MAJOR MAJOR CHANGES COMING IN THE CHURCH !

[pollibird]

Fun! I like new stuff happening!
I wish they did like 20-30 new temples at once that would be exciting.

I'll agree with XEmilyX.
I think there will be an exponential increase of the number of temples. How many you might ask? Into the hundreds if not thousands in the next decade.

[Finrock]

With all due respect, I could say the same to you. I don't mean to sound zealous or confrontational, I have spent years studying and praying about this very topic. I know my answer is from God himself. I do not know where your answer is from, D&C 132 and Jacob 2 clearly contradict. Someone someday will be able to answer for that contradiction. What I do know is that I believe the Book of Mormon to be the most correct, just as Ezra Taft Benson said. He had access to the D&C and did not say it was the most correct book, even though it was written modernly with no need for translation.

Many in the church believe as I do. I can believe the prophets in the early church were just as much prophets in the Old Testament. Both groups of men had human frailties and sins. We just don't dissect the sins of Joseph the same way we do the sins of Jonah, I believe if we did there would be much to learn.

The gospel is about trusting in God instead of the arm of flesh. I believe the truth is there for all who honestly seek it.

I had the opposite experience. I felt very clearly that it was never God's way and a mistake and felt the spirit burning. Finally my heart and mind could reconcile and I could still believe in a just and loving God and an afterlife I would want to be in.

I, on the other hand, have come to a knowledge by revelation from God that polygamy is of God and that D&C 132 is divinely inspired scripture. Mtm411, I plead with you to consider that your experience may have been a product of your own zeal for what sits best with your notions of eternity instead of the spirit. I can say that, having been deceived by my own zeal in like manner in the past: it felt like the spirit but contradicted the scriptures. It’s been a long path, but the Lord help me better differentiate His spirit from my own. That may be a hard saying, but I stand by the prophets Joseph and Brigham (and Hyrum, and Heber, etc) that the revelation and the practice it describes is of God. So many people here are falling for the arguments put forth in their day against the truth, which they defended with honesty. If we don’t believe them about the origins of D&C 132, and think they were acting as natural men pursuing women, then why not go and join the Community of Christ? They teach what you claim. The reason we don’t do this is because we have a witness that the priesthood is with the church and that President Nelson is a true prophet. Study D&C 132 in fasting and prayer with a heart open to believing and you too can come to know the truth of it. The questions and problems of the Old Testament become clear and melt away in this light (the claim that it always ends in disaster is a lie based on selective, cursory research coupled with Victorian sentimentality; Abraham only had two wives? No [see Genesis 25:6 for example]). Most of all, you can come to actually know the God we worship and His only begotten son.

When contraries are proven, truth is discovered. What appears to us to be contradictions in scripture are never truly so if we have our hearts open to believing that the Book of Mormon is of God just as the D&C is of God just as the POGP is of God, etc. Have you never had to take a passage in the Bible that contradicts with the Book of Mormon and show someone how they do not in actuality contradict? If so, then you should be able to see how there’s always more to the story, rather than assuming the newer stuff is faulty.

So how do we reconcile the passage in Jacob 2 with the passage in D&C 132? If we are a believing people, then this is our homework. I can testify that there is an answer and it is a principle at play all throughout the recorded dealings between God and man (aka scriptures).

Do not cast away the pearl that is D&C 132 just because you doubt what it says. Where in scriptures does it say that everything that is true will agree with our feelings and sensibilities? Even Jonah, whom you referenced, knew better than to make that claim.

In case you missed it Baurak Ale, but your testimony and appeal to authority was answered by another testimony and appeal to authority.

Who's testimony and appeal to authority is the correct one? You say its you, but, others don't agree with that.

Have you considered that you might be wrong? Of course you have, and then I bet you fasted, prayed, pondered, read, and asked God in sincerity, and then by the power of the Holy Ghost you received this certain knowledge that polygamy is grand and wonderful and its of God. But, the opposition says the same thing.

So, now what?

I bet you I know...more appeals to authority.

Everyone is always certain that all of their convictions and beliefs have been confirmed by God and that they know the truth and others don't and then they proceed to argue, usually about who's authority is greater or who is being more loyal or who is a better Mormon and then comes the "casting pearls" and "every fiber of my being" and *some scripture sounding language to make the post sound all authoritative*, sound bytes and verbiage.

