Former FLDS bishop goes on trial in Texas

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • John Pack Lambert of Michigan Ypsilanti, MI
    Jan. 16, 2012 11:43 p.m.

    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.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Nov. 2, 2011 1:15 a.m.

    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?

  • MapleDon Springville, UT
    Nov. 1, 2011 5:12 p.m.


    Please 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) the saints.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Nov. 1, 2011 12:51 p.m.

    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.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 31, 2011 4:18 p.m.

    '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.

  • morpunkt Glendora, CA
    Oct. 31, 2011 2:52 p.m.

    Lying and waiting to deceive?

  • LDSareChristian Anchorage, AK
    Oct. 31, 2011 1:54 p.m.


    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?

  • Northern Lights Louisville, KY
    Oct. 31, 2011 1:54 p.m.


    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.

  • Rifleman Salt Lake City, Utah
    Oct. 31, 2011 1:30 p.m.

    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 Springville, UT
    Oct. 31, 2011 12:42 p.m.

    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.