Must and Shall Abide the Law


I can’t believe I finally got this post done.

Before I go into this post I want to testify to all of you, that I have a witness of the truthfulness of Plural Marriage. The witness I received of this principle was one of the few times in my life I have heard a voice speak to me. If it’s not to bold of me, I would like to say that, I have been praying specifically, by name, that some of you may read this blog will also receive a witness that this principle is true. I also hope that everyone, not just those people, will pray and ask Heavenly father if the principle of Plural Marriage is true.

            Research the principle of Plural Marriage. You can even start here on my blog. Find other sources throughout the internet. Study the word of the Lord concerning this principle. Ponder those things you have learned. Think about them. And then ask Heavenly Father, “with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you.” Don’t pray to confirm your preconceived notions, or dislike. But pray, being prepared to receive further light and knowledge from the Lord.

            The principle of Plural Marriage has not been done away with for our time. The Lord has said He cannot and will not do away with it. Those commanded to practice this principle in our day will stand accountable if they did not obey the voice of the Lord. The Lord’s will is not subservient to the laws of man. The Lord has provided ways for the Saints to practice Plural Marriage even when the government forbids it. He has likewise provided ways for the Saints to practice Plural Marriage even when the Church forbids it.

            The Lord reveals in the scriptures that whoever forbids from marrying is not ordained of God. There is no place in the gospel for selfishness. Plural Marriage points to Jesus Christ.

            Please ask God about these things. If you do Heavenly Father will give you the knowledge you seek.

If you have any questions, comment, if you would like to talk about this more, or share you experiences with praying about it, just send me an email. You can find my email on my blog profile.

Here is a quote I love, given by one of the great women of the church. 

In Nauvoo I first understood that the practice of plurality [of wives] was to be introduced into the church. The subject was very repugnant to my feelings – so directly was it in opposition to my educated prepossessions, that it seemed as though all the prejudices of my ancestors for generations past congregated around me. But when I reflected that I was living in the Dispensation of the fullness of times, embracing all other Dispensations, surely Plural Marriage must necessarily be included, and I consoled myself with the idea that it was far in the distance, and beyond the period of my mortal existence. It was not long, however, after I received the first intimation, before the announcement reached me that the “set time” had come – that God had commanded his servants to establish the order, by taking additional wives – I knew that God, who had kept silence for centuries, was speaking – I had covenanted in the waters of baptism to live by every word He should communicate, and my heart was firmly set to do His bidding. As I increased in knowledge concerning the principle and design of Plural Marriage, I grew in love with it, and today esteem it a precious, sacred principle – necessary in the elevation and salvation of the human family – in redeeming woman from the curse, and world from corruptions. – Eliza R. Snow

October has been over for over a week now and I’ve been trying to hammer out this post to conclude Plural Marriage month. I’ve written parts of it over the past week or so. My mind has been off working on future blog posts and projects. I want to get some more posts for my God Species blog. So I’ve tried to weld together this post into one cohesive thought.

Let’s start it off with a question. Is it wrong for a person to practice Plural Marriage in these days, when commanded by God? The answer is, No it is not. I’m sure there will be many who will compare me to the Nephites. They will say I am using the scriptures to justify people in taking more wives. But when I’ve quoted scriptures and prophets which say,

4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting covenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye damned; for no one can reject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.

5 For all who will have a blessing at my hands shall abide the law which was appointed for that blessing, and the conditions thereof, as were instituted from before the foundation of the world.

6 And as pertaining to the new and everlasting covenant, it was instituted for the fulness of my glory; and he that receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God.

 

And I say again, woe unto that nation or house or people who seek to hinder my people from obeying the Patriarchal law of Abraham, which leadeth to Celestial Glory, which has been revealed unto my Saints through the mouth of my servant Joseph, for whosoever doeth these things shall be damned, saith the Lord of Hosts, and shall be broken up and wasted away from under heaven by the judgments which I have sent forth, and which shall not return unto me void.

 

I have not revoked this law nor will I for it is everlasting and those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof, even so, Amen.

