.

I know before, many women looked for a man who could financially meet her needs. This type of man was considered to be a superior option for a husband. But I don't think the same rule applies today.
I think many women are more concerned about feeling loved by their husbands than feeling financially secure. This is why polygamy is so repulsive to many in the younger generation - it doesn't matter how big your paycheck is, if you have another wife, then your wives' needs are not being met. ( just my personal feelings).

[freedomforall]

Wives to do list for their husband.

Polygamist To Do List.jpg (12.13 KiB) Viewed 2244 times

We do believe in eternity, right?

[freedomforall]

FYI

Church discipline may be required for someone guilty of serious criminal offenses. It is also used to address apostasy — the repeated, clear and open public opposition to the Church, its leaders and its doctrine. If someone seeks to teach as doctrine something that is contrary to the Church’s beliefs, attempts to persuade other Church members to their point of view or publicly insists the Church change its doctrine to align with their personal views, they would be counseled by a local Church leader and asked to cease that practice. If they fail to do so, Church discipline may follow. This also applies to an individual who subscribes to the teachings of apostate groups that engage in practices contrary to Church doctrine, such as polygamy.

SEE: http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-discipline" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Ann]

Wow! "Willing to permit others to do it"? That rubs me the wrong way! Who are we to say what someone else can or cannot do?

[Sarah]

My mother, who is dead, is presently sealed to four husbands.

In spite of sentiments to the contrary, there is nothing in the scriptures or the temple sealing ordinance that implies that its' goal is to create "ideal" romantic companionships. The purpose is to seal children to fathers and fathers to children. The blessings of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob point clearly to the obtaining of eternal increase. I don't know where it states anywhere that the sealing ordinance is really about forever and ever living with your own one true love(except in some peoples' minds)

In every strong ancient culture around the world, the purpose of marraige was to bring posterity into the world( which IMO lines up with scripture), not about the personal romantic gratification of two people. The so-idealized modern romantic companionship type marraige of today is simply a modern day construct. Back in the bible days, someone who "fell in love"was considered insane, as people "in love" are totally out of reality regarding who they are "in love" with, ( don't parents today worry about this all the time?) and in some kind of la-la land about everything else. They often can't eat, sleep or concentrate. In the ancient middle east, not only was romantic love considered crazy, it was looked down on, with the story of Jacob and Rachael being just one of the many typical ancient middle eastern tales of the quarrels, contentions, favoritism, and hurt feelings it caused. A man in love was no longer his own man, could not think clearly, and was almost seemingly "possessed". This of course applies to women, as well.

The scriptures do say a man should love his wife. But this is meant to be a religious, christ like type love, which is a lot more enduring than the romantic type.

As for me, I was sealed to my husband very shortly after my mission, and I didn't even like him. But Heavenly Father loved him a great deal, and he literally gave me to him in marraige, with my own marraige dreams being sacrificed, no matter how idealic or dear. This was a very spiritual experience for both of us, with real romantic bonds formed. However, we are very deeply important to each other ) I strongly believe that my submission to a sealing ordinance to my husband proves to Heavenly Father that it is Him I love, as I did this so I could eternally be with Him. I only want to "be with my family forever" because He wants me to, and it is the only way to live with Him forever. As far as my marraige was concerned, it was a literal " Behold the handmaid of the Lord. Be it unto me according to thy will."

Maybe one day I could tell this story on my Story Hour. It was very intense experience for my husband.

I'd be interested in hearing your AND your mom's story.

[passionflower]

My mother, who is dead, is presently sealed to four husbands.

In spite of sentiments to the contrary, there is nothing in the scriptures or the temple sealing ordinance that implies that its' goal is to create "ideal" romantic companionships. The purpose is to seal children to fathers and fathers to children. The blessings of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob point clearly to the obtaining of eternal increase. I don't know where it states anywhere that the sealing ordinance is really about forever and ever living with your own one true love(except in some peoples' minds)

In every strong ancient culture around the world, the purpose of marraige was to bring posterity into the world( which IMO lines up with scripture), not about the personal romantic gratification of two people. The so-idealized modern romantic companionship type marraige of today is simply a modern day construct. Back in the bible days, someone who "fell in love"was considered insane, as people "in love" are totally out of reality regarding who they are "in love" with, ( don't parents today worry about this all the time?) and in some kind of la-la land about everything else. They often can't eat, sleep or concentrate. In the ancient middle east, not only was romantic love considered crazy, it was looked down on, with the story of Jacob and Rachael being just one of the many typical ancient middle eastern tales of the quarrels, contentions, favoritism, and hurt feelings it caused. A man in love was no longer his own man, could not think clearly, and was almost seemingly "possessed". This of course applies to women, as well.