-Finrock

[MMbelieve]

Ok, this is so Mormon telephone game but my husband’s coworker was told by someone who was at a stake conference with elder Anderson this weekend that he had been hearing rumors we were going to a two hour block. He said he could say absolutely that that was not going to happen.

Haha!! That sounds rediculous! I know:)

Our elders quorum was talking about this on sunday. Apparently Sunday school is going to be taught in the home.

[Col. Flagg]

Why is it ridiculous? And don't patronize me RH... I'm no fool.

Your claim is that Satan couldn't have devised a better tactic to destroy the family unit...
Seriously?
Have you ever heard of gay marriage?
And your statement about not being a fool is clearly questionable if you are contending that polygamy is worse.

So Satan is capable of changing someone's sexual preference? And how many gay people are there compared to heterosexuals? 4 in 100 Americans identify as having homosexual tendencies and it is substantially lower than that inside the church.

... and your point is?

It's silly to insinuate that gay marriage is a bigger impediment to the family unit and plan of salvation than polygamy.

[Baurak Ale]

With all due respect, I could say the same to you. I don't mean to sound zealous or confrontational, I have spent years studying and praying about this very topic. I know my answer is from God himself. I do not know where your answer is from, D&C 132 and Jacob 2 clearly contradict. Someone someday will be able to answer for that contradiction. What I do know is that I believe the Book of Mormon to be the most correct, just as Ezra Taft Benson said. He had access to the D&C and did not say it was the most correct book, even though it was written modernly with no need for translation.

Many in the church believe as I do. I can believe the prophets in the early church were just as much prophets in the Old Testament. Both groups of men had human frailties and sins. We just don't dissect the sins of Joseph the same way we do the sins of Jonah, I believe if we did there would be much to learn.

The gospel is about trusting in God instead of the arm of flesh. I believe the truth is there for all who honestly seek it.

I, on the other hand, have come to a knowledge by revelation from God that polygamy is of God and that D&C 132 is divinely inspired scripture. Mtm411, I plead with you to consider that your experience may have been a product of your own zeal for what sits best with your notions of eternity instead of the spirit. I can say that, having been deceived by my own zeal in like manner in the past: it felt like the spirit but contradicted the scriptures. It’s been a long path, but the Lord help me better differentiate His spirit from my own. That may be a hard saying, but I stand by the prophets Joseph and Brigham (and Hyrum, and Heber, etc) that the revelation and the practice it describes is of God. So many people here are falling for the arguments put forth in their day against the truth, which they defended with honesty. If we don’t believe them about the origins of D&C 132, and think they were acting as natural men pursuing women, then why not go and join the Community of Christ? They teach what you claim. The reason we don’t do this is because we have a witness that the priesthood is with the church and that President Nelson is a true prophet. Study D&C 132 in fasting and prayer with a heart open to believing and you too can come to know the truth of it. The questions and problems of the Old Testament become clear and melt away in this light (the claim that it always ends in disaster is a lie based on selective, cursory research coupled with Victorian sentimentality; Abraham only had two wives? No [see Genesis 25:6 for example]). Most of all, you can come to actually know the God we worship and His only begotten son.

When contraries are proven, truth is discovered. What appears to us to be contradictions in scripture are never truly so if we have our hearts open to believing that the Book of Mormon is of God just as the D&C is of God just as the POGP is of God, etc. Have you never had to take a passage in the Bible that contradicts with the Book of Mormon and show someone how they do not in actuality contradict? If so, then you should be able to see how there’s always more to the story, rather than assuming the newer stuff is faulty.

So how do we reconcile the passage in Jacob 2 with the passage in D&C 132? If we are a believing people, then this is our homework. I can testify that there is an answer and it is a principle at play all throughout the recorded dealings between God and man (aka scriptures).

Do not cast away the pearl that is D&C 132 just because you doubt what it says. Where in scriptures does it say that everything that is true will agree with our feelings and sensibilities? Even Jonah, whom you referenced, knew better than to make that claim.

In case you missed it Baurak Ale, but your testimony and appeal to authority was answered by another testimony and appeal to authority.