 

And when the actions of early leaders of the church who, while publically preaching against it, practiced it in secret. Leaders who, after making a public declaration against Plural Marriage, and excommunicating members of the church, authorized and encouraged church members to enter into Plural Marriage.

Including my own personal witness that Plural Marriage is a true principle, I cannot help but conclude that the modern Ban on Plural Marriage is not from God. It is not God’s will that Plural Marriage is no longer acceptable in the church. It is my belief, in light of scriptural, historical, and spiritual evidence, that those who forbid Plural Marriage are not ordained of God and are under condemnation.

Now keep in mind I am not saying that everyone must practice it. I believe that God may tell some people that Plural Marriage is not for them. But God my also command some people to practice it. And if you are one of those people who condemn those people God has commanded to live Plural Marriage, then I suggest that you may be guilty of forbidding to marry.

Doctrine and Covenants 49:15

15 And again, verily I say unto you, that whoso forbiddeth to marry is not ordained of God, for marriage is ordained of God unto man.

 

People who don’t like Plural Marriage will resort to all sorts of scriptures, and teachings to support their views. One verse used to back up the Ban on Plural Marriage is Doctrine and Covenants 132:7. It is claimed that this verse gives the President of the Church authority to restrict or grant Plural Marriages at any time. And since the current President of the Church does not grant permission for Plural Marriages then they are not allowed. There is however a gaping hole in this argument.

First let’s read that verse:

Doctrine and Covenants 132:7

7 And verily I say unto you, that the conditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is anointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by revelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this power (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this power in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the keys of this priesthood are conferred), are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead.

This verse would hold great implication for the discussion of Priesthood keys, but we’ll save that for another day. It is true that this verse says that all “covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations” must be sealed by the Holy Spirit through he who is appointed to hold the keys. If a contract is not made by this way it will have an end at death.

So it does give the President of the Church the authority to approve(or not approve) marriages sealed by officiators. However, no where in there does it give the President of the Church the authority to ban or prevent members from marrying in covenants that end with death. If a man wants to marry more than one woman, without a sealing being performed by an officiator, then the President of the Church has no authority to prevent them.

There are two types of marriages that could be performed without being sealed by an officiator. The first is a marriage covenant that will end with death. This is commonly referred to as a civil marriage. But since a marriage does not need government approval to be acceptable in the eyes of God, the term “civil” is a bit misleading.

The other type of marriage is a concubinage or associated marriage. This will be discussed in more detail later.

So even if plural sealings are not permitted by the President of the Church. The Church does not have authority to ban non-sealed Plural Marriages/polygamous marriages. But yet most LDS people do not recognize this. Instead we are blindly led around, “tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;”

If the Church allowed Plural Marriages the number of converts would decrease. And therefor tithing revenue would decrease. The Church as a corporation must operate to show a profit. Therefor everything which is unacceptable to the world or that would show the church in a negative light; and thus decrease the number of converts, is not permitted or discussed. In doing so we are guilty of many grave error and are not in harmony with God. We are currently under condemnation for our sacrificing sacred principles in order to be more acceptable to the world and this have more converts.

One concern I’ve had with Plural Marriage is that the Temple Covenants prevent a person from having sexual relations except with their husband or wife to whom they are legally and lawfully married. This means that a person must be married by the State in order to have sexual relations with their spouse. Since a person(in the USA at least) cannot be legally married polygamously then they cannot have sexual relations with their other spouses. This quandary perplexed me for some time(ooh two big words). But then the answer came. First the modern covenant gives two conditions for a marriage. It must be legal, and it must be lawful. I used to think they were the same thing. But if they are then why state it twice? This actually refers to two different situations. The term “legally,” refers to the law of the land. The term “lawfully” refers to the law of God. The modern law of Chastity covenants places both requirements in order to have sexual relations with one’s spouse.

So what about early Pluralists. They were not married legally, according to the laws of the land. They were only married lawfully according to the laws of God. I then found another piece to the puzzle. An 1931 transcript of the Law of Chastity covenant states:

“You and each of you do covenant and promise that you will not have sexual intercourse with any of the opposite sex except your lawful wife or wives who are given you by the holy priesthood”

 

This version does not use the term “legally.” It only uses “lawfully.” This means that the requirement to be legally married was added after 1931. That put another question in my mind. If the “legal” requirement was added to the covenant, it is a valid addition? Meaning, Is a person bound part of a covenant that was added by men to that which God had given.

