I'm gonna grab you to be one of my plural wives in the CK

[_The Dude]

The joke about alcoholism is not appreciated. I grew up in a family of alcoholic bastards...

As for those here I see the infamous Peterson is not the only jackass.

Chill out. Most of us are here for entertainment.

[_moksha]

That is one aspect of Mormon culture that has totally evaded me; I've never really known anyone who openly discussed or joked about future polygamy.

FAIR: The Musical part II, had a younger Hugh Nibley doing a great song and dance number with a bevy of unreformed Egyptian hunnies celebrating The Principal. Maybe that is still in the archived section at Beliefnet. However, since the setting was in ancient Egypt, I suppose that does not technically qualify as future polygamy.

Perhaps it is best to explore past seasons of Saturday's Voyeur.

.

[_bcspace]

It did make sense that I was taught that females are generally more righteous than males are when I was growing up within the LDS Church, hence the need for plural marriage within the Celestial Kingdom.

I don't believe for a minute that females are more spiritual than men. Their spirituality is different to be sure, but no more or less effective.

However, I do want to make it very clear in this Discussion Thread, That I am now very, very Anti - Plural Marriage (Polygamy), and that I don't believe that Plural Marriage will be practice in the Celestial Kingdom. I do believe in the Book of Mormon teaching about Plural Marriage (Polygamy), that Plural Marriage (Polygamy) is an abomination before the Lord God.

You haven't read all the way to Jacob 2:30. Therefore the Book of Mormon does NOT teach what you just said. It has a caveat.

[_Jason Bourne]

You haven't read all the way to Jacob 2:30. Therefore the Book of Mormon does NOT teach what you just said. It has a caveat.

Does it not seem odd to you that the entire chapter of Jacob 2 resoundingly condemns plural marriage and calls it an abomination then suddently in one sentence there is this caveat that seems to allow the practice of an abomination? Perhpas there is some other meaning as others have explained.

Also, Jacob 2 conflict with D&C 132. Jacob 2 condemns all the multiple wives of David and Solomon. And it is a specific condemnation because the Nephites were using David and Solomon as an excuse. Then along comes D&C 132 and now the only sin in David's and Solomon's many wives were if they were not received by God. But Jacob 2 allows for no such wiggle room:

24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord

This says nothing about wives that God gave. He says it was abominable...period. Why did God change his mind in D&C 132 where he says:

38 David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those things which they received not of me.
39 David’s wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord.

Both of these passages cannot be correct. Jacob 2:24 and D&C 132:38-39 flat out cotradict each other.

[_Jason Bourne]

The joke about alcoholism is not appreciated. I grew up in a family of alcoholic bastards and am glad I have never gone back. I can see why a number I have seen here don't post often and when they do, often do not come back.

What I posted is accurate.

.

Well then you have some real dorks in our ward/stake. Were I partly active and found some dude hitting on my wife like that I would have words with him as well.

[_truth dancer]

LDS men joking about their future plural wives is in my opinion, not uncommon at all. As sick as it is, it is the legacy of the demeaning and disgusting practice that is polygamy. Thank you Joseph Smith.

I haven't read the MAD board for a while but "jokes" (along with serious discussion/fantasies/expectations) about LDS men having their harem in the next life were not at all unusual.

CI's post above is a good example.

To me these types of jokes are akin to a white man joking about what black men he will have as slaves... really, seriously, sick. Even sicker because most of these LDS men seem to think their "jokes" are actually their future reality.

The abomination lives on.

~td~

[_Yoda]

Also, Jacob 2 conflict with D&C 132. Jacob 2 condemns all the multiple wives of David and Solomon. And it is a specific condemnation because the Nephites were using David and Solomon as an excuse. Then along comes D&C 132 and now the only sin in David's and Solomon's many wives were if they were not received by God. But Jacob 2 allows for no such wiggle room:

Exactly! BC and I have had this argument before. Those who use Jacob 2:30 as a caveat are taking it out of the context of the entire chapter which condemns polygamy as a whole.

[_truth dancer]

Also, Jacob 2 conflict with D&C 132. Jacob 2 condemns all the multiple wives of David and Solomon. And it is a specific condemnation because the Nephites were using David and Solomon as an excuse. Then along comes D&C 132 and now the only sin in David's and Solomon's many wives were if they were not received by God. But Jacob 2 allows for no such wiggle room:

Exactly! BC and I have had this argument before. Those who use Jacob 2:30 as a caveat are taking it out of the context of the entire chapter which condemns polygamy as a whole.

Even if one goes with the "caveat" theory... God, (if you believe LDS scripture), specifically states polygyny breaks the hearts of his daughters. There is NOWHERE God says that if he commands the cruelty of polygyny it will not break the hearts of his daughters.

In other words, if God wishes he will command that men break the hearts of his daughters.

OK then...

~td~

[_Chap]

Here is the relevant chunk of Jacob 2:

22 And now I make an end of speaking unto you concerning this pride. And were it not that I must speak unto you concerning a grosser crime, my heart would rejoice exceedingly because of you.
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.
29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.
31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.
32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.
33 For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction; for they shall not commit whoredoms, like unto them of old, saith the Lord of Hosts.
34 And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before; and ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done.
35 Behold, ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren. Ye have broken the hearts of your tender wives, and lost the confidence of your children, because of your bad examples before them; and the sobbings of their hearts ascend up to God against you. And because of the strictness of the word of God, which cometh down against you, many hearts died, pierced with deep wounds.

And all that bitter outpouring against polygamy is somehow supposed to be nullified by the frankly barely coherent verse 30? Get along with you.

And how anyone can say that D&C 132 does not flatly conflict with Jacob 2:24 I simply cannot imagine:

38 David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those things which they received not of me.
39 David’s wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord.

But then I don't have the Spirit, do I?

[_harmony]

No amount of 'splainin' or caveats or interpretive freedom can get around Fanny.

No amount of 'splainin' or caveats or interpretive freedom can get around the Book of Mormon saying plural marriage is an abomination.

Our apologists have to find a way around Fanny in order to get to the abomination thing, and ignoring both in their rush to defend the indefensible does them no good.

I wonder how the S/R theory explains Jacob 2.