Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
flds believe in what lds used to believe in. the normal moron church was pressured into disbelieving in many things not just poligamy and like most churches they fell under pressure there members were being slaughtered by normal so called christians if any thing lds make things hard for flds.
The LDS Church has never stated that it does not "believe" in plural marriage. It has only stated it will not practice plural marriage in conformance with the law. Hopefully you can understand the difference.
Yeah, it looks like Martin Harris was not a good choice as someone to place in a position of authority when founding a new religion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_..._Day_Saints%29
//
...
Even before he had become a Mormon, Harris had changed his religion at least five times. After [Joseph Smith, Jr.'s] death, Harris continued this earlier pattern, remaining in Kirtland [Ohio] and accepting James J. Strang as Mormonism's new prophet, a prophet with his own set of supernatural plates and witnesses to authenticate them.
//
[quote=SergeantL;2260311]The LDS Church has never stated that it does not "believe" in plural marriage. It has only stated it will not practice plural marriage in conformance with the law. Hopefully you can understand the difference.
i do know the difference ok i messed up on the believing and just not doing but its still wrong they believed in it and then quit because of PRESSURE and on a another note they DON'T believe in it if i believed in Christ but then later quit praying and calling him my savior then i guess i would still be a believer in Christ huh. no i wouldn't because you cant believe in some thing if you wont live it, so i am actually right they don't believe in it anymore like most church's they cracked under pressure. like i said if i quit doing what Christ wants or his commandments then i wouldn't be a believer but in your words i would be.
i do know the difference ok i messed up on the believing and just not doing but its still wrong they believed in it and then quit because of PRESSURE and on a another note they DON'T believe in it if i believed in Christ but then later quit praying and calling him my savior then i guess i would still be a believer in Christ huh. no i wouldn't because you cant believe in some thing if you wont live it, so i am actually right they don't believe in it anymore like most church's they cracked under pressure. like i said if i quit doing what Christ wants or his commandments then i wouldn't be a believer but in your words i would be.
Thomdan, the Church stopped practicing plural marriage because the Prophet received a revelation from the Lord to end the practice. That revelation was placed in the Doctrine and Covenants; therefore, it is now Canon and Church Doctrine. Such a revelation is a commandment, and members are required to obey. Anything less is disobedience to the Lord.
Next, to infer the Church does not believe in plural marriage is to assert it denies Canon that existed before the Manifesto on Plural Marriage. Such an assertion is without merit and contrary to the historical record, which clearly shows the Church used every legal means available to overturn federal laws prohibiting the practice of plural marriage.
Finally, you forget the 12th Article of Faith, which states, “We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.” Remember what the Savior stated. “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.” The Savior is talking about more than just paying taxes; He is also telling us to obey the law of the land.
Sergeant, I know that the Mormon church's official explanation is that the practice of polygamy ended because of revelation. But surely you can see that for non-Mormons the timing of the said revelation seems awfully convenient?
Sergeant, I know that the Mormon church's official explanation is that the practice of polygamy ended because of revelation. But surely you can see that for non-Mormons the timing of the said revelation seems awfully convenient?
I understand how non-LDS perceive the issue, but most, if not all non-LDS do not understand the true nature of revelation and prophets. Prophets and modern revelation are necessary for man to navigate modern problems. I was once asked on this forum whether I believed the contents of the Bible were applicable to this day and age. The answer is yes and no. Many basic principles are still applicable, such as the Ten Commandments; however, much in the Bible is uniquely applicable to the people for which it was written and are designed as general learning lessons for this day.
In the case of plural marriage, revelation authorized the practice when it was legal; however, there was nothing in the revelation to indicate authorization could not be revoked. It is my opinion people believe God cannot or does He alter His directives to men. If that is true, then Mosaic Law is still in effect.
It seems apparent to me the Lord did not revoke His authorization until such time as all legal means had been exhausted. Once the legal system rejected the appeals of the Church, the Lord was faced with the dilemma of a contradiction. He could either allow the Church to remain in a state contrary to the law, which is a violation of the basic beliefs and practices of the Church, or He could revoke His authorization and place the Church in harmony with the law. There was one other option, which was to use his power and cause the laws to be overturned through divine intervention, but that would require interfering with man’s freewill, and I don’t know that God engages in such acts.
Next, few if any non-LDS and all breakaway polygamists do not understand the revelation regarding plural marriage. This revelation did NOT require plural marriage, it only authorized plural marriage. The only thing that was required was marriage in the Temple. I have read this section many times, and nowhere does it state a man must have more than one wife; it only establishes the laws related to the practice. All of this means that cessation of the practice does not interfere with an LDS man or woman reaching their full potential.
Finally, I find the Lord usually sets up His work so that there is always a choice. In this case, the choice is to choose between believing the Manifesto was simply an excuse for the Church to bow to government pressure or a revelation.
In reality, didnt LDS stop polygamy so they could become a state? I know little about LDS but it seems they should be allowed to worship without criticism. EVERY religion is based on FAITH that they are right. NO ONE KNOWS for sure.
SARGE-my Jewish friend had his horns removed too. Damned bloody operation!!! God Bless you my friend!
In reality, didnt LDS stop polygamy so they could become a state? I know little about LDS but it seems they should be allowed to worship without criticism. EVERY religion is based on FAITH that they are right. NO ONE KNOWS for sure.
SARGE-my Jewish friend had his horns removed too. Damned bloody operation!!! God Bless you my friend!
Among many other punishments the federal government directed toward the Church, it also withheld statehood until the Church ceased the practice of plural marriage. A partial list of sanctions directed at the Church during that time included seizure of all Church assets and property, the imprisonment of countless members, and the destruction of numerous family units. Of primary concern was the governments attempts to seize Church property and in particular the Temples. After the experiences of Kirtland, Ohio, and Nauvoo, Illinois, the Church wanted no further defilement of its Temples.
Few people understand the relationship that existed between the Church and the government in those days. The Church had suffered three major exoduses, Ohio to Missouri, Missouri to Illinois, and Illinois to the Great Basin. In every case, the exoduses were the result of government persecution, such as the “Mormon Extermination Order” issued by the Governor of Missouri, Lilburn Boggs, or the failure of the government to protect the constitutional rights of church members, as illustrated by the criminal collusion of local and state officers related to the murder of Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum in the Carthage, Illinois jail. In short, as far as the Church was concerned, the government had proven itself to be a deceitful and murderous force; a lesson not lost on the American Indian.
Even with all of these issues, the Church resisted and used legal venues for over ten years, and this is where I believe the Lord used his divine intervention much in the same fashion as parting the Red Sea. Just when it appeared the Church would be destroyed, He intervened and relieved the Church of the burden of plural marriage. One can view it in a number of ways, but I view it as just another test and trial of the faithful.
I still do not understand what all the hubbub is related to plural marriage. As long as all parties are adults, everyone consents, and it is economically feasible, there should be no problem. It is my personal opinion the federal government’s motivation for outlawing plural marriage was nothing more than a cross between vindictive behavior and unfounded hysteria.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