The answer came in Section 132:9-10.

9 Will I accept of an offering, saith the Lord, that is not made in my name?

10 Or will I receive at your hands that which I have not appointed?

 

If we make a covenant, that is not what God has prescribed, God will not accept it. This makes me wonder if all of my Law of Chastity covenant is invalid or just the “legal” part of it. You could also apply this across the board. Are any of us really endowed, when the endowment we have gone through was not done as God has prescribed?

But anyway this cleared an obstacle in my mind for a person who has been commanded to live Plural Marriage. Even if they have taken the post 1931 Law of Chastity covenant, they are still justified in having sexual relations with their wives even if they are not legally married, but lawfully married.

Marriage Ordained of God

I want refer all of you to this post which explains about this subject.

http://ldsanarchy.wordpress.com/2010/10/11/marriage-without-a-marriage-license-is-ordained-of-god/

In the previous section I talked about the difference between lawful and legal marriages. Here I want to examine a bit more about legal marriages.

Have you ever been in one of those “what if” discussions about marriage? Basically it goes like this:

What if Gilligan and Mary-Ann wanted to get married. With no political authority on the island, if the professor married them in a ceremony, would that marriage be a real marriage? Could they be intimate as a couple and not break the Law of Chastity?

 

Many people would say that since they are not legally married then they would be breaking that Law of Chastity. And perhaps it would be best if they waited until they are rescued.

But the entire premise if these “what if’s” overlooks and even more important question. Namely, “Are marriages required to be approved by the government in order to be acceptable to the Lord?”

For thousands of years marriage was a personal commitment between two people. If two people wanted to get married they just had a religious ceremony, if any, and started their lives together. The governments had no hand in marriages.

The first real legislation in marriages occurred in England about the 1600s. It required couples, who were going to get married, to post notices at the churches they attend. This was to be done for three consecutive weeks.

In the mid 1700s licences were used to prevent interracial marriages. And by the 1920s there was a big push for state marriage licenses. Many laws were passed to prevent interracial marriages. Thus requiring a  licences for any interracial couple to marry.

But still marriages were considered private contracts. All that was needed for a couple to be considered married was that they claimed to be married.

Today marriage licences are not used to prevent interracial marriages, rather they are used to determine qualifications for state benefits.

In some places in the world legal marriages can still be formed by people simply making vows to each other. The modern requirement for state marriage licenses is an infringement of the government upon our right to marry.

God’s acceptance of a marriage is not determined by a valid state marriage license. Rather it is determined by it’s meeting God’s requirements. We can read some of these requirements in Section 132. Verse 15 says that marriages for time only are only acceptable to God for time. After death they are not valid. Verse 18 says that marriage which are made for time and eternity but are not done by God’s authority are valid only in life. They are not valid after death. Verse 19 says that if a marriage covenant is made and it is sealed by the Holy Spirit and the Priesthood then it will be valid in this life and in the life to come.

No where, in any of God’s Word, is there a requirement that a couple have a government marriage license for that marriage to be valid either in this life or the next. As long as a couple are dedicated to each other for time(and eternity) then their marriage is valid in God’s eyes.

Marry Plurally Amidst the Ban

In preparing for this post I contemplated some of the ways that a person could be married and live plurally even while the Ban on Plural Marriage is in effect in the church. Now I understand that I am not in a plural marriage so all of these ideas are just theory. I’m sure someone actually in this situation would be able to provide a much more in depth and practical analysis.

One thing I’ve thought of is how women in the church have been taught their whole lives to get sealed in the temple. In a plural marriage would it be right to deny a woman something she has yearned for her whole life? I’m not talking about whether or not it is needed, but rather fulfilling the lifelong dream.

So here are some idea’s I came up with:

Being Sealed in a Temple Ceremony – It certainly wouldn’t be possible to just walk into the temple and marry another wife. But there might be some way of doing it. A person might have to lie to leaders to get a recommend and schedule the marriage. That might be lying about one’s identity, or maybe going to another country and start a new identity to use for that marriage. A person could pretend to be a convert, get baptized, and wait the year to go to the temple.

