tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post8124462862237824261..comments2024-03-13T12:52:19.391-07:00Comments on Pure Mormonism: Why Heed Prophetic Counsel?Alan Rock Watermanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04971243364867111868noreply@blogger.comBlogger241125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-42629157636142342932018-01-23T12:31:11.965-08:002018-01-23T12:31:11.965-08:00https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_4LpZgm2nwhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_4LpZgm2nwR. Metzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15875261161185193692noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-19722088868889325382018-01-19T23:30:29.799-08:002018-01-19T23:30:29.799-08:00DeeLyn,
I agree, any form of adultery or fornicat...DeeLyn,<br /><br />I agree, any form of adultery or fornication is abominable to God. Whether Abraham, Jacob, and others were justified in what they did is up to God to judge, not us. And if they made mistakes or sinned, then I believe it’s between them and God. If their actions harm me, than I suppose I need to forgive them and move on. But I don’t have to participate in it.<br /><br />However, do I understand correctly that you consider widows and widowers to be also guilty of such crimes if they remarry after their spouse dies? I honestly don’t know how God views that. I do know how he views divorce, which he says is adultery. <br /><br />But be that as it may, I am a little more curious about other comments you made and hope you can offer more explanation.<br /><br />You said: “I believe it's impossible for both Christ to be teaching truth and also most past Bible prophets be true also. For their teachings contradict each other.” <br /><br />You used the word “most” here as well as in other places. That seems like a lot. I would like to know more about these prophets who went contrary to Christ’s teachings and against each other, as I don’t want to follow false ones. <br /><br />And can you let me know specifically which ones didn’t go contrary to God? In other words, who are the few good guys?<br /><br />You did mention that Moses didn’t live the Ten Commandments. Could you elaborate on how and when he did that? I’m curious about that.<br /><br />You also wrote: “it seems most Bible prophets either lived it or supported it or went along with polygamy, serial or concurrent. And whether they lived it or just supported it, it's the same.” <br /><br />Could you offer some background information on that? Other than Abraham, and Jacob (which we discussed), who are the “most”? With the exception of a few that I can think of, ancient prophets didn’t mention anything about their wives or marriage, so how can we know what they supported or not? Perhaps I’ve missed something.<br /><br />I’m not trying to claim any position here. I am just looking for truth, as the world seems to be covered in falsehoods. I, like most, prefer some evidence of facts, if possible. Zebedeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03954987664796123149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-84728562517214048732018-01-19T10:37:38.311-08:002018-01-19T10:37:38.311-08:00So I finished reading David Whitmer's pamphlet...So I finished reading David Whitmer's pamphlet and it contained the second witness to what I was saying about handing authority over to someone is an excuse people use to abdicate responsibility.<br /><br />With the corporate president replacing Christ as the head of the church, the members are convinced they do not have to inquire of the Lord directly, because they can just have the leaders do it for them. This happened at the time of Moses and applies just as much to temporal as well as spiritual affairs.<br /><br />It is one of Satan's greatest and most effective tools because of how much it entices the natural man to take the easy way out.Dave P.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09408131079502238239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-72101749203302334222018-01-19T10:06:50.649-08:002018-01-19T10:06:50.649-08:00Wise words DeeLyn. Thank you for sharing your wisd...Wise words DeeLyn. Thank you for sharing your wisdomLena Hansenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06856311577110152290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-82072439097146670202018-01-19T02:17:15.999-08:002018-01-19T02:17:15.999-08:00Continued -
Polygamy can be considered as having...Continued - <br /><br />Polygamy can be considered as having an intimate relationship with more than 1 person. Man has given marriage and relationships many names, according to man's changing customs. So whether a woman is called a concubine, slave, one night stand, wife or girlfriend, etc, it's not the name that counts but the relationship that makes it polygamy, at least in God's eyes I believe.<br /><br />So I believe Abraham lived polygamy, he had more than 1 intimate relationship. And also, the effects of polygamy on the 1st wife (or society) don't change just because the other woman/women isn't/aren't called a 'wife'. The Bible also says he remarried after Sarah died, so that's a 3rd woman and then it goes on to suggest he had concubines also. So whatever we call multiple relationships, it's the same thing, with the same effects, spiritually and eternally, on all involved. <br /><br />But polygamy was not the only thing those prophets did contrary to Christ, just one thing of many things. What did they do to prove they were really prophets? Claiming so doesn't make it so. In fact, a true prophet would probably never claim to be a prophet, but tend to doubt he was one. <br /><br />Issac may have been a righteous man and never lived polygamy. <br /><br />Jacob didn't have to live polygamy, he could have returned Leah to her father as soon as he learned of the deception. A righteous man doesn't go along with false customs in any age, he tries to make things right, just like Christ and John the Baptist did, when confronted with false customs. Jacob had not given his consent to marrying Leah, so without consent he would not have been bound by God to honor the false marriage to her. And it was not good for Leah to be married to a man who didn't love or want