Who's testimony and appeal to authority is the correct one? You say its you, but, others don't agree with that.

Have you considered that you might be wrong? Of course you have, and then I bet you fasted, prayed, pondered, read, and asked God in sincerity, and then by the power of the Holy Ghost you received this certain knowledge that polygamy is grand and wonderful and its of God. But, the opposition says the same thing.

So, now what?

I bet you I know...more appeals to authority.

Everyone is always certain that all of their convictions and beliefs have been confirmed by God and that they know the truth and others don't and then they proceed to argue, usually about who's authority is greater or who is being more loyal or who is a better Mormon and then comes the "casting pearls" and "every fiber of my being" and *some scripture sounding language to make the post sound all authoritative*, sound bytes and verbiage.

-Finrock

It is true. When backed against the wall of faith all anyone can do is state their testimony. Will they conflict? Doubtless. Will they profess the same approaches at gaining said testimonies? Of course. Is one of them more closely aligned to the truth of the matter than the other? When it comes to opposing views, the answer is yes. So what is to be done then?

We must give our testimonies and let them be counted by the angels, and we will be judged by them in the end. Just because my testimony conflicts with the most innocent and devout Muslim doesn’t negate his ability to reject Christ and elevate Alah. But perhaps there is an Alma in this court, someone listening for the voice of the Good Shepherd who has not yet considered these things. That was me once many years ago. Someone in a thread raised their testimony, though it cut against the current, and I heard the Savior’s voice in it.

I stand by my experiences and my testimony: God has given D&C 132 and polygamy is an eternal institution of the highest heaven. The man who wrote “let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly,” who followed that counsel unwaveringly, also practiced polygamy and was never a fallen prophet. The scriptures do not ultimately contradict but teach when contraries are proven.

Nothing in that says you must believe what I know, but I put it forth as my witness for they who have ears to hear, whom God has not made dull of hearing.

[Robin Hood]

Your claim is that Satan couldn't have devised a better tactic to destroy the family unit...
Seriously?
Have you ever heard of gay marriage?
And your statement about not being a fool is clearly questionable if you are contending that polygamy is worse.

So Satan is capable of changing someone's sexual preference? And how many gay people are there compared to heterosexuals? 4 in 100 Americans identify as having homosexual tendencies and it is substantially lower than that inside the church.

... and your point is?

It's silly to insinuate that gay marriage is a bigger impediment to the family unit and plan of salvation than polygamy.

Polygamy does produce a family unit. It might not be a family unit that you approve of, but that is not the criteria by which these things are judged.
Gay marriage doesn't.
To contend otherwise is just plain daft.

I get that you don't like polygamy, and there is nothing wrong with that position. But to say that Satan couldn't devise a better tactic to destroy the family unit, totally undermines your position. Why? Because it demonstrates that you are not interested in rational argument, just in promoting your prejudice.
For the record, I'm not keen on polygamy either. But I know that gay marriage and homosexuality in general presents by far the greater risk to the family unit.
I think if you stop for a moment and think about what you've said, you will realise that your choice of words was, at best, unfortunate.
If you don't, then your motive is obvious for all to see and your argument is thereby significantly devalued; to the extent that most right thinking people will immediately dismiss it.
My advice: when you're in a hole, stop digging.

[oneClimbs]

Pretty safe bet Brian and Linda Hales, seeing as we have very little in regards to the true and correct record of this world. Also, it seems very reasonable for a need to command, when a restoring the truth and ordinances of all dispensations that were completely removed through apostasy.

I disagree with the Hales on quite a bit. However, they are correct, there is absolutely zero evidence that God ever commanded polygamy in the first place, and commanding it specifically as a tool for population growth is absolutely nowhere to be found except for a poor misreading of Jacob 2:30. The first polygamist was Lamech, a grandson of Cain. There was no polygamy mentioned after Solomon which is also near the time Lehi received a commandment that his people should be monogamous.

One might assume that the commandment to only have one wife was unique to Lehi and the Nephites through their 1000 year existence. You could argue that, but consider the situation of Riplakish who not only predated Lehi but was also not a descendant of Abraham, his people having come to the promised land after the tower of Babel incident.