The scriptures do say a man should love his wife. But this is meant to be a religious, christ like type love, which is a lot more enduring than the romantic type.

As for me, I was sealed to my husband very shortly after my mission, and I didn't even like him. But Heavenly Father loved him a great deal, and he literally gave me to him in marraige, with my own marraige dreams being sacrificed, no matter how idealic or dear. This was a very spiritual experience for both of us, with real romantic bonds formed. However, we are very deeply important to each other ) I strongly believe that my submission to a sealing ordinance to my husband proves to Heavenly Father that it is Him I love, as I did this so I could eternally be with Him. I only want to "be with my family forever" because He wants me to, and it is the only way to live with Him forever. As far as my marraige was concerned, it was a literal " Behold the handmaid of the Lord. Be it unto me according to thy will."

Maybe one day I could tell this story on my Story Hour. It was very intense experience for my husband.

I'd be interested in hearing your AND your mom's story.

Glad you're curious, but not sure how well I could explain this stuff. Truth, though straight forward, tends to be stranger than fiction.

My mother has never been divorced, just widowed. And WW2 had something to do with it, plus an arranged marraige that never went through. I read Gone With the Wind at the age of 13, and after seeing the movie a few years later, I told my mother she reminded me of Scarlett O' Hara, and with her usual frankness, she agreed! On my last post in the story hour, I told a long but still very abbreviated story from our family history ( long before my mother was born ) Maybe I'll follow it up with my mother, who, during WW2 was a member of the underground and whose husband was a double agent. My cousin has a photo of my mother, my infant brother, and her then husband in a Nazi uniform with Adolf Hitler, where he is looking intently at them!

[freedomforall]

What does a polygamy back look like? If it's gross, I don't want one.

[Kingdom of ZION]

Having lived Celestial Marriage more than once in my life, I know first hand the heartache and hardship it is to live such a principle. It can destroy your current marriage if your not extremely devoted, very close and have a totally honest relationship with each other.

Polygamy is what people live if their hearts are not set on the world to come and building the kingdom! Yet how deceived most people are into thinking that there is any other type of marriage in the heavens. Like the parable of the talents... if you are only married to one wife, she will be taken from you and given to one far more worthy then you who has five wives.

If you are marriage to a man who only has you as his only wife, and you chose to not ever add other wife to your family... eventually you will remain single and separate and shall become a servant to those who are worthy of a far greater glory then you or even either of you can bear!

Is what I said here, hurtful and unkind? Would it be better that I said nothing, and on the day of your resurrection/rebirth, you saw clearly the truths of Eternity for the first time and were awakened to you awful situation?

Fear not, most of you are yet just children in the eternities, and many of you will have a little more time to grow up and live this principle here in hell, before your final judgment!

Shalom

[rewcox]

What does a polygamy back look like? If it's gross, I don't want one.

Cardinal, it's surplus! Gross was never write.

[Jesef]

KoZ, and you KNOW you are correct/right (about this subject of plural/celestial marriage) by the voice of God the Father speaking to you out of the Heavens, that pierced you to the very soul and caused your heart to burn and your frame to quake/shake? Or was it by some other way?

[Kingdom of ZION]

KoZ, and you KNOW you are correct/right (about this subject of plural/celestial marriage) by the voice of God the Father speaking to you out of the Heavens, that pierced you to the very soul and caused your heart to burn and your frame to quake/shake? Or was it by some other way?

I was told 7 years before that I would see the Messiah. I saw Him in a prophetic dream where He counseled me on living this Principle. I was warned at the time to not marry a person I was courting.

I was praying one day in the true order of Prayer, and said, if it is not His will at this time or that we lack authority, I would not seek to live this principle. He allowed me to feel His anger for me asking this question, He spoke no words to me. I immediately begged His forgiveness and I have never renounced seeking to live this principle thereafter, though it has been more hell on earth for me then it has been worth!

I have had more revealed to me upon this subject the any other people I have encountered in this life. Not that I have not received much more upon other eternal doctrines, but I do know it is an eternal doctrine for the Elect of G_d, and no others!

Shalom

[A Random Phrase]

What does a polygamy back look like? If it's gross, I don't want one.

Cardinal, it's surplus! Gross was never write.

:))

[freedomforall]

What does a polygamy back look like? If it's gross, I don't want one.

Cardinal, it's surplus! Gross was never write.

So a polygamy back is more like a hump because it is surplus? Aren't humps gross? What good is a gross, surplus hump on a polygamy back?

[Jesef]

KoZ, and you KNOW you are correct/right (about this subject of plural/celestial marriage) by the voice of God the Father speaking to you out of the Heavens, that pierced you to the very soul and caused your heart to burn and your frame to quake/shake? Or was it by some other way?

