LDS Freedom Forum

Telavian wrote: ↑October 25th, 2023, 9:25 pm

Original_Intent wrote: ↑October 25th, 2023, 9:22 pm I'd say it was more of a challenge to your statement rather than condescending. I mean, of course you can't do it, and neither can I - that was the point. If you want condescending, re-read your own post that I was responding to.

Wow, God's word is eternal and better than anything we can think! Thanks Captain Obvious!

Again, another attack for no reason. You mentioned that your reasoning or Rob's reasoning is superior to the scriptures and I just mentioned that you might want to rethink that.
You took that as an attack for some reason.

I'd like to see where I said that. I stated that the spirit was required to determine truth whether from the scriptures, or the mouth of a prophet.
That's not MY reasoning or Rob's, reasoning by a country mile.

I said that God does reason with us, and provided a scripture stating exactly that, so you should accept it.

Telavian wrote: ↑October 25th, 2023, 9:19 pm

Original_Intent wrote: ↑October 25th, 2023, 9:05 pm Thanks for that, obviously true. Identify for me which words of sola scriptora are God's what are mistranslations of other changes, what got left out, and so forth. Thanks in advance.

Men can reason anything away or into being.

for me, you've just made the same point.

Men wrote scripture, not God. They wrote it using fallible skills of observation and recollection, tainted with personal bias.
Men chose which scrolls fit their own idea of Christianity, not God.
Men translated it from one language to another, not God.
Men interpret scripture for each different church, not God.

Scriptures are needed as a guide but not as a rule.

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 26th, 2023, 1:17 am

Telavian wrote: ↑October 25th, 2023, 9:19 pm

Original_Intent wrote: ↑October 25th, 2023, 9:05 pm Thanks for that, obviously true. Identify for me which words of sola scriptora are God's what are mistranslations of other changes, what got left out, and so forth. Thanks in advance.

Men can reason anything away or into being.

for me, you've just made the same point.

Men wrote scripture, not God. They wrote it using fallible skills of observation and recollection, tainted with personal bias.
Men chose which scrolls fit their own idea of Christianity, not God.
Men translated it from one language to another, not God.
Men interpret scripture for each different church, not God.

Scriptures are needed as a guide but not as a rule.

All of these things are so intertwined, and are the reason why sinlessness is such an important concept to learn about and consistently live. How can we hope to gain the spirit of understanding otherwise?

One of Webster’s 1828 dictionary’s definitions for “understand” says:

2. To have the same ideas as the person who speaks, or the ideas which a person intends to communicate.

We gain understanding of everything that comes from God by sharing the same mind and by reasoning with him, and the greatest interactions with him can only come as we live in complete obedience to what we understand about him.

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 26th, 2023, 1:17 am for me, you've just made the same point.

Men wrote scripture, not God. They wrote it using fallible skills of observation and recollection, tainted with personal bias.
Men chose which scrolls fit their own idea of Christianity, not God.
Men translated it from one language to another, not God.
Men interpret scripture for each different church, not God.

Scriptures are needed as a guide but not as a rule.

You don't think God was involved in any of those steps?
Why did the Bereans search the scriptures to see if Christ was the Messiah?
Why were the brass plates so important to get if they were written by men?
Why was the book of mormon so important to bring forth if it was a product of men?
Why was the Bible so important to people like Tyndale if it was just a work of men?
Why have the scriptures at all if you can just pray and get better guidance?

I don't think the scriptures are word for word what God would write, however I think they are the best we have currently.

Telavian wrote: ↑October 26th, 2023, 6:41 am

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 26th, 2023, 1:17 am for me, you've just made the same point.

Men wrote scripture, not God. They wrote it using fallible skills of observation and recollection, tainted with personal bias.
Men chose which scrolls fit their own idea of Christianity, not God.
Men translated it from one language to another, not God.
Men interpret scripture for each different church, not God.

Scriptures are needed as a guide but not as a rule.

You don't think God was involved in any of those steps?
Why did the Bereans search the scriptures to see if Christ was the Messiah?
Why were the brass plates so important to get if they were written by men?
Why was the book of mormon so important to bring forth if it was a product of men?
Why was the Bible so important to people like Tyndale if it was just a work of men?
Why have the scriptures at all if you can just pray and get better guidance?

I don't think the scriptures are word for word what God would write, however I think they are the best we have currently.

You seem to think anyone that disagrees with you dismisses the scripture out of hand. I sure don't. At a BARE MINIMUM, by studying the scriptures, you learn to feel promptings and the Spirit is able to communicate with you and you learn to connect to God as your understanding opens. I think there is much more value than that, but that's a baseline. There is also stories and truths that mankind has seen fit to transmit down thru thousands of years. This also holds true for scriptures of other faiths - while they may not contain the word of God in as pure a form, they do represent things that different people have held sacred and important and kept for thousands of years. As Jordan Peterson says, you discard that at your peril and at the peril of society.

