Common Sense Prophecy: Polygamy will be renounced by the LDS Church

[SmallFarm]

What about animal sacrifice Copeland? Were all the prophets in the Old Testament blood thirsty heathens? Or were they just confused?I want to know how much you want to parse the scriptures to fit your modern-day world-view.

Is someone using the fact that there was animal sacrifice in the Old Testament to justify doing it today?

I'm not sure I understand the question.

I want you to lay it out on the line Copeland. Where else are you more righteous in your discernment than the prophets? Just on polygamy or also animal sacrifice? Are you with the prophets on baptism or is it a silly ritual that has no relevance in our, more civilized, modern era? In short, where are the else are the prophets backwards and barbaric and being sinful men instead of prophets?

[inho]

Brigham Young never taught the Adam-God theory. If you read what Joseph Fielding Smith said, it says Brigham Young's sermon was "erroneously transcribed." Joseph Fielding Smith then proves that Brigham Young clearly knew that Adam was not God. That is why President Kimball said the Adam-God theory was "alleged to have been taught." Anyone claiming it was taught is either misinformed or purposely lying in an effort to discredit the Church.

Your denial skill is impressive.

Impressive denial indeed.

Tony, it is good and important that there are defenders of the church here on the forum (this at least used to be pro-LDS forum, not always sure if it is it anymore). However, please get your facts straight, otherwise you just do more harm than good. Unlike JFS implied, Adam-God theory is not based on one single sermon (that could thus be erroneously transcribed). BY taught it over and over again and even claimed that it was based on revelation. That doesn't mean that we should accept it; Orson Pratt didn't accept it even while BY lived and subsequent church leaders have rejected it. You can find some basic information about it from this pro-lds website: http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_ ... God_theory" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[marc]

It still is a pro LDS forum. Truth is not anti-Mormon. Many of us, though misguided, seek the truth. Reviling, however, I believe is anti-Mormon. Let us not revile one another.

[BrotherOfMahonri]

One of the first things that happens, when polygamy will no longer remain stuffed into the back of your consciousness, is you tell yourself that Joseph couldn't have been a part of it. People blame various people -- Brigham Young, Sidney Rigdon, etc. -- anybody but Joseph. They go to a lot of trouble to prove that Joseph Smith wasn't a polygamist, but it all boils down to everybody was lying. Which isn't likely. And it also requires that you figure out a way to convince yourself that the overwhelming evidence for his nearly ribald polygamy, was all made up. I found I just couldn't do it. But don't think I didn't try. I tried hard. I just couldn't pull it off.

Your next step will be to accept that indeed, Joseph Smith was not only a polygamist, he was an enthusiastic one. That he did it in secret. That he lied to his wife about it, repeatedly. He lied to many people about it. I just read a very thoughtful post that expressed something that's occurred to me before, that maybe polygamy was the sin that led to his death.

I don't know how long it will take you to get there. I know you're probably going to lash out at me for saying you will. But you will. Some people leave the church in anger over it. Which is understandable. But I don't think it's necessary. You don't need to leave all that's good about the modern church, over the rot that was in the early one. But it's really up to you. I do advise though, not getting mad at people who are no longer able to deceive themselves about this. They're just a little further along the road than you are.

Thank you for your response. Lash out? Not so. Once you have a witness, lashing out comes by way of being offended. It is up to you and I to offend not God and to seek out truth by faith. I had the faith God would answer me, and he has. I simply share that with the invite to set aside all that you think you know, and allow the Spirit to teach you what you can know. White lies are common throughout any man's life - so unless we believe in infallibility, which I don't think you do, then it is easy for the master of lies to stick his foot in the restoration with hopes to heal the wounded beast that was wounded to death upon Joseph having attempted to restore the Kingdom but instead got the church as the saints were not ready to live up to the Kingdom.

But as for your idea that the church will ever renounce polygamy, I'm not optimistic. Renouncing polygamy means renouncing Joseph Smith. Renouncing Joseph Smith means renouncing the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine & Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price. The temple rites would have to go too, and then all we are is Methodists with a pioneer history. I just don't see it ever happening.

