Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
cwald wrote:NotSure2008 wrote:
This seems silly…)
I don’t think so. It shows the evolution of the church, and gives hope that the apostles are, like the rest of the church membership, adapting to the times. THE CULTURE IS CHANGING. The mere fact that 6 did not serve missions is astonishing! Why didn’t they? Perhaps they are “human” after all? And when you compare family sizes —- it appears that the younger half of the apostles are PERHAPS a lot more like my generation than my fathers generation — which means they may be able to see things, and understand things like my generation does? That gives me hope that change will happen.
No I meant my thought was silly ie that I am pleased that they are all well educated and intellectual people. I think the whole idea of showing this is great!
This seems silly, but its quite nice to know they are all quite well educated and intellectual men! Wasnt Kimball renowned for saying the word “Damn”??
mormonmom wrote:This is very true and I feel kind of sad about it. I come from a family where everyone likes to gossip and judge. Not only do they gossip but they will gossip at your wedding and after. At one wedding of my cousins when they did not get married in the temple everyone talked at the wedding about why he wasn’t able to get married in the temple and how they thought he was maybe doing drugs. Every person I know that has not gotten married in the temple if it is someone in the ward, a friend or family member my family would always talk about what they thought that person did that was wrong and talk about how horrible it was they could not get married in the temple and they would not get to see their family in heaven. Even at my wedding in the temple I was told after from different people in my family about how they didn’t like this or that or my husband. It’s really hurtful. This is something that has always bothered me. I don’t know how much it happens in the church though and wonder what one can do about this other than not care. Maybe there is something you could say when someone is judging or talking.
Maybe its just because Im a fiery character, but if people did that at my wedding I would have something to say about it – in fact they would be kicked out of the wedding! I really dont understand some people, never will but the thing I have learnt is that it happens both in AND out of the Church so I have learnt not to blame the religion itself. I tried the last time to run away from it (fell away from the Church) but I still encountered it outside of the Church.
Its sort of like the whole Knife in the hands of a surgeon or a murderer analogy which has been used countless times to defend muslims (due to terrorism). The knife is like the religion, in the hands of a surgeon (good person) it can be used for good, to save peoples lives and help others, in the hands of the murderer (bad person ie GOSSIP in this case) will be used for bad, take lives away and bring terror to the world.
OK Thanks for the information!! I am breaking the news VERY GENTLY to my mother that I am actually still a member, so hopefully I will be able to attend Church and get a recommend for when I go.
Quote:Not true. Plain and simple, and many resources on the net will show this. It was not usual or typical, especially when you add in all the other factors. Besides, women and teens weren’t approaching the prophet and asking him to be their husband, out of a love interest, he was approaching them (or their parents), and making deals, and saying an angel with a flaming sword was commanding him, almost against his own will, to do this. Nope, not the same at all.
I have looked into the age thing (away from religion) – my understanding of history from that era (and of course I could be wrong) is that generally it was very different from now. Dowrys were still involved and many families who were poor would effectively “sell” their daughters to survive. Of course they used the term “Marry” instead – but it was all around money in those days. I read a wonderful true story about a woman from the late 1900s so after JS era whose family had no money so she couldnt marry her true love (long story, but he was not good anyway so did her a favour! but anyway…)..a very kind clergyman offered to take her on with no dowry (that was sweet!). Many of these girls were very young. Back in those days – age wasnt an issue – children started work down the mines at the ages of 6 in some cases and girls were considered “marriage material” as soon as they were fertile. The average age was 18-20 to be married which yes is older than 14, but it wasnt unheard of for a 14/15/16 year old to marry and it was certainly in higher proportions than today.
Back to religion – I honestly dont know what happened in JS era and what they were doing! I intend to ask them in the CK. I was talking to a friend about this, about how I struggled with some of the history of the Church and especially polygamy (you sound like me a few months back actually). I have come to accept (for me) that there are parts of the Church history I dont like, I dont understand, but there is also parts of history in general I dont like or dont understand (especially being british – we were barbarians centuries ago – still are in some regards!!!
😆 but I dont run to another country!). I have decided that the basic principles of the Church/lifestyle I agree with and want to live – it does have its good points also which for me anyway far outweigh the bad.Thats what I love about this site though..it lets people express their opinions in a safe environment and without fear of being judged (I do it anyway, dont bother me! hehe)
Quote:Given the church’s moral strictness and punishing behavior on sexual indiscretions today (even things like MB!), why should members allow such latitude in its leadership in the past? It really strikes me as incredulous, but that’s just me.
Yes the Church does have a moral strictness HOWEVER from what I have seen in members, many members do things they shouldnt, they break some of the principles and just keep it between them and God. Its easy to forget that the important part here is God..noone else. This of course is just my view and how I live WITH the Church. Now I know that some principles requires a leaders help for repentence, however I dont think MB is one (if I am understanding MB correctly!), I think that is a private thing and its upto the individual to keep it to themselves and not make it known.