Scripture is not some minor detail. Christ is the ultimate foundation, but scripture (however flawed) is the foundation that we must start with to learn of Christ, God, and the ideas that our society is formed around (however imperfectly) The last 40 years shows what happens to a society that tries to divorce itself from these things.

But, it is a starting point, not an end. If you do not learn to connect with the powers of heaven and how to seek and receive true messengers - well, you may have a decent society from following a very good rule book, but you are not anywhere near where God wants you to be.

Reluctant Watchman wrote: ↑October 24th, 2023, 6:38 am

jack wrote: ↑October 24th, 2023, 4:53 am Minerals in the ground have no value.

Just because the minerals have no current value doesn’t mean they don’t have potential.

It is only after they are dug up and refined that they becomes useful or in other words valuable.

Thus it is with mankind. Until we are refined we are less than the dust. God can see our potential however and because He loves us it becomes his work to begin the refining process in our lives — to make us valuable.

All of God’s creations have immense value to Him. Minerals included. All matter vibrates and has life. It is my opinion that all material and matter is capable of some level of awareness. In Vinny Tolman’s NDE he talks extensively about experiencing grass, flowers, bugs, and water in heaven. In a follow up interview he said that he could probably write a one thousand page book on grass alone.

Whoosh!

An Eye Single wrote: ↑October 26th, 2023, 5:00 am

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 26th, 2023, 1:17 am

Telavian wrote: ↑October 25th, 2023, 9:19 pm

Men can reason anything away or into being.

for me, you've just made the same point.

Men wrote scripture, not God. They wrote it using fallible skills of observation and recollection, tainted with personal bias.
Men chose which scrolls fit their own idea of Christianity, not God.
Men translated it from one language to another, not God.
Men interpret scripture for each different church, not God.

Scriptures are needed as a guide but not as a rule.

All of these things are so intertwined, and are the reason why sinlessness is such an important concept to learn about and consistently live. How can we hope to gain the spirit of understanding otherwise?

One of Webster’s 1828 dictionary’s definitions for “understand” says:

2. To have the same ideas as the person who speaks, or the ideas which a person intends to communicate.

We gain understanding of everything that comes from God by sharing the same mind and by reasoning with him, and the greatest interactions with him can only come as we live in complete obedience to what we understand about him.

^

as it is.

The understanding of sinlessness is something that can only be given by God.
The only word that I have ever come up in the English language for "love" that actually encompass it is the word "understanding". The implied meaning of Love as people use is not love at all.

Rob dropping some sweet goodness this morning. Around the 50 minute mark he briefly brushes the topic of "beings of light being born in this world as babies" and goes a bit into detail about how there is a higher cost but also higher power than a ministering angel. Smoly Hokes,

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 24th, 2023, 8:40 pm

Original_Intent wrote: ↑October 24th, 2023, 4:08 pm Take it as you will. I am more inclined to believe it than I have for any other claimant previously. I have some soul searching to do.

I thought it was interesting. I watched this one because you linked it here, but I didn’t realize at first that there is a part I, so I’ll have to watch that one too.

It seems that he’s saying that he is the davidic servant or one mighty and strong, or he will be if he accomplishes what needs to be done.

The part about naming your kid Jesus was kind of weird. (Did he name one of his kids Jesus?) Seems that it was sort of symbolic, but then he also seemed literal about it at times.

I watched part 1.
He brought up polygamy and says it might be good in some instances. (I guess like war that kills off lots of men, leaving single women or not enough good men around to marry the single ladies.) I dunno. I can take a sort of nuanced view of polygamy - I’m not one of those die hard pro or die hard con people. But if I had to choose, I’d definitely be con. Since I can have a nuanced view, I suppose he could be correct. But I think he is absolutely playing with fire if he’s thinking it would be good for him to take on additional wives. He clearly thinks he can handle it. And he thinks he’s sinless, so he’s obviously a “good” man. So he can rescue those damsels in distress if need be and give them a wonderful life.
I just don’t see how it’s much better than being a single mom who used a sperm donor to conceive. Maybe it’s slightly better if the kids get to know their father then it would be for a sperm donor, and if they know their half siblings. Maybe for the women it’s slightly better if they get some financial support from him.
But the first wife. If he adds 1 more wife, any one-on-one time she had with him will now be cut in half. If he wants to do this fairly. That’s a raw deal.
Obviously I don’t want to derail this into a polygamy debate, so feel free to copy this to a new post somewhere if you want to debate it with me.