Look what Moroni wrote about him:

"And it came to pass that Riplakish did not do that which was right in the sight of the Lord, for he did have many wives and concubines,..." Ether 10:5

It seems that even among these people, having many wives and concubines was considered "not right" in the sight of the Lord. The Book of Mormon is consistent on this. Even Deuteronomy 17:17 states this concerning the kings of Israel: "Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away..." And lo and behold, both David and Solomon who had multiple wives turned away from the Lord through adultery, murder, and idolatry.

Personally, I don't find D&C 132 a convincing document in that it contradicts (in parts) the Book of Mormon and the Bible. There will be those that disagree with me on this and that is fine, we all have our opinions. Personally, I've studied this topic for many, many years and I'm not saying that there isn't a case to make for polygamy, I'm only saying that I find that case to be extremely weak.

I don't condemn those that were involved in it, just like I don't condemn David or Solomon, that's up to God. Even though mistakes were made by a LOT of God's servants, his work still continued. We still read Proverbs and Psalms and even Jesus quoted from David's psalms in his ministry. I take the good and set aside the bad, and as God works with his servants through their weaknesses, I can accept to discerning and accepting the truth from any of his servant's weaknesses.

[Finrock]

With all due respect, I could say the same to you. I don't mean to sound zealous or confrontational, I have spent years studying and praying about this very topic. I know my answer is from God himself. I do not know where your answer is from, D&C 132 and Jacob 2 clearly contradict. Someone someday will be able to answer for that contradiction. What I do know is that I believe the Book of Mormon to be the most correct, just as Ezra Taft Benson said. He had access to the D&C and did not say it was the most correct book, even though it was written modernly with no need for translation.

Many in the church believe as I do. I can believe the prophets in the early church were just as much prophets in the Old Testament. Both groups of men had human frailties and sins. We just don't dissect the sins of Joseph the same way we do the sins of Jonah, I believe if we did there would be much to learn.

The gospel is about trusting in God instead of the arm of flesh. I believe the truth is there for all who honestly seek it.

When contraries are proven, truth is discovered. What appears to us to be contradictions in scripture are never truly so if we have our hearts open to believing that the Book of Mormon is of God just as the D&C is of God just as the POGP is of God, etc. Have you never had to take a passage in the Bible that contradicts with the Book of Mormon and show someone how they do not in actuality contradict? If so, then you should be able to see how there’s always more to the story, rather than assuming the newer stuff is faulty.

So how do we reconcile the passage in Jacob 2 with the passage in D&C 132? If we are a believing people, then this is our homework. I can testify that there is an answer and it is a principle at play all throughout the recorded dealings between God and man (aka scriptures).

Do not cast away the pearl that is D&C 132 just because you doubt what it says. Where in scriptures does it say that everything that is true will agree with our feelings and sensibilities? Even Jonah, whom you referenced, knew better than to make that claim.

In case you missed it Baurak Ale, but your testimony and appeal to authority was answered by another testimony and appeal to authority.

Who's testimony and appeal to authority is the correct one? You say its you, but, others don't agree with that.

Have you considered that you might be wrong? Of course you have, and then I bet you fasted, prayed, pondered, read, and asked God in sincerity, and then by the power of the Holy Ghost you received this certain knowledge that polygamy is grand and wonderful and its of God. But, the opposition says the same thing.

So, now what?

I bet you I know...more appeals to authority.

Everyone is always certain that all of their convictions and beliefs have been confirmed by God and that they know the truth and others don't and then they proceed to argue, usually about who's authority is greater or who is being more loyal or who is a better Mormon and then comes the "casting pearls" and "every fiber of my being" and *some scripture sounding language to make the post sound all authoritative*, sound bytes and verbiage.

-Finrock

It is true. When backed against the wall of faith all anyone can do is state their testimony. Will they conflict? Doubtless. Will they profess the same approaches at gaining said testimonies? Of course. Is one of them more closely aligned to the truth of the matter than the other? When it comes to opposing views, the answer is yes. So what is to be done then?

We must give our testimonies and let them be counted by the angels, and we will be judged by them in the end. Just because my testimony conflicts with the most innocent and devout Muslim doesn’t negate his ability to reject Christ and elevate Alah. But perhaps there is an Alma in this court, someone listening for the voice of the Good Shepherd who has not yet considered these things. That was me once many years ago. Someone in a thread raised their testimony, though it cut against the current, and I heard the Savior’s voice in it.

