Official: LDS Inc admits to post manifesto polygamy.

[_Boaz & Lidia]

While educating the unwitting boys and girls on the Mormon.com chat, I found this new gem:
Polygamy (Plural Marriage)

Click the "Additional Information" tab...

The Bible indicates that Abraham, Jacob, and others of the Lord’s servants had multiple wives (see Genesis 16:1–3; 29:23–30; 30:4, 9; Judges 8:30; 1 Samuel 1:1–2). Joseph Smith asked God why He had permitted this practice and was told that God had commanded it for specific purposes. One reason given by the Lord for plural marriage is mentioned in the Book of Mormon: “If I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall [have only one wife]” (Jacob 2:30; see also v. 27).

But NO mention of NEW TESTAMENT prophets or Jesus practicing or commanding it... and NONE of these supposed old testament prophets said that EVERYONE had to do it...

After God revealed the doctrine of plural marriage to Joseph Smith in 1831 and commanded him to live it, the Prophet, over a period of years, cautiously taught the doctrine to some close associates. Eventually, he and a small number of Church leaders entered into plural marriages in the early years of the Church. Those who practiced plural marriage at that time, both male and female, experienced a significant trial of their faith. The practice was so foreign to them that they needed and received personal inspiration from God to help them obey the commandment.

Huh 1831?? Wow, that early?, so why did they produce the 1835 edition of the D&C which had section 101 verse 4 which denied they practiced polygamy????? NICE TRY LDS LIARS!

When the Saints moved west under the direction of Brigham Young, more Latter-day Saints entered into plural marriages.

No sh*t Sherlock.

Influenced by rumors and exaggerated reports, the United States Congress, beginning in 1862, enacted a series of laws against polygamy that became increasingly harsh. By the 1880s many Latter-day Saint men were imprisoned or went into hiding.

Oh really? Exaggerated reports like the MMM? Brigham's theocracy which he wanted to eventually secede from the Union??? Can you believe it? Such petty concerns!

And it sounds so familiar... can't put my finger on it... oh yeah! The ummm... FLDS think the same thing!

In 1889 in the face of increasing hardships and the threat of government confiscation of Church property, including temples, Wilford Woodruff, President of the Church at the time, prayed for guidance. He was inspired to issue a document that officially ended the sanction of plural marriage by the Church. The document, called the Manifesto, was accepted by Church members in a general conference held in October 1890 and is published in the Doctrine and Covenants as Official Declaration 1 (see also “Excerpts from Three Addresses by President Wilford Woodruff Regarding the Manifesto” following Official Declaration 1).

Admission coming UP!! Quinn is vindicated!!

Just as the practice of plural marriage among the Latter-day Saints began gradually, the ending of the practice after the Manifesto was also gradual. Some plural marriages were performed after the Manifesto, particularly in Mexico and Canada. In 1904, President Joseph F. Smith called for a vote from the Church membership that all post-Manifesto plural marriages be prohibited worldwide.

Ehhhh heeeemmmmm? And Utah too you friggin LIARS!

Someone call Quinn, tell him they will un-excommunicate him and let him room with Bushman.

More recently, President Gordon B. Hinckley has reiterated that plural marriage is “against the law of God. Even in countries where civil or religious law allows [the practice of a man having more than one wife], the Church teaches that marriage must be monogamous and does not accept into its membership those practicing plural marriage” (“What Are People Asking about Us?” Ensign, Nov. 1998, 72).

Even though their laws of the land allow it? huh. Besides he is worm food now, and I am not sure he taught that...

Groups who teach polygamy today are not part of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Yeah, we know that dip wad. They are called The Fundamental Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.


So there you have it folks! We forced their hand!

[_Gazelam]

But NO mention of NEW TESTAMENT prophets or Jesus practicing or commanding it... and NONE of these supposed old testament prophets said that EVERYONE had to do it...

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 & 27-28.

In 1 Corinthians 7, the Apostle Paul differentiates when he is making his own "recommendation" (in verses 6, 12, and 25) and when he is expressing the "commandment of the Lord" (verses 10-11). Indeed, in verses 10-11, Paul clarifies that the instruction in those two verses is the "commandment of the Lord". (It should therefore also be noted that the other areas in which he clarifies as being only his "recommendation" can NOT be used to otherwise and incorrectly assert that God Himself is creating some sin or doctrine. After all, Paul's ultimate "recommendation" therein is celibacy!)

With that realized, it is clear for readers of the Bible that Paul makes it emphatically clear that verses 10-11 are different. Namely, verses 10-11, in the exact way in which thay are actually written, are the "commandment of God".