Original_Intent wrote: ↑October 27th, 2023, 8:32 am Rob dropping some sweet goodness this morning. Around the 50 minute mark he briefly brushes the topic of "beings of light being born in this world as babies" and goes a bit into detail about how there is a higher cost but also higher power than a ministering angel. Smoly Hokes,

I watched this one too.
I don’t know. I just don’t get as much out of these as you do. They’re underwhelming to me.

I’m curious. Does he have a substantial amount of his audience that does not come from an LDS background? He always feels the need to explain and couch things that come from an LDS perspective for the benefit of those watching without an LDS background. I just find it hard to believe that he would have much of an audience like that. But maybe I’m wrong, and it is considerate of him to think about them and explain it for them.

It's true, I do tend to get a lot from things that almost everyone doesn't see the value of. I'm OK with that

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 27th, 2023, 5:46 pm I watched this one too.
I don’t know. I just don’t get as much out of these as you do. They’re underwhelming to me.

I’m curious. Does he have a substantial amount of his audience that does not come from an LDS background? He always feels the need to explain and couch things that come from an LDS perspective for the benefit of those watching without an LDS background. I just find it hard to believe that he would have much of an audience like that. But maybe I’m wrong, and it is considerate of him to think about them and explain it for them.

I have been observing him for maybe 2 years now. The first year was very closely. My observation is he is getting further and further away from a firm foundation. Of course, some may say he is revealing new truth. However, it seems he is revealing his truth as there is no way to gauge whether it is correct or not. Sydney was asked by God to prove Joseph's words according to the scriptures for a reason. It most certainly wasn't for Sydney's enjoyment.

As far as LDS though. His audience is realistically 95% LDS or former LDS. I personally get the sense that he is deviating away from the core LDS ideas like Joseph and the Book of Mormon. I asked him several basic LDS questions during his Q&A session and he ignored them.

His method of teaching is a bit weird. He has mentioned more than once that we need to study everything he says or does because he will intentionally hide a nugget of truth here or there. Therefore we always need to be prepared for it. Then if people don't watch enough, he releases a video about how people are focused on the wrong things. It might help if he didn't release an hour long video almost every day. Doesn't he have books to write? Hasn't he said videos are a much lower priority than his books?

I really may be missing the boat here, and I totally accept that. However, people lap his teachings up and hang on his every word. Everything he says or does it unquestionably true and divine. It really is fascinating to see it play out in people. There seems to be no critical thinking as the master has spoken so the thinking has been done.

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 27th, 2023, 5:42 pm

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 24th, 2023, 8:40 pm

Original_Intent wrote: ↑October 24th, 2023, 4:08 pm Take it as you will. I am more inclined to believe it than I have for any other claimant previously. I have some soul searching to do.

I thought it was interesting. I watched this one because you linked it here, but I didn’t realize at first that there is a part I, so I’ll have to watch that one too.

It seems that he’s saying that he is the davidic servant or one mighty and strong, or he will be if he accomplishes what needs to be done.

The part about naming your kid Jesus was kind of weird. (Did he name one of his kids Jesus?) Seems that it was sort of symbolic, but then he also seemed literal about it at times.

I watched part 1.
He brought up polygamy and says it might be good in some instances. (I guess like war that kills off lots of men, leaving single women or not enough good men around to marry the single ladies.) I dunno. I can take a sort of nuanced view of polygamy - I’m not one of those die hard pro or die hard con people. But if I had to choose, I’d definitely be con. Since I can have a nuanced view, I suppose he could be correct. But I think he is absolutely playing with fire if he’s thinking it would be good for him to take on additional wives. He clearly thinks he can handle it. And he thinks he’s sinless, so he’s obviously a “good” man. So he can rescue those damsels in distress if need be and give them a wonderful life.
I just don’t see how it’s much better than being a single mom who used a sperm donor to conceive. Maybe it’s slightly better if the kids get to know their father then it would be for a sperm donor, and if they know their half siblings. Maybe for the women it’s slightly better if they get some financial support from him.
But the first wife. If he adds 1 more wife, any one-on-one time she had with him will now be cut in half. If he wants to do this fairly. That’s a raw deal.
Obviously I don’t want to derail this into a polygamy debate, so feel free to copy this to a new post somewhere if you want to debate it with me.

Your post caused me to recall a thought about this.

77% of the current U.S. population are adults which equates to about 240 million people.

Today.... right now.... some 46% of adults are single. If a million men that are currently married, suddenly made the decision to take another wife, AND ... found women that desired it, this would be no injustice at all to the tens of millions of men that are not seeking marriage. The trend today is that single men are seeking sex without marriage.

