Polygamy justification?

[Jeff Lebowski]

What you are saying does make sense but I don't see myself in any of the options you just outlined. My mind is very inquisitive and analytical and seeks a resolution of any conflicts it perceives. Sometimes it can resolve them, and some times it can't. I think there was a time in my life when I was in the "slowly eroding category" but over a number of years I realized that I will always be Mormon, that I love the church, and that when I attend church and do what I am supposed to, I feel very happy and good. I additionally realized that in my heart I believe all the things necessary to to be in, even if I don't understand them all in my mind, and that this paradox was not only tenable, but that it is beautiful because it is faith, the essence of religion.

So now, I continue to study things, learn things, debate and conjecture about things, but none of it leads to an exit. Mostly it just interesting, and when I am done thinking about anything particularly thorny I simply think: what's for dinner?

I think there are a lot of us like this, which makes us a Holy Mystery to SU.

This describes me quite well.

[Pheidippides]

The groupings are not absolute and there is a substantial overlap(and likely other categories that I haven't thought of). I too am very anylitical and I really hate spiritual and intellectual dissonance. When the dissonance is loud and intrusive, I am very depressed and detatched. I wandered through many of these groupings as I slowly exited mormonism. I existed as an apologist for a while and a revisionist for a while, but as the dissonance continued the house crashed down around me. I became an antagonist for a good amount of time, until I realized that the anger was consuming me and causing even more dissonance. I finally came to terms with what I was angry about and who I was angry at. I have finally come to a peace with my nonbelief and how to integrate the church into my life. This was a painful road to travel, but I am a more complete person for this path, and I wouldn't re-do it if I could. I learned more about myself, faith, my relationship with Christ and God, than if I had stopped trying to quell the dissonance.

Are you my father? This sounds much like his journey, and having seen it, I have respect for it.

For my part and place on the spectrum, I also hate the intellectual/spiritual dissonance, but what I hate more than that is the intentional ignorance of the dissonance itself - the refusal to acknowledge that there's a bunch of stuff out there that isn't all peaches and rainbows, the refusal to think about one's religion critically and at least acknowledge the seedy underbelly. If your response to the seedy underbelly is, "I don't know how that fits in, but I still believe in X" where X is anything from the Book of Mormon to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, fine by me - as long as you don't proselyte me too fiercely.

I realize that last bit is contrary to the way I operated my life for two years. I am more than happy to recognize my own hypocrisy.

I will unabashedly admit that I am very much in the "I believe in the dogmatic fundamental principles of the Gospel as a means of salvation but take everything else with a grain of salt" category, wherever that places me on the spectrum. That is, I am that way now. I have alternately been a mullah, an apologist, a revisionist, and a cultural-only-for-the-sake-of-my-wife Mormon at different times in my life, and my view shifts based on my experience. Right now, I attend church meetings with more regularity than most, read my scriptures less frequently than recommended, pray individually seldom if you are counting formal kneel-down types but often if you buy into that whole prayer in the heart thing (which I do) and honestly qualify for (and use) a TR. However, I love nothing more than to (1) bust the chops of the 1st counselor in the B-ric during b-ric meetings and (2) blow my HTer's mind with discourse, doubts, critical thinking and context.

Now you know where I'm coming from too. Nice to meet you all again, and I will participate in this forum more.

[Jarid in Cedar]

Are you my father? This sounds much like his journey, and having seen it, I have respect for it.

For my part and place on the spectrum, I also hate the intellectual/spiritual dissonance, but what I hate more than that is the intentional ignorance of the dissonance itself - the refusal to acknowledge that there's a bunch of stuff out there that isn't all peaches and rainbows, the refusal to think about one's religion critically and at least acknowledge the seedy underbelly.

This was one thing that absolutely drove me crazy. Too many members and leaders refuse to acknowledge the 500 lb gorillas and "wish them away". It's an attitude of "if we don't talk/acknowledge these things, they don't exist and they will go away".

Also, I am probably a bit young to be your father

[Pheidippides]

Also, I am probably a bit young to be your father

In addition, I trust your medical judgment much more. Oh, if the scars on my hands could talk.

[Indy Coug]

What bothers me is the disproportionate importance that is too often placed on these areas of dissonance. For me, the purpose of the Gospel is utilitarian and getting caught up in deutero-Isaiah, mitochondrial DNA or polygamy or what have you are just distracting tangents that even if resolved won't provide any additional utility. They won't help me love my wife and children, they won't help me serve my fellow man, they won't help me forgive or repent, they won't make me strive to be a better man.

I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to experiment upon the word to find out for myself if it bears good fruit. I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to act upon the spiritual promptings I receive from time to time to know that I am led by God inasmuch as I am willing to follow Him. The sum of these personal experiences over the course of an increasingly long life provide me a sufficiently reinforced independent witness of the truthfulness of the Gospel.

I'm not saying that there is no value in striving to reconcile the tension between the spiritual and intellectual, but I think for some they allow that struggle to needlessly overwhelm them. What are the core values and purposes of the Gospel? Do these issues materially affect my day to day life and how I attempt to integrate those core values? If we aren't constantly asking these questions and seeking to re-evaluate, we can lose sight of ultimate goal.

Faith is the first principle of the gospel. It is the principle that effectively states that sometimes, the spiritual simply has to win out over the intellectual if we are to progress. Rather than trying to buck that notion, there is a great deal of peace with intellectually accepting the fact that resolution is not always going to happen and then get about the business of trying to become more like the Savior.

Fire away.

[beefytee]

I'm not saying that there is no value in striving to reconcile the tension between the spiritual and intellectual, but I think for some they allow that struggle to needlessly overwhelm them. What are the core values and purposes of the Gospel? Do these issues materially affect my day to day life and how I attempt to integrate those core values? If we aren't constantly asking these questions and seeking to re-evaluate, we can lose sight of ultimate goal.