But because of these reasons I would not recommend this method.

Being Sealed in a Proxy Ceremony – Go to a proxy sealing with the woman who will be your additional wife. Have the understanding that the covenants you are making in the a ceremony are not for the proxy but for yourselves. As I understand it, the names in the temple go through ordinances two or three times. So if a person’s name isn’t done because you are privately taking the covenants for yourselves, I don’t think it would affect those dead people. Besides it will all be sorted out in the Millennium right?

But then again the problem with this that the Law of Sarah might not be fulfilled. But then again in many early Plural Marriages it wasn’t either. In ideal Plural Ceremonies the woman who will be the new wife kneels across the altar from the man and his wife. The wife takes her hand and places it in the hand of her husband. She will then be asked if she gives her husband to the new wife. This could not be done in a proxy sealing.

Being Sealed in Another Location in the Temple – You could find you own quite corner of the temple and perform the ceremony. I recall an account of one of Joseph Smith’s marriages. The woman dressed up as a man, so that any onlookers would think it was just a bunch of guys standing around talking. This same thing could be applied in the Temple. Or why not have the man dress up.

All those above ideas presume that your future additional wife just has to be sealed in the temple; or that you are such a kind hearted softy, that you couldn’t stand to break your future wife’s goal of being sealed in the temple. It also presumes you are Temple Recommend holders

Other was of being sealed would be:

Participate in Sealings in an Alternate Location – Sealing ordinances are just as valid inside or outside the temple. Many early plural sealings were not performed in the temple. Some were even performed aboard ship. They could be performed in your home, at a church, in the woods, on a ship, etc. If you had access to a facility you could even make it a sort of endowment house.

Another option would be to take your future wife as an Associated Wife or Concubine. I know most people view concubine as a dirty word but it really is not. But here I will use Associated Wife.

Marrying an Associated Wife involves no Ordinance or Officiator. The man and woman make a solemn covenant with each other. This would be done with the man and woman taking each other by the hand. They must do so of their own free will. They must make a vow of love and fidelity that cannot be broken for time or eternity. They must do is for all intents and purposes as if the sealing has been placed upon them for time and eternity. They must call upon God, angles, and each other as witnesses. If there are others present then they could call upon the others as witnesses. They must then always acknowledge each other as husband and wife.

According to George Q. Cannon, marrying associated wives may be used as a means for members to still practice Plural Marriage while the Manifesto is in effect. This is because it does not require a ceremony nor church authorization. This is a “plan whereby men and women can live together under sacred ordinances and vows until they can be married [by an officiator].”

Wilford Woodruff approved of marrying associated wives without church approval. He said that people are justified in doing this so long as it is done to raise a righteous posterity. Marrying an associated wife does not mean that the woman is a “lesser wife.” It is just that your marriage is done “as if the sealing has been placed upon” you. The actual sealing with an officiator would still be done at some later time, in this life or the next.

Marrying an associated wife reminds me of the ancient custom of “hand-fasting.” Hand fasting was done by a couple having their hands tied, or fastened, together by a cord.

A couple's hands ties with a cord.

This symbolized their marriage union. They then went about(after untiing their hands of course) as if they were husband and wife. This was their marriage until a preacher made it to their village and was able to marry them.

Until the Church ends its Ban on Plural Marriage, marrying an associated wife may be the best option for most people.

Consummation of Marriage

Now we get to where the rubber meets the road, consummation. According to my WordPerfect 12 dictionary the first definition of consummate is: Make (a marriage or relationship) complete by having sexual intercourse.

I doubt the Church would really care that much if a person thinks he has other wives, so long as he does not have sexual relations with them or act as if they are married. But that begs the question, is a person really married if they have not consummated that marriage? Is the consummation of marriage necessary according to God’s Laws? If not, then is it possible to have a celibate marriage?

While thinking of ways a person could live Plural Marriage, during the Ban on Plural Marriage and stay in the church, I realized there are really only two ways to do it. First is to have what I’ll call is distant marriage. Second would be to have a secret marriage, but they are kind of the same thing.