I stand by my experiences and my testimony: God has given D&C 132 and polygamy is an eternal institution of the highest heaven. The man who wrote “let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly,” who followed that counsel unwaveringly, also practiced polygamy and was never a fallen prophet. The scriptures do not ultimately contradict but teach when contraries are proven.

Nothing in that says you must believe what I know, but I put it forth as my witness for they who have ears to hear, whom God has not made dull of hearing.

No, I get it, but again, those who disagree with you put forth their witness and hope that you are not too dull to hear God's words. They have the same hope, that perhaps you are the Alma in the crowd, and perhaps you will hear God's voice when they speak it. Its presumptuous on both sides to make comments like this. You presume to know and you presume that others do not know. You presume to be hearing God's voice, while presuming those who disagree with you do not. And the only reason why this is even mentioned is because a person happens to disagree.

-Finrock

[JamesBews]

1. found 116 pages lost?!

2. merging with rlds?!


"An interesting photo. Twelve apostles of the Community of Christ."

Help me find the dis-like button

Because we know God and Christ also dislike them, right?

Nothing to do with God or Christ dis-liking them...not too sure where you get that from tbh but if ever there were a picture to describe what a "worldly" group should look like then this is 99% it... throw in a gay and you have it, 100% worldly opinion on how everything should be run.
7 Male
5 Female
a Black and few mixed race and you have it...all we're missing is 2 male or female linking arms and raising a child

[JamesBews]

So Satan is capable of changing someone's sexual preference? And how many gay people are there compared to heterosexuals? 4 in 100 Americans identify as having homosexual tendencies and it is substantially lower than that inside the church.

... and your point is?

It's silly to insinuate that gay marriage is a bigger impediment to the family unit and plan of salvation than polygamy.

Polygamy does produce a family unit. It might not be a family unit that you approve of, but that is not the criteria by which these things are judged.
Gay marriage doesn't.
To contend otherwise is just plain daft.

I get that you don't like polygamy, and there is nothing wrong with that position. But to say that Satan couldn't devise a better tactic to destroy the family unit, totally undermines your position. Why? Because it demonstrates that you are not interested in rational argument, just in promoting your prejudice.
For the record, I'm not keen on polygamy either. But I know that gay marriage and homosexuality in general presents by far the greater risk to the family unit.
I think if you stop for a moment and think about what you've said, you will realise that your choice of words was, at best, unfortunate.
If you don't, then your motive is obvious for all to see and your argument is thereby significantly devalued; to the extent that most right thinking people will immediately dismiss it.
My advice: when you're in a hole, stop digging.

you forgot to say "Drop mic"

[Col. Flagg]

So Satan is capable of changing someone's sexual preference? And how many gay people are there compared to heterosexuals? 4 in 100 Americans identify as having homosexual tendencies and it is substantially lower than that inside the church.

... and your point is?

It's silly to insinuate that gay marriage is a bigger impediment to the family unit and plan of salvation than polygamy.

Polygamy does produce a family unit. It might not be a family unit that you approve of, but that is not the criteria by which these things are judged.
Gay marriage doesn't.
To contend otherwise is just plain daft.

I get that you don't like polygamy, and there is nothing wrong with that position. But to say that Satan couldn't devise a better tactic to destroy the family unit, totally undermines your position. Why? Because it demonstrates that you are not interested in rational argument, just in promoting your prejudice.
For the record, I'm not keen on polygamy either. But I know that gay marriage and homosexuality in general presents by far the greater risk to the family unit.
I think if you stop for a moment and think about what you've said, you will realise that your choice of words was, at best, unfortunate.
If you don't, then your motive is obvious for all to see and your argument is thereby significantly devalued; to the extent that most right thinking people will immediately dismiss it.
My advice: when you're in a hole, stop digging.

I'm not the one who needs to stop digging a hole. Both polygamy and gay marriage are abominable in the sight of God who created the feeling and expression of love for a reason... polygamy destroys that emotion completely while denigrating women. Believe what you will RH... when we get on the other side some day, those who thought polygamy was 'doctrine' or OK 'when the Lord commands it' are in for a rude awakening.

