Actually, in the Bible, Christ cast out the unworthy from the Temple.

That, and true believers were instructed to avoid throwing pearls before swine. We take that to mean that there are sacred things that are not to be shared with those who will only mock them.

No, a true Christian believer understands what sacred is. A true Christian believer knows an Angel of God visited Mary, and instructed her to keep certain sacred information to herself. Every real Christian knows that.

I can understand many in modern Christianity who don't understand sacred teachings, sacred promises, and what is sacred. But the true believers understand that you don't give a little baby a T-bone steak...

And you don't cast pearls before swine.

Edited:

I own Page 2 and Page 3...How about that!

ROTFLMFAO!!!!

McConkie's "Mormon Doctrine" is pretty consistently discredited by the church as NOT being mormon doctrine.  In fact, I'm pretty sure that a mormon has pointed that out every time I've brought up something from that book.  If you really want to put forth that book as an authoritative source of mormon doctrine, we can have any number of interesting discussions related to it (as an aside, I wonder if any of the mormons that are following this thread have the intellectual honesty point out that McConkie's book really isn't an accurate source of mormon doctrine).

Let's see. . .  Who would be a better authority about polygamy?  An apostle with a discredited book, or a mormon prophet?  I say prophet FTW!



And how about this one?



So, if polygamy is NOT required for salvation, as you claim, then Brigham must have been a false prophet.  Which is it?



Again, ROTFLMFAO!!

Polygamy is alive and well in the mormon church.  And I'm not talking about what you  would consider "apostate splinter groups."  I'm talking about mainstream mormonism, headquartered in Salt Lake City.

Mormon men are routinely "sealed" to more than one woman.

"But wait!" you say.  That is only after their wife has died.

Two points.

1) If polygamy is unacceptable, why are these men being sealed to more than one woman?  Could it be because spiritual polygamy (after you are dead) is indeed acceptable, and as Brigham clearly pointed out, REQUIRED?

2) The ONLY prohibition regarding polygamy in the modern mormon church is that a man can only have sex with the wife to whom he is currently CIVILLY married.  While not mainstream, it is certainly not rare for a mormon man to be sealed to more than one living woman.  He only gets to have sex with one, but other than that, it IS polygamy.



Again, ROTFLMFAO!!  I love how all ex-mormons are labeled as bitter.

As far as being honest about the beliefs. . .

You and the other mormons here may not like me, and you may not like what I have to say, but everything I have said, in this, and in every mormon thread I have participated in, is 100% accurate.  We may draw different conclusions when faced with the same information, but I certainly am not being dishonest about anything.  If I am, please provide the evidence.



Scott

If you are going to be 100% honest, I'd like you to elaborate on how you were manipulated into attending the Temple.

Here is your original quote:

"The oaths and covenants of the temple can hardly be considered valid, especially considering the nature of those oaths, and the corresponding pressure/coercion to enter into them."

Low lets find out how "100% honest" you are...

Maybe you are 90% honest...Or 80%...How far are we going to get with this honesty thing. I'd let you settle with 70% honest...

And to answer your question of "Mormon Doctrine," You yourself have (in this thread) quoted "Christian" authors who have clarified "Christian" teaching in writing books and such. That is what McConkie's book is...Even McConkie changed parts of the book to match more effectively revealed truth. Is it 100% accurate? Or is it like your "honesty..."

Mormons don't consider McConkies writings to be doctrine. But they can be effectively used to clarify points. And the post you quoted was used to show how you twist mormon doctrine around, and McConkies writings were used to clarify how you had done some "twisting" of what Mormons really believe with your "100% honesty." Well, 70% honesty I guess...

So you say that Mormons believe in polygamy, because in the LDS church, a man can be sealed to more than one woman. 100% honest? Nope. Lets settle at 70% honest again. What our anti-Mormon friend here left out (100% honest???) was that if a mans wife dies, he can re-marry in the LDS church. What would you have the guy do? His wife dies, he has three kids to take care of, he falls in love with another woman, she falls in love with him, yeah LDS doctrine allows him to re-marry. The situation our anti-Mormon friend here described is created only when one spouse dies. How about that...And the guy is 100% (70%) honest...