Times have changed dramatically and the argument that single men won't find mates due to polygamy is now invalid.

Hence, Rob's ideas on polygamy are not unreasonable at all.

If we take this to a spiritual level and grasp at a few straws'; Consider a million spiritual, decent, hard working and moral men taking another wife , that are , of course willing. Would there be a beneficial result in this world?

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 12:19 am Times have changed dramatically and the argument that single men won't find mates due to polygamy is now invalid.

Hence, Rob's ideas on polygamy are not unreasonable at all.

If we take this to a spiritual level and grasp at a few straws'; Consider a million spiritual, decent, hard working and moral men taking another wife , that are , of course willing. Would there be a beneficial result in this world?

This completely misses the actual issue and greatly simplifies an incredibly complicated problem. Of course, if a few people took an additional spouse, it wouldn't affect anything overall. However, taking millions of good people off the dating market certainly would.

Certainly some men are seeking sex without marriage. However we are not talking about "some men" now are we? We are talking about good men and good women who are not seeking sex without marriage. Therefore your logic doesn't make any sense in this context. Who cares what the tinder culture wants in this regard as it doesn't impact me. If I was seeking a spouse I wouldn't use tinder.

Men in general are having an incredibly hard time finding a spouse because they are the least prepared generation to do so.

1. Men are increasingly having a hard time supporting themselves so they have to realize it would be more difficult in a traditional relationship. Why take a wife if you barely can support yourself? Why get married if you are living with your parents out of necessity?
2. Men are bombarded with images and videos of incredibly beautiful women and are taught that should be what they get. Why get a "nice" girl when you deserve a super model?
3. We live in a me, me, me generation. This makes any kind of partnership with another person a very difficult endeavor. You mean I have to listen to someone else?
4. Why marry at all when the women can leave you for any reason and take the kids and most of your stuff? Marriage greatly disadvantages the men in almost every situation. Men have to pay women for many years after the divorce, even when the woman could easily support herself.
5. Men are pacified through movies and video games. This can fill a void for a while, however when it fails to, they realize they are older and past their prime. If you don't marry young then it becomes much more difficult.
6. Men in general are having less sex than ever before. This is a major problem not just for the LDS demographic, but for society in general. Less sex means less marriage which means less traditional situations and so on.
7. Men's testosterone in general is plummeting sooner and faster than ever before. A man's T levels at 20 today is less than their fathers at 20, which is less than his fathers at 20. This is a global problem in all western societies. Less T levels means men are losing many of the things that helped shape society for 1000's of years.

To sum this up though. Many very good high-quality men are having a very hard time finding a spouse. Polygamy will only make this more difficult.

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 12:19 am

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 27th, 2023, 5:42 pm

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 24th, 2023, 8:40 pm

I thought it was interesting. I watched this one because you linked it here, but I didn’t realize at first that there is a part I, so I’ll have to watch that one too.

It seems that he’s saying that he is the davidic servant or one mighty and strong, or he will be if he accomplishes what needs to be done.

The part about naming your kid Jesus was kind of weird. (Did he name one of his kids Jesus?) Seems that it was sort of symbolic, but then he also seemed literal about it at times.

I watched part 1.
He brought up polygamy and says it might be good in some instances. (I guess like war that kills off lots of men, leaving single women or not enough good men around to marry the single ladies.) I dunno. I can take a sort of nuanced view of polygamy - I’m not one of those die hard pro or die hard con people. But if I had to choose, I’d definitely be con. Since I can have a nuanced view, I suppose he could be correct. But I think he is absolutely playing with fire if he’s thinking it would be good for him to take on additional wives. He clearly thinks he can handle it. And he thinks he’s sinless, so he’s obviously a “good” man. So he can rescue those damsels in distress if need be and give them a wonderful life.
I just don’t see how it’s much better than being a single mom who used a sperm donor to conceive. Maybe it’s slightly better if the kids get to know their father then it would be for a sperm donor, and if they know their half siblings. Maybe for the women it’s slightly better if they get some financial support from him.
But the first wife. If he adds 1 more wife, any one-on-one time she had with him will now be cut in half. If he wants to do this fairly. That’s a raw deal.
Obviously I don’t want to derail this into a polygamy debate, so feel free to copy this to a new post somewhere if you want to debate it with me.

Your post caused me to recall a thought about this.

77% of the current U.S. population are adults which equates to about 240 million people.

Today.... right now.... some 46% of adults are single. If a million men that are currently married, suddenly made the decision to take another wife, AND ... found women that desired it, this would be no injustice at all to the tens of millions of men that are not seeking marriage. The trend today is that single men are seeking sex without marriage.

