Context of Polygamy in the Book of Mormon

[Finrock]

No, it doesn't. Your paradigm "Whatever the Church or Church leaders do or say is true/good/right" is fallacious (not rational) and fragile (not a good place to build your life on).

But, in any case, this foundation that you have, this paradigm that you keep using to support your position here, doesn't do what you think it is doing for you. Its an illusion. You are not standing on a solid foundation. If you are going to persist in supporting the early practice of polygamy or polygamy in general and you want to be relevant/rational/reasonable, you'll need to come up with a different argument/rationale that isn't fallacious. "Whatever the Church or Church leaders do or say is true/good/right" is false.

-Finrock

Why do you promote the philosophy of Laman and Lemuel?

Rebel no more against your brother, whose views have been glorious, and who hath kept the commandments from the time that we left Jerusalem; and who hath been an instrument in the hands of God, in bringing us forth into the land of promise; for were it not for him, we must have perished with hunger in the wilderness; nevertheless, ye sought to take away his life; yea, and he hath suffered much sorrow because of you.

And now my son, Laman, and also Lemuel and Sam, and also my sons who are the sons of Ishmael, behold, if ye will hearken unto the voice of Nephi ye shall not perish.

Have you forgotten: We believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth.

So you don't hearken to the apostles and prophets, who receive direction from Christ. You are on sandy soil.

Why do you promote the philosophy of abusing your wife by supporting polygamy? So you hearken to the voice of the devil?



-Finrock

[Arenera]

Why do you promote the philosophy of abusing your wife by supporting polygamy? So you hearken to the voice of the devil?



-Finrock

You and Jesef promote your twisted view of polygamy.

[Finrock]

The issue in the early days of the church was that they were not progressing. They were happy to take on more wives, but they were not willing to live other celestial principles or were being hindered from doing so, and so the practiced of plurality was taken away.

So, God ended the practice of polygamy because early members "were not willing to live other celestial principles"? The hindered part is irrelevant. Because if God wanted it, people can't hinder Him. In any case, what is your proof for this assertion that this is the why?

We know the spirits who have died before us are not focused on having children, but are
focused on missionary and family history work.

We do? How?

And that is what the Church has been focused on too. Are the spirits in heaven any less worthy of blessings because they are not fulfilling the law of marriage and having children? Obviously the answer is no, that it's simply a case of different circumstances and a different law for their time and sphere. That's how I see our time. We have laws and conditions suited to our time and place, and aren't asked right now to live every law or commandment ever revealed.

Maybe and even if so, not sure why that's relevant. But, the biggest issue here is that this part of your reasoning ignores the fact that early prophets taught that this practice would never be taken away from the earth, that it was an eternal principle that members must accept and live, and that if the Church stopped practicing it (here on earth, not in heaven), the Church would be damned. The opposite happened. Faithful members couldn't convince God to support God's own decrees. Prophets with the sealing power couldn't convince God to support God's decree. Why not?

Those who find fault with this in my estimation have a rebellious spirit and are looking for reason to accuse the brethren.

Those who believe that everything the Church or Church leaders say or do is right/truth/good have a cult mentality and are living on a shaky foundation. That paradigm (Church/Church Leaders always right no matter what) is DEMONSTRABLY false. It takes a big dose of cognitive dissonance to ignore this. But, whatever, I get it.

In any case, no rebellion, no accusations from me. You'll have to prove my rebelliousness and my accusations with more than just an assertion. You can't and you won't, so don't worry about this part...

At the time of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, we don't see world-wide missionary work and baptism going on. But the covenants were being established. Now we have an opportunity to make the same covenants because of their lives, and we are to take those covenants to all the world. Thanks to them we can make this phase of the work happen. And thanks to the sacrifice of some of those early saints who obeyed and practiced plurality, many righteous spirits were born into the covenant to help provide this missionary force. I and my husband both descend from plural wives, and many saints I talk to also do, so it really did make a difference I think, and someone mentioned how the posterity of those plural wives would be blessed for their sacrifice, and I believe that to be the case.

Conjecture and speculation created solely to support a paradigm. It would be assumption on yours and my part to say that "many righteous" spirits were born in to the covenant. At the same token, we can also assume that many unrighteous spirits were born in to the covenant. Also, many foolish traditions were passed on to these spirits who were born in to polygamous families at the time that hindered their progression. In any case, that's all speculation. Further, if you or others, didn't come from plural marriage, you'd be grateful for your monogamous heritage. Polygamy is not necessary in order to bring up "righteous" seed. Polygamy and being born in to the Church doesn't guarantee righteousness, etc. In short, its a wash. Same can be said if the situation was different (all monogamy).

-Finrock

[MMbelieve]

Or plural marriage IS an eternal principle and has been temporarily suspended in mortality.

You know that polygamy can't work unless there are more women than men right? Supposing polygamy is legit for an eternal practice implies that women are way more righteous than men. At least twice as righteous. Why would God create his sons to fail? If anything is a war on men or harmful to men, it's this belief.