Maybe I am just stubborn, but I have never been the sort of person to follow like a robot, I have my own views, my own ways and I will follow the prophet AFTER praying myself and deciding if I agree with it or not. When I first joined the church, my parents thought it was a cult and I said no its not, cults use brainwashing and I am too stubborn and independent to be brainwashed
Orson wrote:Agreed! And you sound spunky today!
😆 …may have something to do with that fact that I am on a spiritual high still at the moment (had a few AMAZING experiences over the last few weeks!)..or it could just be the tub of belgium chocolate hagen daz ice cream I just ate!🙄 flowerdrops wrote:NotSure2008 wrote:That actually makes sense to me. I dont know what they were thinking..we never will until of course we meet them – then I for one will be sure to ask them what exactly they were doing!!
Good attitude.
ALL areas of lifeis asking too much. I am not entirely convinced that a MALE GA can be better in the knowledge of ALL areas of life for a woman?? Anyone who thought that would be daft in my opinion – they are men after all and what do men know about women??
😆 Thats what this site is for flowerdrops – we cant ask these questions in Church because of those that do prefer to go through life with their blinders on. Some just havent come across this part of church history yet. When I was having scripture study with a friend the other day and I mentined something about JS having a 14 year old wife to which my friend replied “Emma wasnt 14 was she?” – when I mentioned that I meant one of his other wives…she was quite shocked and had no idea that JS had any other wife than Emma (of course there is the option that he didnt and its all a conspiracy..). You cant believe anything from those years. The very fact that they think William Lee has an allerby just because he wrote it in his diary shows how silly people thought back then! You can easily kill someone and then while writing in your diary pretend you were not there! I know people who to hide from their life has it is make up stories in their diaries so they can believe their life is somehting which it isnt! I suppose its like when a young child goes through a terrible traumatic event and develops a multi-personality disorder – the extra personalities protect the original one.
As for the children, I have heard stories that there has been DNA testing, and so far all has come back negative. You can place a child into another family, but you cant change DNA. Regarding abortions, I doubt he would have been able to do it so often and have a living mother at the end of it. If he tried, I am pretty sure the woman would have died on most occasions purely through hygeine etc. Just as a note, I am not saying this is what I think happened, just that it is one of the many possibilities.
I am heading into this with the intent of following the principles I agree with and I have personally recieved confirmation on. If in the future a revelation comes that polygamy is to be re-instated (which I highly doubt it will!), I wouldnt take the prophets word for it straight away, I would pray myself and then and only then choose the path I would like to follow. Some of course would disagree with this course of action, but surely through all of this its God we should listen to first and foremost??
I was reading back through some posts on another forum I used to partake in. I had forgotten I had asked about Joseph Smiths wives and polyandry on that site. I shall copy and paste the answer I recieved from a very wise woman I must say! “While a few of the marriages were likely consummated, there is a very, very good probability that the majority were not. (For instance, it would be pretty odd for not one single solitary child to have been born to any of Joseph’s wives except Emma. Birth control in the early 1800s was not exactly what it is today and if Joseph were having intimate relations with even a few of these 48 women, you’d expect to see a few children as a result. Only Emma had children.)Many of these women were sealed to Joseph for one reason and one reason alone — that they might fulfill one of the requirements to attain Exaltation in the Celestial Kingdom. They understood that celestial marriage is an eternal principle. Their own husbands were either disinterested or unworthy to receive the blessings of the temple, and since they wanted these blessings for themselves, they were sealed to Joseph, a man they realized they could be sealed to in the next life. They continued to live with their husbands and to have children with their husbands. Their sealings to Joseph were to be for the next life, not for this one. Some of the women were very young, as you pointed out. Many, many young girls married at the age of 14 and 15 back in those days, though. It was not at all unusual, even though it kind of strikes us today as pretty shocking. The vast majority know that he was sealed to a number of different women at the same time. Plural marriage, while no longer practiced, is not something we’re ashamed of. It was, after all, practiced in Old Testament times by some of God’s most faithful servants. I’m sure you know, for instance, that Abraham had more than one wife. It was commanded by God in the early days of the Church and those who were asked to practice it did so. At its heighth, however, probably only about 5% of the Church’s men had more than one wife. Many of them took on a second wife after the Saints had crossed the plains and were living in what is now Utah. Life was extremely difficult for a single woman back in the western frontier. Many of these men married second and third wives who would have otherwise been forced to try to get along on their own.”
That actually makes sense to me. I dont know what they were thinking..we never will until of course we meet them – then I for one will be sure to ask them what exactly they were doing!!
With regards to BY, by all accounts Emma couldnt stand him so there is the chance that he is just a horrid man.
