The Davidic Servant and the Prospect of Future Polygamy

[FrankOne]

As I was viewing another recent thread, I had a thought on polygamy which was novel.

Seeing that this subject is so volatile and polarizing on this forum, I think it's safe to say that it is divisive in all sectors.

That being said, I'll make a guess that this subject could be one which causes a stark division in the times to come. In other words, within the current church, polygamy has already been officially kicked to the curb with the attitude that "it will never again be practiced". Hinkley responded on this question on the Larry King Show in saying "It is not doctrinal". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntDqQwCCjDA

So, mainstream church has taken it's side already. Now, we have those that have become disaffected with the current church and are finding their own way, hoping for a future 'setting in order'. In this group, the polarization is very strong with very few that are on the fence line of "maybe it's true, maybe it's not".

Will the future restoration of the true church hold polygamy as a valid and doctrinal tenet? Will it be taught that in the BOM, the teaching against it was meant for those at that time and it was not an "eternal" teaching? Will it be taught that JS did in fact live in polygamy? Will it be taught that polygamy can be so easily abused that the Lord has said very little on the subject of condoning it? Will it be taught that section 132 was a revelation given to JS and that he had to keep his own polygamous marriages secret due to the wisdom of the Lord instructing him? (for many reasons).

So.,.. what if there arrives a man on the scene that claims to be the Davidic Servant which comes to restore the Church and he teaches the above. How open would you be or would this be the sign for you that he, in fact, is NOT the authentic Davidic Servant? What if on every subject and from every perspective, his words are the spot on truth but... he also teaches that polygamy is a doctrine of God for the end days and beyond? If you could only find fault with this one aspect of his teachings, would that be enough to decide that he is a charlatan?


I have hope that this thread will be generally contained within the above hypothetical scenario.

As a hypothetical scenario, what say ye?

In any argument, there exists personal bias.

Another way of approaching this subject is to ask yourself, why is my position so important to me personally. and how is it affecting my answer to these questions? It's a given that some men are horn dogs, so there is one form of bias.

I hope we can keep some levity alive in this thread.

[ransomme]

It's a Trap!

[Luke]

It would be, at least, an indicator that he wasn’t a faker. Any so-called servant preaching against polygamy wouldn’t actually be the Davidic Servant. Almost all the most recent fakers have been preaching against CPM.

[Reluctant Watchman]

More polygamy?

[ransomme]

I can't wait for my many many virgins, I will be blessed! Women have no choice! Or at least very little because I will have a higher priesthood than all of you. They will all want me!

Oh wait, I think BY possessed me for a sec.

[FrankOne]

huh... no serious answers excepting Luke?

example: No, I wouldn't believe him. He would obviously be a fake.

or.. I would listen carefully, pray and then decide.

It appears that the general stance here is that everyone's mind is already made up no matter what may come.

Well...there it is then. I guess this is a good example why there has been over 10,000 differing christian sects since Christ. Each creates a church within their own mind and then finds the one that agrees with their preference of 'truth'. and if there isn't one,....they start a new one! It does cause me to wonder how many different LDS groups will form, each of them, of course, being the true one, after the LDS organization falls to pieces.

It will be likened to the Fundamental Plyg groups that have numbered in the several dozen, each one saying that they have the coveted and unique KEYS of the priesthood while every other group is in error. lol. I know several from several groups , it is an interesting study.

'we have the authority' will be a future mantra from the offshoots to come. "No! we do"... hahahah "You are a liar, We have the authority" "The truth is with us!" ... "Here! read this scripture!" "We can prove it!" "You are not of God!" NO!, the scripture is a fake! , This is the truth!" One giant forum of argument.

klown world will be the only common thread.

[Cruiserdude]

One giant forum of argument.

Sounds like our modern day internet

[FrankOne]

One giant forum of argument.

Sounds like our modern day internet

yah....but I do need to add something, now that you've said that.

I am certain that so many of our fixed ideas will fall by the wayside quite quickly and common ground will be found by all of those that are sincerely following the Christ. Change is good and change is coming. I am hopeful

[tmac]

The effectiveness of any Davidic Servant (and/or TOM&S) will boil down to Divine power, fruits, and genuine leadership.