A distant marriage would be were a husband only lives with one of his wives, most likely the legal one. He would not spend a lot of time with his other wives. Nor would he publicly associate with them. If they did associate in public they would treat each other as friends. They would not have sexual relations. But he would take care of them from a distance. This type of marriage would be more like a someone taking care of their friend.

But could such a marriage really be called a marriage?

A secret marriage is pretty straight forward, and is really similar to a distant marriage. In public the husband and would act as if they were not married. But in private they would have an active marriage. The only real difference is that with one there is no physical intimacy, with the other there is.

If you don’t really care about remaining in the Church then finding a way to live Plural Marriage doesn’t present as great of a problem.

Conclusion, Advice, and Warnings

I would like to ask for you ideas. What can we do to further the acceptance of Plural Marriage in a Church that doesn’t want it because of bad publicity?

One things is there are some questions we must ask ourselves.

To the men:

If the Lord commands you to practice plural Marriage will you do it? Will you be willing to obey the word of the Lord in the face of persecution and oppression? Would you be willing to give of yourself to support your wives and children? Would you be willing to give up your hobbies?

Are you only looking for future wives among women who are physically attractive? I remind you that God does not look on the outward appearance. Do your hormones decide who you will marry or does the Spirit?

If another man has been commanded to marry your wife what will you do? Will you be guilty of not allowing your spouse to marry another person? Are you okay with marrying additional wives but are uncomfortable with your own wife marrying additional husbands?

To the married women:

If the Lord commands your husband to practice plural Marriage would you allow him to do it? Will you be willing to obey the word of the Lord in the face of persecution and oppression? Would you be willing to give of yourself and allow your husband to fulfill the emotional needs of another woman? Will you be guilty of not allowing your spouse to marry another person?

If you received commandment from the Lord to take another husband would you do it? If the Lord had given you to another man would you be willing to marry that man?

To the single women:

Would you be willing to come to know, court, and then marry a man who already has a wife? Would you be willing to share the time of you future husband with another woman? If such interactions were required to be kept secret could you keep them secret? Have you even considered asking Heavenly Father if you should marry a man that already has a wife? Perhaps there is a man out there who has received spiritual guidance concerning you and is waiting for you to receive a witness from the Lord that Plural marriage is true. Have you asked the Lord of Plural Marriage is true?

I ask all of you to seriously ponder these questions. Study out the commandments of the Lord. Search the scriptures. Read all of section 132 not just the first part. Research Plural Marriage. You can find some interesting things on this blog for Plural Marriage month. But don’t look for answers here. Look for ideas that you can then take to the Lord to find answers. And that is what you should do, ask the Lord.

But all of that is the easy part. Once the Lord gives you an answer then it is up o you to obey. If the Lord tells you Plural Marriage is true, what will you do? Will you disobey the commandments of God? Or will you obey His will regardless of what will come?

John Taylor gave a warning and reassurance in 1886 which is applicable to all who are commanded to practice this principle,

“Some of you will be handled and ostracized and cast out from the Church by your brethren because of your faithfulness and integrity to this principle, and some of you may have to surrender your lives because of the same, but woe, woe, unto those who shall bring these troubles upon you.”

So we have a choice, we can remain under spiritual bondage, or we can free ourselves. The Church waves the Manifesto around like a banner against Plural Marriage. They say that Plural Marriage was some fluke of the 1800s. They relegate Plural Marriage to deep doctrine, “what if” discussions, that we aren’t encouraged to discuss anyway. And then they use their position against Plural Marriage to become popular in the eyes of the world, to gain converts, and to get good PR.

http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2010/10/how-corporatism-has-undermined-and.html

http://truthmarche.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/church-finance-part-i/

http://truthmarche.wordpress.com/2010/10/10/church-finance-part-ii/

http://truthmarche.wordpress.com/2010/10/17/church-finance-part-iii/

http://truthmarche.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/church-finance-part-iv/

Plural Marriage is a VERY REAL PRINCIPLE OF THE RESTORATION! Without Plural Marriage it is impossible for those commanded to practice it, to attain the fullness of God’s glory.