her, or who even took another wife he loved more. It's better to never marry than have to live polygamy. <br /><br />As far as other Bible prophets living polygamy, it seems most Bible prophets either lived it or supported it or went along with polygamy, serial or concurrent. And whether they lived it or just supported it, it's the same. Like with Moses, whether he lived polygamy or not, he supported it. <br /><br />A true prophet would never live, support or willingly go along with any form of polygamy or multiple relationships, they would have naturally understood and followed Christ's teachings. For everyone is born with a knowledge of right and wrong, of the Golden Rule, equality and love. No one had to teach those ancient prophets that all forms of polygamy were wrong.Lillihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06093952277840534639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-63492085266162378082018-01-19T02:16:16.124-08:002018-01-19T02:16:16.124-08:00Zebedee,
Thank you for your last comment. It see...Zebedee, <br /><br />Thank you for your last comment. It seems to me though, that the Church still very much likes polygamy, serial and concurrent, and I believe it will bring back concurrent polygamy once it's legal. And it seems most members would accept it, for they already are ok supporting past leaders who lived it, like BY, etc. and most seem very supportive of serial polygamy, which is even more accepted and rampant in the church today than concurrent polygamy ever was in the 1800's. And there isn't much difference between the two. <br /> <br />And in reference to your earlier post, I don't believe Christ can save us 'from our sins', but that he is our Savior in that he taught/reminded us how to save ourselves by repenting. He taught that only those who keep all of his commandments (basically the Golden Rule & unconditional love) will gain Eternal Life. He can't do that for us. <br /><br />And if most prophets throughout history were true prophets, speaking Gods' words, than one could only conclude that it's impossible to know truth from error, for God would be always changing his mind and preaching different doctrines from one prophet to another. It would be chaos. <br /><br />So I believe it's impossible for both Christ to be teaching truth and also most past Bible prophets be true also. For their teachings contradict each other. For example, it doesn't seem like Moses even really believed in, let alone lived, his own 10 commandments, nor did most other Bible prophets seem to either. But I believe Christ did. <br /><br />So I have to side with Christ, for his teachings prove to me to be merely eternal 'natural law', things like the Golden Rule, equality and unconditional love. And it doesn't seem like most Bible or LDS prophets even believed in those things. <br /><br />I don't believe God intended, nor did anyone need, past prophets to tell people to watch for Christ, in fact, it seems the actions and teachings of most past Bible prophets actually did more to help people reject Christ and his teachings rather than recognize and follow him once he did come. <br /><br />Lillihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06093952277840534639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-33169355388977565942018-01-19T00:24:00.605-08:002018-01-19T00:24:00.605-08:00Dave,
Though prophets are practically perfect, t...Dave, <br /><br />Though prophets are practically perfect, that doesn't mean they can't still fall and thus why Christ taught us to not even trust or follow 'true' prophets, for they aren't infallible like him. Christ didn't want us led astray by a true prophet who might unknowingly fall and start preaching falsehoods. And if we refuse to even follow true prophets then he knew we wouldn't be led astray by false ones either. <br /><br />But if a true prophet falls then he isn't a prophet anymore, but of course he can still repent, but most never do, at least few if any in history seem to have repented after falling, assuming they were true to being with. They almost always still go on thinking and claiming they are prophets, and most people believe them. Fallen or false prophets almost never realize they are false or fallen.<br /> <br />And about Joseph, I don't believe it was possible for Joseph to fall for a 'pro polygamy' revelation or inspiration, for he was too wise for that, he understood very well how wrong it was and that God could never command it. He also knew to watch for any revelation or angels inspiring false things like polygamy, that are contrary to Christ's teachings. So if he had received any such revelation or thoughts he would have known they were from false spirits. <br /><br />Joseph seemed to understand that revelation can come from the Adversary too and that it must always be tested. <br /><br />Though I wouldn't put it past Joseph to have fallen for polygamy because of weakness despite knowing it was wrong, while also still preaching against it, (for it appears he did many other things that were contrary to Christ's commandments too) but I rather doubt he did fall for polygamy. He would have known people would find out eventually, and then most of the church wouldn't have supported or trusted him anymore and he would have lost everything he worked to build up. For he told the people to reject him if he was ever found living polygamy. He may not have been perfect but he was very smart. <br /><br />It seems what he was repenting of during his last year or so was for not trying harder to stop all the secret polygamy going on in the Church. <br /><br />And yes, David Whitmer does sound much wiser and a better man than Joseph. It seems David taught more of what Christ taught, to beware of deception by only focusing on Christ's teachings, not man's or prophet's words. Lillihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06093952277840534639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-50164293896395044592018-01-18T21:26:51.442-08:002018-01-18T21:26:51.442-08:00The other part is his reference to 2 Nephi 3. I b...The other part is his reference to 2 Nephi 3. I believe he's absolutely correct that the "Choice Seer" mentioned in during Little Joseph's blessing is not Joseph Smith. The choice seer is a descendant of Lehi through his son Joseph, whose posterity was not utterly destroyed. <br /><br />2 Nephi 3 tells us a lot. There are multiple prophecies therein, but we tend to tie them all together when we shouldn't.