It has been so long since we have seen any real, genuine leadership in the Church (or almost anywhere else) that it should be a stark contrast.

It will be interesting to see who is prepared to follow a real leader, versus just hang-out in the weeds, and murmur, complain, and take pot shots.

[FrankOne]

The effectiveness of any Davidic Servant (and/or TOM&S) will boil down to Divine power, fruits, and genuine leadership.

It has been so long since we have seen any real, genuine leadership in the Church (or almost anywhere else) that it should be a stark contrast.

It will be interesting to see who is prepared to follow a real leader, versus just hang-out in the weeds, and murmur, complain, and take pot shots.

it would be very refreshing to find a man that is resolute in his link with God. I'm almost thinking that it would be too easy if such a man arrived. For me, it would be nothing at all to just follow. Anyone that has been around the block a few times understands that following is very easy compared to being responsible for everything .... all of the time.

I would hope that it is Joseph Smith that miraculously returns to lead. Even though my spiritual path is a bit different than the 'normal' doctrine of the LDS church, I'd follow him blindly just to see where it goes. It would no doubt be an amazing walk. I've loved reading his history and felt like he was a very sincere man.

There's a song, zac brown band, with the line : Heavy is the head that wears the crown. .

[Bronco73idi]

I can't wait for my many many virgins, I will be blessed! Women have no choice! Or at least very little because I will have a higher priesthood than all of you. They will all want me!

Oh wait, I think BY possessed me for a sec.

“Thinker” posted an article about polygamy in Jesus’s time by Christians who don’t believe in polygamy. It was an opinion piece with one piece of fact, like many post here.

Something along the lines of they didn’t practice polygamy much by that time but the only evidence they have is of a woman who had her own lands and became a second wife.

One day you will understand how bad it will get and why women will bring it back.

You posted in EQ’s thread

JST Gen 6
6:5 And then began these men to call upon the name of the Lord; and the Lord blessed them; and a book of remembrance was kept in the which was recorded in the language of Adam, for it was given unto as many as called upon God to write by the Spirit of inspiration;
6:6 And by them their children were taught to read and write, having a language which was pure and undefiled.
6:7 Now this same priesthood which was in the beginning shall be in the end of the world also.
6:8 Now this prophecy Adam spake as he was moved upon by the Holy Ghost.


1: Adam = God “ language of Adam” “having a language which was pure and undefiled.”

2: in a society that honors Men of God, Men who make an Everlasting Covenant, Sons of Sons of Adam with daughters of men… most women would want to marry a man of God….

2: Also shows, Adam is our father that art in heaven….


I have never read JST Genesis 6 but it completely goes with what the Holy Ghost has testified to me about Genesis 6:1-4. I wrote a Thread here back on the 7th of February.

viewtopic.php?t=69603

[ransomme]

I can't wait for my many many virgins, I will be blessed! Women have no choice! Or at least very little because I will have a higher priesthood than all of you. They will all want me!

Oh wait, I think BY possessed me for a sec.

“Thinker” posted an article about polygamy in Jesus’s time by Christians who don’t believe in polygamy. It was an opinion piece with one piece of fact, like many post here.

Something along the lines of they didn’t practice polygamy much by that time but the only evidence they have is of a woman who had her own lands and became a second wife.

One day you will understand how bad it will get and why women will bring it back.

You posted in EQ’s thread

JST Gen 6
6:5 And then began these men to call upon the name of the Lord; and the Lord blessed them; and a book of remembrance was kept in the which was recorded in the language of Adam, for it was given unto as many as called upon God to write by the Spirit of inspiration;
6:6 And by them their children were taught to read and write, having a language which was pure and undefiled.
6:7 Now this same priesthood which was in the beginning shall be in the end of the world also.
6:8 Now this prophecy Adam spake as he was moved upon by the Holy Ghost.


1: Adam = God “ language of Adam” “having a language which was pure and undefiled.”

