LDS Freedom Forum

Chip wrote: ↑August 19th, 2018, 6:34 pm

NIGHTLIGHT wrote: ↑August 19th, 2018, 10:39 am

Chip wrote: ↑August 19th, 2018, 12:17 am

Thinker wrote: ↑August 17th, 2018, 3:45 pm
Chip,
I’ve already experienced and seen some of that, with the www. And I believe in times of judgment (each day of our lives but with more awareness after death), we will see more of what was hidden.

Are you referring to finances, history or what? Will you clarify and expand on how you think many’s eyes will be open about some of the less popular truths? Why do you think some keep their head in the sand, some focus on the negative, and some see the positive as well as negative aspects? What factors contribute to such different responses?

Thinker, I didn't answer the latter part of your question.

I've realized, being Mormon, that people don't really care about truth. They love to assume they have the truth, because it feels ennobling, but what they really love is that they BELONG to a tight-thinking fellowship that gives life good meaning and structure. This sense of belonging and pleasant normality is the last thing anyone wants jeopardized. Plus, God's blessings are abundantly experienced in the church. This may have mainly to do with obedience to the Ten Commandments being taught.

In the church, there are penalties for wandering outside the cozy dome of belief, where you could become "apostate" for reasons that really have NOTHING to do with Jesus Christ, since many things of man have been heavily conflated with Christ in the church. This makes the church a trap, at some levels. We all take solace in belonging to it because it soothes our souls with notions of truth and permanence, while we instinctively avoid certain avenues of truth that could disrupt our fixed comfort in it.

If you do a lot of reading, pondering, and praying and come to the conclusion that polygamy was absolutely not of God, you've just opened a Pandora's Box that cannot be closed. Now you are screwed, as a Mormon, since you've set an unraveling into motion that cannot be stopped until all subsequent inquiries are pursued. Everything Mormon seems up-in-the-air and suspect.

In my case, I know I'm an improved person for being a Mormon, and I don't see my attitude toward my family diminishing, but I'm suspect of things like eternal marriage, exaltation, and the three Kingdoms, as Joseph Smith pitched them to get more wives, while they were completely superfluous in light of God's blessings already promised (i.e. Nobody has seen/heard/imagined the things that God has in store for those that love him.) I mean, we may get to heaven and realize that eternal marriage was a totally misguided notion. Christ said that nobody is married in heaven - just one of the many things he said that we ignore, while we carry on with some whole other construct.

Meanwhile, Christ is the preeminent matter and he is unmoved, still there, and the only man worthy of pursuit. The rest of us are verifiable turd bags, unsteady wanderers, and criminals before God.

Jesus Christ was speaking to men who take part in the Second Resurrection.... those who take part in the second Resurrection are not given in marriage but they are as they were before the earth ,except they have bodies now. It reminds me of the scripture where Jesus tells the young man "Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God." So is Jesus a liar????? No!!!!
He was talking to somebody who did not know that He was the Christ. The kid thought he was just some new prophet.... so ,Jesus knowing this, was telling the kid not to look to man because his arm of flesh will fail him, look only to God.

I wonder.... Since you believe in the Book of Mormon ,then you believe Joseph Smith translated it through means of divinity. In this book Mormon there are prophecies of js and his calling, his high capacity of being a seer..... and This Book of Mormon tells us the Bible was gutted by evil men, many plain truth were taken from it. Chip, who is more likely to be correct..... you or Joseph Smith?

First you come to the conclusion that D&C 132 has to be fake..... Now you come to the conclusion that there might be other fake parts of D&C.... ones that speak on Eternal Marriage and levels of Glory.

Chip, the Holy Ghosts effect on a man does not leave him in confusion and in doubt. Satan has you on slow boil...

Shake him off, stick and move

Endure

I do believe in the divinity of the Book of Mormon, even if it was dictated from a seer stone in a hat.

The Book of Mormon is said to contain the fullness of the gospel, right? And I don't detect any conflicts between it and the bible. It says the same things the bible says, but in condensed and clarified form. It DOES NOT allow for polygamy, despite what the chapter header of Jacob 2 insinuates. After the advent of the Book of Mormon, a whole bunch of stuff was added (restored?!?) that was in neither the Bible nor the Book of Mormon. How can it be said that the Book of Mormon contained the fullness of the gospel, then, when many ideas were added later via Joseph Smith, such as "plural wives", not to mention Brigham's (temporary) additions? Sounds like revisionism to me, not restoration.