<br /><br />Try this and see if you like it. (I don't claim this is 100% accurate. I'm still trying to work it out)<br /><br />First, we read of the Lord's covenant with Joseph of Egypt, that out of his loins the Lord would raise up a righteous branch. This branch is coming in the latter-days, through Little Joseph (the name Joseph means "to add to" or "to do again.")<br /><br />Verse 6 - 15 discusses the end-time prophet, latter-day prophet, Davidic Servant (?), who will restore Israel. He must be a descendant of Lehi. Joseph Smith is an Ephraimite. <br />Verse 18 - 21 identifies Mormon (scribe) and Moroni (spokesman)<br />Verse 22 - 24 Lehi also prophesies that this prophet will work mighty wonders through faith and restore Israel and the Lamanites (Joseph Smith did neither)<br /><br />The Lamanites and surviving Josephites are the descendants of Manasseh/Joseph. The Mulekites are the blood heirs to the throne of David/Judah. Joseph and Judah eventually merged in Zarahemla and undoubtedly mixed. (Ishmael soon joined by way of Lamoni and the Anti-Nephi-Lehi's). There is a direct blood descendant of David somewhere on the earth (he probably has no idea who he is) because of the Davidic Covenant. The Lord accomplished two promises by leading Lehi and Mulek out of Jerusalem, thereby preserving their seed, perhaps in the same person--the end-time prophet. (D&C 113:6?) Whether this person is what we call a "Native American" or not, I don't know. But I don't believe the remnant of Lehi has yet been identified. They most definitely aren't Guatemalans. The first missionaries Joseph ever sent out went among the Indians of the Iroquois nation. Unfortunately, those missionaries got side-tracked when they encountered the Rigdonites.<br /><br />We read in Parley P. Pratt's autobiography: <br /><br />"We trust that at some future day, when the servants of God go forth in power to the remnant of Joseph, some precious seed will be found growing in their hearts, which was sown by us in that early day." ("In power" is correct description of that event)<br /><br />Some people, at least, knew what was going on and understood the work of the Lord.<br /><br />So, all things being a type or shadow, Joseph of Egypt serves as a type for the end-time prophet, who is also a descendant of Joseph (and may very well be named Joseph, or given the title of Joseph?) This prophet and the righteous branch of Joseph of Egypt will gather and "save/restore" Israel just as their progenitor did. This all has yet to happen. Our role as Gentiles, as I understand it, is to take the Book of Mormon to the remnant of Joseph/Lehi to begin this process. That's why the BOM is so important and so central the Marvelous Work and Wonder, which too, has yet to begin.<br /><br />Now, instead of "having a concern for the House of Israel," the cause of physical Zion (Gordon declared the gathering to Zion "complete," being sanctified and coming into God's presence so we Ephraimites receiving an inheritance, thus becoming "King and Queens of the Gentiles" to serve as "nursing fathers and nursing mothers" to Israel, we (the church) are more concerned with drinking beer, R-rated movies, women and the priesthood, and bending the knee to the LDS seat of power.<br /><br />What a time.<br /><br />matt lohrkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05159067604487338024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-21701422250726453562018-01-18T20:44:48.308-08:002018-01-18T20:44:48.308-08:00Dave P -
Regarding David Whitmer's address, a...Dave P -<br /><br />Regarding David Whitmer's address, a few things really stuck out to me. David states that prior to 1830, the manifestations of the spirit were plentiful and manifestly obvious. After 1830, the gradually declined. Pentecostal meetings were gradually replaced with "Fast and Testimony Meeting" and we now have an LDS apostle deny the gift of healing by stating that we need to have faith not to be healed. David's account is anecdotal, to be sure, but it's an interesting observation. <br /><br />Secondly, David believes that some of Joseph's revelations weren't of God. He states that some revelations are from God, some from the devil, and some from man (allegedly quoting Joseph). I believe the majority of revelations are TRUE revelations that came from God. The question is whether the Lord gave the saints what He wanted or what they wanted. (See Jacob 4:14). The Lord will never compel. He offered the saints a new covenant, not dissimilar from Abraham's (including land), but the saints wanted a New Testament church. Well, we got a New Testament church with endless strata of bureaucracy. I see similarities between Moses/Israelites, Joseph/Saints. Both were trying to bring the people into God's presence, just as they individually had. The parallels are endless.<br /><br />We read in the BOM that there are "save two churches." Those who believe, repent, are baptized an come to Christ and those who don't. Joseph did ask what church he should join, he asked which sect of Christianity he should join. The answer was none because their <i>creeds</i>--shared beliefs of a religious community--were incorrect. Baptism of children, sacrament, etc. It had all been contaminated. <br /><br />If you read the original 1833 Book of Commandments, Chapter 4, it reads:<br /><br />"And thus, if the people of this generation (all of them) harden not their hearts, I will work a <i>reformation</i> among them, and I will put down all lyings, and deceivings, and priestcrafts, and envyings, and strifes, and idolatries, and sorceries, and all manner of iniquities, and I will establish my church, like unto the church which was taught by my disciples in the days of old. And now if this generation do harden their hearts against my word, behold I will deliver them up unto satan, for he reigneth and hath much power at this time, for he hath got great hold upon the hearts of the people of this generation: and not far from the iniquities of Sodom and Gomorrah, do they come at this time: and behold the sword of justice hangeth over their heads, and if they persist in the hardness of their hearts, the time cometh that it must fall upon them."