Times have changed dramatically and the argument that single men won't find mates due to polygamy is now invalid.

Hence, Rob's ideas on polygamy are not unreasonable at all.

If we take this to a spiritual level and grasp at a few straws'; Consider a million spiritual, decent, hard working and moral men taking another wife , that are , of course willing. Would there be a beneficial result in this world?

I'm not pro-polygamy, but this is a legit argument.
My feeling has always been I would live it if commanded, but it would have to be direct from heavenly messenger, received by both my wife and myself preferably in a shared experience. Definitely not something I am hoping for.

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 12:19 am

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 27th, 2023, 5:42 pm

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 24th, 2023, 8:40 pm

I thought it was interesting. I watched this one because you linked it here, but I didn’t realize at first that there is a part I, so I’ll have to watch that one too.

It seems that he’s saying that he is the davidic servant or one mighty and strong, or he will be if he accomplishes what needs to be done.

The part about naming your kid Jesus was kind of weird. (Did he name one of his kids Jesus?) Seems that it was sort of symbolic, but then he also seemed literal about it at times.

I watched part 1.
He brought up polygamy and says it might be good in some instances. (I guess like war that kills off lots of men, leaving single women or not enough good men around to marry the single ladies.) I dunno. I can take a sort of nuanced view of polygamy - I’m not one of those die hard pro or die hard con people. But if I had to choose, I’d definitely be con. Since I can have a nuanced view, I suppose he could be correct. But I think he is absolutely playing with fire if he’s thinking it would be good for him to take on additional wives. He clearly thinks he can handle it. And he thinks he’s sinless, so he’s obviously a “good” man. So he can rescue those damsels in distress if need be and give them a wonderful life.
I just don’t see how it’s much better than being a single mom who used a sperm donor to conceive. Maybe it’s slightly better if the kids get to know their father then it would be for a sperm donor, and if they know their half siblings. Maybe for the women it’s slightly better if they get some financial support from him.
But the first wife. If he adds 1 more wife, any one-on-one time she had with him will now be cut in half. If he wants to do this fairly. That’s a raw deal.
Obviously I don’t want to derail this into a polygamy debate, so feel free to copy this to a new post somewhere if you want to debate it with me.

Your post caused me to recall a thought about this.

77% of the current U.S. population are adults which equates to about 240 million people.

Today.... right now.... some 46% of adults are single. If a million men that are currently married, suddenly made the decision to take another wife, AND ... found women that desired it, this would be no injustice at all to the tens of millions of men that are not seeking marriage. The trend today is that single men are seeking sex without marriage.

Times have changed dramatically and the argument that single men won't find mates due to polygamy is now invalid.

Hence, Rob's ideas on polygamy are not unreasonable at all.

If we take this to a spiritual level and grasp at a few straws'; Consider a million spiritual, decent, hard working and moral men taking another wife , that are , of course willing. Would there be a beneficial result in this world?

I agree that it’s a huge problem that men seek sex without marriage and women give it to them. It has caused so many problems in our society. But you can’t say that the problem of single men not finding mates is invalid. You can observe it in the FLDS!
What happens is the richest men get all the women for wives, leaving none for the regular guys!
Anyway, I hadn’t brought up the problem of single men. I had brought up the problem of polygamist women basically being single mothers, only a slightly better situation than using a sperm donor. In some situations it could be worse than if she had just used a sperm donor (abuse, unrighteous dominion).

Telavian wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 6:56 am

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 12:19 am Times have changed dramatically and the argument that single men won't find mates due to polygamy is now invalid.

Hence, Rob's ideas on polygamy are not unreasonable at all.

If we take this to a spiritual level and grasp at a few straws'; Consider a million spiritual, decent, hard working and moral men taking another wife , that are , of course willing. Would there be a beneficial result in this world?

This completely misses the actual issue and greatly simplifies an incredibly complicated problem. Of course, if a few people took an additional spouse, it wouldn't affect anything overall. However, taking millions of good people off the dating market certainly would.

Certainly some men are seeking sex without marriage. However we are not talking about "some men" now are we? We are talking about good men and good women who are not seeking sex without marriage. Therefore your logic doesn't make any sense in this context. Who cares what the tinder culture wants in this regard as it doesn't impact me. If I was seeking a spouse I wouldn't use tinder.

Men in general are having an incredibly hard time finding a spouse because they are the least prepared generation to do so.