Joseph F. Smith said:

Some people have supposed that the doctrine of plural marriage was a sort of superfluity, or non-essential, to the salvation or exaltation of mankind. In other words, some of the Saints have said, and believe, that a man with one wife, sealed to him by the authority of the Priesthood for time and eternity, will receive an exaltation as great and glorious, if he is faithful, as he possibly could with more than one. I want here to enter my solemn protest against this idea, for I know it is false. There is no blessing promised except upon conditions, and no blessing can be obtained by mankind except by faithful compliance with the conditions, or law, upon which the same is promised. The marriage of one woman to a man for time and eternity by the sealing power, according to the will of God, is a fulfillment of the celestial law of marriage in part–and is good so far as it goes–and so far as a man abides these conditions of the law, he will receive his reward therefor, and this reward, or blessing, he could not obtain on any other grounds or conditions. But this is only the beginning of the law, not the whole of it. Therefore, whoever has imagined that he could obtain the fullness of the blessings pertaining to this celestial law, by complying with only a portion of its conditions, has deceived himself. He cannot do it. When that principle was revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith… he did not falter, although it was not until an angel of God, with a drawn sword, stood before him; and commanded that he should enter into the practice of that principle, or he should be utterly destroyed, or rejected, that he moved forward to reveal and establish that doctrine. (J.D. Vol.20, p.28 – p.29)

These words are just as applicable now as they were then. We live in a time when many Saints truly believe that monogamy is just as good or better than Plural Marriage. This is a deception, it is a lie. For those commanded by God, monogamy is only PART of the New and Everlasting Covenant, but it is NOT the fulness. The fulness of the New and Everlasting Covenant; the fulness of obedience to this covenant; the way to receive the fulness of exaltation, can only come through Plural Marriage for those who are commanded to live it. The words of the prophets confirm this.

I feel I should share a personal experience. This last general conference a say or so before it started I fasted. I’ve had strong experiences that prove that the Lord can do whatever He will even if it seems impossible. So I fasted that the Lord would provide a way for Plural Marriage to be practiced again in the Church.

Now before you go calling me naive, I certainly had faith that this could happen. I did not understand at the time just how much the Church works to be acceptable to the world. But anyway, that is what I fasted for. I would also have to say this was one of my most sincere fasts. Through conference I watched and waited for some new revelation or policy change that would make Plural Marriage possible again. But nothing happened.

We had driven down to Salt lake City for a Filipino Fireside. We were driving while the last session of conference was on so we missed it. We were on temple square when it finished. I remember walking around the visitor center, looking around, thinking, Well I don’t heard anything about a new revelation. Surely if Plural Marriage was allowed again there would be someone talking about it. But alas conference came and went and nothing happened.

I was feeling a little bit down about it for a week or so. Then suddenly it was I that had a revelation. Something HAD been said in conference that made Plural Marriage possible. It was in Dallin Oaks’s talk on Priesthood lines. While there was a lot of good things in his talk there were many misleading things too. But there was one precious gem which, all of us who seek to follow the will of the Lord amidst a church engrossed in Babylon, would to well to grab onto and use in our defense. While I think many of us already understand this principle it was nice to hear it taught from the pulpit. This precious gem, this answer to my fast, was these simple words:

But the authority that presides in the family—whether father or single-parent mother—functions in family matters without the need to get authorization from anyone holding priesthood keys.

Getting married is a family matter. And as taught by Wilford Woodruff, associated marriages do not require authorization by one holding the keys. The path to me seems clear. We are allowed to enter into associated marriages. And we are certainly allowed to enter into “temporal” without priesthood authorization.

By answering my fast in this way the Lord also taught me that He will not bring the church out of condemnation. We must do it ourselves.

Unless we read the Book of Mormon and give heed to its teachings, the Lord has stated in section 84 of the Doctrine and Covenants that the whole Church is under condemnation: “And this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all.” (D&C 84:56.) The Lord continues: “And they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have given them, not only to say, but to do according to that which I have written.” (D&C 84:57.)