[Finrock]

Why do you promote the philosophy of abusing your wife by supporting polygamy? So you hearken to the voice of the devil?



-Finrock

You and Jesef promote your twisted view of polygamy.

Thanks. That was powerful reasoning.

When you stop with the nonsense, I'll stop with the nonsense. When you want to engage with me on a sincere/rational level, I'll engage with you on sincere/rational level.

-Finrock

[MMbelieve]

If polygamy as it was being practiced by the early Church was an eternal principle, never to be done away, and if it was required to be exalted, etc. then why didn't God protect His Church? When you read the historical record during this time, you read accounts of hundreds/thousands of individuals fasting/praying/pleading with God to protect their practice. Multiple individuals who had the same "sealing" power as Nephi (supposedly), could not seal polygamy on earth as it was on heaven.

Doesn't this inform people as to whether God approved of this or not? Why couldn't those with the sealing power, seal polygamy on earth as it was on heaven? Why didn't God protect the Church so it can maintain what was an eternal principle that was NECESSARY in order to be exalted?

As far as I can see this leaves us with two possibilities (I'm open to other possibilities here): Either the early Church leaders really didn't have the sealing power or God didn't approve of polygamy.

-Finrock

There is absolutely zero laws that prevent us from sealing for eternity only any and all people we want to, just as the early church did. Legally, they cannot marry for life but if polygamy is essential then we would still be sealing like mad in the temple.

In fact, it should be a requirement for marriage in the temple, there needs to be 2 women and 1 man. 1 woman is married legally and both are sealed. This would give 100% credence to eternal polygamy. I was the only woman there with my husband and thus I conclude that out marriage/sealing is 100% legit and sufficient.

[Arenera]

Those who believe that everything the Church or Church leaders say or do is right/truth/good have a cult mentality and are living on a shaky foundation. That paradigm (Church/Church Leaders always right no matter what) is DEMONSTRABLY false. Takes a big does of cognitive dissonance to ignore this. But, whatever, I get it.

-Finrock

You don’t get it. You have shown many times by the words you write that you do not support/sustain our leaders.

Abraham practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.
Jacob/Israel practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.
Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.

These were all directed by Christ. That is good enough for me.

Your logic is not good.

[MMbelieve]

Or plural marriage IS an eternal principle and has been temporarily suspended in mortality.

Prophets of the time taught repeatedly that if we were to stop practicing it, we would be damned as a Church and as a people. They thought it was an eternal law, necessary for exaltation, must be supported by members, and members who refuse to believe are less faithful, damned, etc. If all of this is true and it is also true that early Church leaders had the sealing power and the early Church members who supported exercised tremendous faith in asking God to protect them, then why would God not protect the Church? Why would God ignore thousands of faithful cries of members and the voice of His prophet (who can seal on earth and in heaven)?

-Finrock

The early "polygamist" church experienced incredible hardships, perhaps it was because of polygamy. They were driven out and attacked and had a bounty on their head. I wonder if any of this would have been different if we lived back then in the world as the church lives today. We are peaceful and cooperative people and generally blend in well in society while still being separate.

The church could have moved to SLC without having been forced through commands and revelations and directions.

[MMbelieve]

Those who believe that everything the Church or Church leaders say or do is right/truth/good have a cult mentality and are living on a shaky foundation. That paradigm (Church/Church Leaders always right no matter what) is DEMONSTRABLY false. Takes a big does of cognitive dissonance to ignore this. But, whatever, I get it.

-Finrock

You don’t get it. You have shown many times by the words you write that you do not support/sustain our leaders.

Abraham practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.
Jacob/Israel practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.
Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.

These were all directed by Christ. That is good enough for me.

Your logic is not good.

You do admit there are uncertainties and questions correct?

[MMbelieve]

I'm not mocking anyone and I'm not mad at anyone. Please don't accuse me of random things. The debate as to whether JS actually practiced polygamy has ample and convincing evidence on both sides. So you are making a leap to make a definitive statement to that effect, in my opinion. The next leap that you make is that if he did practice it, he received revelation from God to do so. These are your beliefs and interpretations. Regardless, even if JS did practice it, AND was commanded by God to do so, we don't have all the ifs, hows and whys about it, which would be no small part of the puzzle, and still wouldn't prove polygamy to be a celestial principle. So, yeah, the fact that it happened in the early restored church, even if JS was involved, doesn't carry a strong doctrinal punch for me.

Since we have 2 senior apostles who have been sealed to 2nd wives, that indicates it is a celestial principle. During the days of practicing, it was called Celestial Marriage.

We don't practice it today so there is no need to get into details on how to practice it.

One of those men is quoted as saying he doesn't know the condition of his 2nd marriage in the eternities. So only 50% credit here.

[Finrock]

Those who believe that everything the Church or Church leaders say or do is right/truth/good have a cult mentality and are living on a shaky foundation. That paradigm (Church/Church Leaders always right no matter what) is DEMONSTRABLY false. Takes a big does of cognitive dissonance to ignore this. But, whatever, I get it.

-Finrock

You don’t get it. You have shown many times by the words you write that you do not support/sustain our leaders.

