God is not ok with lying.

[Shawn Henry]

Joseph only legitimately attempted plural marriage for two years

That's a priceless statement right there!

He only did it legitimately for two years. So all the years prior to the last two you admit would be adultery?

The apostles bringing back new wives, sometimes pregnant, from England in the 1830's was during the "illegitimate" years?

Was Apostle Williard Richards and his nightly visits to Mirinda Hyde's house while Orson was on his mission legitimate?

[Shawn Henry]

That was the only loophole the Lord gave

It's not a loophole.

Jacob 2:30 when read in context would read, "I, the Lord, always want to raise up righteous seed and therefore command monogamy, otherwise my people will hearken unto these abominable practices."

[Shawn Henry]

So why is it impossible for God to instruct Joseph not to reveal that he and the others in his inner circle had more than one wife?

And if God did instruct him to keep it a secret, what would that look like?

What would that look like? It would look like God ceasing to become God because he has said that he does not work in secrecy or in darkness. He has said he does his work in the light, meaning out in the open.

Only the Devil establishes doctrines in secret inner circles. The Lord establishes doctrines in the mouth of two or three witnesses.

[Reluctant Watchman]

That was the only loophole the Lord gave

It's not a loophole.

Jacob 2:30 when read in context would read, "I, the Lord, always want to raise up righteous seed and therefore command monogamy, otherwise my people will hearken unto these abominable practices."

It's the only exception when the Lord commands it in very specific circumstances that a man takes more than one wife. Those exceptions are questionable in the OT, and the only allowable instance. I'm not going to tell the Lord He can't do something when he clearly states it in the BoM that there's the possibility. Raising up seed is having children. I've read all of the nuanced language around this, and the opposing viewpoint, but it is having children IMO.

[Shawn Henry]

Now imagine you are screwing 50 + women

I wonder if followers of Islam are kicking themselves for their mistake of not realizing you don't have to wait to get to heaven for your 70 virgins.

"You mean we could've been doing that now in this life! Damn, we should've thought of that!"

If only Mohammed had been as smart as Bring 'em young.

[Shawn Henry]

he clearly states it in the BoM that there's the possibility. Raising up seed is having children. I've read all of the nuanced language around this, and the opposing viewpoint, but it is having children IMO.

No! He doesn't state that at all in the BoM!

He already gave the command to raise up seed in 1 Ne 7:1 and that command was monogamy.

..."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"....

Jacob 2:30 is referencing the command that was already given.

"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."

The Lord did want to raise up seed and he did command his people. The precedent is in 1 Ne 7:1,2. It's plain English.

The Lord always wants to raise up seed, it's a standing commandment ever since "multiply and replenish" in the garden.

Obviously, the Lord is smart enough to also know that monogamous societies produce more children.

If you do word link studies you will just as easily find that hearkening unto "these things" are the things they ought not to have done.

Just four verses later, verse 34: ..."for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done."

Jacob even says, "And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi"....a direct reference to 1 Ne 7:1,2 where the "raise up seed" command was given.

[Reluctant Watchman]

he clearly states it in the BoM that there's the possibility. Raising up seed is having children. I've read all of the nuanced language around this, and the opposing viewpoint, but it is having children IMO.

No! He doesn't state that at all in the BoM!

He already gave the command to raise up seed in 1 Ne 7:1 and that command was monogamy.

..."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"....

Jacob 2:30 is referencing the command that was already given.

"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."

The Lord did want to raise up seed and he did command his people. The precedent is in 1 Ne 7:1,2. It's plain English.

The Lord always wants to raise up seed, it's a standing commandment ever since "multiply and replenish" in the garden.

Obviously, the Lord is smart enough to also know that monogamous societies produce more children.

If you do word link studies you will just as easily find that hearkening unto "these things" are the things they ought not to have done.

Just four verses later, verse 34: ..."for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done."

Jacob even says, "And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi"....a direct reference to 1 Ne 7:1,2 where the "raise up seed" command was given.

You have to read Jacob 2 in the context of Jacob's discourse. He was talking about sex and babies. I can see how you want to explore the nuances of language and other verses about "seed', but again, you have to read this with focused emphasis on Jacob's discourse. This was all about taking more wives and justifying it as did David and Solomon, which thing was an abomination... well, except when 132 "justified" them and failed to condemn them...

[LDS Watchman]

So why is it impossible for God to instruct Joseph not to reveal that he and the others in his inner circle had more than one wife?

And if God did instruct him to keep it a secret, what would that look like?

What would that look like? It would look like God ceasing to become God because he has said that he does not work in secrecy or in darkness. He has said he does his work in the light, meaning out in the open.

Only the Devil establishes doctrines in secret inner circles. The Lord establishes doctrines in the mouth of two or three witnesses.

Ah shucks Henry, then I guess God ceased to by God at the time he commanded Abraham to keep his marriage to Sarah a secret. Or maybe he was never God at all to begin with.