[Robin Hood]

... and your point is?

It's silly to insinuate that gay marriage is a bigger impediment to the family unit and plan of salvation than polygamy.

Polygamy does produce a family unit. It might not be a family unit that you approve of, but that is not the criteria by which these things are judged.
Gay marriage doesn't.
To contend otherwise is just plain daft.

I get that you don't like polygamy, and there is nothing wrong with that position. But to say that Satan couldn't devise a better tactic to destroy the family unit, totally undermines your position. Why? Because it demonstrates that you are not interested in rational argument, just in promoting your prejudice.
For the record, I'm not keen on polygamy either. But I know that gay marriage and homosexuality in general presents by far the greater risk to the family unit.
I think if you stop for a moment and think about what you've said, you will realise that your choice of words was, at best, unfortunate.
If you don't, then your motive is obvious for all to see and your argument is thereby significantly devalued; to the extent that most right thinking people will immediately dismiss it.
My advice: when you're in a hole, stop digging.

I'm not the one who needs to stop digging a hole. Both polygamy and gay marriage are abominable in the sight of God who created the feeling and expression of love for a reason... polygamy destroys that emotion completely while denigrating women. Believe what you will RH... when we get on the other side some day, those who thought polygamy was 'doctrine' or OK 'when the Lord commands it' are in for a rude awakening.

You might be right, but that is not my issue with you.
My issue is your, frankly, utterly ridiculous statement.
How you could say that and keep a straight face simply beggars belief.

[oneClimbs]

I don't know whether polygamy is from God or not. I've asked but he hasn't said anything yet, so I've turned to the scriptures and have done everything I can on my end to understand as much as possible about it. I don't care about being right, just what is true. If you are a believer in polygamy then you are in good company along with every president of the church who supported it from Brigham Young up until today. But up until 1978, you were also in good company if you believed that blacks were denied the priesthood because of being less valiant in the pre-existence.

I don't know who is right yet. Currently, I remain unconvinced based on the principle that modern revelation cannot contradict previous revelation and what I see as a weak foundation that polygamy was built on and the horrible things that came from it until it was eradicated. There are certainly other ways to look at the history and interpret it, I used to believe them and don't altogether rule them out but I prefer to base my beliefs on the most solid information I can find, as I'm sure each of you does.

I'm not saying that I am right, just where I stand at the moment given the information I have available. I've been firmly on both sides at different stages of my life and I'm sure we'll get more light on this subject in the future. My line of questioning and reasoning have brought me more understanding and respect for our early leaders and not less which some might find odd.

[tribrac]

Wow Flagg. Just wow.

I found the discussion at the face to face fireside on Polygamy's past and future to be quite informative. It answered a couple of my lingering questions. I really like Elder Cooks comment that Polygamy served its purpose , blessed the church and it is done.

Watch from about 35 to 41ish

https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/face-to- ... k?lang=eng

Also liked the Sister's comment that when Polygamy's end was announced some in the church celebrated and some cried. Tied back to the original point of this thread...if changes are announced at this conference some will celebrate, some may cry. After that each of us will have to decide what we believe.

[brianj]

Ok, this is so Mormon telephone game but my husband’s coworker was told by someone who was at a stake conference with elder Anderson this weekend that he had been hearing rumors we were going to a two hour block. He said he could say absolutely that that was not going to happen.

Haha!! That sounds rediculous! I know:)

So... 90 minute blocks?

[brianj]

Sunday at church I told someone that polygamy is coming back, but it will be reversed so women have multiple husbands. That way marriage is more affordable for men.

I think the church getting out of the marriage business is the most realistic rumor. But if this happens I wonder how the policy will be implemented. Will it be immediate, leaving people with weddings planned the following week scrambling to make new plans? Will they allow people with existing reservations to keep those reservations? If so, will temples no longer accept wedding reservations or will there be a cutoff date after conference?

At Safeco Field President Eyring said some things we do because of doctrine, others because of policy, and some of changes will require faith to accept. Last Sunday a friend in Orem Utah was at a stake conference where the president had strong words about not murmuring. We keep hearing things that sound like preparation for big changes and I'm excited to see what they are.