<br /><br />That entire passage was memory-holed in the 1835 D&C. I can't find any reference to a "restoration of the church" or "restoration of the Gospel" anywhere in the BOM, D&C or Joseph's writings. The only "restorations" in scriptures are the Abrahamic covenant, land and the soul/body. (How often do you hear about the Restoration of Israel in General Conference?) How would human history have changed if they hadn't hardened their hearts?<br /><br />It's not accidental that the BOM shows up in 1830, not long after the "gentiles (Ephraim) were established in this land as a free people." The Lord brought forth the BOM to reform Christianity (correct the ordinances, the correct view of the atonement, etc) and unite the various sects under its banner. In other words, the New Covenant. That's why the Lord put the church under condemnation for taking the BOM lightly. It literally was a New Covenant--a reset of Christianity using the fullness of the Gospel found in the BOM. The polluted "holy church of God" in Mormon 8 is the people, the body of Christ, of which Mormons are a part. <br /><br />I think the very last thing the Lord wanted was a church with a massive HQ, vast land holdings, billions of dollars in "temples." <br /><br />The Lord, above all, desires the heart. Anything less is ultimately worthless.<br /><br />Con't...matt lohrkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05159067604487338024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-84275543583241999632018-01-18T15:09:51.623-08:002018-01-18T15:09:51.623-08:00Obviously you are all very anti polygamy. I totall...Obviously you are all very anti polygamy. I totally get it. I'm not a fan of it either. <br /><br />However, I believe in finding the truth and following it. <br /><br />Jacob 2 is could be opening the door for polygamy or it could be shutting it completely. It depends on private interpretation. <br /><br />Yes D&C 132 is problematic. Parts of it just don't seem to add up. <br /><br />There's still no way around the fact that Jacob was a polygamist. Through that polygamist the Lord's chosen people Israel were born. And yes his seed was righteous. Not always, but certainly more righteous than there neighbors. They are and were the Lord's covenant people.<br /><br />Polygamy is allowed under the law of Moses. If it is truly evil and an abomination why would God have allowed it under the law that he set up to point the people towards the Messiah?<br /><br />Moses may very well have been a polygamist when married an Ethiopian woman. According to an apocryphal book Adam was a polygamist too. <br /><br />I think it's complicated. <br /><br />It seems natural to me that marriage will continue in the eternities. My reading of the scriptures leads me to believe that many more women will be exalted than men. That would polygamy a necessity in the next life. <br /><br />If marriage continues in the eternities at the very least polygamy would exist there in the cases of remarriage. <br /><br />Anyone have an explanation why Joseph did change the verses in the Old Testament which say that God gave David his wives and would have given him more had he not taken Bathsheba? Joseph Smith changed quite a few verses about David to show that his heart had not been perfect before God, but he did not in anyway condemn David's polygamy.<br /><br />I don't have an agenda. The truth is all that matters to me.Matthiashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00373707992098571574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-68106931609265270022018-01-18T14:24:12.906-08:002018-01-18T14:24:12.906-08:00Trying to remember where I read it (and it may hav...Trying to remember where I read it (and it may have even been linked from a comment in an earlier thread), but someone made a blog post of a "what if" scenario wherein the roles of men and women in the corporation had been swapped, and it hammered the point home about how women are viewed as basically nothing more than breeding stock even today.Dave P.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09408131079502238239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-83246760910901543492018-01-18T13:52:05.002-08:002018-01-18T13:52:05.002-08:00DeeLyn's point is well taken. I would absolute...DeeLyn's point is well taken. I would absolutely hate to have my wife being with any other man or men, regardless if some dude claims it's OK 'cause God said it was. My heart aches for all those women who were suckered into that false doctrine. Because it is false. My great-great-grandfather had six wives. I descend from number six. The first one refused to give her consent and was excommunicated and divorced. Very sad.<br /><br />Section 132 has a lot of problems. As mentioned the consent of the first wife was required upon pain of death. But according to Emma she never gave any consent whatsoever as she didn't know anything about this "revelation" before 1852. So if Joseph was doing things behind her back then he was violating his own law. (I for one doubt Joseph did anything of the sort).<br /><br />There is a lot of talk about virgins in that section. Well, that wasn't followed either, if we believe Joseph married other men's wives. Or how about Brigham marrying other men's wives and even marrying some of Joseph's so-called other wives including Eliza Snow? Brigham stated that a man with higher priesthood could take the wife of a man with lower priesthood. I think that's called adultery. What a scoundrel!<br /><br />I wonder if Brigham would have tried to make the moves on Emma. That certainly would have solidified his regal position no doubt. It's funny to think about because it was completely unlikely. She saw Brigham as the fraud he was and he knew she knew it. Emma was no dummy. Remember the Lord called her an "elect lady." <br /><br />This "doctrine" has proven to be the thorn in the side of the Church for over 160 years and will likely be its undoing, unless the higher-ups confess and repent. (I'm not holding my breath though, as any such thing would destroy the Mormon financial empire.)<br />Zebedeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03954987664796123149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-20557606982395615852018-01-18T12:30:01.677-08:002018-01-18T12:30:01.677-08:00DeeLyn,