I'm surprised by this seemingly narrow-minded analogy, it is the same as saying that Christ in his ministry negated everything back to Adam for having taught against the church's leaders of his time, as the church of his mortal days was practicing the law of Moses and had the doctrines and teachings of such - or Lehi and his prophesying to the saints of Jerusalem. Lehi renounced the false traditions of his people but that did not negate the truths throughout his people and history of such. Abinadi renounced the polygamy of Noah and his priests amongst other things, and that didn't negate the priesthood that existed then or the scriptures or prophesies of those who were righteous before Noah.

Such an analogy in my view is tantamount to saying the opposite, "I have a witness of the Book of Mormon, so that means everything else is true, up to Thomas S Monson and I have no need to inquire as the book is true so everything else falls into the truth with it." Such a mindset leads to being deceived by man.

Help me see what I am missing here, as this really seems out of color for you to lump it all in because of one potential error, polygamy.

[BrotherOfMahonri]

I wouldn't be so quick to denounce any commandment of God, Cope.

Polygamy was no commandment. Not from God anyway.

And what if God commanded it now, would you comply?

We best know my friend which God it is coming from, the mimicking false God of this world, or the God of Abraham.

[Fiannan]

What about animal sacrifice Copeland? Were all the prophets in the Old Testament blood thirsty heathens? Or were they just confused?I want to know how much you want to parse the scriptures to fit your modern-day world-view.

Is someone using the fact that there was animal sacrifice in the Old Testament to justify doing it today?

I'm not sure I understand the question.

Animal sacrifice was an ordinance while marriage is something far more meaningful, with esoteric aspects most people miss. However, as an ordinance those who accept the New Testament no longer sacrifice animals. But it should be noted that Muslims still sacrifice animals and I hope you do not consider that a sin.

[Fiannan]

We best know my friend which God it is coming from, the mimicking false God of this world, or the God of Abraham.

Are you saying Abraham's god was false?

[BrotherOfMahonri]

He is either ridiculing the Church or he actually is a false prophet. His OP states: "The Holy Spirit has been upon me for some time . . . . and I now prophesy in the workings of the Holy Spirit."

Either way, he should be banned.

Pfft, not the first person I would ban who has made copious responses in this thread. They make so many arguments and are at odds with everyone on almost any topic I find it distasteful to read this forum as much as I have in the recent past. He just has to have the last word on anything and does not agree with anyone on anything.

I post on this forum so that people can read God's eternal truths instead of the ramblings of apostates like BrotherOfMahonri.

If by apostate you mean I do not do what you do, absolutely correct, and please label me that all you want, as I want NOTHING TO DO WITH YOUR PROFESSION OF HOW YOU LIVE THE GOSPEL!!!!, as it seems your gospel you preach through your actions here lack entirely in my view of the restored Gospel of Prophecy by the members, revelation by the members, and faith beyond manuals and warm fuzzy testimony (and if any moderator feels to lock this thread because of this, just recognize Tony is getting a small taste of his own here).

An invite to go read Mosiah 4 and Alma 5 and ask the Lord to bless those you hate in your version of His gospel, woops, I think it is actually the reverse ;)

[BrotherOfMahonri]

We best know my friend which God it is coming from, the mimicking false God of this world, or the God of Abraham.

Are you saying Abraham's god was false?

Are you saying Abraham was commanded of God to practice polygamy?

Is this the same guy that engaged with my wife in a weird polygamous conversation here on this LDSFF because he really likes the thought of polygamy?

Are you of the type to believe that if I don't condone polygamy and ultimately practice it you will get my wife in the hereafter?

I do not care to engage much with such carnally-minded people, they seem to step on the husband while winking at the wife ;) so they can maintain a good report in her eyes, failing to see that she is one flesh with her one husband, while breaking the heart of his own wife.

I do not fear to speak up when things are being twisted to man's own carnal desires.