Abraham practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.
Jacob/Israel practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.
Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.

These were all directed by Christ. That is good enough for me.

Your logic is not good.

I do get it. I know your foundation. I know where you stand. You've stated it repeated.

Here is your foundation and the motivation for your posts is to maintain your fragile paradigm: Whatever the Church or Church leaders say/do is good/right/truth, no matter what.

Counter to your paradigm, your foundation: Brigham Young taught that Africans were intended to be slaves to white people. He taught that the priesthood wouldn't be given to the "Negroes" until after all the white people got the priesthood. Church has denounced this and BY's prophetic prediction is DEMONSTRABLY false.

Demonstrably means that it can be demonstrated either through historical fact, through reasoning/logic, science, etc. You can prove it. My position is proven. Your position is wishful thinking. I understand it, because I used to stand on that very foundation, but your foundation of Church/Church leaders always right no matter what, is fallacious and demonstrably false (fallacious - poor reasoning; demonstrably false - proven through facts to be false).

-Finrock

[Arenera]

I'm not mocking anyone and I'm not mad at anyone. Please don't accuse me of random things. The debate as to whether JS actually practiced polygamy has ample and convincing evidence on both sides. So you are making a leap to make a definitive statement to that effect, in my opinion. The next leap that you make is that if he did practice it, he received revelation from God to do so. These are your beliefs and interpretations. Regardless, even if JS did practice it, AND was commanded by God to do so, we don't have all the ifs, hows and whys about it, which would be no small part of the puzzle, and still wouldn't prove polygamy to be a celestial principle. So, yeah, the fact that it happened in the early restored church, even if JS was involved, doesn't carry a strong doctrinal punch for me.

Since we have 2 senior apostles who have been sealed to 2nd wives, that indicates it is a celestial principle. During the days of practicing, it was called Celestial Marriage.

We don't practice it today so there is no need to get into details on how to practice it.

One of those men is quoted as saying he doesn't know the condition of his 2nd marriage in the eternities. So only 50% credit here.

So you think Sister Nelson and Sister Oaks believe their condition of being sealed as second wives is not known?

[Arenera]

Those who believe that everything the Church or Church leaders say or do is right/truth/good have a cult mentality and are living on a shaky foundation. That paradigm (Church/Church Leaders always right no matter what) is DEMONSTRABLY false. Takes a big does of cognitive dissonance to ignore this. But, whatever, I get it.

-Finrock

You don’t get it. You have shown many times by the words you write that you do not support/sustain our leaders.

Abraham practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.
Jacob/Israel practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.
Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.

These were all directed by Christ. That is good enough for me.

Your logic is not good.

I do get it. I know your foundation. I know where you stand. You've stated it repeated.

Here is your foundation and the motivation for your posts is to maintain your fragile paradigm: Whatever the Church or Church leaders say/do is good/right/truth, no matter what.

Counter to your paradigm, your foundation: Brigham Young taught that Africans were intended to be slaves to white people. He taught that the priesthood wouldn't be given to the "Negroes" until after all the white people got the priesthood. Church has denounced this and BY's prophetic prediction is DEMONSTRABLY false.

Demonstrably means that it can be demonstrated either through historical fact, through reasoning/logic, science, etc. You can prove it. My position is proven. Your position is wishful thinking. I understand it, because I used to stand on that very foundation, but your foundation of Church/Church leaders always right no matter what, is fallacious and demonstrably false (fallacious - poor reasoning; demonstrably false - proven through facts to be false).

-Finrock

Wrong FR. Your and JF reasoning is so strong, you resort to name calling and mocking. That is such a strong position!

[Finrock]

Those who believe that everything the Church or Church leaders say or do is right/truth/good have a cult mentality and are living on a shaky foundation. That paradigm (Church/Church Leaders always right no matter what) is DEMONSTRABLY false. Takes a big does of cognitive dissonance to ignore this. But, whatever, I get it.

-Finrock

You don’t get it. You have shown many times by the words you write that you do not support/sustain our leaders.

Abraham practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.
Jacob/Israel practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.
Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. That is good enough for me.

These were all directed by Christ. That is good enough for me.

Your logic is not good.

I do get it. I know your foundation. I know where you stand. You've stated it repeated.

Here is your foundation and the motivation for your posts is to maintain your fragile paradigm: Whatever the Church or Church leaders say/do is good/right/truth, no matter what.

Counter to your paradigm, your foundation: Brigham Young taught that Africans were intended to be slaves to white people. He taught that the priesthood wouldn't be given to the "Negroes" until after all the white people got the priesthood. Church has denounced this and BY's prophetic prediction is DEMONSTRABLY false.

Demonstrably means that it can be demonstrated either through historical fact, through reasoning/logic, science, etc. You can prove it. My position is proven. Your position is wishful thinking. I understand it, because I used to stand on that very foundation, but your foundation of Church/Church leaders always right no matter what, is fallacious and demonstrably false (fallacious - poor reasoning; demonstrably false - proven through facts to be false).

