DCP Supports Whitewash of History

[_Gazelam]

Jason,

While plural marriage is not a necessary ordinance to be exalted, it is an ordiance, similar to the sacrament in its importance. What lesson do you feel the Lord intended for those who practised, and will practise, the ordinance?

Gaz

[_Polygamy Porter]

Jason,

While plural marriage is not a necessary ordinance to be exalted, it is an ordiance, similar to the sacrament in its importance. What lesson do you feel the Lord intended for those who practised, and will practise, the ordinance?

Gaz

Hey, quick question for ya Gaz.

Lets say you go into the temple to do some necro-sealings for a non Mormon man who was 38 in 1869, and died in 1889, just before the first manifesto, again never a Mormon..

Since polygamy was being touted by Briggie and his band of pervs as a REQUIREMENT for becoming a GOD, should we round up a bunch of names of girls from back then, to then have him necro-sealed to? Just so that he meets the commandment of his day, so that he will have the chance to accept all of those young honeys to become a god?

I wonder if the non Mormon guys who were born after 1890 get jealous when they hear non Mormon born BEFORE 1890 accept the sealingS of many young girls??? "YESSS!!!!"" they yell out from their cell in paradise...

[_harmony]

Jason,

While plural marriage is not a necessary ordinance to be exalted, it is an ordiance, similar to the sacrament in its importance. What lesson do you feel the Lord intended for those who practised, and will practise, the ordinance?

Gaz

Gaz, where do you get this stuff? I mean, I've been in the church for 35 years, and never once have I ever heard anyone say plural marriage is similiar to the sacrament in importance. What are you basing your conclusion on? In other words: call for references (because that's just so out-there, I need a Hubble telescope to find it).

[_Jason Bourne]

Jason,

While plural marriage is not a necessary ordinance to be exalted,

Not according to Brigham Young. He said it was necessary for exaltation.

I wish here to say to the Elders of Israel, and to all the members of this Church and kingdom, that it is in the hearts of many of them to wish that the doctrine of polygamy was not taught and practiced by us. It may be hard for many, and especially for the ladies, yet it is no harder for them than it is for the gentlemen. It is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to you, and all the world, that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the [p.269] blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained. This is as true as that God lives. You who wish that there were no such thing in existence, if you have in your hearts to say: "We will pass along in the Church without obeying or submitting to it in our faith or believing this order, because, for aught that we know, this community may be broken up yet, and we may have lucrative offices offered to us; we will not, therefore, be polygamists lest we should fail in obtaining some earthly honor, character and office, etc," - the man that has that in his heart, and will continue to persist in pursuing that policy, will come short of dwelling in the presence of the Father and the Son, in celestial glory. The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy. Others attain unto a glory and may even be permitted to come into the presence of the Father and the Son; but they cannot reign as kings in glory, because they had blessings offered unto them, and they refused to accept them. - JoD 11:268-269 (Aug 9, 1866)

So should I believe you or Brigham?

it is an ordinance, similar to the sacrament in its importance.

Not currently it isn't.

What lesson do you feel the Lord intended for those who practiced, and will practice, the ordinance?

Well since it is not a current ordinance and I believe it never was an ordinance that God wanted us to do, and I do not believe the LDS Church will ever do it again, the answer to your question in the Lord did not intend for us to learn anything from it. He did not institute it. Joseph Smith did, on his on volition.


Jason

[_Rollo Tomasi]

The deal here is that the Church really wants it to go away. They want to distant themselves from it. The best way is to admit it was bad deal, an error, and all that. But they won't because that taints the past prophets.

They also can't, in my opinion, so long as D&C 132 remains in the current canon. To admit a mistake is to admit that D&C 132 is a mistake, too.

Same deal with the priesthood and the black. But like McConkie or not, he had the guts to admit what he had written on that was a mistake.

I've read that quote by McConkie to only admit he was mistaken by previously declaring that black men would not receive the priesthood in this life (which was obviously wrong after SWK received the 1978 revelation); I don't think he was admitting that the underlying doctrines and practices for the ban were mistaken, which is what I think the Church needs to do.

[_Jason Bourne]

The deal here is that the Church really wants it to go away. They want to distant themselves from it. The best way is to admit it was bad deal, an error, and all that. But they won't because that taints the past prophets.

They also can't, in my opinion, so long as D&C 132 remains in the current canon. To admit a mistake is to admit that D&C 132 is a mistake, too.

Agreed

Same deal with the priesthood and the black. But like McConkie or not, he had the guts to admit what he had written on that was a mistake.

I've read that quote by McConkie to only admit he was mistaken by previously declaring that black men would not receive the priesthood in this life (which was obviously wrong after SWK received the 1978 revelation); I don't think he was admitting that the underlying doctrines and practices for the ban were mistaken, which is what I think the Church needs to do.

Yes I agree again. It was more that what he said about it was wrong then the withholding of it being wrong. But he did admit his thought on when it would be given to blacks was wrong. A rare thing indeed for a GA.

Jason

[_Daniel Peterson]

An important thread from the past.