Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Re: Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

Post by _bcspace »

There is absolutely NO Evidence whatsoever, that the Phrase, 'raise up seed unto me', in Jacob 2:30, refers to that the Lord God will command His People to enter into the Practice of Polygamy.


Not experienced with the english language or computer programming? What does the for...otherwise in Jacob 2:30 refer to? The subject of the previous verses which is plural marriage.

The Lord God intends to command His People to marry Monogamously, in order to be able to raise up a righteous seed unto Him. This is really meaning raising up righteous children, righteous sons and daughters, unto the Lord God.


It's now obvious that raising up a righteous seed is to be done through plural marriage in this verse.
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
_Ray A

Re: Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

Post by _Ray A »

William Schryver wrote:While agreeing with you that there is no "proof" of Rigdon introducing a "System of Wifery" in Antrim, PA in 1846, I also see no appreciable difference between the allegations against Sidney Rigdon in this case and the hostile witnesses who would have us believe Joseph Smith consummated his sealings to already-married women.

Do you? If so, in what respect?


I was about to reply to this, but I think Kevin just did.
_Inconceivable
_Emeritus
Posts: 3405
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 5:44 am

Re: Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

Post by _Inconceivable »

bcspace wrote:And I think you're intentionally being sexually obsessive.


It's a man's church. Not a woman's.

This man's church attempted to hold women as possessions - Just as Jacob explained was abominable to his God - always. Only a Mormon prophet would have the little manliness to Trump 1 entire chapter testifying against the practice.

Check your garments, BC, you got one. Your opinion has greater value than your wife's does in your Mormon church.

You're confusing physical anatomy with one of it's divine purposes. I can't help you.
_Gazelam
_Emeritus
Posts: 5659
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:06 am

Re: Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

Post by _Gazelam »

Image
Jacob had many wives and concubines. Others with multiple wives include Moses, David and Solomon.



RayA,

And according to the Book of Mormon, it is "an abomination". Why?


In saying that "whoredoms are an abomination before me" (see Jacob 2:28), the Lord was not equating the principle of plural marriage with whoredoms or declaring that all such marriages - including those of Abraham, Isacc, and Jacob - are abominable in his sight. He was denouncing the abuse of a sacred principle, not the principle itself.

Although the law of Moses permitted wives and concubines, the Lord forbade the practice for the house of Joseph in the Promised Land, in the Americas. This was probably because the basis for such marriages did not exist in Lehi's colony.

The Nephites did not practice slavery, nor did they take female captives and make wives of some of them as had their Israelitish ancestors even in the days of Moses. As for the many war-produced widows found at times among the Nephites, the policy was to care for their temporal needs rather than to marry them (see Mosiah 21:10, 17; Moroni 9:16).

Following the death of Nephi (about 540 BC), pride and "the grosser crime" (see Jacob 2:22) of whoredoms appeared for the first time among the Nephites. Certain men "began to grow hard in their hearts, and indulge themselves somewhat in wicked practices, such as like unto David of old desiring many wives and concubines, and also Solomon, his son" (Jacob 1:15).

Jacob, Nephi's younger brother, was instructed by the Lord to denounce this evil in its incipency. Only some Nephites were actually engaged in polygyny; others probably contemplated doing so, while others remained "pure in heart." So it was a mixed audience - as such groups usually are- that Jacob addressed. The heart of the message on the subject was as follows:

Jacob chp.2
23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.
24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.
26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.
27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;
28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.


Jacob did not proclaim a new doctrine. He told the Nephites: "ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before" (Jacob 2:34; see also 3:5)

The effort to introduce forbidden practices and to justify them by appealing to scriptural precedents was clearly out of order. It was so then, and it is so now. The Lord's people are bound by the commandments given them through the prophet of their day, not those of an earlier time. They are accountable to the prophet they raise their hand to sustain. President Benson said, "The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet... Beware of those who would pit the dead prophets against the living prophets, for the living prophets always take precedence" (Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet").

Thus Jacob cut to the heart of the matter. What prominent men did and what the Lord approved could be two very different things. No man was justified in deviating from the commandments of the Lord for his time because of the commandments of the Lord to others in another time.

What was abominable in the practices of the Nephites Jacob was addressing was any form of marriage that is motivated by lust, or when it robs ones wife of her personhood and reduces her to the level of a thing to be used, mistreated, manipulated, or whimsically abandoned. In that regard, some monogamous marriages among us are abominations.

When wives are neglected, subjected to physical or verbal abuse, to emotional trauma, or to humiliating or degrading conduct by their husbands, the spirit of chastity in them is violated. For chastity is more than a sexual matter, it is also a state of mind, heart, and spirit towards one's whole being. The very soul is at issue.