-Finrock

Wrong FR. Your and JF reasoning is so strong, you resort to name calling and mocking. That is such a strong position!

Please stop lying. You shouldn't lie about people's posts just so you can be right or appear to be right. That's not good at all.

-Finrock

[Finrock]

I'm not mocking anyone and I'm not mad at anyone. Please don't accuse me of random things. The debate as to whether JS actually practiced polygamy has ample and convincing evidence on both sides. So you are making a leap to make a definitive statement to that effect, in my opinion. The next leap that you make is that if he did practice it, he received revelation from God to do so. These are your beliefs and interpretations. Regardless, even if JS did practice it, AND was commanded by God to do so, we don't have all the ifs, hows and whys about it, which would be no small part of the puzzle, and still wouldn't prove polygamy to be a celestial principle. So, yeah, the fact that it happened in the early restored church, even if JS was involved, doesn't carry a strong doctrinal punch for me.

Since we have 2 senior apostles who have been sealed to 2nd wives, that indicates it is a celestial principle. During the days of practicing, it was called Celestial Marriage.

We don't practice it today so there is no need to get into details on how to practice it.

One of those men is quoted as saying he doesn't know the condition of his 2nd marriage in the eternities. So only 50% credit here.

So you think Sister Nelson and Sister Oaks believe their condition of being sealed as second wives is not known?

What they believe is irrelevant. It doesn't inform this question at all. Also, you and I can only speculate as to what they believe and what their feelings on polygamy is. Being sealed is not the same as practicing polygamy. Being sealed to one live woman and one dead woman is not the same as practicing polygamy.

-Finrock

[Arenera]

I'm not mocking anyone and I'm not mad at anyone. Please don't accuse me of random things. The debate as to whether JS actually practiced polygamy has ample and convincing evidence on both sides. So you are making a leap to make a definitive statement to that effect, in my opinion. The next leap that you make is that if he did practice it, he received revelation from God to do so. These are your beliefs and interpretations. Regardless, even if JS did practice it, AND was commanded by God to do so, we don't have all the ifs, hows and whys about it, which would be no small part of the puzzle, and still wouldn't prove polygamy to be a celestial principle. So, yeah, the fact that it happened in the early restored church, even if JS was involved, doesn't carry a strong doctrinal punch for me.

Since we have 2 senior apostles who have been sealed to 2nd wives, that indicates it is a celestial principle. During the days of practicing, it was called Celestial Marriage.

We don't practice it today so there is no need to get into details on how to practice it.

One of those men is quoted as saying he doesn't know the condition of his 2nd marriage in the eternities. So only 50% credit here.

So you think Sister Nelson and Sister Oaks believe their condition of being sealed as second wives is not known?

You can listen to Finrock if you like...

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2017/10/open ... k?lang=eng President Nelson: When my grandfather A. C. Nelson was a young husband and father, just 27 years old, his father died. About three months later, his deceased father, my great-grandfather, came to visit him. The date of that visit was the night of April 6, 1891. Grandfather Nelson was so impressed by his father’s visit that he wrote the experience in his journal for his family and friends.

“I was in bed when Father entered the room,” Grandfather Nelson wrote. “He came and sat on the side of the bed. He said, ‘Well, my son, as I had a few spare minutes, I received permission to come and see you for a few minutes. I am feeling well, my son, and have had very much to do since I died.’”

When Grandfather Nelson asked him what he had been doing, his father answered that he had been busy teaching the gospel of Jesus Christ in the spirit world.

“You cannot imagine, my son, how many spirits there are in the spirit world who have not yet received the gospel,” he said. “But many are receiving it, and a great work is being accomplished. Many are anxiously looking forth to their friends who are still living to administer for them in the temples.”

Grandfather Nelson told his father, “We intend to go to the temple and get sealed to you, Father, as soon as we can.”

My great-grandfather responded: “That, my son, is partly what I came to see you about. We will yet make a family and live throughout eternity.”

Then Grandfather Nelson asked, “Father, is the gospel as taught by this Church true?”

His father pointed to a picture of the First Presidency hanging on the wall of the bedroom.

“My son, just as sure as you see that picture, just as sure is the gospel true. The gospel of Jesus Christ has within it the power of saving every man and woman who will obey it, and in no other way can they ever obtain salvation in the kingdom of God. My son, always cling to the gospel. Be humble, be prayerful, be submissive to the priesthood, be true, be faithful to the covenants you have made with God. Never do anything that would displease God. Oh, what a blessing is the gospel. My son, be a good boy.”

[Arenera]

I'm not mocking anyone and I'm not mad at anyone. Please don't accuse me of random things. The debate as to whether JS actually practiced polygamy has ample and convincing evidence on both sides. So you are making a leap to make a definitive statement to that effect, in my opinion. The next leap that you make is that if he did practice it, he received revelation from God to do so. These are your beliefs and interpretations. Regardless, even if JS did practice it, AND was commanded by God to do so, we don't have all the ifs, hows and whys about it, which would be no small part of the puzzle, and still wouldn't prove polygamy to be a celestial principle. So, yeah, the fact that it happened in the early restored church, even if JS was involved, doesn't carry a strong doctrinal punch for me.