I'd bet dollars to donuts that the church you currently attend allows a man (or woman) to re-marry after the death of a spouse. Certainly a tilted (bigoted) point of view that LDS church members are instantly polygamsists when we re-marry after the death of a spouse. It certainly shows your (not so nice) opinion of LDS families for you to claim something is right for other "Christians" to do, and not right for Mormons to do. (100% honest? Yeah, I'll go with 70% honest again.)

And McConkie (and many other LDS authors) clarify the point of marraige and it lasting in the hereafter. So does scripture, which I will venture to say is the only thing I will trust with 100% honesty. Sorry to burst your bubble, my anti-Mormon friend...But you don't stack up to scripture when it comes to clarifying doctrine with 100% accuracy. And scripture is clear. God has the power to bind in "earth and in Heaven." And God has used Temples throughout time for his people to worship him, and make sacred promises. 100% honest...Yep, and backed up 100% by scripture!

Claiming that coercion and pressure exist is not the same as claiming that it happened to me.  It may have, but I haven't made that claim, and if you try to make that claim for me, you are making an assumption that is not supported by any evidence.



I never quoted McConkie here in support of anything I have said.  Any McConkie quote in a post of mine is a re-quote from a mormon attempting to use "Mormon Doctrine" to support their position.

I quoted Packham, an ex-mormon, as he described the invalidity of mormon temple oaths and covenants better than I could.  Is that what you're referring to?  Or is it my quotes of the mormon prophet Brigham Young?



Actually, that is 100% honest and accurate.  If you want to try to blur the lines between polygamy in the here and now vs. polygamy in the hereafter, that is you, not me.



Remarrying and being sealed to another woman are two different things.  No problem with getting remarried. People do it all the time.  But you are attempting to blur the lines between re-marriage, and being sealed to another woman.  For the uninformed, it makes little difference.  However, as you certainly are aware, the sealing to another woman creates spiritual polygamy, and will absolutely be polygamy in the hereafter (assuming all of the other requirements stipulated by the mormon church are met).



My experience in mormonism has caused me to swear off organized religion.  However, any church that I might consider joining does allow a widower to remarry.  But again, we aren't talking about that.  Becoming an instant polygamist happens not with a simple re-marriage, but upon being sealed to another woman.

You failed to address my points (or perhaps you did, by trying to blur the lines between simple re-marriage, and being sealed to another woman).  1) Why the sealing to another woman, instead of simply getting married?  And 2) Mormon men can be sealed to more than one LIVING woman.  The one caveat is that they can only have sex with the woman that they are currently civilly married to, but in all other respects, it is polygamy.  In the here and now, not just in the hereafter.  Yes, polygamy is alive and well in mormonism.

Now, I'm sure you won't like what I just said.  But please, show how what I said is wrong.  Good luck!  



You still haven't shown any inaccuracies in what I've said.  Keep trying!

I've asked before for scriptural evidence showing that initiatories, endowments, and temple sealings as practiced in modern mormon temples were practiced in ancient temples.  So far, neither you nor anyone else has provide that evidence.  But please, show us the 100% support.

Shane put forth two chapters, but as was demonstrated, there are virtually no similarities, beyond the use of two words, "garment(s)" and "annoint(ing)."

Holy cow.

You have some issues with Mormons, man.

Here is your original quote: "considering the nature of those oaths, and the corresponding pressure/coercion to enter into them." You made that quote, brother. I didn't. And to be clear, you could accuse any organized religion of "pressure/coercion..." with a bit of a stretch. But you are 100% honest, not 70% honest, I guess.