1. Men are increasingly having a hard time supporting themselves so they have to realize it would be more difficult in a traditional relationship. Why take a wife if you barely can support yourself? Why get married if you are living with your parents out of necessity?
2. Men are bombarded with images and videos of incredibly beautiful women and are taught that should be what they get. Why get a "nice" girl when you deserve a super model?
3. We live in a me, me, me generation. This makes any kind of partnership with another person a very difficult endeavor. You mean I have to listen to someone else?
4. Why marry at all when the women can leave you for any reason and take the kids and most of your stuff? Marriage greatly disadvantages the men in almost every situation. Men have to pay women for many years after the divorce, even when the woman could easily support herself.
5. Men are pacified through movies and video games. This can fill a void for a while, however when it fails to, they realize they are older and past their prime. If you don't marry young then it becomes much more difficult.
6. Men in general are having less sex than ever before. This is a major problem not just for the LDS demographic, but for society in general. Less sex means less marriage which means less traditional situations and so on.
7. Men's testosterone in general is plummeting sooner and faster than ever before. A man's T levels at 20 today is less than their fathers at 20, which is less than his fathers at 20. This is a global problem in all western societies. Less T levels means men are losing many of the things that helped shape society for 1000's of years.

To sum this up though. Many very good high-quality men are having a very hard time finding a spouse. Polygamy will only make this more difficult.

I agree with everything except number 4. Yes divorce might screw men over, but it also screws women over. It’s just an overall terrible thing that breaks up families and harms them immensely. Men are supposed to provide for their children, are they not? In a divorce he now has to pay for two households if he’s going to do his duty of providing for his children. (Incidentally men have to do this if they have more than one wife too, unless he has a huge house that they all live together in. But often each wife has her own house to live in separately.) So yeah, that’s going to be a hardship on a man unless he’s wealthy! But it’s also no smooth ride for the woman! And I know of some raw deals that women have gotten in the divorce as well. It’s not just men that get raw deals. I know one woman who somehow never gets to see her children now. I don’t know how that happened. But I can tell you she’s a very loving mother and a good person.
I know another woman who I think they weren’t actually married, but were engaged, and had a couple of pregnancy losses and then finally one live birth. Then her fiancé left her for a co-worker of his. Because his fiancé has some blindness/vision issues, he used that against her in court to try to get full custody of the child. And tried to say that she can’t work to provide for their child, so she should not have custody of him, etc. I guess that wasn’t even technically a divorce, but it seems like one due to a child and a house they bought together. All that to say that divorce just makes both people poorer and hurts children, usually, and should only be used in the most dire circumstances.

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 8:25 am I agree with everything except number 4. Yes divorce might screw men over, but it also screws women over. It’s just an overall terrible thing that breaks up families and harms them immensely. Men are supposed to provide for their children, are they not? In a divorce he now has to pay for two households if he’s going to do his duty of providing for his children. (Incidentally men have to do this if they have more than one wife too, unless he has a huge house that they all live together in. But often each wife has her own house to live in separately.) So yeah, that’s going to be a hardship on a man unless he’s wealthy! But it’s also no smooth ride for the woman! And I know of some raw deals that women have gotten in the divorce as well. It’s not just men that get raw deals. I know one woman who somehow never gets to see her children now. I don’t know how that happened. But I can tell you she’s a very loving mother and a good person.
I know another woman who I think they weren’t actually married, but were engaged, and had a couple of pregnancy losses and then finally one live birth. Then her fiancé left her for a co-worker of his. Because his fiancé has some blindness/vision issues, he used that against her in court to try to get full custody of the child. And tried I say that she can’t work to provide for their child, so she should not have custody of him, etc. I guess that wasn’t even technically a divorce, but it seems like one due to a child and a house they bought together. All that to say that divorce just makes both people poorer and hurts children, usually, and should only be used in the most dire circumstances.

Certainly divorce is horrendous, and I don't wish it on anyone. For #4 I was thinking of alimony which goes to the former spouse. I can understand its intended purpose and in some cases it is absolutely beneficial. However in other cases it is used as a crutch. I am not sure what the correct answer is.

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 8:07 am

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 12:19 am

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 27th, 2023, 5:42 pm

I watched part 1.
He brought up polygamy and says it might be good in some instances. (I guess like war that kills off lots of men, leaving single women or not enough good men around to marry the single ladies.) I dunno. I can take a sort of nuanced view of polygamy - I’m not one of those die hard pro or die hard con people. But if I had to choose, I’d definitely be con. Since I can have a nuanced view, I suppose he could be correct. But I think he is absolutely playing with fire if he’s thinking it would be good for him to take on additional wives. He clearly thinks he can handle it. And he thinks he’s sinless, so he’s obviously a “good” man. So he can rescue those damsels in distress if need be and give them a wonderful life.
I just don’t see how it’s much better than being a single mom who used a sperm donor to conceive. Maybe it’s slightly better if the kids get to know their father then it would be for a sperm donor, and if they know their half siblings. Maybe for the women it’s slightly better if they get some financial support from him.
But the first wife. If he adds 1 more wife, any one-on-one time she had with him will now be cut in half. If he wants to do this fairly. That’s a raw deal.
Obviously I don’t want to derail this into a polygamy debate, so feel free to copy this to a new post somewhere if you want to debate it with me.