Now we not only need to say more about the Book of Mormon, but we need to do more with it. Why? The Lord answers: “That they may bring forth fruit meet for their Father’s kingdom; otherwise there remaineth a scourge and judgment to be poured out upon the children of Zion.” (D&C 84:58.) We have felt that scourge and judgment! – Ezra Taft Benson

Any of you out there who call yourselves faithful saints, myself included, Repent! Let go of your idol worship. Stop hanging your salvation on the words of men who do not prophecy, who do not, have visions, who do not give revelations. The arm of flesh cannot save us. Hang your salvation on the arm of the Lord. Do as the prophets have taught. Read the scriptures, search the words of teachers of righteousness. Do not rely upon them, but take their words to the Lord. And find the will of the Lord for you! Develop a relationship so close to the Lord that you can literally hear his voice giving you guidance. That is the type of relationship I want to have.

I pray that the Lord will guide you in coming to understand Plural Marriage. And I pray that He will give you strength to do what He commands, whatever that is.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Jesus Christ, Plural Marriage, Prophets and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Must and Shall Abide the Law

  1. John Ellis says:

    You’re arguments are sound, Michael. Honestly, I don’t understand what is so difficult to understand. “New” means that it is something new or different than before. “Everlasting” means that it will last forever. If this new and everlasting covenant can be given to Joseph Smith, Jr., how is it possible that the church leadership can prohibit the practice, thus making it less than everlasting? The example of Daniel comes to mind, where he not only prayed to God when it was banned by the government, he also prayed so that he was visible by all, in defiance to the government!

    Classic Mormon theology teaches that the Church became corrupt and taken from the earth shortly after Christ’s apostles died (which as a Christian, I don’t personally believe, but for the sake of argument). So, how many years did that take? Maybe 70 years? Isn’t it a bit arrogant to think that what Christ himself couldn’t hold together, today’s modern LDS corporation is able to preserve intact? Is it possible that once again the keys of the priesthood have been taken from the earth. Why is it so difficult for members of the church to think just for a moment that perhaps history is repeating itself?

  2. zo-ma-rah says:

    Well apostasy is not a single event it happens little by little. Even as someone who believs in the Apostasy of the ancient church, there is not one point where the church became apostate. It will little by little piece by piece.

    We are fooling ourselves if we think we are exempt from that. In the Book of Mormon it prophecies that the gentiles(that’s us) will sin against the Gospel. the Gospel will then be taken from us and given to the Israelites. We will have our turn and muff it. Or should I say we are having our turn and we are muffing it. There is no other alternative than for the Gospel to be taken from us and given to the Israelites. The only thing we really can control is to obey the voice of the Lord as he commands us. If we do that and do not follow the teachings/traditions of men we will be able to join the Israelites when they receive the Gospel.

    All given from the perspective of someone who believes in the Restored Gospel of course.

  3. Justin says:

    John: Is it possible that once again the keys of the priesthood have been taken from the earth. It is possible I guess, but it has not happened. The keys of the priesthood and the keys of the church still reside in the Church of Jesus Christ of LDS. Read this for more information.

    From the Eliza Snow quote: Do have the source for this quote to know why in “practice of plurality [of wives]” — “of wives” is in brackets. I’m thinking that perhaps it was just “plurality” or maybe “plurality of spouses” [indicating tribal plural marriage] and the person who put the quote together bracketed [of wives] because they held the false assumption that God only justifies polygyny.

    From Being Sealed in a Proxy Ceremony: I think that perhaps the first spouse should go with the husband/wife and new spouse into the sealing ceremony as a proxy child. In this way, the first spouse’s hand will be placed on top of the joined hands of the new couple — fulfilling the law of Sarah.

    I personally favor the Participate in Sealings in an Alternate Location. Considering the current condition within the Church(TM), I believe plural marriage to best be practiced under tribal authority.

    But could such a marriage really be called a marriage? It is my understanding that the purpose of marriage is to ensure that couples having sexual relations cohabitate and remain with each other at least for the duration of mortal life [barring any sexual transgression]. Thus, marriage necessitates that you have sexual relations.

  4. Boanerges Saenz says:

    Thank you, this is grandeur. This is a treasure, and a wonder.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s