I'm in agreement with the consequences imposed on Jeffs and the FLDS church. It
should be noted however, that the doctrine of plural marriage being a necessity
in receiving exaltation, is TRUE. The LDS Church today won't admit it, because
they are aligning themselves with the world. After the manefesto, revelation to
the "prophets" ceased. In fact, Joseph F. Smith, as president of the
Church admitted that he had never received a revelation, nor had he seen the
Savior. He later sent out a letter to the entire membership of the Church,
stating that the lay members of the Church should no longer look to him or the
Presidency for spiritual guidance; that they should seek it on their own. The
Lord stated to Wilford Woodruff that the people's rejection of this law was the
reason He no longer accepted them.If you question the importance of
this doctrine and try to dismiss it and say that it isn't needed in our time,
consider the history of John Taylor. He was literally forced to live in hiding
throughout his entire presidency because of his refusal to do away with this
doctrine. He was wiling to die first.
Re: Keith43 | 12:42 p.m. Oct. 31, 2011 "Joseph F. Smith, as president
of the Church admitted that he had never received a revelation, nor had he seen
the Savior"Since the days of the Savior there have always been
apostates. For those who seek however the fruits of Joseph Smith's ministry are
evidenced by an ever expanding world wide LDS membership today. Like beacons on
a hill the light from their temples around the world can't be hid.
Keith43:What in the wide, wide world of sports are you talking
about? First, as a member of the LDS Church, I cannot begin to
guess which scripture or history book you are basing your facts in the first
paragraph of your comment. I have never heard such outlandish claims!Second, as as American, I believe the Frederick Merrill Jessop is entitled to
due process and MUST be considered innocent until proven guilty by the
courts.If you are simply trying to be sarcastic or clever in your
comment, that was not very well reflected.
Keith43,D&C 132 states that one must be married by proper
authority (at least once) to potentially receive exaltation. The later half of
the section covers how to accomplish the plural aspect of marriage. But nowhere
does it state one must have more than one wife. verse 7 is the key to this. The idea everyone must have multiple wives for exaltation simply does
not pass the common sense test. There would never be enough women to go around.
Consider that many LDS men of that era even had more than two wives, thus making
less available for the other men? If this were, as you allege, a
requirement, why were all the men of that era with one wife unconcerned about
the subject? What is required for exaltation is one wife married by
authority of God. You allege Joseph F Smith claimed no revelation?
What about D&C 138?
@Keith43Lying and waiting to deceive?
'The idea everyone must have multiple wives for exaltation simply does not pass
the common sense test.' - LDSareChristian | 1:54 p.m. Oct. 31, 2011
This also punches holes in Utah's 'Amendment 3' passed in 2004 which LIMITS
marriage to 'one man and one woman', which before 2004 was... two
people. A common tactic which people against gay marriage use... but now is debated to have muiltiple wives to recive 'exaltation?' Double. Standard. I wonder if this post will be allowed.
Since I have not: 1) Insulted anyone 2) Brought up anyone's
faith 3) Point out only, the flaws in the logic. We'll see.
Re: Pagan | 4:18 p.m. Oct. 31, 2011 LDS men can still currently
marry more than one woman for eternity. The stipulation is that their wife or
wives have passed away before they remarry.
@Keith43Please site your sources. I'm interested in seeing support
for your claims, specifically relating to the following:- Doctrine
that clearly states plural marriage is a requirement for exaltation.-
Specific instances where the LDS Church is aligning itself with "the
world". - Letter by Joseph F Smith telling members of the LDS Church
to no longer look to him and the First Presidency for spiritual guidance.-
The Lord's declaration to Wilford Woodruff that He rejected (no longer accepted)
So, I guess I can't bring up Amendment 3? Passed in Utah in 2004 it changed
marriage in Utah from 'two people' to 'one man and one woman'... to
contradict the claims that support polygamy?? At what point does
'moderation' start to have a severe disconnect from reality?
A deceased woman can be sealed to multiple husbands? Are people going to claim
the LDS practice polyandry as well?Obviously the question is about
practicing polygamy in this life. I think an honest reading of Jacob 3 will
reveal that the Lord most forcefully condemns polygamy when it is not
authorized.Joseph F. Smith clearly denounced all new polygamy after
1906. The Church began to excommunicated for polygamy in 1910, and has treated
those who claim to be practicing polygamy as adulterers since about 1920.