Hi Kira, I realise this thread is a little old now, but although as not extreme as yours, my situation is similar in that when I finally return to the Church as a fully active member, it will be my third time (my mum is very anti also..) so just wanted to let you know what I am doing. I am not actually attending church, I would LOVE to and miss it deeply (but that just happens to be the stage that I am at at the moment) but dont go due to still living with my parents. I have regained contact with members who I havent spoken to for some time through facebook and also I was lucky in that a couple of the members had remained friends of mine in my absence. I am spending lots of time with them, the missionaries (mainly on their p-days where they have come around to my house to play footie) and just generally having fun WITH the members but not necessarily on a spiritual level. Of course i am that stage now where I WANT to be on a spiritual level with them and only the other day took a couple fo the girls onto the hills for some scripture study. I have started living the principles again and when I recieve confirmation that it is true and seen the blessings and joy I recieve from it, I start another one and so on and so forth..so its all very relaxed, slow and not rushing into anything.
I remember one of the members telling me that those that have a burning fire blazing away can quite quickly go out, but those that have a small flame and constantly tender to it, burns forever! quite poetic too
Take things slow – just out of interest have you ever been on another forum which deals with plenty of religions. You sound a lot like a member who was there and I am sure her name was Kira..she was into Islam at that point and like you had been through many religions.
I would get your bi-polar looked at, I think you may be looking for something, but dont quite know what it is, which is why you have been through so many religions.
I find it a fascinating subject – have been enjoying looking through all the links and information on the internet etc. I seem to have a great understanding and openess now. As I have read, it seems much easier to sort through things when you dont look at it in black and white. Does anyone know the reasoning behind the polyandry (ie Smith taking wives of women that were already married??). Was he just confused in the idea of polygamy and what he was supposed to do?
:Thanks for all of your answers. I have tried to read and research some of the history myself but as has been said there is so much on the internet and a lot of them are long winded answers. Also there are a lot of critical sites out there and many of their answers are probably not very trust worthy (although I do read through them sometimes!).
One of the main things I struggle with the Church is how many members seem to have blinders on, they dont like to even be questioned about the faith in a remotely negative way or even in a way of WHY do you believe that. It makes it difficult to ask what the point of view from the churches perspective is! However, looking through all the different informations available I can understand why as you just get yourself into a big mess. I am not sure whether I am doing myself a favour or not. With the experiences I have had recently, I cant possibly deny the Church, but there are so many things I am not sure on – as this thread is based, polygamy is one of them (there are several others I have come across). However having family which are anti-religion anyway, I dont want to accept the church fully without having researched all the criticism. I know this is probably a strange way of going about it, but it comes from my science background, I cant make the answers fit the model I would like the Church to be, I have to analyse all the information and come to the conclusion that the factual answers take me. However with everyone having such different opinions and with most of the problems originating from JS time when to be honest we will never know the exact goings on..this will be difficult.
I read somewhere about JS marrying a 14year old, tbh this wouldnt worry me as it was the norm in that era. Many 40/50year olds married very young maidens! I am assuming due to them being more fertile perhaps. I am a little confused about the explanation of JS having a glimspe into the afterlife and then trying to follow it??
I am a big believer in that we are all human even the prophets and people make mistakes. I am lending more to the conclusion that the Church is true or the basic general principles are, but that it has got human error within as well. However I am also not sure if this is an appropriate stand to take?
I hope that posts make sense!!
Katzpur wrote:NotSure2008 wrote:Welcome to this forum Katz
You will know me as Dream Angel…
Its good to have you here…and to everyone else Katz is a very wise and knowledgeable lady!
Dream Angel!!!! Wow! It’s so good to see you here. I was just thinking about e-mailing you about this site, but then I got to wondering if this was where you got that article you posted about no one being normal.
Yes I got that article from this site..ray posted it.
Welcome to this forum Katz You will know me as Dream Angel…
Its good to have you here…and to everyone else Katz is a very wise and knowledgeable lady!
mr_musicman wrote:Heber13 wrote:NotSure2008 wrote:Just as a side note, I noticed some of you talking about the question of asking women if they have ever had an abortion? I never got asked that question? (or dont remember being asked it anyhow!) or have they changed it since?
I never asked that question once, nor was instructed to. Of course, I was only counselor in bishopric and high councilor, never a bishop or anything like that.
I always read the questions as they were in the book. I remember reading that if a woman had an abortion, it did need to be addressed with the bishop and stake president, but I figured the question about “Any prior actions not resolved with priesthood authorities” type question covered that. Whenever people started delving deep into details, I always ended the interview and scheduled time for the bishop to talk with them about it (total cop out for me, but that was the way I was told to do it).
It is one of the Baptismal Interview questions for adult converts. The instructions are that a person that has had one needs the mission president’s clearance before being baptized. Because the ward is only involved in Child of Record baptisms at age 8, you probably would never have had to deal with it. Convert baptisms are under the direction of the mission until the person is confirmed a member of the church and joins the ward. It is not part of any other standard interview questions.
They must have forgotten it with me then..I was 21 when I joined the Church. That or my memory is awful..which at 23 is not a good sign!
😯