[BrotherOfMahonri]

It still is a pro LDS forum. Truth is not anti-Mormon. Many of us, though misguided, seek the truth. Reviling, however, I believe is anti-Mormon. Let us not revile one another.

re·vile
rəˈvīl/
verb
gerund or present participle: reviling
criticize in an abusive or angrily insulting manner.
"he was now reviled by the party that he had helped to lead"
synonyms: criticize, censure, condemn, attack, inveigh against, rail against, castigate, lambaste, denounce;

I am guilty of responding to reviling just as well, but I try to do it in a manner after the examples of righteous indignation I study of in the Scriptures.

[BrotherOfMahonri]

And his IP address as well.

I have no problem debating genuine and sincere people like KMC but not people that are here to merely tear down the faith. :-w

@-) :-ss =))
Seriously? A carnal mind is easily offended by one who stands up boldly against it. To then adhere to the, let me build up KMC so I can get more people on my side? Childish at best, but even that is too high of a compliment.

To twist my words to the tearing down of faith is of the doctrine that seems to be getting more common amongst many TBMs like you on this forum, must be that same spirit working its way through those who fear and trust in the arm of flesh, which we are warned of.

I am tearing down faith in what? - your future polygamy, marriage to that girl down the road that one secretly has loved as his wife is not enough to cherish her alone? This is beginning to clearly make sense with you and frankly it makes me sick. :ymsick: Talk about faith tearing, even the tender faith of the daughters of God who in times past were manipulated into plural marriage by way of God's supposed commandment to Joseph who was taken because of the DARKNESS OF THE MINDS OF THE SAINTS, manipulating these women to think that such is the only way to the highest degree of Glory.

Even if polygamy were of God (which obviously I testify boldly against despite yours and Tony's and others persecution now (Reviling if you will, which reviling is of the devil mind you) ) I am sure all of the righteous men on earth would not seek it out whatsoever, per their guiless, child like, and virtuous natures, but God would lead the tender hearts of his own daughters to His truest sons who do not seek it out, but love God over all others such that God would consider that man a candidate to cherish his own daughters, a man amongst men whose innocence, virtue, and righteousness exceed that of the hidden lusts of the carnal natural man. All your comments speak of facts of how polygamy would benefit women, but I HAVE NOT SEEN ONE SINGLE COMMENT ABOUT THOSE WOMEN and THEIR HEARTS, just how they fit into the program of polygamy. Sick.

Your doctrine is not welcome in my house whatsoever, and may the God of Heaven rebuke any saint who is practicing in their minds what the saints were rebuked for doing in Jacob chapter 2 and elsewhere.

[marc]

BoM, is D&C 132:65 of God? What say ye?

[BrotherOfMahonri]

BoM, is D&C 132:65 of God? What say ye?

If you read any of my thoughts you already know my answer. Marc - you are a sincere man in my view, I invite you to prayefully ask God on the matter, have you? What was his answer to you? Do you care to know on this matter? Should you care in your view? Why or Why not? Do you have the spirit of prophecy? Should you? Why or why not?

D&C 132 is the bug in the cake, the poop in the pudding in my view. A potentially beautiful couple of revelations, twisted and doctored into something that does not settle in the ole' ticker per the Spirit's workings in my own revelation I and all of us have a right to and have exercised such right.

I invite you and all others to think outside the box, as your testimony of His Gospel (not the church) should be unshakable if it is based on the Rock of our Redeemer, and consider a perspective I think this author ( see starting at "How we got from there to here": http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2010/ ... ygamy.html )does well at expressing as far as an introduction to some new wine, if you will, concerning things surrounding section 132... and polygamy.

but if you didn't catch it, I am stating again that it isn't the scholarly proof, affidavits, etc. that any of us will be able to stand on in the end, do you disagree?, Did Stephen have the affidavits of Moses in hand as he testified while being stone to death when He saw God on his throne? Not necessary, as he could stand on his own. Did Joseph Smith need scholarly works to build up the Kingdom of God on earth and restore the priesthood in its fullness? No. It required faith, active faith, even as a child, affidavits were unnecessesary and down right unbecoming of fath - and if only you could be in my shoes for a moment or two, and feel the child like faith I am expressing here, even boldly - it would maybe break through the chains of depending on scholarly work, philosophy, thick tradition, and come down to common sense in the workings of the Spirit, which workings you and I both are invited to partcipiate in, even prophesy and revelation. (speaking to all, not you particularly)

it is the Spirit testifying to us of the truth that we must stand on, and I now see that this is God's way of proving faith over history told through the eyes of who knows how many honest and dishonest people -

To repeat Marc
I invite you to prayerfully ask God on the matter, have you? What was his answer to you? Do you care to know on this matter? Should you care in your view? Why or Why not? Do you have the spirit of prophecy? Should you? Why or why not?