My confusion and doubt have to do with a restoration. The Book of Mormon complemented the bible. What came after the Book of Mormon REDEFINED the bible AND the Book of Mormon. All this upset seems rooted in polygamy. Looks not right to me. Confusion? Doubt? Maybe they're appropriate here.

And look at the end of Joseph Smith's life: Anointed King of the World by the Council of Fifty, bragged he accomplished things even Jesus couldn't do, more wives than Emma even knew about, Jupiter talisman found on his body, killed two men in the shootout and wounded another, last words were a Masonic distress call. What are YOU going to believe? Your own tried instincts or a man who seemed to be running off the rails? I want to know the truth, and just because a lot of people believe something does not make it true.

LukeAir2008 wrote: ↑August 19th, 2018, 8:53 am Quite ironic that the Church department which announces that ‘Mormon’ is no longer acceptable is ‘Mormon Newsroom’. Nothing quite like announcing your own irrelevance.

This ‘Lord’ who is guiding President Nelson seems to change his mind quite a lot. After years of going overboard on the use of ‘Mormon’ in everything the Church did - Mormon Newsroom, Mormon Channel, Mormon.org, I’m a Mormon campaign, Meet the Mormons movie etc etc. it’s all change again.

So this ‘Lord’, who doesn’t seem to be able to see very far into the future, now announces that he has made a huge mistake and now wants to dump the ‘Mormon’ thing and even the ‘LDS’ thing too.

Sounds to me like Church lawyers and Church PR men have decided that they could never get exclusive use of the nickname ‘Mormon’ and that unfortunately ‘Mormon’ refers to all churches and groups who trace their origins back to Joseph Smith and who accept the Book of Mormon as scripture.

Yeh, that’s the real reason.

illyume wrote: ↑August 16th, 2018, 2:14 pmAre we keeping the "LDS Freedom Forum" title here, or are we going to change things up to "Latter Day Saints Freedom Forum" or "Freedom Forum for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints"?

LucianAMD wrote: ↑August 16th, 2018, 7:45 pm

LucianAMD wrote: ↑August 16th, 2018, 3:19 pm "When describing the combination of doctrine, culture and lifestyle unique to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the term “the restored gospel of Jesus Christ” is accurate and preferred.”

Culture and lifestyle are not the gospel. I think it is a dangerous precedent to set.

Chip wrote: ↑August 19th, 2018, 6:34 pm
It DOES NOT allow for polygamy, despite what the chapter header of Jacob 2 insinuates.

Crackers wrote: ↑August 20th, 2018, 4:59 pm

Chip wrote: ↑August 19th, 2018, 6:34 pm
It DOES NOT allow for polygamy, despite what the chapter header of Jacob 2 insinuates.

It sounds like you didn't see the discussion in a recent polygamy thread regarding the Jacob 2 chapter heading. The heading in the 2011 edition was changed to read:

"...The Lord commands that no man among the Nephites may have more than one wife..."

The previous edition said:

"...Jacob condemns the unauthorized practice of plural marriage..."

Not an insignificant change, in my opinion.

Chip wrote: ↑August 20th, 2018, 10:53 pm

Crackers wrote: ↑August 20th, 2018, 4:59 pm

Chip wrote: ↑August 19th, 2018, 6:34 pm
It DOES NOT allow for polygamy, despite what the chapter header of Jacob 2 insinuates.

It sounds like you didn't see the discussion in a recent polygamy thread regarding the Jacob 2 chapter heading. The heading in the 2011 edition was changed to read:

"...The Lord commands that no man among the Nephites may have more than one wife..."

The previous edition said:

"...Jacob condemns the unauthorized practice of plural marriage..."

Not an insignificant change, in my opinion.

Post-translation headings aside, I don't believe the actual verses condone polygamy. There have been MANY threads about this over the last few years.

I would like to put together an interactive poll where non-Mormons are shown all the verses in Jacob 2, beginning at the verse about the Nephites excusing themselves in committing whoredoms, and ask them to summarize every few verses, to the end of the chapter. At the end of the quiz, I'd ask them if these verses imply that it is EVER okay to have more than one wife. I'm sure NOBODY would think so.