I was told 7 years before that I would see the Messiah. I saw Him in a prophetic dream where He counseled me on living this Principle. I was warned at the time to not marry a person I was courting.

I was praying one day in the true order of Prayer, and said, if it is not His will at this time or that we lack authority, I would not seek to live this principle. He allowed me to feel His anger for me asking this question, He spoke no words to me. I immediately begged His forgiveness and I have never renounced seeking to live this principle thereafter, though it has been more hell on earth for me then it has been worth!

I have had more revealed to me upon this subject the any other people I have encountered in this life. Not that I have not received much more upon other eternal doctrines, but I do know it is an eternal doctrine for the Elect of G_d, and no others!

Shalom

Thanks for sharing and Peace to you as well. If you don't mind elaborating just a bit more: in what manner were you "told 7 years before that [you] would see the Messiah"? And in the prophetic dream in which you saw Him and He counseled you on living the principle of celestial/plural marriage, can you describe the experience (no need to share the content)? In both of these cases, how do you KNOW it was Messiah/Christ and not some other being trying to deceive you into unauthorized practices, etc.?

[Melissa]

I dont think it correct to equate women and wives as "talents".

[Jesef]

I dont think it correct to equate women and wives as "talents".

I agree. One to many is by definition inequality. One man does not equal several women. Would that not be inequality, inequity, iniquity? From an eternal perspective, I'm still not convinced that polygamy/plural-marriage is true. D&C 132 seems suspect. From my perspective, it's still possible that the Brethren and Church went astray for a time in practicing it, that we are more correct now in not living/practicing it. But if an angel with a sword shows up, I'll shake his hand (or test his blade) and then listen. Or maybe I'll still wrestle him. And now that I think about it, why didn't Joseph wrestle that angel? Probably because he had a sword - no fair. Who knows, I could be totally wrong.

[Kingdom of ZION]

I dont think it correct to equate women and wives as "talents".

I am not the original author of that interpretation of that Parable. It came from Presidents and General Authorities of the LDS Church originally!

From my prospective, it take 999 righteous women to produce one perfect man. Without them their would be no G_ds!

[Kingdom of ZION]

I dont think it correct to equate women and wives as "talents".

I agree. One to many is by definition inequality. One man does not equal several women. Would that not be inequality, inequity, iniquity? From an eternal perspective, I'm still not convinced that polygamy/plural-marriage is true. D&C 132 seems suspect. From my perspective, it's still possible that the Brethren and Church went astray for a time in practicing it, that we are more correct now in not living/practicing it. But if an angel with a sword shows up, I'll shake his hand (or test his blade) and then listen. Or maybe I'll still wrestle him. And now that I think about it, why didn't Joseph wrestle that angel? Probably because he had a sword - no fair. Who knows, I could be totally wrong.

If the Brethren and the Church went astray, then the kingdom is lost and there is no difference between LDS and Catholics except their level of apostasy! As for being forced to live this principle... that is against everything G_d stands for, Agency rules in one ability to choose their own path. The Angel was commanding JS a Lord's Anointed, to teach the principle (fulfilling his covenant). There is a difference.

[Kingdom of ZION]

"I was praying one day in the true order of Prayer, and said, if it is not His will at this time or that we lack authority, I would not seek to live this principle. He allowed me to feel His anger for me asking this question, He spoke no words to me. I immediately begged His forgiveness and I have never renounced seeking to live this principle thereafter, though it has been more hell on earth for me then it has been worth!"

This statement above from KOZ should send warning signals to any who have ears to hear of the dangers one can experience from false spirits when inappropriate methods are followed in seeking the Lords will. I personally have seen a number of people who used the true order of prayer and all that is accociated with it outside of the protective walls of the temple that the Lord has reserved for such methods of communication with Him and they were taken down all sorts of deceptive paths. Those who joined the TLC church are but one of several examples of this. I don't doubt that KOZ was given revelation. It's the source of that revelation that concerns me greatly.

YES, parting the veil is perilous! It is the culmination of complete worship. To seek the Face of the Lord, may cost you everything, but nothing you posses here shall rise with you except your deeds, your love, and your memories. He who holds onto to his life shall loose it. And He who looses his life seeking the kingdom, shall find it. Coming into the presence of G_d is everything! Besides how are you to ever overcome deception, lest you are tested?

So, we have come full circle. I was pointing out the LDS Apostasy, which pasted without comment, as everyone stepped over it like the dead body in the room. Now you come pointing out how everyone is taught how to 'Ask and Received' (to pray properly), but you are told, you shall never pray in or out of the Temple this way, we will forever lead you in such prayers! Maybe you should start following the Catholics, by bowing your head and saying, you know best Holy Father!