"And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife." 1 Corinthians 7:10-11.

Paul further specifies that that above "commandment of the Lord" was only addressed to believers-married-to-believers. In the next verses (i.e, 12-16), he clarifies that he is subsequently addressing believers-married-to-unbelievers, and that that subsequent instuction is not the Lord's words, but his own again.

Verses 10-11 show that, if a believer WIFE leaves her believer HUSBAND, the


- believer WIFE is commanded of God to either:
remain unmarried, or
be reconciled back to her husband


- believer HUSBAND is commanded of God to:
not put away any wife, and to
let any departed wife return back to him

The key point is that the HUSBAND is NOT given the same commandments of instruction. Only the WIFE is commanded to remain unmarried, but the HUSBAND is not given that commandment. He is commanded of God to let her be married to him, either way!

Accordingly, the HUSBAND is of course, still free to marry another wife. That fact is further proved by the later verses of 27-28d.

"Art thou bound unto a wife?
seek not to be loosed.
Art thou loosed from a wife?
seek not a wife.
But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned;
and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned."
1 Corinthians 7:27-28d.

The Greek text of verse 27 is clearly only addressing married men --whether or not the wife has departed.

As such, the married man whose wife is still with him does not sin when he marries another wife (who is not another's wife). And likewise, the married man, whose wife has departed from him, he also does not sin when he marries another wife (who is not another's wife).

And herein comes the "commandment of the Lord", of polygamy, as in the following situation.

A believer WIFE departs from her believer HUSBAND. She is commanded of God to remain unmarried, per verses 10-11. Her HUSBAND, however, then subsequently marries another wife (who is not another man's wife). The HUSBAND and the new wife have not sinned, per verses 27-28. The departed WIFE then seeks to be reconciled back to her HUSBAND.

In that situation, verses 10-11 show the following instruction as the "commandment of the Lord". The HUSBAND is commanded of God to let the departed wife be reconciled back to him. AND.... he is commanded of God to not put away a wife, including the new wife.

As such, verses 10-11 show that it is an outright "commandment of the Lord" of polygamy for the family in that situation.

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 is indeed a Commandment of God --- in the New Testament --- that, when a previously-departed believer wife returns, her believer husband and his new (believer) wife (from verse 27c-28d) MUST let the previous wife be reconciled to her husband.



source: http://www.biblicalpolygamy.com/exegesi ... testament/

[_Gazelam]

:
More recently, President Gordon B. Hinckley has reiterated that plural marriage is “against the law of God. Even in countries where civil or religious law allows [the practice of a man having more than one wife], the Church teaches that marriage must be monogamous and does not accept into its membership those practicing plural marriage” (“What Are People Asking about Us?” Ensign, Nov. 1998, 72).

Porter said:
"Even though their laws of the land allow it? huh. Besides he is worm food now, and I am not sure he taught that..."



This was a Major issue at the time, even causeing Matthias Cowley to lose his Apostle position and his rights to the priesthood for over 25 years.

However it appears that Elder Cowley was unable to accept continueing revelation. Matthias F. Cowley resigned from the Quorum of the Twelve on October 28, 1905 because he "maintained that the Manifesto applied to the United States only. However, the attitude of the Church was that it applied to the entire world."

His priesthood was suspended May 11, 1911.

Happily, he received a restoration of blessings April 3, 1936 He died four years later June 16, 1940 in full fellowship with the Church at Salt Lake City, Utah.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

Thanks for the source.

[_Chap]

But NO mention of NEW TESTAMENT prophets or Jesus practicing or commanding it... and NONE of these supposed old testament prophets said that EVERYONE had to do it...

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 & 27-28.

In 1 Corinthians 7, the Apostle Paul differentiates when he is making his own "recommendation" (in verses 6, 12, and 25) and when he is expressing the "commandment of the Lord" (verses 10-11). Indeed, in verses 10-11, Paul clarifies that the instruction in those two verses is the "commandment of the Lord". (It should therefore also be noted that the other areas in which he clarifies as being only his "recommendation" can NOT be used to otherwise and incorrectly assert that God Himself is creating some sin or doctrine. After all, Paul's ultimate "recommendation" therein is celibacy!)

With that realized, it is clear for readers of the Bible that Paul makes it emphatically clear that verses 10-11 are different. Namely, verses 10-11, in the exact way in which thay are actually written, are the "commandment of God".

"And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife." 1 Corinthians 7:10-11.

