The work of exaltation stopped, aka plural marriage, aka polygamy. And this wasn't a different time, it's still the same dispensation.Artaxerxes wrote: ↑November 13th, 2022, 7:35 amNo work was stopped. God requires things at times and not at others. So what?ransomme wrote: ↑November 13th, 2022, 5:11 amSo much for no unhallowed hand can stop the work. Or does it mean that unhallowed hands can still reverse the work, but just not stop it?Artaxerxes wrote: ↑November 13th, 2022, 2:05 amSome were contemporaneous, some were later.ransomme wrote: ↑November 12th, 2022, 5:41 pm
Show me these testimonies/witnesses.
Are they from years after the fact, and years after Joseph's death?
Here are a few things off the top of my head...How do you explain how the would-be/should-be pinnacle of modern revelation...
a) was changed/doctored from the parts of the original text that existed during Joseph's life?
b) had been treated so carelessly by Joseph that he never talked about it, published it, etc?
c) was left out of the D&C that Joseph prepared in 1844?
d) was so important that they waited 32 years until 1876 to add it even though BY published it in '52?
e) contains false doctrine and factual errors that conflict with the scriptures?
f) contains repeated odd phrasing found nowhere else in scripture?
g) goes against, "Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and none else" (D&C 42:22)?
h) goes against, "Wherefore, it is lawful that he should have one wife, and they twain shall be one flesh, and all this that the earth might answer the end of its creation;" (D&C 49:16)?
i) goes against B0M/Jacob?
j) creates an incongruent (with scripture) exhalation doctrine?
k) that somehow promises more "Fulness"?
and last but not least...
l) redefines "Everlasting Covenant" & "Fulness" into foreign and unrecognizable concepts?
"Behold, I say unto you that all old covenants have I caused to be done away in this thing; and this (referring to baptism) is a new and an everlasting covenant, even that which was from the beginning." (D&C 22:1)
"Verily I say unto you, blessed are you for receiving mine everlasting covenant, even the fulness of my gospel, sent forth unto the children of men, that they might have life and be made partakers of the glories which are to be revealed in the last days, as it was written by the prophets and apostles in days of old." (D&C 66:2)
"And for this cause, that men might be made partakers of the glories which were to be revealed, the Lord sent forth the fulness of his gospel, his everlasting covenant, reasoning in plainness and simplicity" (D&C 133:57)
"Verily, thus saith the Lord: It shall come to pass that every soul who forsaketh his sins and cometh unto me, and calleth on my name, and obeyeth my voice, and keepeth my commandments, shall see my face and know that I am;" (D&C 93:1)
"15 Behold, when ye shall rend that veil of unbelief which doth cause you to remain in your awful state of wickedness, and hardness of heart, and blindness of mind, then shall the great and marvelous things which have been hid up from the foundation of the world from you—yea, when ye shall call upon the Father in my name, with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, then shall ye know that the Father hath remembered the covenant which he made unto your fathers, O house of Israel.
16 And then shall my revelations which I have caused to be written by my servant John be unfolded in the eyes of all the people. Remember, when ye see these things, ye shall know that the time is at hand that they shall be made manifest in very deed.
17 Therefore, when ye shall receive this record ye may know that the work of the Father has commenced upon all the face of the land.
18 Therefore, repent all ye ends of the earth, and come unto me, and believe in my gospel, and be baptized in my name; for he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned; and signs shall follow them that believe in my name" (Ether 4)
For example, Austin Cowles's contemporaneous account:
"In the latter part of the summer, 1843, the Patriarch, Hyrum Smith, did in the High Council, of which I was a member, introduce what he said was a revelation given through the Prophet; that the said Hyrum Smith did essay to read the said revealtion in the said Council, that according to his reading there was contained the following doctrines; lst the sealing up of persons to eternal life, against all sins, save that of sheding innocent blood or of consenting thereto; 2nd, the doctrine of a plurality of wives, or marrying virgins; that "David and Solomon had many wives, yet in this they sinned not save in the matter of Uriah.""
There were also later recollections that corroborate the earlier ones.
From Thomas Grover:
"The High Council, of Nauvoo, was called together by the
Prophet Joseph Smith, to know whether they would accept the
Revelation on celestial marriage or not. The presidency of the Stake, Wm. Marks, Father Coles and
the late Apostle Charles C. Rich, were there present. The
following are the names of the High Council that were present,
in their order, viz : Samuel Bent, William Huntington, Alpheus
Cutler, Thomas Grover, Lewis D. Wilson, David Fullmer, Aaron
Johnson, Newel Knight, Leonard Soby, Isaac Allred, Henry G.
