any former mormons out there?

[Allweather]

Even in the NT polygamy is not condemned. Jesus never condemned it, even though it was practiced among the Jews, and some of His own disciples were probably polygamists. There are even indications that it was practiced in the Christian church after the time of Christ. You seem to be the type of guy who talks first and thinks afterwards. I suggest think first before you let your mouth loos like a rabid animal.zerinus

LOL, well, it is true that my frothing mouth has kept me in trouble throughout most of my almost 60 years on this mortal coil. I won’t deny it.

However, I have never, ever heard, read, or been otherwise informed that Jesus approved of polygamy, or that the disciples or apostles practiced it, or for that matter that it “was practiced among the jews.” This is news to me!!

And, though I’ve said many intemperate things at various times, I’ve never accused our Lord of being a polygamist, as some of your so-called prophets have “revealed.”

 

[Allweather]

I did not say that they taught polygamy. They did not need to. It was already permissible and practised under their law. But Jesus never condemns it either. Jesus changes or abrogated many of the old Jewish laws; but He never condemned or abrogated polygamy.

zerinus

Ah, so. The Jews in Jesus’ day were polygamists. Where is this related, either in Scripture, or in any historical records? I confess to being ignorant of this. I’ve never, ever heard of such a thing as this. I’m open to being informed. Please do.

I’m glad I finally found a Mormon who knows something about polygamy. The ones I’ve met locally seem surprised to find out that Joseph Smith taught and practiced it. Apparently LDS don’t really dwell on this subject anymore. I never see it mentioned in their TV commercials, nor amongst the missionaries. I’m glad to have found a proud, polygamy-believing Mormon! Now I can finally learn something useful!

 

[Allweather]

Through Ishmael came the Arab nation, with a rich cultural heritage and great history, through whom the world has been greatly blessed.zerinus

Ah, yes. Ishmael. In Gen 16:12 Ismael is described by the Lord’s messenger this way:

“He shall be a wild *** of a man, his hand against everyone, and everyone’s hand against him; In opposition to all his kin shall he encamp.”

I just love the way Zerinus describes this great Arab nation, with its “rich cultural heritage and great history, through whom the world has been greatly blessed.” Z? What are you smoking this evening?

 

[truthsilence]

I just love the way Zerinus describes this great Arab nation, with its “rich cultural heritage and great history, through whom the world has been greatly blessed.” Z? What are you smoking this evening?

I’ll bet he’s drinking Kool-Aid.

 

[zerinus]

However, I have never, ever heard, read, or been otherwise informed that Jesus approved of polygamy, or that the disciples or apostles practiced it, or for that matter that it “was practiced among the jews.” This is news to me!!

Then you can hear it now. Polygamy was permissible under the old Jewish law, as well as under the Roman Law. Throughout history, in all nations and societies whenever polygamy was permissible under the law, it has always been a small section of the population that have actually practised it, for various reasons, the most important of which was economical. It costs money to keep a wife, and only wealthy people could afford it. In most Islamic countries today where polygamy is legal, it is practised by very few, for the same reasons. It also requires a strong character and a lot of emotional stability to have more than one wife. Some people can’t get along with one wife, never mind two! But it was permissible under the Jewish law, and some people undoubtedly practised it.

And, though I’ve said many intemperate things at various times, I’ve never accused our Lord of being a polygamist, as some of your so-called prophets have “revealed.”

Yes, it is characteristic of anti-Mormons that when they lose the argument, they start slandering our “prophets”. That is a cheap shot that will not wash. It rebounds negatively on you. It doesn’t harm us.

zerinus

 

[geraldffff]

You still didn’t answer my queston though. Did God create eternity or not? If He created time, then He must have also created eternity, because time is only a small, incomplete segment of eternity. And if He created eternity, then there must have been a time when He wasn’t eternal!

zerinus

I think I asked my question first? Perhaps I did not phrase the question I asked, many many times, properly? Do you believe that God the Father, the creator, is a man?

 

[Karin]

Polygamy is forbidden in the following passages of the Bible:
([Deuteronomy 17:17; Leviticus 18:18; Malachi 2:14,15; Matthew 19:4,5; Mark 10](http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy 17:17; Leviticus 18:18; Malachi 2:14,15; Matthew 19:4,5; Mark 10))

 

[zerinus]

Ah, yes. Ishmael. In Gen 16:12 Ismael is described by the Lord’s messenger this way:

“He shall be a wild *** of a man, his hand against everyone, and everyone’s hand against him; In opposition to all his kin shall he encamp.”

I just love the way Zerinus describes this great Arab nation, with its “rich cultural heritage and great history, through whom the world has been greatly blessed.” Z? What are you smoking this evening?

It looks like my Bible reads differently from yours. This is what my Bible says about Ishmael:

Genesis 16:

12 And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.

“Dwell in the presence of all his brethren” is a sign of favor, not of disfavor. Also, “his hand will be against every man, and every man’s hand against him;” is not derogatory either. In those days all strong nations were periodically at war with their neighbours.