I can see your point of view on the basis...DeeLyn,<br /><br />I can see your point of view on the basis that every man who has been considered a prophet was also a fallen human just like the rest of us, but it honestly feels to me like you're saying that, as prophets, they're denied the process of repentace if they ever make mistakes. A prophet can fall, but can also be corrected and return.<br /><br />Per the polygamy issue, David Whitmer in his address cites testimony of people who state that Joseph received a revelation on and practiced it, but also how he repented of it prior to his death. Polygamy gets the most focus in Whitmer's address, but he also brings up a <i>lot</i> of times Joseph proved to be fallible both during and after the translation of the Book of Mormon and how he constantly had to repent just to finish the translation. He also urges people to not discount the things that fallible prophets have done right because of things they did wrong at other times, but also to <i>always</i> measure their words against the words of Christ in the BoM and NT.<br /><br />David Whitmer himself admits to having been deceived in the early days of the church but gave everyone the counsel of "Don't make these same mistakes!" Per the topic of the original post I would consider it prophetic counsel because of the urging of a man who testified of Christ and even considered himself a prophet (as mentioned in the pamphlet himself) and said "I erred and fell away because of deception, then had to repent," while constantly reminding all of the church branches to focus solely on what Christ taught.<br /><br />Whether or not David W. was a prophet, it's been a great read as he recounts the early history of the church that "approved" materials never touch upon and provides a great answer as to <i>why</i> the early church fell into condemnation and how they treated lightly the Book of Mormon: Heeding the words of fallible men over the written Word of God when the two contradicted each other. And he is merciless in ripping the D&C a new one because of how many "revelations" <i>just</i> happened to align with the carnal desires of the people at the time despite contradicting what the BoM taught.Dave P.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09408131079502238239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-39716317842322875672018-01-18T11:33:34.552-08:002018-01-18T11:33:34.552-08:00The teachings, writings and so called 'revelat...The teachings, writings and so called 'revelations' of mortals will never settle the polygamy question, for some will claim God can be for it and some will say he's against it. <br /><br />But if we test polygamy against the teachings of Christ it's very easy to see it's impossible for it to ever be ok in the sight of God in any circumstance. No one has to wonder if it was ok for Joseph or Abraham or anyone to live it, in any of it's forms, serial or concurrent. For Christ clearly condemned all forms of polygamy in multiple ways. <br /><br />His many teachings on love, marriage, equality and especially the Golden Rule totally destroy the man made idea of polygamy. What man would put up with polygamy the other way around and want done to him what he does to his wife in polygamy? What man would want to stay faithful or even be willing to stay faithful to his 1 wife he hardly ever sees cause she is always living with her other husbands, or out being wined and dined by new prospective ones? While he lives alone with and cares for all the kids, house and earns a living. The Golden Rule, as always, reveals the truth. <br /><br />Christ also clearly taught that once married no one can ever marry anyone else their whole life, no matter what. Lifelong unconditional faithfulness to one person. His teachings astounded his disciples who then determined that it's best to never marry at all. And Christ agreed with them and taught that it's not good to marry.<br /><br />But as for Joseph, it appears he did not write or even read any loop holes for polygamy in Jacob 2:30. There are 2 ways to read that verse, for or against polygamy. It seems it was not read the pro polygamy way in Joseph's day, but appears to have started reading it with loop holes much later by polygamists in Utah, who surely needed more scriptural backing for their actions. <br /><br />But just common sense can reveal the truth about Jacob 2:30, for if the Lord wants to raise up a righteous people, history and science has shown that polygamy is the last way to do it and the slowest, not to mention that it quickly destroys society. Christ's idea of righteous lifelong monogamy proves to be the best and only way to raise up a righteous people. <br /><br />But why would we assume any of Joseph's revelations, visitations, writings and teachings came from God, for mere claims don't prove anything, even if we get warm fuzzies about them. Billions of people in every religion are just as sure as Mormons that God confirmed to them that their religion, leaders or scriptures are true. Feelings, revelations and visitations are some of the easiest ways to be deceived. Christ taught we should even assume our own revelation and inspiration is wrong, until we test it against his. <br /><br />Even Joseph understood that anyone's revelations or teachings, including his, has to be the same as Christ's teachings or they prove to be false, no matter what kind of person, spirit, angel or God relayed the message. Joseph just didn't always heed his own advice on that though, and thus didn't test some of his beliefs, teachings and practices against Christ's. But at least he understood how wrong polygamy was, whether he secretly fell for it or not. But he did not fully understand it or Christ's teachings enough. <br /><br />For, despite the fact that Joseph fought and condemned polygamy all his life, even teaching that if any prophet ever taught or lived it, even him, they would be wrong and a false prophet and anyone who followed them would lose their salvation, he still held up Abraham as righteous and didn't seem to make the connection, that not even Abraham can live any form of polygamy either, let alone the other wrong things he did. <br /><br />Righteous men and prophets teach and act the same yesterday, today and forever. Lillihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06093952277840534639noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-60171553642240227402018-01-18T10:25:29.075-08:002018-01-18T10:25:29.075-08:00Another great statement from David Whitmer on Page...Another great statement from David Whitmer on Page 34 of the pamphlet:<br /><br />"After Sydney Rigdon came into the church — or in the spring of 1831 — we began to make proselytes faster; but great numbers coming into the church does not always signify great <i>spiritual</i> prosperity."