2: in a society that honors Men of God, Men who make an Everlasting Covenant, Sons of Sons of Adam with daughters of men… most women would want to marry a man of God….

2: Also shows, Adam is our father that art in heaven….


I have never read JST Genesis 6 but it completely goes with what the Holy Ghost has testified to me about Genesis 6:1-4. I wrote a Thread here back on the 7th of February.

viewtopic.php?t=69603

Yeah, ok Adam is God, but became a son of Jesus by getting baptized, so that now we all may become sons of Jesus. Ok, sure.

I love seeing how far people can twist the texts. I'll start a thread this week detailing how Jesus is YHWH. Even messianic Jews see it when they actually read the Bible, which is why they convert to Jesus.

B.Young was a theologist for the Church of the devil. Bringing blood oaths into the temple, justifying murder, abominations, whoredoms, he raided the Church coffers for personal gain, uses his position for unrighteous dominion, etc. Just sad that he continues to lead people astray.

[Bronco73idi]

I can't wait for my many many virgins, I will be blessed! Women have no choice! Or at least very little because I will have a higher priesthood than all of you. They will all want me!

Oh wait, I think BY possessed me for a sec.

“Thinker” posted an article about polygamy in Jesus’s time by Christians who don’t believe in polygamy. It was an opinion piece with one piece of fact, like many post here.

Something along the lines of they didn’t practice polygamy much by that time but the only evidence they have is of a woman who had her own lands and became a second wife.

One day you will understand how bad it will get and why women will bring it back.

You posted in EQ’s thread

JST Gen 6
6:5 And then began these men to call upon the name of the Lord; and the Lord blessed them; and a book of remembrance was kept in the which was recorded in the language of Adam, for it was given unto as many as called upon God to write by the Spirit of inspiration;
6:6 And by them their children were taught to read and write, having a language which was pure and undefiled.
6:7 Now this same priesthood which was in the beginning shall be in the end of the world also.
6:8 Now this prophecy Adam spake as he was moved upon by the Holy Ghost.


1: Adam = God “ language of Adam” “having a language which was pure and undefiled.”

2: in a society that honors Men of God, Men who make an Everlasting Covenant, Sons of Sons of Adam with daughters of men… most women would want to marry a man of God….

2: Also shows, Adam is our father that art in heaven….


I have never read JST Genesis 6 but it completely goes with what the Holy Ghost has testified to me about Genesis 6:1-4. I wrote a Thread here back on the 7th of February.

viewtopic.php?t=69603

Yeah, ok Adam is God, but became a son of Jesus by getting baptized, so that now we all may become sons of Jesus. Ok, sure.

I love seeing how far people can twist the texts. I'll start a thread this week detailing how Jesus is YHWH. Even messianic Jews see it when they actually read the Bible, which is why they convert to Jesus.

B.Young was a theologist for the Church of the devil. Bringing blood oaths into the temple, justifying murder, abominations, whoredoms, he raided the Church coffers for personal gain, uses his position for unrighteous dominion, etc. Just sad that he continues to lead people astray.

I love seeing how emotions lead people down the paths they choose to take.

Jesus is the son of ancient of days and AOD is Adam.

YHWH is Jesus. The beginning is the end!

blah blah blah

Have you seen my baseball?

[ransomme]

“Thinker” posted an article about polygamy in Jesus’s time by Christians who don’t believe in polygamy. It was an opinion piece with one piece of fact, like many post here.

Something along the lines of they didn’t practice polygamy much by that time but the only evidence they have is of a woman who had her own lands and became a second wife.

One day you will understand how bad it will get and why women will bring it back.

You posted in EQ’s thread

JST Gen 6
6:5 And then began these men to call upon the name of the Lord; and the Lord blessed them; and a book of remembrance was kept in the which was recorded in the language of Adam, for it was given unto as many as called upon God to write by the Spirit of inspiration;
6:6 And by them their children were taught to read and write, having a language which was pure and undefiled.
6:7 Now this same priesthood which was in the beginning shall be in the end of the world also.
6:8 Now this prophecy Adam spake as he was moved upon by the Holy Ghost.