[Shawn Henry]

I guess God ceased to by God at the time he commanded Abraham to keep his marriage to Sarah a secret. Or maybe he was never God at all to begin with.

You misunderstand.

It is perfectly ok for God to tell someone to keep a secret. That is not what we are talking about.

What we are talking about is how God brings forth doctrine. He brings forth his doctrine, his word, his teachings, in the light, out in the open and never starts a doctrine in the dark.

Keeping a secret and establishing doctrine are two vastly different things.

[LDS Watchman]

I guess God ceased to by God at the time he commanded Abraham to keep his marriage to Sarah a secret. Or maybe he was never God at all to begin with.

You misunderstand.

It is perfectly ok for God to tell someone to keep a secret. That is not what we are talking about.

What we are talking about is how God brings forth doctrine. He brings forth his doctrine, his word, his teachings, in the light, out in the open and never starts a doctrine in the dark.

Keeping a secret and establishing doctrine are two vastly different things.

Show me where it says that God never teaches a doctrine in secret.

[Shawn Henry]

Ah shucks Henry

This is the derisive and un-Christlike opening you chose to lead with? Is this how you are going to win us over to your side?

[Momma J]

God is NOT OK with lying. There is no way to justify dishonesty. We are not perfect and can ask for forgiveness when we utter a falsehood.

There are many scriptures that tell us we should not lie. I have yet to find words or promptings from the Holy Ghost to tell me that God accepts deceit.

Revelation 21:8

But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

and again in verse 27

And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Lying is wrong.... my humble opinion which is guided by the spirit.

[Shawn Henry]

You have to read Jacob 2 in the context of Jacob's discourse. He was talking about sex and babies. I can see how you want to explore the nuances of language and other verses about "seed', but again, you have to read this with focused emphasis on Jacob's discourse. This was all about taking more wives and justifying it as did David and Solomon, which thing was an abomination... well, except when 132 "justified" them and failed to condemn them...

How do you read "sex and babies" in a discourse that never says those words? The context of his discourse is in the words he wrote, not in the words he didn't write. He wrote raising up seed, which is scriptural language that already has been used in scripture. This is what prophets do, they use the language of scripture, especially when writing scripture.

I agree, they are justifying polygamy by David and Soloman, but they are justifying it as a practice. The people's reasoning beyond that is never stated.

The context of Jacob's sermon is that that is how you get unrighteous seed, wicked practices, and broken hearts. The unrighteous seed, because the unrighteous practice would be passed on, leaving a corrupt seed and a corrupt people.

He then contrasts how that practice will yield unrighteous seed by reminding them of God's way to raise up seed the way he commanded.

[Reluctant Watchman]

You have to read Jacob 2 in the context of Jacob's discourse. He was talking about sex and babies. I can see how you want to explore the nuances of language and other verses about "seed', but again, you have to read this with focused emphasis on Jacob's discourse. This was all about taking more wives and justifying it as did David and Solomon, which thing was an abomination... well, except when 132 "justified" them and failed to condemn them...

How do you read "sex and babies" in a discourse that never says those words? The context of his discourse is in the words he wrote, not in the words he didn't write. He wrote raising up seed, which is scriptural language that already has been used in scripture. This is what prophets do, they use the language of scripture, especially when writing scripture.

I agree, they are justifying polygamy by David and Soloman, but they are justifying it as a practice. The people's reasoning beyond that is never stated.

The context of Jacob's sermon is that that is how you get unrighteous seed, wicked practices, and broken hearts. The unrighteous seed, because the unrighteous practice would be passed on, leaving a corrupt seed and a corrupt people.

He then contrasts how that practice will yield unrighteous seed by reminding them of God's way to raise up seed the way he commanded.

He’s talking about taking multiple wives and sex… babies. Sexual perversions. Why did these Nephites want to take more wives? Sex. They wanted more sex. They wanted more sexual partners and they tried to justify it through corrupt interpretations of scripture and how OT prophets did the “same” thing, supposedly.

[Shawn Henry]

Sexual perversions.

Yes, there it is. A good summation of what Jacob is talking about. Sexual perversions do not raise up seed to the Lord. Sexual perversions raise up seed to Satan. God does not have an exception where he raises up seed to Satan. This is why Jacob specifically references the command given to Lehi.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Sexual perversions.

Yes, there it is. A good summation of what Jacob is talking about. Sexual perversions do not raise up seed to the Lord. Sexual perversions raise up seed to Satan. God does not have an exception where he raises up seed to Satan. This is why Jacob specifically references the command given to Lehi.

What *few* early OT prophets did to "raise up seed" was to have babies with more than one wife. Sex and babies.

[LDS Watchman]

Ah shucks Henry

This is the derisive and un-Christlike opening you chose to lead with? Is this how you are going to win us over to your side?