[BrotherOfMahonri]

My OP attacks the doctrine of polygamy (which doctrine is NEVER TAUGHT BY GOD IN SCRIPTURE TO ANYONE BUT potentially what Brigham said was taught by Joseph in the one obscure historical section 132), defends the innocence of the man who has done more for the salvation of mankind excepting the Savior himself, and states the church will denounce it (what a beautiful thing to come to the truth despite all the wisdom of the world against it - sounds pretty much like what Joseph was up against, wisdom of the then Christian world) - and having done such offends many to the point of reviling, persecution, crying apostasy, etc.. Do you not see what is occurring on this forum thread? What is the Spirit telling you about yourself here?

It is blatant that the majority here are ignoring the doctrine we profess to believe in, which is having the spirit of prophesy and revelation by one's diligence, prayers, and fasting oft. I have expressed such and expounded upon such, but the spirit of offense requires and has proven that many here pass those weightier matters and stick to the offending points. Show me in any of your responses one ounce of prophecy - prophecy we all should attain to as practicing saints in the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. Who dares prophecy boldy out of any of you here? Why do you not prophecy, for the fear of man, for the fear of rejection? The key to prophesy is plainly and simply given, and I have shared just that, even giddily as a child who has discovered a treasure chest, even so much that it is more of my message than that of polygamy, yet it is IGNORED, as philosophical debate continues ENDLESSLY in vain!

Follow that pattern the Sons of Mosiah teach, and then come back and prophesy boldly against what I am prophesying and sharing - otherwise it is empty debate and offenses will abound and all words against such are in vain.

[Fiannan]

Are you saying Abraham was commanded of God to practice polygamy?

He is never condemned for it, was he?

Is this the same guy that engaged with my wife in a weird polygamous conversation here on this LDSFF because he really likes the thought of polygamy?

You lost me here. Who is your wife Bro of Mah?

Are you of the type to believe that if I don't condone polygamy and ultimately practice it you will get my wife in the hereafter?

What does your wife say about that? Again, are you serious? I have not had a conversation like this since talking to a stoned hippie in Bakersfield a long time ago.

I do not care to engage much with such carnally-minded people, they seem to step on the husband while winking at the wife ;) so they can maintain a good report in her eyes, failing to see that she is one flesh with her one husband, while breaking the heart of his own wife.

Okay, now you are sounding really creepy.

I do not fear to speak up when things are being twisted to man's own carnal desires.

[BrotherOfMahonri]

Okay, now you are sounding really creepy.

I do not fear to speak up when things are being twisted to man's own carnal desires.

Now you know a little of what it feels like to be on the receiving end of projecting on another, hypocrisy is the term I feel best for such a scenario. You and Tony spit it out all you want, projecting distasteful motives, malicious intent, etc., but how dare anyone project with yourself. Sometimes you have to do unto others as they do unto you to get their attention enough to clue them in on their actions. Glad you have labeled for us all what you are doing. I just have a bit more maturity to refrain mostly from labeling others creepy, apostate, etc.. Now you have been alerted to your doings, take it as you will.

[Fiannan]

Okay, now you are sounding really creepy.

I do not fear to speak up when things are being twisted to man's own carnal desires.

Now you know a little of what it feels like to be on the receiving end of projecting on another, hypocrisy is the term I feel best for such a scenario. You and Tony spit it out all you want, projecting distasteful motives, malicious intent, etc., but how dare anyone project with yourself. Sometimes you have to do unto others as they do unto you to get their attention enough to clue them in on their actions. Glad you have labeled for us all what you are doing. I just have a bit more maturity to refrain mostly from labeling others creepy, apostate, etc.. Now you have been alerted to your doings, take it as you will.