Of the tribe of Judah the Lord said something similar:

Genesis 49:

8 Judah, thou art he whom thy brethren shall praise: thy hand shall be in the neck of thine enemies; thy father’s children shall bow down before thee.

zerinus

 

[Allweather]

Yes, it is characteristic of anti-Mormons that when they lose the argument, they start slandering our “prophets”. That is a cheap shot that will not wash. It rebounds negatively on you. It doesn’t harm us.

zerinus

I still need something more firm than your assertion alone that polygamy was practiced by Jews in the time of Jesus. All we have here is your assertion. I should think that you would be able to provide some additional supporting information.

As for my so-called “cheap shot” are you claiming that no LDS prophet ever taught that Jesus was a polygamist and fathered children among his “wives?” If untrue, then, yes, it would indeed be a cheap shot. But, if true, then it reflects rather poorly instead upon the so-called prophets who made such a claim. And even more poorly upon the misguided people who adhere to that religion. To my knowledge, nowhere in Scripture are we informed that Jesus was married, that he was the groom at the wedding feast in Cana at which his first miracle was performed, or that he fathered children. If this is indeed a feature of Mormon teaching, then it should have some basis from the scriptural or historical records. Can you show it?

 

[zerinus]

I still need something more firm than your assertion alone that polygamy was practiced by Jews in the time of Jesus. All we have here is your assertion. I should think that you would be able to provide some additional supporting information.

Answer given in post #285

As for my so-called “cheap shot” are you claiming that no LDS prophet ever taught that Jesus was a polygamist and fathered children among his “wives?” If untrue, then, yes, it would indeed be a cheap shot. But, if true, then it reflects rather poorly instead upon the so-called prophets who made such a claim. And even more poorly upon the misguided people who adhere to that religion. To my knowledge, nowhere in Scripture are we informed that Jesus was married, that he was the groom at the wedding feast in Cana at which his first miracle was performed, or that he fathered children. If this is indeed a feature of Mormon teaching, then it should have some basis from the scriptural or historical records. Can you show it?

Yes, it is a cheap shot. Our doctrines are defined in the standard works. We don’t have any “extra canonical” theology.

zerinus

 

[Karin]

Answer given in post #285

well here is post #285…do we just take your word for this?
Then you can hear it now. Polygamy was permissible under the old Jewish law, as well as under the Roman Law. Throughout history, in all nations and societies whenever polygamy was permissible under the law, it has always been a small section of the population that have actually practised it, for various reasons, the most important of which was economical. It costs money to keep a wife, and only wealthy people could afford it. In most Islamic countries today where polygamy is legal, it is practised by very few, for the same reasons. It also requires a strong character and a lot of emotional stability to have more than one wife. Some people can’t get along with one wife, never mind two! But it was permissible under the Jewish law, and some people undoubtedly practised it.

 

[Allweather]

It looks like my Bible reads differently from yours.zerinus

And so it does. I used the New American Bible, and it reads as I quoted it. FWIW, the NIV, which is a favorite among Protestants, reads this way:

Ge 16:12 "He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone’s hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers.”

The TEV, which I believe is a less literal rendition, reads like so:

Gen 16:12 “But your son will live like a wild donkey; he will be against everyone, and everyone will be against him. He will live apart from all his relatives.”

I’ll let someone more knowledgeable address this, if they want, but my guess is that the KJV is not the best translation in this regard.

There is no need to get sidetracked on this tiny matter. I’ll give you your admiration of the Arabs. Let’s stick to the matter at hand, which is this: Where is the evidence, apart from the words of Zerinus, that Jews in Jesus’ day were polygamists, that polygamy was, or is, permitted or encouraged by Hebrew law and customs, and that the disciples of Jesus, to include the Apostles, practiced polygamy. If we can nail that down, then we can agree that Joseph Smith did not issue a false revelation, or prophesy with regard to polygamy. If we cannot nail it down, then we are going to have to go with the false prophesy idea, because polygamy is, and always has been AFAIK, a crime in Christian civilization.

 

[Allweather]

Yes, it is a cheap shot. Our doctrines are defined in the standard works. We don’t have any “extra canonical” theology.

zerinus

So, you’re saying here that nowhere, anywhere in LDS teaching, is there anything about Jesus having been married to at least three women and having children by them?

 

[zerinus]

There is no need to get sidetracked on this tiny matter. I’ll give you your admiration of the Arabs. Let’s stick to the matter at hand, which is this: Where is the evidence, apart from the words of Zerinus, that Jews in Jesus’ day were polygamists, that polygamy was, or is, permitted or encouraged by Hebrew law and customs, and that the disciples of Jesus, to include the Apostles, practiced polygamy.

The Jews lived under the old Mosaic law, and under that law polygamy was permitted, and Jesus never condemned the practice. That is all that you need to know.

If we can nail that down, then we can agree that Joseph Smith did not issue a false revelation, or prophesy with regard to polygamy. If we cannot nail it down, then we are going to have to go with the false prophesy idea, because polygamy is, and always has been AFAIK, a crime in Christian civilization.

