Z
zerinus
Guest
Yes.Can a woman “not be fine with it” and remain LDS?
Yes.Can a woman “not be fine with it” and remain LDS?
We claim to be the restoration of the original church that Christ founded. That would include accepting the scriptures that He did, y’know.You make a good point and I need to remember the “restoration of all things” concept when discussing things with LDS.
What throws me off is the often quoted references to OT scripture. If LDS is a restoration of all things, then why reference the OT? Just start over with a new religion all by itself with its own ideas and doctrines not tied to anything else. (Ooops! I forgot I am not supposed to ask you these questions because you are a former LDS). If you choose to answer, I would appreciate your insight. I might get a hand slap for it, but maybe LDS will answer too, then all will be balanced.
Do LDS acknowledge the possible influence of Cochran on JS or LDS teachings? Once again, this question is open to all.
So, does that mean that LDS can practice polygamy now, as long as the country they live in doesn’t forbid it?The LDS received a new “revelation” in 1890 when president Wilford Woodruff said he received a revelation “to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land”
Amontoya,So, does that mean that LDS can practice polygamy now, as long as the country they live in doesn’t forbid it?
So, does that mean that the Lord was rescinding his command, because “the law of the land” was against it?Amontoya,
No. That particular talk was used to explain to the LDS members why the Lord was rescinding the provision that had been temporary as to the practice of plural marriage. It applied and still applies to all members throughout the world, with a “no”.
Nope, no Mormon may practice polygamy. If you want to hear it straight from the “horse’s mouth” go here and ask a missionary:So, does that mean that LDS can practice polygamy now, as long as the country they live in doesn’t forbid it?
Amontoya,So, does that mean that the Lord was rescinding his command, because “the law of the land” was against it?