[djinwa]

I get a kick out of these threads.

People who claim to have a testimony that our leaders are inspired, then proclaiming past practices by our leaders to be evil. So I assume in 50 years, much of what we do today will be also be seen as evil.

And then we try to predict what the major changes are. If we can predict what the revelation will be, why do we need a prophet?

I guess to receive revelation, the prophet needs to pass out surveys and consult the PR department.

We criticize the "anti's" for bashing the church, but seems the faithful do the same.

Very few actually believe in the church. Most are cherry-picking what they like.

[MMbelieve]

I get a kick out of these threads.

People who claim to have a testimony that our leaders are inspired, then proclaiming past practices by our leaders to be evil. So I assume in 50 years, much of what we do today will be also be seen as evil.

And then we try to predict what the major changes are. If we can predict what the revelation will be, why do we need a prophet?

I guess to receive revelation, the prophet needs to pass out surveys and consult the PR department.

We criticize the "anti's" for bashing the church, but seems the faithful do the same.

Very few actually believe in the church. Most are cherry-picking what they like.

Some of the things from the early church have been wrong and modern prophets have declared this. The church has matured and grown just as each of us do. So yes, in 50 years or more, the prophet(s) will have more to say to keep the church progressing and maturing. And then when we get to the millenium, Christ will set the church further by refining many things and making many changes.

Prophets from old did the best they could for their time they had stewardship over. The prophet that always has greater influence in my life is my prophet of the time I'm living. It should always be this way and it shows we have a living church and a living prophet.

[MMbelieve]

Wow Flagg. Just wow.

I found the discussion at the face to face fireside on Polygamy's past and future to be quite informative. It answered a couple of my lingering questions. I really like Elder Cooks comment that Polygamy served its purpose , blessed the church and it is done.

Watch from about 35 to 41ish

https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/face-to- ... k?lang=eng

Also liked the Sister's comment that when Polygamy's end was announced some in the church celebrated and some cried. Tied back to the original point of this thread...if changes are announced at this conference some will celebrate, some may cry. After that each of us will have to decide what we believe.

Thanks for posting this, I wasnt aware of it.
And yes, it sounds like polygamy is over and they reinforced that monogamy is the rule.

[Fiannan]

Some of the things from the early church have been wrong and modern prophets have declared this. The church has matured and grown just as each of us do. So yes, in 50 years or more, the prophet(s) will have more to say to keep the church progressing and maturing. And then when we get to the millenium, Christ will set the church further by refining many things and making many changes.

This is what people who believe in women being ordained to the priesthood as well as gays being sealed in the temple say as well.

[MMbelieve]

I don't know whether polygamy is from God or not. I've asked but he hasn't said anything yet, so I've turned to the scriptures and have done everything I can on my end to understand as much as possible about it. I don't care about being right, just what is true. If you are a believer in polygamy then you are in good company along with every president of the church who supported it from Brigham Young up until today. But up until 1978, you were also in good company if you believed that blacks were denied the priesthood because of being less valiant in the pre-existence.

I don't know who is right yet. Currently, I remain unconvinced based on the principle that modern revelation cannot contradict previous revelation and what I see as a weak foundation that polygamy was built on and the horrible things that came from it until it was eradicated. There are certainly other ways to look at the history and interpret it, I used to believe them and don't altogether rule them out but I prefer to base my beliefs on the most solid information I can find, as I'm sure each of you does.

I'm not saying that I am right, just where I stand at the moment given the information I have available. I've been firmly on both sides at different stages of my life and I'm sure we'll get more light on this subject in the future. My line of questioning and reasoning have brought me more understanding and respect for our early leaders and not less which some might find odd.

Modern revelation can and does contradict past scripture. Not sure contradict is the best word though. We are about to see changes in the church that just might show this. Policy is often considered doctrine because its traditional. Many old traditional policies have been done away with.

Modern revelation always trumps any previous statements on the matter. Living church...and all living things progress until they reach perfection.

I respect anyone who has studied and sought answers and understanding as much as you have.