1: Adam = God “ language of Adam” “having a language which was pure and undefiled.”

2: in a society that honors Men of God, Men who make an Everlasting Covenant, Sons of Sons of Adam with daughters of men… most women would want to marry a man of God….

2: Also shows, Adam is our father that art in heaven….


I have never read JST Genesis 6 but it completely goes with what the Holy Ghost has testified to me about Genesis 6:1-4. I wrote a Thread here back on the 7th of February.

viewtopic.php?t=69603

Yeah, ok Adam is God, but became a son of Jesus by getting baptized, so that now we all may become sons of Jesus. Ok, sure.

I love seeing how far people can twist the texts. I'll start a thread this week detailing how Jesus is YHWH. Even messianic Jews see it when they actually read the Bible, which is why they convert to Jesus.

B.Young was a theologist for the Church of the devil. Bringing blood oaths into the temple, justifying murder, abominations, whoredoms, he raided the Church coffers for personal gain, uses his position for unrighteous dominion, etc. Just sad that he continues to lead people astray.

I love seeing how emotions lead people down the paths they choose to take.

Jesus is the son of ancient of days and AOD is Adam.

YHWH is Jesus. The beginning is the end!

blah blah blah

Have you seen my baseball?

If you found my posts emotional that is kind of funny. Too bad text does't transfer emotion easily

I had a feeling of play acting when posting them.

[Bronco73idi]

Yeah, ok Adam is God, but became a son of Jesus by getting baptized, so that now we all may become sons of Jesus. Ok, sure.

I love seeing how far people can twist the texts. I'll start a thread this week detailing how Jesus is YHWH. Even messianic Jews see it when they actually read the Bible, which is why they convert to Jesus.

B.Young was a theologist for the Church of the devil. Bringing blood oaths into the temple, justifying murder, abominations, whoredoms, he raided the Church coffers for personal gain, uses his position for unrighteous dominion, etc. Just sad that he continues to lead people astray.

I love seeing how emotions lead people down the paths they choose to take.

Jesus is the son of ancient of days and AOD is Adam.

YHWH is Jesus. The beginning is the end!

blah blah blah

Have you seen my baseball?

If you found my posts emotional that is kind of funny. Too bad text does't transfer emotion easily

I had a feeling of play acting when posting them.

Very emotional, anything dealing with Brigham Young and you are off the rails. A tissue would float away.

[ransomme]

I love seeing how emotions lead people down the paths they choose to take.

Jesus is the son of ancient of days and AOD is Adam.

YHWH is Jesus. The beginning is the end!

blah blah blah

Have you seen my baseball?

If you found my posts emotional that is kind of funny. Too bad text does't transfer emotion easily

I had a feeling of play acting when posting them.

Very emotional, anything dealing with Brigham Young and you are off the rails. A tissue would float away.

Not emotional, it's more reflexive.

I do like this photo of B.Young though

[tmac]

There's no question, this issue always seems to trigger lots of emotions, and they often run pretty wild by the time it's done.

But, back to the original premise, the reality is, it could very easily be a very legitimate test issue. We know for a fact that at this point, under current conditions, just as a completely emotional, knee-jerk reaction, a large percentage of women -- especially in the Church -- would be opposed, and would probably not be able to bring themselves to ever accept possible application of the principle. And, we also know, just from discussions here, that because men are, by nature, horn dogs, that hypothetically (at least under creepy conditions) more of them may be open to the possibility. That is certainly true, but doesn't cover the full picture.

And then there are those of both genders who have painted themselves into a corner, and said that it is not, never was, and never will be, a correct principle, and they will NEVER accept it. And it is pretty clear that, as much as a matter of pride as anything, the vast majority of those who fit into that category will not, and would not, accept the principle under any possible scenario.

Based on these realities under current conditions, there is no question that the principle of CPM could be a very good test. I have a friend would would argue that the test should also be combined with the LoC ( as intended), and that between CPM and LoC, it would thoroughly screen and test anyone with aspirations for exaltation in the highest degree of the CK.