Since we have 2 senior apostles who have been sealed to 2nd wives, that indicates it is a celestial principle. During the days of practicing, it was called Celestial Marriage.

We don't practice it today so there is no need to get into details on how to practice it.

One of those men is quoted as saying he doesn't know the condition of his 2nd marriage in the eternities. So only 50% credit here.

Another one.

After a three-year courtship, the couple married in the Salt Lake Temple on June 10, 1931. Claire passed away in 1983.

It was seven years later, on April 12, 1990, when President Howard W. Hunter, then president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, announced in the quorum’s weekly meeting that he was going to be married that afternoon. Aside from President Gordon B. Hinckley, to perform President Hunter’s sealing to Inis Staton, and President Thomas S. Monson, to be a witness, “no one else was invited” from the quorum, according to “Courtships of the Prophets.”.

I don’t think this is just playing around.

[Finrock]

Since we have 2 senior apostles who have been sealed to 2nd wives, that indicates it is a celestial principle. During the days of practicing, it was called Celestial Marriage.

We don't practice it today so there is no need to get into details on how to practice it.

One of those men is quoted as saying he doesn't know the condition of his 2nd marriage in the eternities. So only 50% credit here.

So you think Sister Nelson and Sister Oaks believe their condition of being sealed as second wives is not known?

You can listen to Finrock if you like...

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2017/10/open ... k?lang=eng President Nelson: When my grandfather A. C. Nelson was a young husband and father, just 27 years old, his father died. About three months later, his deceased father, my great-grandfather, came to visit him. The date of that visit was the night of April 6, 1891. Grandfather Nelson was so impressed by his father’s visit that he wrote the experience in his journal for his family and friends.

“I was in bed when Father entered the room,” Grandfather Nelson wrote. “He came and sat on the side of the bed. He said, ‘Well, my son, as I had a few spare minutes, I received permission to come and see you for a few minutes. I am feeling well, my son, and have had very much to do since I died.’”

When Grandfather Nelson asked him what he had been doing, his father answered that he had been busy teaching the gospel of Jesus Christ in the spirit world.

“You cannot imagine, my son, how many spirits there are in the spirit world who have not yet received the gospel,” he said. “But many are receiving it, and a great work is being accomplished. Many are anxiously looking forth to their friends who are still living to administer for them in the temples.”

Grandfather Nelson told his father, “We intend to go to the temple and get sealed to you, Father, as soon as we can.”

My great-grandfather responded: “That, my son, is partly what I came to see you about. We will yet make a family and live throughout eternity.”

Then Grandfather Nelson asked, “Father, is the gospel as taught by this Church true?”

His father pointed to a picture of the First Presidency hanging on the wall of the bedroom.

“My son, just as sure as you see that picture, just as sure is the gospel true. The gospel of Jesus Christ has within it the power of saving every man and woman who will obey it, and in no other way can they ever obtain salvation in the kingdom of God. My son, always cling to the gospel. Be humble, be prayerful, be submissive to the priesthood, be true, be faithful to the covenants you have made with God. Never do anything that would displease God. Oh, what a blessing is the gospel. My son, be a good boy.”

The Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by this Church is true. I agree that "the gospel of Jesus Christ has within it the power of saving every man and woman who will obey it, and in no other way can they ever obtain salvation in the kingdom of God." I agree that we should "always cling to the gospel. Be humble, be prayerful, be submissive to the priesthood, be true, be faithful to the covenants you have made with God. Never do anything that would displease God." I agree, "what a blessing is the gospel." We should be good, yes indeed.

All of it true. Not relevant to polygamy or what we've been discussing here, but true nonetheless. If that is what you've been trying to say all along, Arenera, then we are agreed. Didn't seem like you were talking about the gospel of Jesus Christ though. It sounded like you were supporting polygamy and teaching that whatever the Church/Church leaders say/teach/do is always right, no matter what.

-Finrock

[natasha]

Or plural marriage IS an eternal principle and has been temporarily suspended in mortality.

You know that polygamy can't work unless there are more women than men right? Supposing polygamy is legit for an eternal practice implies that women are way more righteous than men. At least twice as righteous. Why would God create his sons to fail? If anything is a war on men or harmful to men, it's this belief.

Because even in the early days of the Church.....if I remember correctly....no more than 4% of the people practiced plural marriage. Joseph Smith said that a person could not take it upon himself, he or she had to be called and even then they could refuse. I am wondering if there is a difference in terminology. People in this day and age (and those against the Church) referred to it as polygamy. When reading commentary by Joseph or some others from that time, they referred to it as plural marriage or more often, celestial marriage.

[Jesef]

That's not accurate. At some point the teaching shifted, after 1852, when it went public & D&C 132 was published and BY & Brethren started teaching that it was essential to exaltation - only polygamists would be exalted - and he also positioned the practice as central/fundamental to our religion in order to try and secure Constitutional protection for it. This was not achieved, the U.S. Government would not relent and forced the LDS to eventually completely stop.