That Jacob 2 chapter heading is just changeable window dressing to maintain the narrative that the Book of Mormon (Jacob 2:30, specifically) condoned polygamy. Nobody not already brainwashed would support the idea of Jacob 2 somehow allowing for polygamy. Aside from demonstrating the lie, the poll would show US how it's easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled.

Chip wrote: ↑August 20th, 2018, 10:53 pm

Crackers wrote: ↑August 20th, 2018, 4:59 pm

Chip wrote: ↑August 19th, 2018, 6:34 pm
It DOES NOT allow for polygamy, despite what the chapter header of Jacob 2 insinuates.

It sounds like you didn't see the discussion in a recent polygamy thread regarding the Jacob 2 chapter heading. The heading in the 2011 edition was changed to read:

"...The Lord commands that no man among the Nephites may have more than one wife..."

The previous edition said:

"...Jacob condemns the unauthorized practice of plural marriage..."

Not an insignificant change, in my opinion.

Post-translation headings aside, I don't believe the actual verses condone polygamy. There have been MANY threads about this over the last few years.

I would like to put together an interactive poll where non-Mormons are shown all the verses in Jacob 2, beginning at the verse about the Nephites excusing themselves in committing whoredoms, and ask them to summarize every few verses, to the end of the chapter. At the end of the quiz, I'd ask them if these verses imply that it is EVER okay to have more than one wife. I'm sure NOBODY would think so.

That Jacob 2 chapter heading is just changeable window dressing to maintain the narrative that the Book of Mormon (Jacob 2:30, specifically) condoned polygamy. Nobody not already brainwashed would support the idea of Jacob 2 somehow allowing for polygamy. Aside from demonstrating the lie, the poll would show US how it's easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled.

Crackers wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 5:24 am

Chip wrote: ↑August 20th, 2018, 10:53 pm

Crackers wrote: ↑August 20th, 2018, 4:59 pm

Chip wrote: ↑August 19th, 2018, 6:34 pm
It DOES NOT allow for polygamy, despite what the chapter header of Jacob 2 insinuates.

It sounds like you didn't see the discussion in a recent polygamy thread regarding the Jacob 2 chapter heading. The heading in the 2011 edition was changed to read:

"...The Lord commands that no man among the Nephites may have more than one wife..."

The previous edition said:

"...Jacob condemns the unauthorized practice of plural marriage..."

Not an insignificant change, in my opinion.

Post-translation headings aside, I don't believe the actual verses condone polygamy. There have been MANY threads about this over the last few years.

I would like to put together an interactive poll where non-Mormons are shown all the verses in Jacob 2, beginning at the verse about the Nephites excusing themselves in committing whoredoms, and ask them to summarize every few verses, to the end of the chapter. At the end of the quiz, I'd ask them if these verses imply that it is EVER okay to have more than one wife. I'm sure NOBODY would think so.

That Jacob 2 chapter heading is just changeable window dressing to maintain the narrative that the Book of Mormon (Jacob 2:30, specifically) condoned polygamy. Nobody not already brainwashed would support the idea of Jacob 2 somehow allowing for polygamy. Aside from demonstrating the lie, the poll would show US how it's easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled.

I agree, and this was the way it was read and understood by the church in Joseph Smith's time.

NIGHTLIGHT wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 1:33 pm

Chip wrote: ↑August 20th, 2018, 10:53 pm

Crackers wrote: ↑August 20th, 2018, 4:59 pm

Chip wrote: ↑August 19th, 2018, 6:34 pm
It DOES NOT allow for polygamy, despite what the chapter header of Jacob 2 insinuates.

It sounds like you didn't see the discussion in a recent polygamy thread regarding the Jacob 2 chapter heading. The heading in the 2011 edition was changed to read:

"...The Lord commands that no man among the Nephites may have more than one wife..."

The previous edition said:

"...Jacob condemns the unauthorized practice of plural marriage..."

Not an insignificant change, in my opinion.

Post-translation headings aside, I don't believe the actual verses condone polygamy. There have been MANY threads about this over the last few years.

I would like to put together an interactive poll where non-Mormons are shown all the verses in Jacob 2, beginning at the verse about the Nephites excusing themselves in committing whoredoms, and ask them to summarize every few verses, to the end of the chapter. At the end of the quiz, I'd ask them if these verses imply that it is EVER okay to have more than one wife. I'm sure NOBODY would think so.