[MMbelieve]

Some of the things from the early church have been wrong and modern prophets have declared this. The church has matured and grown just as each of us do. So yes, in 50 years or more, the prophet(s) will have more to say to keep the church progressing and maturing. And then when we get to the millenium, Christ will set the church further by refining many things and making many changes.

This is what people who believe in women being ordained to the priesthood as well as gays being sealed in the temple say as well.

People will always have many trains of thought that are all over the place.
Maybe its important that we stay strong and steadfast on Christs gospel and keep it simple like he did. Lets the rest come when it comes. I can pretty much bet on the fact that the only thing we can expect to know as an eternal truth is the plain and simple gospel. We do not know everything or all the details.

[JohnnyL]

Pretty safe bet Brian and Linda Hales, seeing as we have very little in regards to the true and correct record of this world. Also, it seems very reasonable for a need to command, when a restoring the truth and ordinances of all dispensations that were completely removed through apostasy.

I disagree with the Hales on quite a bit. However, they are correct, there is absolutely zero evidence that God ever commanded polygamy in the first place, and commanding it specifically as a tool for population growth is absolutely nowhere to be found except for a poor misreading of Jacob 2:30. The first polygamist was Lamech, a grandson of Cain. There was no polygamy mentioned after Solomon which is also near the time Lehi received a commandment that his people should be monogamous.

One might assume that the commandment to only have one wife was unique to Lehi and the Nephites through their 1000 year existence. You could argue that, but consider the situation of Riplakish who not only predated Lehi but was also not a descendant of Abraham, his people having come to the promised land after the tower of Babel incident.

Look what Moroni wrote about him:

"And it came to pass that Riplakish did not do that which was right in the sight of the Lord, for he did have many wives and concubines,..." Ether 10:5

It seems that even among these people, having many wives and concubines was considered "not right" in the sight of the Lord. The Book of Mormon is consistent on this. Even Deuteronomy 17:17 states this concerning the kings of Israel: "Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away..." And lo and behold, both David and Solomon who had multiple wives turned away from the Lord through adultery, murder, and idolatry.

Personally, I don't find D&C 132 a convincing document in that it contradicts (in parts) the Book of Mormon and the Bible. There will be those that disagree with me on this and that is fine, we all have our opinions. Personally, I've studied this topic for many, many years and I'm not saying that there isn't a case to make for polygamy, I'm only saying that I find that case to be extremely weak.

I don't condemn those that were involved in it, just like I don't condemn David or Solomon, that's up to God. Even though mistakes were made by a LOT of God's servants, his work still continued. We still read Proverbs and Psalms and even Jesus quoted from David's psalms in his ministry. I take the good and set aside the bad, and as God works with his servants through their weaknesses, I can accept to discerning and accepting the truth from any of his servant's weaknesses.

You are giving one possible reason for Ether 10:5. Here's another: it wasn't commanded by the Lord. Does that not work?
Where is the consistency, and more importantly, what is it consistent about?

[JohnnyL]

Some of the things from the early church have been wrong and modern prophets have declared this. The church has matured and grown just as each of us do. So yes, in 50 years or more, the prophet(s) will have more to say to keep the church progressing and maturing. And then when we get to the millenium, Christ will set the church further by refining many things and making many changes.

This is what people who believe in women being ordained to the priesthood as well as gays being sealed in the temple say as well.

People will always have many trains of thought that are all over the place.
Maybe its important that we stay strong and steadfast on Christs gospel and keep it simple like he did. Lets the rest come when it comes. I can pretty much bet on the fact that the only thing we can expect to know as an eternal truth is the plain and simple gospel. We do not know everything or all the details.

I basically agree. We get hung up over so many things because we can't figure them out, often forgetting that God's thoughts are not ours, nor His ways ours.
Basically, it doesn't matter much. Not much that we worry about does, I guess. If we're the happiest where we are in the eternities, good for us. Like I said, we can always drop a kingdom or two if we want, but we can't think, "Oh darn, now I get it, that's fine" and decide to up and move up a few.
Our natures will be different. Alma used to think destroying God's church was fun, along with fornication. Then his nature changed, and it wasn't like that anymore. I've seen people's natures change.

[JohnnyL]

Sunday at church I told someone that polygamy is coming back, but it will be reversed so women have multiple husbands. That way marriage is more affordable for men.

And this works in some societies, true.