Sherwood and, I think, Samuel Smith.
"Brother Hyrum Smith was called upon to read the revelation. He did so, and after reading it said: "Now, you that believe this revelation and go forth and obey the same shall be
saved, and you that reject it shall be damned."
"We saw this prediction verified in less than one week. Of the
Presidency of the Stake, William Marks and Father Coles rejected the revelation; of the Council that were present, Leonard
Soby rejected it. From that time forward there was a very
strong division in the High Council. These three men greatly
diminished in spirit day after day, so that there was a great
difference in the line of their conduct, which was perceivable
to every member that kept the faith."
Leonard Soby:
"Leonard Soby,
who was by me sworn in due form of law, and upon oath
saith, that on or about the 12th day of August, 1843, in the city
of Nauvoo, in the State of Illinois, in the county of Hancock,
before the High Council of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter
Day Saints, of which body and council aforesaid he was a member, personally appeared one Hyrum Smith, of the first presidency of said church, and brother to Joseph Smith, the president and prophet of the same, and presented to said council the
Revelation on Polygamy, enjoining its observance and declaring it came from God; unto which a large majority of the council
agreed and assented believing it to be of a celestial order,
though no vote was taken upon it, for the reason that the voice
of the prophet, in such matters, was understood by us to be the
voice of God to the church, and that said revelation was presented to said council, as before stated, as coming from Joseph
Smith, the prophet of the Lord, and was received by us as other revelations had been."
David Fullmer:
"On or about the
12th day of August, A. D. 1843, while in meeting with the High
Council, (he being a member thereof), in Hyrum Smith's brick
office, in the City of Nauvoo, County of Hancock, State of
llinois, Dunbar Wilson made inquiry in relation to the subject of
a plurality of wives, as there were rumors about respecting it, and he was satisfied there was something in those remarks, and
he wanted to know what it was, upon which Hyrum Smith
stepped across the road to his residence, and soon returned,
bringing with him a copy of the revelation on celestial marriage,
given to Joseph Smith, July 12, A. D. 1843, and read the same
to the High Council, and bore testimony of its truth. The said
David Fullmer further said that to the best of his memory and
belief, the following named persons were present: William
Marks, Austin A. Cowles, Samuel Bent, George W. Harris, Dunbar Wilson, Wm. Huntington, Levi Jackman, Aaron Johnson,
Thomas Grover, David Fullmer, Phineas Richards, James Allred
and Leonard Soby. And the said David Fullmer further saith that Wm. Marks, Austin A. Cowles and Leonard Soby were
the only persons present who did not receive the testimony of
Hyrum Smith, and that all the others did receive it from the
teaching and testimony of the said Hyrum Smith. And further, that the copy of said revelation on Celestial Marriage, published
in the Deseret News extra of September fourteenth, A. D. 1852,
is a true copy of the same."
How is it possible for so many people, some Brighamite, some not, to remember the same meeting if it weren't true?
Section 132 doesn't disagree with any of these things. It doesn't contradict anything. People can always manufacture conflicts between scriptures, whether it's about faith vs works or whatever. We can make up conflicts or see how they can both be true together.
Joseph was good at keeping a secret, as he said he was. But tons of people were brought into the secret and talked about it.
I suppose the Church only lost the principle of exaltation...
Perhaps it's a classic trial of faith. Just enough for people to believe either way. Good luck with your choice.
Although if you had true faith in the principle you'd live it, because if you don't then you won't make it to the highest level of the Celestial kingdom You know since polygamy didn't really end by revelation:
"I hereby declare MY intention to submit to those laws, and to use MY influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise."
What in the world are you talking about? I believe the Lord instituted animal sacrifices. I'm not gonna be doing that either. And you know why I'm not going to do either. What does any of this have to do with Section 132? And again, how can Brighamites and non -Brighamites (Austin Cowles later joined the Reorgs) all remember the same event?
God says, "roll it out....no wait, I take that back. This really isn't the dispensation of the fullness of times."
Either it was wrong from the beginning, or it was wrong to stop... No mental gymnastics to try to have it both ways.
And BTW, wow, you pulled that whole animal sacrifice thing out from before Christ's sacrifice on the cross. Bravo awesome non sequitur.
Because women are possessions, "62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified."
Because women don't have a choice in the matter other than to be damned and somehow giving a man more wives glorifies God's name....? What?
"64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law."