And if you were the true Davidic Servant, acting under God’s direction, why would you not apply such tests, in making preparations for transition to Celestial laws?

But the bottom line is, and it goes without saying that, the remnant who would be willing to accept and live the LoC and CPM would undoubtedly be probably be very small -- which is what it will be. What other test(s) would be as effective in such a winnowing process?

So, let's think of this whole thing in terms of a funneling, cream separation process -- if you know how that works. All the milk goes into the big funnel at the top, and then, through a process of centrifugal spinning, the heavy cream is separated from the skim milk, half and half, etc.

In this case, let's look at it as a screening, testing process. The vast majority of TBMs would simply probably never even accept the possibility of a Davidic Servant who didn't emerge from within the corporate organizational structure anyway, so they will be screened out right out of the chute. Then, like looking on the brass serpent, additional screens and tests might be applied, like for example, LoC, CPM, etc., and by the time all of those screens and tests are applied, there is no question that what remains -- the remnant -- will be a very, very small fraction of what started.

Are there any other principles that would be as effective? I'm sure RW, Ransomme and others can argue that the same process could/will apply but going the other direction -- and that open-mindedness to plural marriage will eliminate all the horn dogs, so that most of what are left are single men, who had little to consecrate and start with, as illustrated by Christ's own test of the rich young man.

. . . and if this thread had been started in th main, General Discussions category, it probably would have blown-up to 10 pages by now. . . .

[FrankOne]

I can't wait for my many many virgins, I will be blessed! Women have no choice! Or at least very little because I will have a higher priesthood than all of you. They will all want me!

Oh wait, I think BY possessed me for a sec.

One day you will understand how bad it will get and why women will bring it back.


2: in a society that honors Men of God, Men who make an Everlasting Covenant, Sons of Sons of Adam with daughters of men… most women would want to marry a man of God….

food for thought there. thanks. I had never considered this in such clear terms. When women are the initiators of this, what will men do? Ah.... I can hear some men in that day crying out in rage "stone her!". I wouldn't think that the foregoing scenario is outside the realm of possibilities. The hard core orthodox men as in ancient times. "Stone Her, we MUST preserve our righteous indignation in the name of our God of jealousy and anger!"

[ransomme]

I can't wait for my many many virgins, I will be blessed! Women have no choice! Or at least very little because I will have a higher priesthood than all of you. They will all want me!

Oh wait, I think BY possessed me for a sec.

One day you will understand how bad it will get and why women will bring it back.


2: in a society that honors Men of God, Men who make an Everlasting Covenant, Sons of Sons of Adam with daughters of men… most women would want to marry a man of God….

food for thought there. thanks. I had never considered this in such clear terms. When women are the initiators of this, what will men do? Ah.... I can hear some men in that day crying out in rage "stone her!". I wouldn't think that the foregoing scenario is outside the realm of possibilities. The hard core orthodox men as in ancient times. "Stone Her, we MUST preserve our righteous indignation in the name of our God of jealousy and anger!"

Babes of Babylon have already brought polygamy back.

[Bronco73idi]

One day you will understand how bad it will get and why women will bring it back.


2: in a society that honors Men of God, Men who make an Everlasting Covenant, Sons of Sons of Adam with daughters of men… most women would want to marry a man of God….

food for thought there. thanks. I had never considered this in such clear terms. When women are the initiators of this, what will men do? Ah.... I can hear some men in that day crying out in rage "stone her!". I wouldn't think that the foregoing scenario is outside the realm of possibilities. The hard core orthodox men as in ancient times. "Stone Her, we MUST preserve our righteous indignation in the name of our God of jealousy and anger!"

Babes of Babylon have already brought polygamy back.

Did god make homosexuals?

[FrankOne]

One day you will understand how bad it will get and why women will bring it back.


2: in a society that honors Men of God, Men who make an Everlasting Covenant, Sons of Sons of Adam with daughters of men… most women would want to marry a man of God….

food for thought there. thanks. I had never considered this in such clear terms. When women are the initiators of this, what will men do? Ah.... I can hear some men in that day crying out in rage "stone her!". I wouldn't think that the foregoing scenario is outside the realm of possibilities. The hard core orthodox men as in ancient times. "Stone Her, we MUST preserve our righteous indignation in the name of our God of jealousy and anger!"