Whatever you say Bro.

[BrotherOfMahonri]

Polygamy might save a lot of marriage, not destroy them. Biologically a man can reproduce decades after a wife of the same age is unable to do so. Why did God set it up that way?
Maybe because women have a ticket to heaven whereas man, to become like God, entrusted with all that the father hath, needs to prove himself, and if he were only "biologically" capable of reproduction for the time women are, then the world would be exalted by now. Maybe it was to test men, to see if they could truly be a friend to God (un-carnal natural man).

In China is used to be that when a wife could no longer have children she would procure a young woman and arrange that her husband take her as a second wife so as to produce more family -- and in ancient China family meant power. Of course this was mainly something that wealthier people could take part in.
Oh China - right, so power, control, communism, and oppression - relates perfectly with polygamy.

Now consider that a man generally displays behavior either called "male menopause" or "mid-life crisis" not based on his age but the age of his wife. Read this over:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/th ... ife-crisis" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A lot of upper-class men, or alpha males with social standing, wind up meeting women 20 o4 30 years younger than them and in many cases (seen it even in our religion) the man leaves his 40 or 50 something wife for the 20 or 30 something "trophy" wife. Is this wired into our genes?
Yes, congrats! You just repeated what PBS nature documentaries show so well,which is a mark of the beast - in that they mate, and see a younger cow and will fight to the death to become alpha male to mate again with younger flesh - carnal natural man through and through - and if we are not careful, we may miss a mark of the beast we are not to take upon ourselves, as the beast Mates, Sleeps, Eats, and kill - we are to be more holy than the beast to be with God.

I would also note that research suggests that women find men who are married or with a woman in a relationship FAR more attractive and will find themselves flirting with these men not because they are off limits but because they want that man - especially if he has proven himself as a good father. Are young women wired to seek men who have proven themselves?
What does your wife think about this? So if I am a better husband than you are, your wife will come after me? This type of research is right up the alley of the research done showing that oral sex will keep youth safe from STDs (http://www.wnd.com/2008/08/72966/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;). So I gather that polygamy will keep down the statistics of infidelity, STDs, etc.

Polygamy would solve this in more ways than one. Maybe there would be far less women in their 40s or 50s being left by husbands if polygamy was an option. If anything polygamy helps women far more than men.
Wow! Let's take this beautiful doctrine of Fiannan above and take a poll with all the women on this forum to see if they feel polygamy will help their poor gender far more than men. I find it a sickening IRONY that I am labeled an APOSTATE when ideas like this are freely expressed and unchallenged by many intelligent saints.

[slimjamm]

There have been a lot of good things taught and referenced in this thread. Let's not take away from that with the prideful personal banter towards one another. Back on topic.

[BrotherOfMahonri]

There have been a lot of good things taught and referenced in this thread. Let's not take away from that with the prideful personal banter towards one another. Back on topic.

I am waiting for anyone to address the topic I have expounded on most here, outside of polygamy... and that is prophesy by the workings of the Holy Spirit to anyone willing to attain to such.

Which is here:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=38780&start=180#p611081" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Fiannan]

Maybe because women have a ticket to heaven whereas man, to become like God, entrusted with all that the father hath, needs to prove himself, and if he were only "biologically" capable of reproduction for the time women are, then the world would be exalted by now. Maybe it was to test men, to see if they could truly be a friend to God (un-carnal natural man).

Bit of a mommy worship here, don't you think? Women have to come here and prove themselves as well as men.

Yet then you seem to imply that sexuality and reproduction are directly correlated? I can assure you many women start affairs as well as get involved with experimenting (often with women) once they are no longer bound by fertility. Yes, women have sexuality Bro.

Yes, congrats! You just repeated what PBS nature documentaries show so well,which is a mark of the beast - in that they mate, and see a younger cow and will fight to the death to become alpha male to mate again with younger flesh - carnal natural man through and through - and if we are not careful, we may miss a mark of the beast we are not to take upon ourselves, as the beast Mates, Sleeps, Eats, and kill - we are to be more holy than the beast to be with God.