Your quote: "Remarrying and being sealed to another woman are two different things." You have got to be kidding me. In the LDS church, a marraige is called a "sealing" meaning that the couple are sealed together with God...The only time a man or woman can re-marry in LDS doctrine is in the death of their spouse, or in a divorce...According to what you are saying is that anytime anyone re-marries after death or divorce, they are polygamsists...? You are kidding, right? If a couple gets a divorce, they can re-marry without the fear of being labled "polygamists." You are really trying to be funny, right. Seeing as how you are 100% honest, I figure you are totally serious. Which makes me think you have some serious issues that ARFCOM is not going to help you with, my friend.

Your quote: "Becoming an instant polygamist happens not with a simple re-marriage, but upon being sealed to another woman." Again, you have got to be kidding. You just have a lot of time on your hands, and are trying to talk in circles...That is the only thing I can see you doing. Basically you are saying that Mormons cannot re-marry without becoming polygamists. But every other church/courthouse/justice of the peace can re-marry people, and they are not polygamists...Because Mormons are just inherently all polygamists. And you are 100% honest, not 70%?

Your quote: "Yes, polygamy is alive and well in mormonism."  TROLL. That is all I can say about that statement. You were just trying to trump yourself...I guess. You were just trying to keep the hate flowing, and keep the argument going, I guess.

Man, every one of your posts you spin truth. First you tried arguing the difference between "sacred" and "secret." When nobody took the bait, you try trumping yourself with LDS church members are polygamists.

Dude. Seriously.

It won't do you any good. If you can look at the LDS church, and call us "Polygamists" because we allow a man or woman to re-marry after the death of a spouse, or a divorce, then it would not do you any good.

I could pile mountains of evidence in front of you, and all you would do is mock it...You were the one who tried to spin the "sacred" vs. "secret" argument...Just so you could mock what is sacred.

Something about pearls before swine...

Yeah, Temple worship is Biblical. You will find Temple worship in the Old Testament, and you will find Temple worship in the New Testament. You will also find that the Temple was unique and held only for the worthy. You will find Jesus casting out the "unworthy" in the New Testament, and you will find the Temple held exclusive to true believers in the Old Testament.

What more evidence could you possibly ask for?

Oh...You want specifics...You mock us on one hand, call us "polygamists" then you want us to share our pearls...

Yeah, right.

That ain't gonna happen...Something about pearls before swine...

Everytime you propose a "question," or rather a challenge, and an LDS member answers it, you spin it around. Then you claim that you are the only one being "honest." Well, Shane tried to be honest, and provided pretty clear scriptural backing...Did no good to you. Now you are openly stating that Mormons can't re-marry (after the death of a spouse, or a divorce) without becoming polygamists. The truth is, if I was dealing with a man who's wife died, I would have no doctrinal qualms about him (or her––vice versa) re-marrying. It is asinine to think that a spouse needs to worry about being labled a polygamist (LDS or not) after the death (or divorce) of a spouse. Truly asinine. About as asinine, as claiming that questions on this thread have not been answered...

The truth is, true believers have always been commanded to keep sacred things sacred. And Temples have always been a place for true believers to worship God.

Specifics?...Keep waiting...And waiting...

I am sure you will find something else to mock Mormons with, but you won't get any specifics about Temple worship...

Something about pearls before swine...

So Taxphd, if you are the the expert on all things mormon, and you are being honest and factual about everything you are claiming, I HAVE ONE QUESTION?

You stated you were made to take ablood oath on what you swore in our temple, SO IF THATS TRUE WHY AREN'T YOU DEAD YET? DOH!!

BTW, NOBODY in the church i have ever met has disclaimed "Mormon Doctrine" by Bruce R. McConkie as not representative of what the mainstream LDS church believes, while the church does not consider a "official book" authorized by the church for printing and distribution, it is still considered a authoritative source.

Quit being disingenuous and spitting out half truths to back your side of things. YOU KNOW FULL WELL IF YOU WERE THE MEMBER YOU CLAIMED YOU WERE, all the apostles are considered prophets in their own right and official spokesmen and ambassadors for the church as a whole.