That Jacob 2 chapter heading is just changeable window dressing to maintain the narrative that the Book of Mormon (Jacob 2:30, specifically) condoned polygamy. Nobody not already brainwashed would support the idea of Jacob 2 somehow allowing for polygamy. Aside from demonstrating the lie, the poll would show US how it's easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled.

30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.
--------"""""""-----------
brainwashed.... you cannot intellectually read that and come to the conclusion that He is saying that if wants his people to have children He'll command is people to get married to one woman....... but "otherwise they shall hearken" unto having multiple wives???? Go ask anybody who has a decent IQ and no bias for or against polygamy and they will tell you that you're interpretation is completely contradictive and redundant.

buffalo_girl wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 3:52 pm Jacob 2 also spells out the condemnation for using scriptural examples to justify sexual sin.

Chip wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 1:59 pm

NIGHTLIGHT wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 1:33 pm

Chip wrote: ↑August 20th, 2018, 10:53 pm

Crackers wrote: ↑August 20th, 2018, 4:59 pm

It sounds like you didn't see the discussion in a recent polygamy thread regarding the Jacob 2 chapter heading. The heading in the 2011 edition was changed to read:

"...The Lord commands that no man among the Nephites may have more than one wife..."

The previous edition said:

"...Jacob condemns the unauthorized practice of plural marriage..."

Not an insignificant change, in my opinion.

Post-translation headings aside, I don't believe the actual verses condone polygamy. There have been MANY threads about this over the last few years.

I would like to put together an interactive poll where non-Mormons are shown all the verses in Jacob 2, beginning at the verse about the Nephites excusing themselves in committing whoredoms, and ask them to summarize every few verses, to the end of the chapter. At the end of the quiz, I'd ask them if these verses imply that it is EVER okay to have more than one wife. I'm sure NOBODY would think so.

That Jacob 2 chapter heading is just changeable window dressing to maintain the narrative that the Book of Mormon (Jacob 2:30, specifically) condoned polygamy. Nobody not already brainwashed would support the idea of Jacob 2 somehow allowing for polygamy. Aside from demonstrating the lie, the poll would show US how it's easier to fool people than to convince them that they've been fooled.

30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.
--------"""""""-----------
brainwashed.... you cannot intellectually read that and come to the conclusion that He is saying that if wants his people to have children He'll command is people to get married to one woman....... but "otherwise they shall hearken" unto having multiple wives???? Go ask anybody who has a decent IQ and no bias for or against polygamy and they will tell you that you're interpretation is completely contradictive and redundant.

Here are all the verses in that section that use the word "thing(s)":

Jacob2

23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.

24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.

30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.

34 And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before; and ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done.


Furthermore, the first half of verse 30 is just reiterating how God had commanded the Nephites to have only one wife, for the express purpose of raising righteous seed.

The footnotes ought to tie back to here, but they don't, in order to maintain the polygamy narrative:


1 Nephi 7

1 And now I would that ye might know, that after my father, Lehi, had made an end of prophesying concerning his seed, it came to pass that the Lord spake unto him again, saying that it was not meet for him, Lehi, that he should take his family into the wilderness alone; but that his sons should take daughters to wife, that they might raise up seed unto the Lord in the land of promise.

2 And it came to pass that the Lord commanded him that I, Nephi, and my brethren, should again return unto the land of Jerusalem, and bring down Ishmael and his family into the wilderness.


The footnote for the word "seed" in Jacob 2:30 points here:


D&C 132

61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.


There's the polygamy tie-in.

NIGHTLIGHT wrote: ↑ The use of the word "HEARKEN" invalidates your interpretation. The Lord never uses hearken in that context.


The Lord will raise up a prophet like Moses, and the people should hearken to him, Deut. 18:15.

To hearken is better than the fat of the rams of sacrifice, 1 Sam. 15:20–23.

We have not hearkened unto the Lord’s servants, the prophets, Dan. 9:6.

The righteous who hearken unto the words of the prophets shall not perish, 2 Ne. 26:8.

If you will not hearken to the voice of the good shepherd, you are not his sheep, Alma 5:38 (Hel. 7:18).

Hearken, O ye people of my church, D&C 1:1.

Those who hearken to the voice of the Spirit are enlightened and come to the Father, D&C 84:46–47.