Babes of Babylon have already brought polygamy back.

he makes some interesting and accurate observations.

it is a bit glaring though that he doesn't understand the word "polygamy". He uses the term often, yet he uses it incorrectly. Polygamy literally means one person married to more than one. Marriage is not relative to multiple sexual partners outside of the institution of marriage.

it goes to Greek: Polygamia - A plurality of wives. (GK and E lexicon hilliard and gray, 1839) The word 'wife' is not synonymous with 'sex partner outside of marriage'.

and yes, this is a babylonian perversion, but it is an excellent example for the opposite point. In a time of future calamities, good women will also be many, while men will be few (see isaiah 3) due to war. Good women will be very selective of who they will choose. The number of 'good' men will be very few. Today, these babylonian women are whoring themselves with the fewer 'successful' men. It is interesting that in truth, as he points out, it is the natural inclination for a woman to seek out a man that represents strength. A spiritual woman would seek out not only a man of physical strength or intelligence, but a man with spiritual strength. Today's babylonian woman wants the strong man, but she has no desire to be responsible with who she is and has no desire to actually follow that man in a marriage. She thinks she is getting her cake and eating it too, but in reality, she is destroying herself.

the world is ripe and beginning to rot.

[FrankOne]

There's no question, this issue always seems to trigger lots of emotions, and they often run pretty wild by the time it's done.

But, back to the original premise, the reality is, it could very easily be a very legitimate test issue.

In this case, let's look at it as a screening, testing process. The vast majority of TBMs would simply probably never even accept the possibility of a Davidic Servant who didn't emerge from within the corporate organizational structure anyway, so they will be screened out right out of the chute. Then, like looking on the brass serpent, additional screens and tests might be applied, like for example, LoC, CPM, etc., and by the time all of those screens and tests are applied, there is no question that what remains -- the remnant -- will be a very, very small fraction of what started.


. . . and if this thread had been started in th main, General Discussions category, it probably would have blown-up to 10 pages by now. . . .

first, I didn't realize there would be more exposure by posting in general discussions. I personally like the slower pace of this thread so perhaps it was a beneficial accident.

I can't see any reformation or restoration occurring without it being something that threshes out the majority of today's world. God's followers ARE peculiar. As I've said before, a woman that I've done business with is a devout follower in the FLDS community. I believe she has two sister wives. We have discussed religion multiple times and one day she said this about "the principle".

"Polygamy is the refiners fire for the women and the Law of Consecration is the refiners fire for the men".

Anyone that has given this much thought can easily see how difficult it would be for a mormon man today to TRULY live Tloc. The pride of being successful with YOUR stuff and earnings is an enormous beam in the eye. I would venture to guess that tloc would be at least as difficult for the average 'successful' mormon man as polygamy would be for women. The modern successful mormon man could never tolerate giving his gain to those that HE PERCEIVES doesn't deserve it.

I find it a all bit humorous. Don't touch my marbles! These are mine!!!! MINE!!! My precious!!!!!

In this modern world, in a general sense, where has the spiritual man gone ?

[ransomme]

food for thought there. thanks. I had never considered this in such clear terms. When women are the initiators of this, what will men do? Ah.... I can hear some men in that day crying out in rage "stone her!". I wouldn't think that the foregoing scenario is outside the realm of possibilities. The hard core orthodox men as in ancient times. "Stone Her, we MUST preserve our righteous indignation in the name of our God of jealousy and anger!"

