[lepidolite]

Just saw another follow up. Missionary health horror stories were solicited exclusively from the exmormon subreddit. That’s some lazy journalism right there.

http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2015/10/slick-and-far-from-truth” class=”bbcode_url”>http://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2015/10/slick-and-far-from-truth

[lepidolite]

I wish I had more insight into the the direct issue at hand, but for now foodoctor33, please accept my sympathies. I don’t personally have quite the deep misgivings that you and others (including my wife) have about plural marriage. But the more I think about your situation the more I understand some of the problems people have with the whole mess.

Hawkgrrl, I think you’ve drawn on a little more than D&C 132 for your polygamy primer there. I was with you until that last sentence in your third point. The man needs the woman just as much as the reverse. My understanding has always been that men and women can be “saved” to the celestial kingdom without each other, but neither can be exalted. It takes two (or more, I guess. . .) to tango into the eternities.

What is the woman to the man? His wife. His companion. Priestess, sure. The mother to his children. If you feel compelled to reduce the woman’s role in the eternities to just one thing, I think that “spirit baby factory” fits the bill better than worshiper. Honestly, I don’t know where that came from. Godhood is about eternal increase, and my understanding of that means kids and creations, not wives. And if the “worshiper” title is about submitting to the husband, as I recall, that only applies insofar as the husband submits to God.

I’m more open to being wrong than I ever have been before, so if I’m off base, please let me know.

[lepidolite]

My go-to testimony has for years been “The Gospel makes me happy.”

And it does! Even now, when I can’t claim to “know” much more, I do know that.

[Author]

Posts