Your post caused me to recall a thought about this.

77% of the current U.S. population are adults which equates to about 240 million people.

Today.... right now.... some 46% of adults are single. If a million men that are currently married, suddenly made the decision to take another wife, AND ... found women that desired it, this would be no injustice at all to the tens of millions of men that are not seeking marriage. The trend today is that single men are seeking sex without marriage.

Times have changed dramatically and the argument that single men won't find mates due to polygamy is now invalid.

Hence, Rob's ideas on polygamy are not unreasonable at all.

If we take this to a spiritual level and grasp at a few straws'; Consider a million spiritual, decent, hard working and moral men taking another wife , that are , of course willing. Would there be a beneficial result in this world?

I agree that it’s a huge problem that men seek sex without marriage and women give it to them. It has caused so many problems in our society. But you can’t say that the problem of single men not finding mates is invalid. You can observe it in the FLDS!
What happens is the richest men get all the women for wives, leaving none for the regular guys!
Anyway, I hadn’t brought up the problem of single men. I had brought up the problem of polygamist women basically being single mothers, only a slightly better situation than using a sperm donor. In some situations it could be worse than if she had just used a sperm donor (abuse, unrighteous dominion).

in FLDS groups, they choose within their groups and every man is wanting to marry. 100% of them.
Small group, all being commanded to get married and not enough women due to polygamy.

in the rest of the 8 billion populace, this problem doesn't exist.

Another point as, you've brought up, is single women with children, If I were to run the numbers on that, we'd see that single mothers are not the desirable ones for a large group of men. Again, the natural solution could be polygamy.

Everyone is seeing this. Many many women seeking good men and not finding them or not being found desirable.

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 11:58 am

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 8:07 am

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 12:19 am

Your post caused me to recall a thought about this.

77% of the current U.S. population are adults which equates to about 240 million people.

Today.... right now.... some 46% of adults are single. If a million men that are currently married, suddenly made the decision to take another wife, AND ... found women that desired it, this would be no injustice at all to the tens of millions of men that are not seeking marriage. The trend today is that single men are seeking sex without marriage.

Times have changed dramatically and the argument that single men won't find mates due to polygamy is now invalid.

Hence, Rob's ideas on polygamy are not unreasonable at all.

If we take this to a spiritual level and grasp at a few straws'; Consider a million spiritual, decent, hard working and moral men taking another wife , that are , of course willing. Would there be a beneficial result in this world?

I agree that it’s a huge problem that men seek sex without marriage and women give it to them. It has caused so many problems in our society. But you can’t say that the problem of single men not finding mates is invalid. You can observe it in the FLDS!
What happens is the richest men get all the women for wives, leaving none for the regular guys!
Anyway, I hadn’t brought up the problem of single men. I had brought up the problem of polygamist women basically being single mothers, only a slightly better situation than using a sperm donor. In some situations it could be worse than if she had just used a sperm donor (abuse, unrighteous dominion).

in FLDS groups, they choose within their groups and every man is wanting to marry. 100% of them.
Small group, all being commanded to get married and not enough women due to polygamy.

in the rest of the 8 billion populace, this problem doesn't exist.

Another point as, you've brought up, is single women with children, If I were to run the numbers on that, we'd see that single mothers are not the desirable ones for a large group of men. Again, the natural solution could be polygamy.

Everyone is seeing this. Many many women seeking good men and not finding them or not being found desirable.

You think the problem doesn’t exist in a population of 8 billion. Why? Aren’t we supposed to still be members of Christ’s church? So what does the rest of the world have to do with it?

The point I was making with single women is that, for all purposes, they’re still essentially single women. No time with the husband. Raising children by themselves. Only financially supported if he’s mega wealthy.

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 12:44 pm You think the problem doesn’t exist in a population of 8 billion. Why? Aren’t we supposed to still be members of Christ’s church? So what does the rest of the world have to do with it?

Certain people will go out of their way to make arguments for polygamy. Heaven has to have polygamy otherwise it is not heaven.

I certainly wish there is more to do in heaven than figure out which wife's turn it is to spend the day with me.