Babes of Babylon have already brought polygamy back.

he makes some interesting and accurate observations.

it is a bit glaring though that he doesn't understand the word "polygamy". He uses the term often, yet he uses it incorrectly. Polygamy literally means one person married to more than one. Marriage is not relative to multiple sexual partners outside of the institution of marriage.

it goes to Greek: Polygamia - A plurality of wives. (GK and E lexicon hilliard and gray, 1839) The word 'wife' is not synonymous with 'sex partner outside of marriage'.

and yes, this is a babylonian perversion, but it is an excellent example for the opposite point. In a time of future calamities, good women will also be many, while men will be few (see isaiah 3) due to war. Good women will be very selective of who they will choose. The number of 'good' men will be very few. Today, these babylonian women are whoring themselves with the fewer 'successful' men. It is interesting that in truth, as he points out, it is the natural inclination for a woman to seek out a man that represents strength. A spiritual woman would seek out not only a man of physical strength or intelligence, but a man with spiritual strength. Today's babylonian woman wants the strong man, but she has no desire to be responsible with who she is and has no desire to actually follow that man in a marriage. She thinks she is getting her cake and eating it too, but in reality, she is destroying herself.

the world is ripe and beginning to rot.

We all know what he means, and what he is saying. A high percentage of women are only interested in a small percentage of men. The effect is the same, most men will go partnerless more often for longer periods of time. Besides we can just call them open marriages, or something.

But let's look at the word anyway:
from polygamy + -ous, or else from Late Greek polygamos "often married." In zoology, "mating with more than one individual." Related: Polygamously. haha we are just animals

polygamy (n.)
"marriage with more than one spouse," 1590s, from Late Latin polygamia, from Late Greek polygamia "polygamy," from polygamos "often married," from polys "many" (see poly-) + gamos "marriage" (see gamete). The word is not etymologically restricted to marriage of one man and multiple women (technically polygyny), but often used as if it were. Related: Polygamist; polygamize.

-ous
word-forming element making adjectives from nouns, meaning "having, full of, having to do with, doing, inclined to," from Old French -ous, -eux, from Latin -osus (compare -ose (1)). In chemistry, "having a lower valence than forms expressed in -ic."

[ransomme]

food for thought there. thanks. I had never considered this in such clear terms. When women are the initiators of this, what will men do? Ah.... I can hear some men in that day crying out in rage "stone her!". I wouldn't think that the foregoing scenario is outside the realm of possibilities. The hard core orthodox men as in ancient times. "Stone Her, we MUST preserve our righteous indignation in the name of our God of jealousy and anger!"

Babes of Babylon have already brought polygamy back.

Did god make homosexuals?

God didn't create us it was a natural evolution.

It is what it is, and whatever it is there is a choice involved. Otherwise, we are just victims. A murderer would say that he was just born that way. A pedophile would say that they were born a minor attracted person. And so on. So your question is irrelevant. That's just the way the cookie crumbles and the ball bounces.

[FrankOne]

I love seeing how emotions lead people down the paths they choose to take.

Jesus is the son of ancient of days and AOD is Adam.

YHWH is Jesus. The beginning is the end!

blah blah blah

Have you seen my baseball?

If you found my posts emotional that is kind of funny. Too bad text does't transfer emotion easily

I had a feeling of play acting when posting them.

Very emotional, anything dealing with Brigham Young and you are off the rails. A tissue would float away.

i am a bit surprised on how often some repetitively bring up BY . I guess some have been traumatized? to learn that BY actually had many faults, made many errors, and was ....omgoodness....A MAN!

without the moses like authoritarian attitude of BY, the saints would never have made it. They WANTED a tyrant to see them through and he did it very well. His abilities to organize were nothing short of extraordinary. After reading church history and many of the volumes of JOD, i made the decision that he was quite the tyrant and not someone I personally would follow. I would have walked away. ...but that is just me. Those that stayed under the authority of BY WANTED to. They chose it! There is no injustice in this.

But then again, i would never have followed Joshua when he commanded everyone to murder every living thing in Canaan. . Who would do that? ...but... I also can see how useful BY was in Gods hands. God makes use of everyone. Everyone. One of the most useful tools of God is his son, Lucifer! Go figure! Is that disturbing? Why? He created him with forethought!

Whether he fabricated the idea of polygamy as an eternal principle has no importance for me! Why would it? How would it affect my daily life? He was just a man in history! He has absolutely no bearing on my physical nor spiritual existence. My choices are between me and my Creator alone.