[Finrock]

Early prophets taught that this practice would never be taken away from the earth, that it was an eternal principle that members must accept and live, and that if the Church stopped practicing it (here on earth, not in heaven), the Church would be damned. The opposite happened. Faithful members couldn't convince God to support God's own decrees. Prophets with the sealing power couldn't convince God to support God's decree. Why not?

-Finrock

[Sarah]

The issue in the early days of the church was that they were not progressing. They were happy to take on more wives, but they were not willing to live other celestial principles or were being hindered from doing so, and so the practiced of plurality was taken away.

So, God ended the practice of polygamy because early members "were not willing to live other celestial principles"? The hindered part is irrelevant. Because if God wanted it, people can't hinder Him. In any case, what is your proof for this assertion that this is the why?

We know the spirits who have died before us are not focused on having children, but are
focused on missionary and family history work.

We do? How?

And that is what the Church has been focused on too. Are the spirits in heaven any less worthy of blessings because they are not fulfilling the law of marriage and having children? Obviously the answer is no, that it's simply a case of different circumstances and a different law for their time and sphere. That's how I see our time. We have laws and conditions suited to our time and place, and aren't asked right now to live every law or commandment ever revealed.

Maybe and even if so, not sure why that's relevant. But, the biggest issue here is that this part of your reasoning ignores the fact that early prophets taught that this practice would never be taken away from the earth, that it was an eternal principle that members must accept and live, and that if the Church stopped practicing it (here on earth, not in heaven), the Church would be damned. The opposite happened. Faithful members couldn't convince God to support God's own decrees. Prophets with the sealing power couldn't convince God to support God's decree. Why not?

Those who find fault with this in my estimation have a rebellious spirit and are looking for reason to accuse the brethren.

Those who believe that everything the Church or Church leaders say or do is right/truth/good have a cult mentality and are living on a shaky foundation. That paradigm (Church/Church Leaders always right no matter what) is DEMONSTRABLY false. It takes a big dose of cognitive dissonance to ignore this. But, whatever, I get it.

In any case, no rebellion, no accusations from me. You'll have to prove my rebelliousness and my accusations with more than just an assertion. You can't and you won't, so don't worry about this part...

At the time of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, we don't see world-wide missionary work and baptism going on. But the covenants were being established. Now we have an opportunity to make the same covenants because of their lives, and we are to take those covenants to all the world. Thanks to them we can make this phase of the work happen. And thanks to the sacrifice of some of those early saints who obeyed and practiced plurality, many righteous spirits were born into the covenant to help provide this missionary force. I and my husband both descend from plural wives, and many saints I talk to also do, so it really did make a difference I think, and someone mentioned how the posterity of those plural wives would be blessed for their sacrifice, and I believe that to be the case.

Conjecture and speculation created solely to support a paradigm. It would be assumption on yours and my part to say that "many righteous" spirits were born in to the covenant. At the same token, we can also assume that many unrighteous spirits were born in to the covenant. Also, many foolish traditions were passed on to these spirits who were born in to polygamous families at the time that hindered their progression. In any case, that's all speculation. Further, if you or others, didn't come from plural marriage, you'd be grateful for your monogamous heritage. Polygamy is not necessary in order to bring up "righteous" seed. Polygamy and being born in to the Church doesn't guarantee righteousness, etc. In short, its a wash. Same can be said if the situation was different (all monogamy).

-Finrock

When I was talking about those who have a problem with our leaders who have a rebellious spirit, I wasn't thinking of you but talking about those who find reason to accuse them of going astray because they are not teaching polygamy. I wasn't referring to you. But I wanted to respond to you to defend the position that it wasn't just either/or, practice totally wrong, or leaders totally wrong. It was more complicated issue in my opinion.

I don't hold to the position that everything Brigham or those leaders said was inspired. I think many of their own opinions were loosely stated, and that includes the negro/priesthood comments. I do think they were under a curse, but Brigham was mistaken in making a prediction that they would never receive the priesthood until after this life, or whatever he said. If anyone can post that quote it would be helpful. But he said pretty much the exact same thing in regards to women that he said about the black race. Women were cursed, blacks were cursed, and the curse wouldn't be taken off until their role was fulfilled. Here's a few examples of how they looked at the principle as it related to women:

Brigham Young - Do not marvel, do not wonder at it, do not complain at Providence, do not find fault with mother Eve because your desire is to your husbands. Bear this with patience and fortitude! Be reconciled to it, meet your afflictions and these little—well, we might say, not very trifling, but still they are wants, for if we desire only that that is necessary, and can govern and control ourselves to be satisfied with that, it is a great deal better than to want a thousand things that are unnecessary, and especially to the female portion of the inhabitants of the earth. But there is a curse upon them, and I cannot take it off, can you? No, you cannot—it never will be taken from the human family until the mission is fulfilled, and our Master and our Lord is perfectly satisfied with our work. It will then be taken from this portion of the community, and will afflict them no more; but for the present it will afflict them.