So nature documentaries = 666? Geeez, and never did I hear of one narrated by Aliester Crowley or Anton LeVey.

So a cattle farmer, according to your logic since his livelihood depends on raising cattle and then killing them for processing, is carnal?

What does your wife think about this? So if I am a better husband than you are, your wife will come after me? This type of research is right up the alley of the research done showing that oral sex will keep youth safe from STDs (http://www.wnd.com/2008/08/72966/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;). So I gather that polygamy will keep down the statistics of infidelity, STDs, etc.

Are you bringing up the wife then because you are insecure in your relationship? Better stay away from all those Alpha male polygamists in Utah. ;) And what does Clinton sex have to do with this discussion? I will note though that infidelity would decrease in a polygamist society -- and least dumping spouses.

Wow! Let's take this beautiful doctrine of Fiannan above and take a poll with all the women on this forum to see if they feel polygamy will help their poor gender far more than men. I find it a sickening IRONY that I am labeled an APOSTATE when ideas like this are freely expressed and unchallenged by many intelligent saints.

Hey hold on to your drawers there partner, I never called you an apostate(although a lot of your posts, if read aloud in sacrament, would get you a one-way trip to the bishop's office pronto). . As for choice, the question would better be framed as if people know women who really wanted to marry and have children but never found a worthy man, or if they know women who would be open to polygamy if it were more mainstreamed in today's society. By the way, I never claimed to be a new prophet with a special doctrine.

[Fiannan]

Can one believe in any of the Abrahamic religions and denounce polygamy?

[slimjamm]

There have been a lot of good things taught and referenced in this thread. Let's not take away from that with the prideful personal banter towards one another. Back on topic.

I am waiting for anyone to address the topic I have expounded on most here, outside of polygamy... and that is prophesy by the workings of the Holy Spirit to anyone willing to attain to such.

Which is here:
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=38780&start=180#p611081" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yes it has been addressed. You have a witness plural marriage is all wrong and will be renounced. Others have stated not so, with why they feel or know. The biggest flaw with your witness is once you renounce patriarchal marriage the whole plan of salvation goes out the window, the scriptures and prophets go out the window, the priesthood and keys. Everything is unraveled. You can argue that all you want, but it's either one or the other. My question to you is, now once that has all come apart, where do you go and what plan do you then follow?

[KMCopeland]

What about animal sacrifice Copeland? Were all the prophets in the Old Testament blood thirsty heathens? Or were they just confused?I want to know how much you want to parse the scriptures to fit your modern-day world-view.

Is someone using the fact that there was animal sacrifice in the Old Testament to justify doing it today?

I'm not sure I understand the question.

I want you to lay it out on the line Copeland.

I always lay it on the line.

Where else are you more righteous in your discernment than the prophets?

Nowhere. I'm not more righteous than any prophet. I'm just comfortable calling a spade a spade. It's painful to hear a prophet calling it something else, but that doesn't mean I should pretend they haven't. It's tempting of course. I like group approval as much as the next guy. But I find I just can no longer pull it off.

We are admonished, by the prophets and the Savior, to work hard to strengthen our ability to tell right from wrong. That we're responsible to always do that, even when it's hard. I do that work every day. I have for many years. I stumble. I get things wrong. I repent. I begin again. But I have to say, it doesn't take a very high level of righteousness to discern the wild contradiction between pretty much everything we know about Heavenly Father, His son, and the Holy Ghost, and polygamy. It's more like learning to recognize the temptation to lie to myself about it because it makes it easier to fit in.

I am responsible for my own righteousness. Not any prophet.

Just on polygamy or also animal sacrifice? Are you with the prophets on baptism or is it a silly ritual that has no relevance in our, more civilized, modern era? In short, where are the else are the prophets backwards and barbaric and being sinful men instead of prophets?

I can't think of anyplace else.

[SmallFarm]

Read my words carefully Cope, I said righteous in your discernment. You say polygamy is a sin. Prophets said, at least for a time, that it was a commandment. This implies that you are putting yourself in a position of superior discernment to the prophets. Either that or you are saying they were false prophets, in which case you may want to discuss that with your stake president. ;)