We don’t have to “nail down” anything. Everything that Joseph Smith taught does not have to be proved form the Bible. Joseph Smith brought about a completely new dispensation of the gospel. What is the point of having a new dispensation, complete with new prophets, revelation, scripture, and the restoration of the fullness of the priesthood, if God wasn’t going to tell us something that we didn’t know before, or which does not already exist in the Bible. It is not our job to “prove” Mormonism to anybody. The commandment that the Lord gave to the early ministers of the Church was to preach “nothing but repentance unto this generation” (D&C 6:9). It is the job of the Holy Spirit to convince people of the truth of our message; and He does confirm it to those who are sincere in their desires to know the truth.

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

So, you’re saying here that nowhere, anywhere in LDS teaching, is there anything about Jesus having been married to at least three women and having children by them?

Yes, such comments have been made, but it has never been the official doctrine of the Church, and is not so now.

Zerinus

 

[truthsilence]

We don’t have any “extra canonical” theology.

Thats why teaching manuals put out by the LDS church itself don’t count.

This is lunacy…

 

[Allweather]

Yes, such comments have been made, but it has never been the official doctrine of the Church, and is not so now.

Zerinus

OK, let’s leave that alone for now.

It remains that ZERINUS teaches polygamy. ZERINUS is a big believer in it, he supports it, he studies it, he knows all about it, but apparently he is not able to provide us any evidence from the NT or from history that Jesus practiced polygamy, that his disciples practiced it, or that the apostles practiced it, or that it was practiced among the Jews of Jesus’ day, or anywhere along the way in Christendom over a period of two thousand years.

ZERINUS has admitted that Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism, issued the so-called “revelation” that instituted polygamy. Other Mormon prophets, notably Brigham Young and Joseph F. Smith, have been big on polygamy. I doubt that ZERINUS would deny that. Various other lesser LDS leaders have made extensive statements in support of polygamy, and have gone so far as to state that one may not attain to godhood without being a polygamist.

What I am getting at is this: Polygamy is, and always has been, a crime in Christendom. Absent any evidence to the contrary, I’m certain it was a moral crime within Judaism well before Jesus’ day. It has been a crime in the United States, was a crime in 1843. The claimed JS revelation was therefore a deviant thing, not in conformity with what is known about Jesus, or the disciples, or the Apostles, or the Church. Therefore, it cannot be considered valid. It is a false revelation, and the revelator that gave it is a false revelator. This gets back to #67 of the Catechism, which we were talking about earlier.

 

[Allweather]

We don’t have to “nail down” anything. Everything that Joseph Smith taught does not have to be proved form the Bible. Joseph Smith brought about a completely new dispensation of the gospel. What is the point of having a new dispensation, complete with new prophets, revelation, scripture, and the restoration of the fullness of the priesthood, if God wasn’t going to tell us something that we didn’t know before, or which does not already exist in the Bible. It is not our job to “prove” Mormonism to anybody.

zerinus

Wait a minute. Before, you were going on and on about how scripture proves this and scripture proves that. Now, you say you don’t need scripture. Which is it? Do you see how you wiggle? When scripture can be used, you use it, even if incorrectly. When it can’t be used, you say, we don’t need it anyway, we’ve got ongoing revelation.

Also, what is this about a “completely new dispensation of the gospel”?? I thought this was a restoration of the lost gospel, not something entirely new. Which is it? Restoration of that which was lost thru apostasy? Or something entirely new? Or both?

But the REAL question is, if polygamy is taught according to this new dispensation, and it is valid without reference to what has been revealed by the DEFINITIVE REVELATION OF CHRIST, then why does the LDS church not practice it today?

 

[geraldffff]

Wait a minute. Before, you were going on and on about how scripture proves this and scripture proves that. Now, you say you don’t need scripture. Which is it? Do you see how you wiggle? When scripture can be used, you use it, even if incorrectly. When it can’t be used, you say, we don’t need it anyway, we’ve got ongoing revelation.

Also, what is this about a “completely new dispensation of the gospel”?? I thought this was a restoration of the lost gospel, not something entirely new. Which is it? Restoration of that which was lost thru apostasy? Or something entirely new? Or both?

But the REAL question is, if polygamy is taught according to this new dispensation, and it is valid without reference to what has been revealed by the DEFINITIVE REVELATION OF CHRIST, then why does the LDS church not practice it today?

 

[Nan_S]

You still didn’t answer my queston though. Did God create eternity or not? If He created time, then He must have also created eternity, because time is only a small, incomplete segment of eternity. And if He created eternity, then there must have been a time when He wasn’t eternal!

zerinus

Z,

That’s like asking “is it possible for God to create a rock that is too heavy for Him to lift?”
Your question is a non-sequitur.

Time is a thing that can be sensed and measured. Eternity is not.

Time is created. It had a beginning and will have an end. Eternity is not and does not.

Time changes. Eternity does not.

Basic definition of God: God is eternal. Eternity is part of the essence of God.

Nan