<br /><br />Of course one of the biggest lies the corporation loves to tout is how it has ~16 million members every time it's brought up in the news. It boasts in those numbers so much that it refuses to acknowledge how less than half of them are active, again because it would hurt the outward image.<br /><br />(I'm actually reading snippets of David Whitmer's address during downtime at work, otherwise I'd likely be putting everything into one larger comment.)Dave P.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09408131079502238239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-69016373623849504902018-01-18T09:25:14.547-08:002018-01-18T09:25:14.547-08:00This polygamy thing keeps coming up. I found an in...This polygamy thing keeps coming up. I found an interesting essay on the topic. You'll find it here: www.eldenwatson.net then go to Different Thoughts, then to<br />#3 - John Taylor's 1886 Revelation<br />I found the conclusion remarkable.R. Metzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15875261161185193692noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-44372009660003453032018-01-18T08:41:08.864-08:002018-01-18T08:41:08.864-08:00@matt,
I found and am reading a copy of Whitmer&#...@matt,<br /><br />I found and am reading a copy of Whitmer's address at http://www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/address1.htm<br /><br />I love how right after he reminds the reader that the BoM outright condemns polygamy, he brings up the fact that the restored church falling away is also according to prophecy: "They have departed in a great measure from the faith of the CHURCH OF CHRIST as it was first established, by heeding revelations given through Joseph Smith, who, after being called of God to translate his sacred word — the Book of Mormon — drifted into many errors and gave many revelations to introduce doctrines, ordinances and offices in the church, which are in conflict with Christ's teachings. They also changed the name of the church. Their departure from the faith is also according to prophecy."Dave P.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09408131079502238239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-69127276052548995752018-01-18T06:16:07.462-08:002018-01-18T06:16:07.462-08:00It's interesting, if you follow the footnote i...It's interesting, if you follow the footnote in Jacob 2:30, one of the scriptures you are led to is D&C 132:61-66. Even if we allow ourselves to believe that God may give a command that varies from that given to Jacob, we have to admit that there are problems with section 132.<br /><br />God apparently goes from condemning polygamy using words like "grosser crimes" "committing whoredoms" "which thing was abominable before me" and warning that he had "seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of (his) people...because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands" and outright condemning the attitude and actions of the perverse men, to allowing a man who has entered into this "law of the priesthood" to simply only need to "desire to espouse" another virgin for her to be given. Oh, he does throw in the caveat that the first wife has to "give her consent" except that if the man taught the principle to his wife that she has to "believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed."<br /><br />Wow, what a change in tone! What a change in position regarding the feelings of women and children! On one hand, we have a God that is deeply concerned for the women and children, who cannot stand to hear the cries and mourning of the "fair daughters of (his) people" to a god who will destroy any woman who violates this law of the priesthood or fails to give her consent. <br /><br />Can anyone defend the difference in tone or level of respect for the thoughts, feelings and well being of women and children? Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14806848698862693059noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-56049762377112523082018-01-18T05:38:57.253-08:002018-01-18T05:38:57.253-08:00More thoughts while on the train this morning:
Th...More thoughts while on the train this morning:<br /><br />The Lord raises up His covenant people to be a peculiar people; unique in that they think and act differently from the rest of the world. The primary way the covenant people will distinguish themselves is to put off the natural man and heed the laws of God <i>while allowing other people their own agency so long as they leave God's people alone</i>. Remember the sons of Mosiah were told it was a waste of time to try and preach to the Lamanites and it was "smarter" to go and annihilate them instead. That would <i>not</i> have ended well.<br /><br />As mentioned earlier, the natural man is inclined to take the easy way out. Be it through justifying sin rather than repenting, or to abdicate responsibility to a false god. One of the biggest pieces of idiot legislation in Utah in recent years was the "Zion's curtain" where restaurant owners had to foot the bill to erect walls in their restaurants so children couldn't see alcoholic drinks being prepared. That has since been removed but also replaced with "Zion's moat" where every eating establishment in Utah must display a clear sign indicating they're licensed as a restaurant or bar.