Well, i guess it's up to the readers who they want to believe more somebody with an Axe to grind because somebody pissed in their wheaties and they are therefore no longer affiliated with the church or those of us who are actually members in good standing of the organization.

No point in argueing anymore, have a nice life Taxphd, good luck avoiding all those "DANITES" you will probably try next to convince everyone you have had to hide from since being out of the church.

I know i do not make it a point to rely on people who were told they were out of an organiztion for my factual info.

I have said this before...

If you could learn about Jesus from two of the Apostles, and your choices were betweeen Peter "the rock" and Judas "the betrayer" who would you choose?

The tradgedy, is that many people (Hollyweird included) seem to like the story that Judas has more and more often.

Many people don't know the distinction between somebody with an axe to grind (and a pretty good story, since they can make it up as they go) and someone who has been honest and faithful to the gosple of Christ.

Our good (tax) doctor (once) wrote that Mormon promises to God are not valid (...Oaths and covenants...Can hardly be considered valid...). How can you have a two-way conversation with somebody who thinks so little of you that you can't make promises to God? God loves everyone, and he listens to everyone. Mormons teach that Baptists, Catholics, and everbody is a Child of God, and God loves them.

The (tax) doctor has serious issues with Mormons if he thinks so little of us, and our sacred things. I have never ever heard a Mormon say that any other religion can't call on God, and grow closer to him. The (tax) doctor, you have issues that ARFCOM can't solve if you think so little of Mormons.

Yeah, the guy certainly has an axe to grind...And so did Judas...

But I have mentioned it before...The faithful keep promises to God. They always have. And they worship in sacred Temples. They always have.

Thanks for playing everyone, I think this thread has run it's course.  JMHO.

OP has his hands full with what's going on in his family.  Prayers are with him.

I believe this thread is like beating a dead horse.



Recommendation is to let this thread go as everyone had their opinion heard.

You do understand the difference between a temple marriage with a sealing, and a non-temple marriage without a sealing, don't you?  In your posts, it appears that either you are intentionally trying to obfuscate the the difference, or you really don't understand the difference, and in that case, your understanding of mormonism is insufficient to allow you to make a meaningful contribution to this thread.  In the interest of not shutting down this discussion, I'll assume it is the former, rather than the latter (please let me know if I am incorrect about this).

I'll try to make this as simple as I can.  

No one is questioning whether or not a mormon man can/should remarry after a divorce or death of their spouse.  If the mormon gets married civilly, by a justice of the peace, minister, mormon bishop, or anyone else that the state deems worthy, then they have simply remarried, and I would never claim that they are in a polygamist relationship.  However, if they get married in a mormon temple and are sealed (and this is a very different situation than that which was originally described), then the polygamist relationship MAY exist.  Let's look at three different scenarios:

1) In the case of divorce and re-marriage, where a cancellation of sealing is obtained, it is not polygamy, in any way.  If this is the situation to which you refer, then you and I are in agreement.

2) In the case where the prior spouse has died, there is no cancellation of the sealing, and the man is sealed to ANOTHER woman, it is spiritual polygamy.  The mormon man is sealed to more than one woman, and will be sealed to (and living with) more than one woman in the hereafter.  If polygamy does not exist in any way shape or form in the mormon church, why allow sealing's (not just re-marriage) to multiple women?

3) The least common scenario, though by no means rare, is where a couple who are married and sealed in the temple divorce, but do not get a cancellation of the sealing.  The man then re-marries another woman in the temple, and is sealed to her.  In this situation, the man is sealed to more than one LIVING woman.  He can only have sex with the woman to who he is currently civilly married to, but in all other respects he is in a living (not just spiritual) polygamist relationship.

You may not be familiar with scenario #3.  That's all right.  Lots of mormons are unaware of a lot of things related to their religion of choice.  If you don't think #3 happens, do some research.  Talk to some people that you trust that know more about this than you do.  You will see that again, I have been 100% accurate.