Telavian wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 1:17 pm

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 12:44 pm You think the problem doesn’t exist in a population of 8 billion. Why? Aren’t we supposed to still be members of Christ’s church? So what does the rest of the world have to do with it?

Certain people will go out of their way to make arguments for polygamy. Heaven has to have polygamy otherwise it is not heaven.

I certainly wish there is more to do in heaven than figure out which wife's turn it is to spend the day with me.

Lol that gave me a chuckle.

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 12:44 pm

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 11:58 am

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 8:07 am

I agree that it’s a huge problem that men seek sex without marriage and women give it to them. It has caused so many problems in our society. But you can’t say that the problem of single men not finding mates is invalid. You can observe it in the FLDS!
What happens is the richest men get all the women for wives, leaving none for the regular guys!
Anyway, I hadn’t brought up the problem of single men. I had brought up the problem of polygamist women basically being single mothers, only a slightly better situation than using a sperm donor. In some situations it could be worse than if she had just used a sperm donor (abuse, unrighteous dominion).

in FLDS groups, they choose within their groups and every man is wanting to marry. 100% of them.
Small group, all being commanded to get married and not enough women due to polygamy.

in the rest of the 8 billion populace, this problem doesn't exist.

Another point as, you've brought up, is single women with children, If I were to run the numbers on that, we'd see that single mothers are not the desirable ones for a large group of men. Again, the natural solution could be polygamy.

Everyone is seeing this. Many many women seeking good men and not finding them or not being found desirable.

You think the problem doesn’t exist in a population of 8 billion. Why? Aren’t we supposed to still be members of Christ’s church? So what does the rest of the world have to do with it?

The point I was making with single women is that, for all purposes, they’re still essentially single women. No time with the husband. Raising children by themselves. Only financially supported if he’s mega wealthy.

I'm likely not explaining this well.

I mean that in the current population on earth, there are vast numbers of men that have no desire to marry. Hence, an imbalance would not be caused by some men having two wives. I'm being very general in saying this and not limiting it to any religion.

In a fundamentalist group, there are sometimes only 200- 5000 members and every man wants to marry , so... there is always an imbalance created when the few take more wives and leave the others with none. These groups almost always marry from within their congregation with a few getting wives from associated groups,.

I hope that makes sense.

Telavian wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 1:17 pm

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 12:44 pm You think the problem doesn’t exist in a population of 8 billion. Why? Aren’t we supposed to still be members of Christ’s church? So what does the rest of the world have to do with it?

Certain people will go out of their way to make arguments for polygamy. Heaven has to have polygamy otherwise it is not heaven.

I certainly wish there is more to do in heaven than figure out which wife's turn it is to spend the day with me.

I am not in your group of "certain people" although it may appear to be so. I have never made an argument "for" polygamy and yes, it could seem that I am contradicting myself, yet...I am not.

I use common sense ideas to demonstrate that polygamy is not the evil, it is the men that abuse it. I do argue for the right that polygamists have to engage in it as long as all parties are consensual. As I've said, I have known and worked with polygamists for over 40 yrs. I am not a polygamist myself, nor am I member of any polygamist churches.

Many here go out their way to vilify it and at times, I interject with corrections to illogical arguments.

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 5:12 pm

Wolfwoman wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 12:44 pm

FrankOne wrote: ↑October 28th, 2023, 11:58 am

in FLDS groups, they choose within their groups and every man is wanting to marry. 100% of them.
Small group, all being commanded to get married and not enough women due to polygamy.

in the rest of the 8 billion populace, this problem doesn't exist.

Another point as, you've brought up, is single women with children, If I were to run the numbers on that, we'd see that single mothers are not the desirable ones for a large group of men. Again, the natural solution could be polygamy.

Everyone is seeing this. Many many women seeking good men and not finding them or not being found desirable.

You think the problem doesn’t exist in a population of 8 billion. Why? Aren’t we supposed to still be members of Christ’s church? So what does the rest of the world have to do with it?

The point I was making with single women is that, for all purposes, they’re still essentially single women. No time with the husband. Raising children by themselves. Only financially supported if he’s mega wealthy.

I'm likely not explaining this well.

I mean that in the current population on earth, there are vast numbers of men that have no desire to marry. Hence, an imbalance would not be caused by some men having two wives. I'm being very general in saying this and not limiting it to any religion.

In a fundamentalist group, there are sometimes only 200- 5000 members and every man wants to marry , so... there is always an imbalance created when the few take more wives and leave the others with none. These groups almost always marry from within their congregation with a few getting wives from associated groups,.

I hope that makes sense.

It makes sense. I was thinking of the context of D&C 132 and it being something sanctioned by God, sealings, etc. Not a worldly polygamy, for lack of a better term.