<br /><br />This goes into the mindset of, "We must legislate the church's definition of morality and use the power of the state to make others comply to our way of thinking by force." Not only is this an abuse of power, but also an abdication of responsibility. To say, "It's against the law!" is not a valid argument when the majority of laws on the books are unjust, but it's also the first thought of many when they say, "There should be a law!" for some things primarily so they don't have to teach their kids about why things like excessive alcohol and hardcore drugs should be avoided whether or not they're "illegal."<br /><br />I once got chewed out by a cop for crossing against a red light even though he was the only one coming while I and the guy with me clearly saw him coming and waited on the median for him to pass. All he could say was, "It was against the law." The security guards at the Courthouse saw this and told us they had more reason to ticket him than us because he was the one who had stopped in the middle of the road and presented a hazard to any traffic that would have been behind him if there was any.<br /><br />So too do we see such a mindset in both the natural man and the church today: "Do not think for yourselves. Simply obey what we say/write even if it contradicts the will and nature of the Unchanging God and all will be well in Zion." Again this is despite the fact that the corporate church today has tangled itself in a web of lies so tight that it cannot be unraveled without great pain. It can come clean, repent, and lose the trust of those who are unwilling to forgive it, or it can continue as it's been doing in its deceit and lose the trust of more and more people who awake to their awful situation until it is burned away entirely in the long run.Dave P.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09408131079502238239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-48242837100634065592018-01-18T02:54:17.009-08:002018-01-18T02:54:17.009-08:00Joseph Smith's primary problem throughout his ...Joseph Smith's primary problem throughout his life was heeding his own carnal lusts and desires and the will of men over the will of God, something he was reprimanded for time after time in the D&C.<br /><br />I did mention Joseph's parallel to Joseph of Egypt in having seven good years followed by seven bad years, but that doesn't mean they were seven perfect years. The church fell under condemnation for its treating lightly the Book of Mormon during those seven good years too. The seven good years lasted until around the time of the dedication of the Kirtland temple, when Joseph fell into the mindset of getting rich and received far less revelation from God and failed to repent far more often.<br /><br />Liberty Jail humbled him for a while, but he didn't break out of it until he realized the mistake of the destruction of the Nauvoo printing press and began to repent. The Lord told him and Hyrum to flee to the Rockies for their protection to avoid a succession crisis until he could complete his repentance, then return and clean up the church. But, he once again heeded the words of men over God and was led like a lamb to the slaughter and the rest is history. In the end, Joseph was as fallible as you and I.<br /><br />Matt and Zebedee also added great points regarding polygamy: The fruits of it for those who practiced it have been nothing short of outright disaster. And it was Christ who taught "By their fruits you shall know them." The statement applies to practices and organizations as much as individual people. Dave P.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09408131079502238239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-16755717658879547942018-01-17T22:03:47.375-08:002018-01-17T22:03:47.375-08:00Well said Matt.
Looking at history, the "ri...Well said Matt. <br /><br />Looking at history, the "righteous seed" argument seems like it could only be applied to Jacob. But look at what Jacob's "righteous seed" did to their brother Joseph--attempted murder, selling him into slavery, and lying to their father. And then look at Judah's behavior with his daughter-in-law who he thought was a prostitute. And later, God told Moses he was going to eliminate all of Jacob's seed, and start over with Moses, even though he only had one wife. <br /><br />In Jacob's case: seed yes, righteous not so much.<br /><br />There was no need for David and Solomon to add to the "righteous seed" of the great nation of Israel. David was an adulterer and Solomon led the whole nation into idolatry, thanks to his many wives.<br /><br />And even among Brigham & Co. taking extra wives meant that there was a disproportionate number of unmarried men kicking around. How does that increase a righteous seed? Brigham averaged one kid per wife, while a monogamous couple could have six or more easily.<br /><br />Nope, I'm not buying it. If that was the loop hole to God's commandment then it sure hasn't worked out very well.<br /><br />By the way, how many wives did Adam have? He and Eve seemed to have raised a bunch of kids just fine without any extra help.Zebedeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03954987664796123149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-4584759723665879472018-01-17T20:48:34.265-08:002018-01-17T20:48:34.265-08:00I like this comment someone left at defendingjosep...I like this comment someone left at defendingjoseph.com:<br /><br />***<br /><br />Jacob 2:30 is not a loophole for polygamy—far from it. While I don’t believe in the Book of Mormon, I do believe in grammar. Note that the verse begins with “For.” This is a conjunction that means “because.” It is “The word by which a reason is introduced of something before advanced” (Webster’s 1828 dictionary).<br /><br />However, “Because” won’t fit the Mormon apologists’ interpretation—v. 30 doesn’t answer why the Nephites must obey God’s commandment to stop polygamy (expressed in the previous verse). Mormons must pretend “For” means “but” or “however” or “nevertheless” in order to completely switch horses in the middle of the stream, so to speak.<br /><br />So what does v. 30 really mean? Let’s break it down:<br />“For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me.” V. 25 has already said God “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.” That’s the SEED referred to later in v. 30. A companion verse is 1 Nephi 7:12--“. . . [Lehi’s] sons should take daughters to wife, that they might RAISE UP SEED UNTO THE LORD in the land of promise.”