See the previous discussion.

Oh, something else, just to help those in this thread who don't know a whole lot about mormonism.  If a mormon woman is sealed in the temple, and her husband dies, can she go to the temple and get re-married AND sealed to another man?  If not, why not?



Again, see the previous discussion.  The ONLY difference between polygamy in the modern mormon church, and the polygamy practiced in the mormon church prior to early 1900's, is sex with just one of the wives.

Now, you won't like that I have said this.  You are going to be all spun up and pissed off.  But instead of simply calling me a troll in an attempt to dismiss me, please address the points that I have raised.  If things have changed in the mormon church, and men are no longer being sealed to multiple women, either living or dead, I would be interested in knowing about it.



Scott

Why is anyone here still entertaining TaxPhd's trolling?  So he has issues with the temple.  So what.  So he has issues with an LDS couple getting divorced and the man remarrying (because the previous sealing hasn't been canceled even though that's only a potential concern in the afterlife anyway).  This particular matter may be something that TaxPhd is personally concerned about, but so what.

Pearls, folks, pearls.

Again, try to stay focused here.  Go read the chapters that Shane referenced.  You will read a little about "anointing," a little about "garments," and a lot about slaughtering animals.  Using the words "anoint" and "garment" does not make what was happening the same as the modern initiatory ceremony.  I'm not sure why you are unable to understand this.  Would it help to have a transcript of the initiatory, to read alongside the biblical chapters?



No one is claiming otherwise.



That temples existed in the bible, that they were holy places, that they were only for the worthy, and that Jesus cast out the unworthy, provides no evidence at all that initiatories, endowments, and sealings as practiced in modern mormon temples were practiced in ancient temples.  I'm sorry if that is just too difficult for you to understand.



Again, everything i have said is 100% accurate.  Your claims of spin don't make it so.  But please, point out, specifically, what I have "spun."



No mockery going on, at least not on my side.  Just clarification of teachings and practices.  I'm not claiming that mormons have horns, and sacrifice virgins in the temple, or any other ridiculous claims.  You should be happy that I am simply clarifying some misunderstood practices of mormonism, rather then letting people believe something that isn't true.

I'm not sure what you are getting at here.  Are you claiming that the blood oaths didn't exist in the mormon temple ceremony, prior to 1990?

If you are simply wondering why I'm not dead yet, I guess it's because no one has gotten around to killing me yet.



You must not have been in the church for very long, or you don't have many involved conversations with knowledgeable people, or you are being disingenuous.  Which is it?



Please, tell us about even one half truth that I have spit out.



ROTFLMFAO!!



The Danites were the best part of the early mormon church.  If they were still around, and recruiting, I might never have left the church.



Nobody told me I was out of the organization.

You and I may have very different perspectives, and we may come to different conclusions based on the same set of facts, but I have not "made up" anything in this conversation.  If you are going to call me a liar, or suggest that I have been less than honest, provide specifics.



Re-read what I wrote.  I never said that you can't make promises with God.  If I am as wrong as you think I am, there should be no need to distort what I have said.



Are you claiming that I said this?  If so, please provide the quote.



I have no issue with "worshiping in sacred temples."  However, if the claim is made that modern mormon temples are the same as the ancient ones, and that modern mormon temple ceremonies are the same as what was practiced in ancient temples, then there would need to be evidence to support that claim.  So far, the evidence hasn't been provided.

Go back and re-read what I posted.  You are mischaracterizing what I said.



Again, not what I said.



Civilly married, no.  Sealed, yes.  And that is the issue.


Neither death nor divorce are extremely rare.  The only way that polygamy will get you exed is if you are civilly married to more than one person, or if you are having sex with more than one woman.

Other than characterizing my posts as trolling, this was a very reasoned response by you, and somewhat uncharactersitic.  Thanks.