Paul further specifies that that above "commandment of the Lord" was only addressed to believers-married-to-believers. In the next verses (I.e, 12-16), he clarifies that he is subsequently addressing believers-married-to-unbelievers, and that that subsequent instuction is not the Lord's words, but his own again.

Verses 10-11 show that, if a believer WIFE leaves her believer HUSBAND, the


- believer WIFE is commanded of God to either:
remain unmarried, or
be reconciled back to her husband


- believer HUSBAND is commanded of God to:
not put away any wife, and to
let any departed wife return back to him

The key point is that the HUSBAND is NOT given the same commandments of instruction. Only the WIFE is commanded to remain unmarried, but the HUSBAND is not given that commandment. He is commanded of God to let her be married to him, either way!

Accordingly, the HUSBAND is of course, still free to marry another wife. That fact is further proved by the later verses of 27-28d.

"Art thou bound unto a wife?
seek not to be loosed.
Art thou loosed from a wife?
seek not a wife.
But and if thou marry, thou hast not sinned;
and if a virgin marry, she hath not sinned."
1 Corinthians 7:27-28d.

The Greek text of verse 27 is clearly only addressing married men --whether or not the wife has departed.

As such, the married man whose wife is still with him does not sin when he marries another wife (who is not another's wife). And likewise, the married man, whose wife has departed from him, he also does not sin when he marries another wife (who is not another's wife).

And herein comes the "commandment of the Lord", of polygamy, as in the following situation.

A believer WIFE departs from her believer HUSBAND. She is commanded of God to remain unmarried, per verses 10-11. Her HUSBAND, however, then subsequently marries another wife (who is not another man's wife). The HUSBAND and the new wife have not sinned, per verses 27-28. The departed WIFE then seeks to be reconciled back to her HUSBAND.

In that situation, verses 10-11 show the following instruction as the "commandment of the Lord". The HUSBAND is commanded of God to let the departed wife be reconciled back to him. AND.... he is commanded of God to not put away a wife, including the new wife.

As such, verses 10-11 show that it is an outright "commandment of the Lord" of polygamy for the family in that situation.

1 Corinthians 7:10-11 is indeed a Commandment of God --- in the New Testament --- that, when a previously-departed believer wife returns, her believer husband and his new (believer) wife (from verse 27c-28d) MUST let the previous wife be reconciled to her husband.



source: http://www.biblicalpolygamy.com/exegesi ... testament/

A good example of what makes biblical exegesis so rewarding.

Now, just to do a reality check - what is the historical evidence that first-century Jews like Saul/Paul (or maybe just the subset of first-century Jews who were the first Christians) actually practiced polygamy? You see, if they did commonly do so, that could help show you are right. If they didn't, maybe your chain of reasoning has one or two weak links.

Of course if they didn't practice polygamy, then maybe they just didn't understand what God was commanding them to do through Saul/Paul. Did the Great Apostacy start that early, though?

[_bcspace]

The Bible indicates that Abraham, Jacob, and others of the Lord’s servants had multiple wives (see Genesis 16:1–3; 29:23–30; 30:4, 9; Judges 8:30; 1 Samuel 1:1–2). Joseph Smith asked God why He had permitted this practice and was told that God had commanded it for specific purposes. One reason given by the Lord for plural marriage is mentioned in the Book of Mormon: “If I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall [have only one wife]” (Jacob 2:30; see also v. 27).

But NO mention of NEW TESTAMENT prophets or Jesus practicing or commanding it... and NONE of these supposed old testament prophets said that EVERYONE had to do it...

In light of Jacob 2:30, why does there have to be authorized plural marriage in New Testament times at all?

So there you have it folks! We forced their hand!

How so?

A good example of what makes biblical exegesis so rewarding.

Yet to even attempt it is to violate 2 Peter 1:20-21. Better to have your interpretation fit all the verses on a subject rather than calling on context that has absolutely nothing to do with the verse in question (which has been my experience with "exegesisians").

[_Roger Morrison]

Thanks B&L, LDSism can exist only so long in denial. Truth does eventually prevail or we would still fear falling off Earth's edge. It's comforting to be aware of that fact. Knowing "the whole world" seen through primitive eyes is but a smidgin of Earth as seen from space beyond...

It should be comforting for Mormons to learn the truth about their persuaded religion. There is no edge to fall from. The edge of understanding is set by the unenquiring mind fettered by authoritarian potentates who rule by fiat and fear, as they pretend authority from a "God" that does not exist. The challenge to Mormons, and fundamentalists of all stripes: Find the "God" that does exist, know the truth, and be free! Warm regards, Roger