DiscussMormonism.com

Polygamy Porter wrote:

Jersey Girl wrote:Inconceivable......

You get nothing but gold stars from me for your post!!! It drives me insane (so that's what's doing it?) whenever I hear/read LDS use the Old Testament as a reference for plural marriage.

Thank you!

Jersey Girl

Yes, funny how Mormons will defend the "most correct book" with the one that was not "completely translated correctly"... I call it the Bible card, which they love to pull.

Cafeteria proof texting.

Jersey Girl wrote:

Polygamy Porter wrote:

Jersey Girl wrote:Inconceivable......

You get nothing but gold stars from me for your post!!! It drives me insane (so that's what's doing it?) whenever I hear/read LDS use the Old Testament as a reference for plural marriage.

Thank you!

Jersey Girl

Yes, funny how Mormons will defend the "most correct book" with the one that was not "completely translated correctly"... I call it the Bible card, which they love to pull.

Cafeteria proof texting.

Pass the seer stone and hat please... I need a translation on that one.

Polygamy Porter wrote:

Jersey Girl wrote:

Polygamy Porter wrote:

Jersey Girl wrote:Inconceivable......

You get nothing but gold stars from me for your post!!! It drives me insane (so that's what's doing it?) whenever I hear/read LDS use the Old Testament as a reference for plural marriage.

Thank you!

Jersey Girl

Yes, funny how Mormons will defend the "most correct book" with the one that was not "completely translated correctly"... I call it the Bible card, which they love to pull.

Cafeteria proof texting.

Pass the seer stone and hat please... I need a translation on that one.

Sorry, just baloney and cheese spread again. Trust me it's the only food group - take it or leave it.

Polygamy Porter wrote:Pass the seer stone and hat please... I need a translation on that one.

If that doesn't work try prayer.

liz3564 wrote:Exactly! Why were Jacob's words supposedly "left open to interpretation"? Jacob's words, as part of the Book of Mormon, should have been translated correctly from the get-go.

This is not a case where, as with the Old Testament, things were translated and re-translated, etc. This is the Book of Mormon we're talking about.

If Jacob meant that there were exceptions, why didn't he make that more clear?

I would find it more odd if Jacob did include more stories on exceptions. Jacob is Lehi's son. Lehi lived in a polygamous culture. At some point (not included in the Book of Mormon) Lehi received a commandment from God that all the people in this land were to have one wife. These people were only 2 generations out of a polygamous culture and their history was full of it. They were also following the Law of Moses meaning it was being read once a year to them. The Law of Moses has quite a few references to polygamy and how it is to work. Jacob didn't need to explain to them that polygamy was sometimes okay. They knew that. He was telling them that THEY were committing whoredoms and breaking the Law of God that had been revealed to them. Taking plural wives for them would be akin to insisting in the LDS Church today that the Word of Wisdom is still just a recommendation or that we should all move to Missouri or Utah right now or that we should still practice polygamy.

Nehor wrote:I would find it more odd if Jacob did include more stories on exceptions. Jacob is Lehi's son. Lehi lived in a polygamous culture. At some point (not included in the Book of Mormon) Lehi received a commandment from God that all the people in this land were to have one wife. These people were only 2 generations out of a polygamous culture and their history was full of it. They were also following the Law of Moses meaning it was being read once a year to them. The Law of Moses has quite a few references to polygamy and how it is to work. Jacob didn't need to explain to them that polygamy was sometimes okay. They knew that. He was telling them that THEY were committing whoredoms and breaking the Law of God that had been revealed to them. Taking plural wives for them would be akin to insisting in the LDS Church today that the Word of Wisdom is still just a recommendation or that we should all move to Missouri or Utah right now or that we should still practice polygamy.

You're jumping to a lot of conclusions based on information that is not present in the actual writings of the Book of Mormon.

Let's back up a bit.

Yes, Lehi lived in a polygamous culture. But, according to the Book of Mormon, Lehi was commanded to take his family and go into the wilderness due to the wickedness of the people, the culture as a whole. They formed a new civilization...a new culture. Would it not make more sense that Jacob, as Lehi's son, was establishing the new rules of the game?

liz3564 wrote:

Nehor wrote:I would find it more odd if Jacob did include more stories on exceptions. Jacob is Lehi's son. Lehi lived in a polygamous culture. At some point (not included in the Book of Mormon) Lehi received a commandment from God that all the people in this land were to have one wife. These people were only 2 generations out of a polygamous culture and their history was full of it. They were also following the Law of Moses meaning it was being read once a year to them. The Law of Moses has quite a few references to polygamy and how it is to work. Jacob didn't need to explain to them that polygamy was sometimes okay. They knew that. He was telling them that THEY were committing whoredoms and breaking the Law of God that had been revealed to them. Taking plural wives for them would be akin to insisting in the LDS Church today that the Word of Wisdom is still just a recommendation or that we should all move to Missouri or Utah right now or that we should still practice polygamy.

You're jumping to a lot of conclusions based on information that is not present in the actual writings of the Book of Mormon.

Let's back up a bit.

Yes, Lehi lived in a polygamous culture. But, according to the Book of Mormon, Lehi was commanded to take his family and go into the wilderness due to the wickedness of the people, the culture as a whole. They formed a new civilization...a new culture. Would it not make more sense that Jacob, as Lehi's son, was establishing the new rules of the game?

Nehor has not respponced to the comparison of Jacob 2 and D&C 132 which shows a clear contradiction so what is the point I wonder.

I also am curious as to Dr Peterson's comments I aksed on the idea that celestial marriage does in fact mean plural marriage.

Maybe he has departed this board for good.

Jason Bourne wrote:I also am curious as to Dr Peterson's comments I aksed on the idea that celestial marriage does in fact mean plural marriage.

Maybe he has departed this board for good.

I doubt it. I too, would like to hear a response to that question.

Jason wrote:Maybe he has departed this board for good.

No, Dr. Peterson hasn't left the board for good, as far as I'm aware.

He did mention that he would be traveling until the end of next week.

I'll PM him when he returns, and have him take a look here. I would also like to hear his opinion on this.

liz3564 wrote:You're jumping to a lot of conclusions based on information that is not present in the actual writings of the Book of Mormon.

Let's back up a bit.

Yes, Lehi lived in a polygamous culture. But, according to the Book of Mormon, Lehi was commanded to take his family and go into the wilderness due to the wickedness of the people, the culture as a whole. They formed a new civilization...a new culture. Would it not make more sense that Jacob, as Lehi's son, was establishing the new rules of the game?

The thing is most of the rules were not new. The Law of Moses was still their Constitution. This was a change that some people didn't like so he was rebuking them. I'd have been careful if giving that speech too. Any more leniency than that God can command it in his sermon might have been stretched the other way to become an endorsement.