George Q Cannon - 1869

If there were no books in existence, if the revelation itself were blotted out, and there was nothing written in its favor, extant among men, still I could bear testimony for myself that I know this is a principle which, if practiced in purity and virtue, as it should be, will result in the exaltation and benefit of the human family; and that it will exalt woman until she is redeemed from the effects of the Fall, and from that curse pronounced upon her in the beginning. I believe the correct practice of this principle will redeem woman from the effects of that curse—namely, “Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”

Joseph F. Smith -1878

Joseph Smith, on the day it was written, expressly declared that there was a great deal more connected with the doctrine which would be revealed in due time, but this was sufficient for the occasion, and was made to suffice for the time. And, indeed, I think it much more than many are prepared to live up to even now.

We can get a feel for how they viewed this issue with these comments. I don't believe it was necessarily inspired when some of the brethren said that plural marriage would never be taken from the earth. In fact, Brigham did say one time that it could be taken away, and I'll try to find that quote.

So, you were also wondering what proof I had for thinking that the reason the principle was taken away was because they were not progressing in other Celestial principles, and I'll refer you to these following quotes and revelation Brigham received:

Brigham Young 1876

You Elders of Israel, do you not see the necessity of an advance? Do you not see that we have traveled just as far as we can, without adopting the revelation the Lord gave at Independence, Jackson County, namely, that “the property of the Saints should be laid at the feet of the Bishops, etc., and unless this was done a curse would befall them?” They refused to do it, and the consequence was, they were driven from their homes. Unless we obey these first revelations, the people will decline in their faith, and they will leave the faith of the holy Gospel. Do the Elders sense this? Yes, a great many of them do—also a great many of the sisters. Were it not for the faith and prayers of the faithful ones, this Church would have

been given into the hands of our enemies. It is the faith of the Priesthood, who cling to the commandments of the Lord, that holds the people where they are.

Brigham Young

We do, every one of us. We ask the question again, Do we expect that we have already become perfect, and that we are prepared to be numbered with the sanctified, and that we are now prepared to be gathered with God's elect, and that, if we were to hear the voice tonight—“Behold the bridegroom cometh”—we should be numbered with the wise? Do we anticipate this? If we do we are wrong, for we are not prepared.

Brigham Young June 21, 1874

I will now say to my brethren and sisters, that while we were in Winter Quarters, the Lord gave to me a revelation just as much as he ever gave one to anybody. He opened my mind, and showed me the organization of the kingdom of God in a family capacity. I talked it to my brethren; I would throw out a few words here, and a few words there, to my first counselor, to my second counselor and the Twelve Apostles, but with the exception of one or two of the Twelve, it would not touch a man. They believed it would come, O yes, but it would be by and by. Says I, “Why not now?” If I had been worth millions when we came into this valley and built what we now call the “Old Fort,” I would have given it if the people had been prepared to then receive the kingdom of God according to the pattern given to Enoch.

Aug. 1874

1. Thus saith the Lord unto my servant Brigham,
2. Call ye, call ye, upon the inhabitants of Zion, to organize themselves in the Order of Enoch, in the New and Everlasting Covenant, according to the Order of Heaven, for the furtherance of my kingdom upon the earth, for the perfecting of the Saints, for the salvation of the living and the dead.

[Arenera]

One of those men is quoted as saying he doesn't know the condition of his 2nd marriage in the eternities. So only 50% credit here.

So you think Sister Nelson and Sister Oaks believe their condition of being sealed as second wives is not known?

You can listen to Finrock if you like...

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2017/10/open ... k?lang=eng President Nelson: When my grandfather A. C. Nelson was a young husband and father, just 27 years old, his father died. About three months later, his deceased father, my great-grandfather, came to visit him. The date of that visit was the night of April 6, 1891. Grandfather Nelson was so impressed by his father’s visit that he wrote the experience in his journal for his family and friends.

“I was in bed when Father entered the room,” Grandfather Nelson wrote. “He came and sat on the side of the bed. He said, ‘Well, my son, as I had a few spare minutes, I received permission to come and see you for a few minutes. I am feeling well, my son, and have had very much to do since I died.’”

When Grandfather Nelson asked him what he had been doing, his father answered that he had been busy teaching the gospel of Jesus Christ in the spirit world.

“You cannot imagine, my son, how many spirits there are in the spirit world who have not yet received the gospel,” he said. “But many are receiving it, and a great work is being accomplished. Many are anxiously looking forth to their friends who are still living to administer for them in the temples.”

Grandfather Nelson told his father, “We intend to go to the temple and get sealed to you, Father, as soon as we can.”

My great-grandfather responded: “That, my son, is partly what I came to see you about. We will yet make a family and live throughout eternity.”

Then Grandfather Nelson asked, “Father, is the gospel as taught by this Church true?”

His father pointed to a picture of the First Presidency hanging on the wall of the bedroom.

“My son, just as sure as you see that picture, just as sure is the gospel true. The gospel of Jesus Christ has within it the power of saving every man and woman who will obey it, and in no other way can they ever obtain salvation in the kingdom of God. My son, always cling to the gospel. Be humble, be prayerful, be submissive to the priesthood, be true, be faithful to the covenants you have made with God. Never do anything that would displease God. Oh, what a blessing is the gospel. My son, be a good boy.”

The Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by this Church is true. I agree that "the gospel of Jesus Christ has within it the power of saving every man and woman who will obey it, and in no other way can they ever obtain salvation in the kingdom of God." I agree that we should "always cling to the gospel. Be humble, be prayerful, be submissive to the priesthood, be true, be faithful to the covenants you have made with God. Never do anything that would displease God." I agree, "what a blessing is the gospel." We should be good, yes indeed.

All of it true. Not relevant to polygamy or what we've been discussing here, but true nonetheless. If that is what you've been trying to say all along, Arenera, then we are agreed. Didn't seem like you were talking about the gospel of Jesus Christ though. It sounded like you were supporting polygamy and teaching that whatever the Church/Church leaders say/teach/do is always right, no matter what.

-Finrock

The Gospel includes leaders. It also includes polygamy when God condones it. See Abraham, Jacob, Joseph Smith.

You remind me of DS, always having to say something negative about leaders.

[Finrock]

So you think Sister Nelson and Sister Oaks believe their condition of being sealed as second wives is not known?

You can listen to Finrock if you like...

https://www.lds.org/ensign/2017/10/open ... k?lang=eng President Nelson: When my grandfather A. C. Nelson was a young husband and father, just 27 years old, his father died. About three months later, his deceased father, my great-grandfather, came to visit him. The date of that visit was the night of April 6, 1891. Grandfather Nelson was so impressed by his father’s visit that he wrote the experience in his journal for his family and friends.

“I was in bed when Father entered the room,” Grandfather Nelson wrote. “He came and sat on the side of the bed. He said, ‘Well, my son, as I had a few spare minutes, I received permission to come and see you for a few minutes. I am feeling well, my son, and have had very much to do since I died.’”

When Grandfather Nelson asked him what he had been doing, his father answered that he had been busy teaching the gospel of Jesus Christ in the spirit world.

“You cannot imagine, my son, how many spirits there are in the spirit world who have not yet received the gospel,” he said. “But many are receiving it, and a great work is being accomplished. Many are anxiously looking forth to their friends who are still living to administer for them in the temples.”

Grandfather Nelson told his father, “We intend to go to the temple and get sealed to you, Father, as soon as we can.”

My great-grandfather responded: “That, my son, is partly what I came to see you about. We will yet make a family and live throughout eternity.”

Then Grandfather Nelson asked, “Father, is the gospel as taught by this Church true?”

His father pointed to a picture of the First Presidency hanging on the wall of the bedroom.

“My son, just as sure as you see that picture, just as sure is the gospel true. The gospel of Jesus Christ has within it the power of saving every man and woman who will obey it, and in no other way can they ever obtain salvation in the kingdom of God. My son, always cling to the gospel. Be humble, be prayerful, be submissive to the priesthood, be true, be faithful to the covenants you have made with God. Never do anything that would displease God. Oh, what a blessing is the gospel. My son, be a good boy.”

The Gospel of Jesus Christ as taught by this Church is true. I agree that "the gospel of Jesus Christ has within it the power of saving every man and woman who will obey it, and in no other way can they ever obtain salvation in the kingdom of God." I agree that we should "always cling to the gospel. Be humble, be prayerful, be submissive to the priesthood, be true, be faithful to the covenants you have made with God. Never do anything that would displease God." I agree, "what a blessing is the gospel." We should be good, yes indeed.

All of it true. Not relevant to polygamy or what we've been discussing here, but true nonetheless. If that is what you've been trying to say all along, Arenera, then we are agreed. Didn't seem like you were talking about the gospel of Jesus Christ though. It sounded like you were supporting polygamy and teaching that whatever the Church/Church leaders say/teach/do is always right, no matter what.

-Finrock

The Gospel includes leaders. It also includes polygamy when God condones it. See Abraham, Jacob, Joseph Smith.

You remind me of DS, always having to say something negative about leaders.

Gospel of Jesus Christ doesn't include leaders neither does it include polygamy, etc. You're conflating things. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is very simple and easy to understand and it is: Faith in Jesus Christ, Repentance, baptism by water for the remission of sins, and receiving the holy ghost by being baptized by fire (some people like to toss in, "endure to the end"). That's it. Everything else is peripheral.

What I remind you of is irrelevant. Your statement about what I remind you of is a dishonest tactic you are trying to use because you're losing the rational debate.

-Finrock

[Jesef]

God must be really wishy-washy & unpredictable & inconsistent, the word is "capricious", if you're correct, Arenera. He condones polygamy, He doesn't condone polygamy. It's In, it's Out. He didn't even employ it in the case of Adam & Eve (didn't send/create more wives for Adam) to multiply quicker and "raise up seed". Ridiculous = absurd, nonsensical. Well, the world & the Church have more people than they've ever had in history, so I guess it's never coming back again (no need to "raise up seed"). Why didn't God send 55 Eve's for Adam to really get this party started on Earth?