<br /><br />“. . . I will command my people.” This clause does not mean or say, “I will command my people to commit polygamy” as Mormon apologists try to influence people into believing. It refers back to the previous verse regarding the people keeping Gods commandments AGAINST polygamy. “Command” here simply means “govern” or “rule.” It’s similar to a general saying, “I will command the army.” Obviously, if the people disobey His COMMANDments, then God is not in command of the people, and their seed will not be righteous.<br /><br />“. . . otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.” Mormons would claim “things” here refers to God’s commandments, but these “things” were identified already in v. 23--“for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the THINGS which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.” <br /><br />Putting it all together in a paraphrase, Jacob 30 actually means: “Because if I will raise up a righteous branch here in the Promised Land, I will govern my people; otherwise they shall listen to the things written about David and Solomon and continue committing whoredoms.”<br /><br />***<br /><br />What's interesting about that discourse is that Jacob prefaces it by saying the Nephites had wrested the scriptures in their justification of polygamy, just as the LDS church did. If that act weren't so dangerous it'd be hysterical. The early saints did exactly what the Nephites did. <br /><br />And despite the wickedness of the Lamanites, it was their monogamy that ultimately stayed the Lord's hand from destroying them. It's that big of a deal.<br /><br />David Whitmer, for all his flaws, pulled no punches when condemning the LDS church for the practice in his "Address to All Believers in Christ." He, too, correctly cites Jacob 2 and condemns those practicing polygamy. One need only look at the fruits: Jeffs, Kingstons, Lebarons, the UAB, and thousands of abused women and children. <br /><br />To make matters worse, the Church cites Jacob 2 on it's official website as justification for polygamy, once again wresting the scriptures to its damnation.<br />matt lohrkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05159067604487338024noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-11116251365779230442018-01-17T19:01:58.725-08:002018-01-17T19:01:58.725-08:00Dave P,
I forgot to answer your question about w...Dave P, <br /><br />I forgot to answer your question about why the Lord never commanded the Nephites to practice polygamy so they could catch up to the Lamanites. <br /><br />First off, I don't think polygamy is about having a bigger population. I think if anything it has to do with having more genealogical lines through a righteous patriarch, such as Abraham or Jacob. <br /><br />Secondly, the Book of Mormon is not a complete history of the people. Women and marriage are almost never mentioned. It's quite possible that if authorized polygamy is a higher law that at some point the Nephites were commanded to practice it. It could all be on the sealed portion. We just don't know.Matthiashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00373707992098571574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-71011460392377094002018-01-17T18:45:48.829-08:002018-01-17T18:45:48.829-08:00Dave P,
Jacob 2:30 is identical in the first edit...Dave P,<br /><br />Jacob 2:30 is identical in the first edition as it is in our current edition. The only difference is that the first edition had a colon instead of the current semicolon. Punctuation is a moot point anyway because the printer's manuscript had no punctuation. The printer's manuscript of Jacob 2:30 is identical too by the way.<br /><br />I agree with you about the danger of wresting the scriptures. People generally do that to justify wrong behavior or false beliefs. <br /><br />I admit that Jacob 2:30 is a bit unclear. I don't see it the way you do. To me it sounds like polygamy is generally an abomination, but is allowable if God commands it to raise seed unto himself. The ancient patriarchs would seem to fit this category. <br /><br />What do you think about the fact that the way D&C 132 talks about the wives of David fits perfectly with the Old Testament in the JST?<br /><br />Joseph began translating (revising) the bible the under the Lord's command the same year the BOM was published. I would think if polygamy was always evil and David did not receive his many wives from God, that Joseph would have been inspired to change those passages in the bible that say that God gave David his wives and would have given him more had he not taken Bathsheba and killed her husband.<br /><br />You commented recently that you believe that Joseph had 7 good years and 7 bad years. I'm assuming you believe that Joseph was a fallen prophet when he began practicing polygamy and received D&C 132. Please correct me if my assumption is false. <br /><br />My question to you is what do make of Joseph's marriage to Fanny Alger sometime between 1835 and 1836? This would be within the 7 good years wouldn't it? <br /><br />Also if Joseph married Fanny after having received the keys to the dispensation of the gospel of Abraham in the Kirtland temple in 1836, then it would seem to fit that his marriage was authorized just as Abraham was justified in taking Hagar. <br /><br />Any thoughts?Matthiashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00373707992098571574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1342380624800894371.post-73808109839429558222018-01-17T15:21:04.653-08:002018-01-17T15:21:04.653-08:00Another scary realization I had:
My mother's ...Another scary realization I had:<br /><br />My mother's best friend required open heart surgery in the late 80s and her surgeon was one Dr. Russell Nelson. This was also right after he'd been called to be an Apostle and her description of his face that she told us later was like "that of a cat that had just eaten the canary."<br /><br />It hit me earlier today: That's the kind of expression someone who had successfully gotten away with something makes.Dave P.https://www.blogger.com/profile/09408131079502238239noreply@blogger.com