You can choose to be offended at my choice of words and use that as an excuse to dismiss my arguments if you want. But it doesn't change the fact that God does reveal things to people in secret and does command people to keep things a secret. There are multiple examples of this in the scriptures. So unless you're arguing that God ceased to be God ages ago because of this, you don't have a valid argument against polygamy on the grounds that it was kept secret.

[Shawn Henry]

What *few* early OT prophets did to "raise up seed" was to have babies with more than one wife. Sex and babies.

It seems that way, but we can't even say that for sure.

For example, why did the Nephites use David and Soloman as their justification and not Abraham and Jacob. If you were trying to justify yourself, you would pick the better examples to follow, the righteous ones, not the two who lost their status, correct.

If you were trying to justify babysitting, would you use as your example Mary Poppins or Jeffery Epstein?

I submit that the Nephites first and foremost would have first picked father Abraham if the text of the Brass Plates allowed them to do so.

Since they did not, we can assume the text didn't allow them to do so. Please tell me I am not alone in seeing this logic.

[Shawn Henry]

You can choose to be offended at my choice of words and use that as an excuse to dismiss my arguments if you want. But it doesn't change the fact...

How did I tie that to dismissing your words? I didn't make that connection. How did I say your un-Christlike behavior changes other facts? I didn't say that either, did I?

Two or more facts can and do coexist. The fact that you chose the words you did is a completely independent fact that has nothing to do with any other facts, correct?

[Shawn Henry]

God does reveal things to people in secret and does command people to keep things a secret.

Why are you backtracking? Did you not read or understand my post?

I have already agreed with you that God reveals "things" to people in secret.

Again, just so we are clear, that is not what we are talking about. We are talking about how God brings forth and establishes doctrine. This is what he doesn't ever do in secrecy. Doctrine and scripture are brought forth in the light.

Who cares about what secrets may or may not have been told by God. Secrets are not binding upon God's people. They don't pertain to everyone, so it doesn't matter. Doctrine, however, does pertain to everyone, that's why it is done in the light.

Show me examples of doctrine and scripture that are brought forth in secrecy.

[Reluctant Watchman]

What *few* early OT prophets did to "raise up seed" was to have babies with more than one wife. Sex and babies.

It seems that way, but we can't even say that for sure.

For example, why did the Nephites use David and Soloman as their justification and not Abraham and Jacob. If you were trying to justify yourself, you would pick the better examples to follow, the righteous ones, not the two who lost their status, correct.

If you were trying to justify babysitting, would you use as your example Mary Poppins or Jeffery Epstein?

I submit that the Nephites first and foremost would have first picked father Abraham if the text of the Brass Plates allowed them to do so.

Since they did not, we can assume the text didn't allow them to do so. Please tell me I am not alone in seeing this logic.

I'm not sure why they chose one over the other. I do know that Joseph changed 3-4 passages in his JST to condemn David and Solomon for their practices.

[LDS Watchman]

God does reveal things to people in secret and does command people to keep things a secret.

Why are you backtracking? Did you not read or understand my post?

I have already agreed with you that God reveals "things" to people in secret.

Again, just so we are clear, that is not what we are talking about. We are talking about how God brings forth and establishes doctrine. This is what he doesn't ever do in secrecy. Doctrine and scripture are brought forth in the light.

Who cares about what secrets may or may not have been told by God. Secrets are not binding upon God's people. They don't pertain to everyone, so it doesn't matter. Doctrine, however, does pertain to everyone, that's why it is done in the light.

Show me examples of doctrine and scripture that are brought forth in secrecy.

I read what you said. You said that God would cease to be God if he had told Joseph and the other members of his inner circle to keep their plural marriages secret.

That claim isn't sustainable from the scriptures.

[CuriousThinker]

Questions- Does it make it ok if God says he won't lie and is full of truth, but tells others to lie? Hmmm. How do we become like God if we lie, yet we are supposed to become full of truth like him? If I never lie, but encourage my kids to lie does that make a good parent? Do I get to then say that I am honest and bummer my kids are liars? Does that make me, the parent, a hypocrite?
These are honest questions that need to be grappled with.
Is lying different cause we are mortals dealing with mortals, but God must follow a higher law?

[Shawn Henry]

I'm not sure why they chose one over the other.

Do you mind giving me some feedback as to whether my logic is sound about them not using Abraham? Do you feel they would have used him if it was an option?

[Reluctant Watchman]

Questions- Does it make it ok if God says he won't lie and is full of truth, but tells others to lie? Hmmm. How do we become like God if we lie, yet we are supposed to become full of truth like him? If I never lie, but encourage my kids to lie does that make a good parent? Do I get to then say that I am honest and bummer my kids are liars? Does that make me, the parent, a hypocrite?
These are honest questions that need to be grappled with.
Is lying different cause we are mortals dealing with mortals, but God must follow a higher law?

I fully believe in higher laws. And it is my feeble understanding that those laws are governed by intent. The lower the realm, the more law is required (aka Law of Moses). The higher the realm, the less hand-holding is required.

Now how does that relate to seemingly contradictory commandments...? I have no idea.