On the part of husbands, the spirit of chastity implies a concious commitment to the physical, spiritual, and emotional well-being of their wives and of all women. When a woman is rendered a mere object, a piece of chattel, the spirit of chastity leaves her. She does not feel toward herself as she has the right to feel.

If we understand the prophet's words, we can understand why the Nephites were forbidden to have plural wives and why the early Latter-day Saints were enjoined to do so. The time to "raise up seed unto me" (see Jacob 2:30) came with the Latter-day Saints, not the Nephites. Much of the leadership of the Church has been drawn from just that seed. Many members of the Church today are products of plural marriage. So the temporary need was met and the commandment suspended. Of course, there are still eternal needs yet to be met, so in due time the Lord will speak again on the subject.
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
_William Schryver
_Emeritus
Posts: 1671
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:58 pm

Re: Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

Post by _William Schryver »

Ray A wrote:
William Schryver wrote:While agreeing with you that there is no "proof" of Rigdon introducing a "System of Wifery" in Antrim, PA in 1846, I also see no appreciable difference between the allegations against Sidney Rigdon in this case and the hostile witnesses who would have us believe Joseph Smith consummated his sealings to already-married women.

Do you? If so, in what respect?


I was about to reply to this, but I think Kevin just did.

So you also planned a torrent of non sequiturs?

Oh, well. I suppose I should have expected nothing less.
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...
_Inconceivable
_Emeritus
Posts: 3405
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 5:44 am

Re: Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

Post by _Inconceivable »

William Schryver wrote:
Ask your wife (if you have one) what she really thinks of the possibility of you demonstrating your most sacred intimatacies with someone who, historically, will be as beautiful and younger as she used to be.

She says she must confess that everyone deserves “the best.”


You didn't ask her did you.

wimp.
_Runtu
_Emeritus
Posts: 16721
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am

Re: Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

Post by _Runtu »

What I don't understand is why some apologists are so adamant that Joseph didn't have sex with his married wives. If he really was commanded to take them as wives, why the squeamishness about their being consummated? I don't get it.
Runtu's Rincón

If you just talk, I find that your mouth comes out with stuff. -- Karl Pilkington
_William Schryver
_Emeritus
Posts: 1671
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:58 pm

Re: Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

Post by _William Schryver »

Runtu wrote:What I don't understand is why some apologists are so adamant that Joseph didn't have sex with his married wives. If he really was commanded to take them as wives, why the squeamishness about their being consummated? I don't get it.

That's not what I said, John. Go back and read what I actually said. Don't draw your conclusions based on how people responded to my statement.
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...
_Seven
_Emeritus
Posts: 998
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:52 pm

Re: Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

Post by _Seven »

"Brackite"


Hello There,

Here we go again, bcspace:

There is absolutely NO Evidence whatsoever, that the Phrase, 'raise up seed unto me', in Jacob 2:30, refers to that the Lord God will command His People to enter into the Practice of Polygamy. The Lord God intends to command His People to marry Monogamously, in order to be able to raise up a righteous seed unto Him. This is really meaning raising up righteous children, righteous sons and daughters, unto the Lord God. It can and will be done through the Practice of Monogamy. The Lord God intends to raise up a righteous seed unto Him, through Monogamy, (NOT Polygamy), as can be clearly seen when correctly comparing Jacob 2:30 to 1 Nephi 7:1, and then correctly comparing 1 Nephi 7:1 to 1 Nephi 16:7-8.




I completely agree with you Brackite. If there was ever a time that God would need to raise up seed unto Him through polygamy, it would have been when Lehi was led to the promised land. Yet God commanded monogamy. The sole purpose in God leading Lehi to this land was to raise a righteous seed!


Jacob 2:
25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.
"Happiness is the object and design of our existence...
That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another." Joseph Smith
_William Schryver
_Emeritus
Posts: 1671
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 3:58 pm

Re: Mormonism's Greatest Downfall.

Post by _William Schryver »

Inconceivable wrote:
You didn't ask her did you.

wimp.

Am not.

In fact, I just really did ask her. She says, "I am not very enthusiastic about the prospects of plural marriage, but if it came to that, I'm sure your love for me wouldn't be diminished by your need to love and provide for someone else."

She goes on: "The thing these people seem to forget is that plural marriage isn't just about having different women in different bedrooms. It's also about all the mundane and taxing details of having multiple families, and the responsibility that would come with that."
... every man walketh in his own way, and after the image of his own god, whose image is in the likeness of the world, and whose substance is that of an idol ...
Post Reply