They were slow to hearken to the Lord; therefore, he is slow to hearken to their prayers, D&C 101:7–9.

Those who do not hearken to the commandments are chastened, D&C 103:4 (Moses 4:4).

Chip wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 4:42 pm

NIGHTLIGHT wrote: ↑ The use of the word "HEARKEN" invalidates your interpretation. The Lord never uses hearken in that context.


The Lord will raise up a prophet like Moses, and the people should hearken to him, Deut. 18:15.

To hearken is better than the fat of the rams of sacrifice, 1 Sam. 15:20–23.

We have not hearkened unto the Lord’s servants, the prophets, Dan. 9:6.

The righteous who hearken unto the words of the prophets shall not perish, 2 Ne. 26:8.

If you will not hearken to the voice of the good shepherd, you are not his sheep, Alma 5:38 (Hel. 7:18).

Hearken, O ye people of my church, D&C 1:1.

Those who hearken to the voice of the Spirit are enlightened and come to the Father, D&C 84:46–47.

They were slow to hearken to the Lord; therefore, he is slow to hearken to their prayers, D&C 101:7–9.

Those who do not hearken to the commandments are chastened, D&C 103:4 (Moses 4:4).

Not so, Mama Joe. "Hearken" only means "to listen to". It usually means to listen to good counsel, but not always:


2 Nephi 28

31 Cursed is he that putteth his trust in man, or maketh flesh his arm, or shall hearken unto the [WRONG] precepts of men, save their precepts shall be given by the power of the Holy Ghost.


Jacob 2

30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these [WRONG] things.


I just searched and found that. I'm amazed I never noticed that before.

But, if you justify sexual sin by using a scripture which warns against using scripture to justify sexual sin, then it cancels out, right? Like how -1 * -1 = 1. You kind of magically pop back out on the side of righteousness. This has to do with quantum mechanics.

Chip wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 8:22 pm Does anyone really suppose that a first-time reader of the Book of Mormon, not steeped in Mormonism, would come to any kind of conclusion that this section of Jacob 2 allows anyone to have more than one wife?

NIGHTLIGHT wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 9:19 pm

Chip wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 8:22 pm Does anyone really suppose that a first-time reader of the Book of Mormon, not steeped in Mormonism, would come to any kind of conclusion that this section of Jacob 2 allows anyone to have more than one wife?

If they are aware of the Patriarchs of the Old Testament... Yes, they would.

Chip wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 10:45 pm

NIGHTLIGHT wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 9:19 pm

Chip wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 8:22 pm Does anyone really suppose that a first-time reader of the Book of Mormon, not steeped in Mormonism, would come to any kind of conclusion that this section of Jacob 2 allows anyone to have more than one wife?

If they are aware of the Patriarchs of the Old Testament... Yes, they would.

I think that would be an unreasonable quantum leap for anyone to make, and extremely speculative. You'd need to be approaching the matter with a polygamy agenda.

On the other hand, Brigham Young could read polygamy into everything. According to him, even Mary had to have sex with Heavenly Father, despite ALL the scriptural basis of Jesus being born of a virgin. Do we ever just call a spade a spade in Mormonism? How much stuff like this are we obliged to swallow, as members of the Church?

NIGHTLIGHT wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 11:15 pm

Chip wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 10:45 pm

NIGHTLIGHT wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 9:19 pm

Chip wrote: ↑August 21st, 2018, 8:22 pm Does anyone really suppose that a first-time reader of the Book of Mormon, not steeped in Mormonism, would come to any kind of conclusion that this section of Jacob 2 allows anyone to have more than one wife?

If they are aware of the Patriarchs of the Old Testament... Yes, they would.

I think that would be an unreasonable quantum leap for anyone to make, and extremely speculative. You'd need to be approaching the matter with a polygamy agenda.

On the other hand, Brigham Young could read polygamy into everything. According to him, even Mary had to have sex with Heavenly Father, despite ALL the scriptural basis of Jesus being born of a virgin. Do we ever just call a spade a spade in Mormonism? How much stuff like this are we obliged to swallow, as members of the Church?

No quantum leaping involved...no agenda needed

Jacob was preaching to an old testament people who had the Brass Plates,they were well aware of the Patriarchal practices of polygamy. Think Abraham, Isaac , Jacob.... This is no leap.