Are you telling me the landing gear light went out?

[Jarid in Cedar]

What bothers me is the disproportionate importance that is too often placed on these areas of dissonance. For me, the purpose of the Gospel is utilitarian and getting caught up in deutero-Isaiah, mitochondrial DNA or polygamy or what have you are just distracting tangents that even if resolved won't provide any additional utility. They won't help me love my wife and children, they won't help me serve my fellow man, they won't help me forgive or repent, they won't make me strive to be a better man.

I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to experiment upon the word to find out for myself if it bears good fruit. I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to act upon the spiritual promptings I receive from time to time to know that I am led by God inasmuch as I am willing to follow Him. The sum of these personal experiences over the course of an increasingly long life provide me a sufficiently reinforced independent witness of the truthfulness of the Gospel.

I'm not saying that there is no value in striving to reconcile the tension between the spiritual and intellectual, but I think for some they allow that struggle to needlessly overwhelm them. What are the core values and purposes of the Gospel? Do these issues materially affect my day to day life and how I attempt to integrate those core values? If we aren't constantly asking these questions and seeking to re-evaluate, we can lose sight of ultimate goal.

Faith is the first principle of the gospel. It is the principle that effectively states that sometimes, the spiritual simply has to win out over the intellectual if we are to progress. Rather than trying to buck that notion, there is a great deal of peace with intellectually accepting the fact that resolution is not always going to happen and then get about the business of trying to become more like the Savior.

Fire away.

I hate when work interferes with a good discussion. I will come back and give you my answer to this when I can.

[Gidget]

What bothers me is the disproportionate importance that is too often placed on these areas of dissonance. For me, the purpose of the Gospel is utilitarian and getting caught up in deutero-Isaiah, mitochondrial DNA or polygamy or what have you are just distracting tangents that even if resolved won't provide any additional utility. They won't help me love my wife and children, they won't help me serve my fellow man, they won't help me forgive or repent, they won't make me strive to be a better man.

I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to experiment upon the word to find out for myself if it bears good fruit. I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to act upon the spiritual promptings I receive from time to time to know that I am led by God inasmuch as I am willing to follow Him. The sum of these personal experiences over the course of an increasingly long life provide me a sufficiently reinforced independent witness of the truthfulness of the Gospel.

I'm not saying that there is no value in striving to reconcile the tension between the spiritual and intellectual, but I think for some they allow that struggle to needlessly overwhelm them. What are the core values and purposes of the Gospel? Do these issues materially affect my day to day life and how I attempt to integrate those core values? If we aren't constantly asking these questions and seeking to re-evaluate, we can lose sight of ultimate goal.

Faith is the first principle of the gospel. It is the principle that effectively states that sometimes, the spiritual simply has to win out over the intellectual if we are to progress. Rather than trying to buck that notion, there is a great deal of peace with intellectually accepting the fact that resolution is not always going to happen and then get about the business of trying to become more like the Savior.

Fire away.

Well said Indy, this is very close to how I feel about issues like these.

[grapevine]

I used to quote mtc teachers than hear about there credentials. In our mission John K Carmack came and said it was a part of the restitituon of all things. I think this is why we did it. As this is the dispensation of the fullness of times. BRM said in DNTC that as hard doctrines weeded out followers in Jesus's day it could of also been one of the purposes too to weed out the week.

I watched the Emma Smith movie and in end she said she did not discuss it herself. She actually picked wives for Joseph for some time but denied it after he was killed. INteresting on that did not accept polygamy but tolerated Bidamens infidelity, employed mother of his bastard son and told Bidamen to marry her after her death. Strange thinking there.

[Mr Incredible]

What bothers me is the disproportionate importance that is too often placed on these areas of dissonance. For me, the purpose of the Gospel is utilitarian and getting caught up in deutero-Isaiah, mitochondrial DNA or polygamy or what have you are just distracting tangents that even if resolved won't provide any additional utility. They won't help me love my wife and children, they won't help me serve my fellow man, they won't help me forgive or repent, they won't make me strive to be a better man.

I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to experiment upon the word to find out for myself if it bears good fruit. I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to act upon the spiritual promptings I receive from time to time to know that I am led by God inasmuch as I am willing to follow Him. The sum of these personal experiences over the course of an increasingly long life provide me a sufficiently reinforced independent witness of the truthfulness of the Gospel.

I'm not saying that there is no value in striving to reconcile the tension between the spiritual and intellectual, but I think for some they allow that struggle to needlessly overwhelm them. What are the core values and purposes of the Gospel? Do these issues materially affect my day to day life and how I attempt to integrate those core values? If we aren't constantly asking these questions and seeking to re-evaluate, we can lose sight of ultimate goal.

Faith is the first principle of the gospel. It is the principle that effectively states that sometimes, the spiritual simply has to win out over the intellectual if we are to progress. Rather than trying to buck that notion, there is a great deal of peace with intellectually accepting the fact that resolution is not always going to happen and then get about the business of trying to become more like the Savior.

Fire away.

I thought it was part of "the restoration of all things." Sometimes these have logical explanations and sometimes they don't (see any WoW discussion). Personally, I'm not sure I have the faith to give it a shot were it to come back and I somehow lost the lottery and was asked to participate.

[UtahDan]

Well said Indy, this is very close to how I feel about issues like these.

Do either of you have any interests in life that are just interesting/stimulating as opposed to productive? No sarcasm, sincere question.

I am perfectly willing to grant that the approach Indy has articulated and that Gidg. has also adopted is legitimate as long no one insists that I share that view. I definitely don't insist that anyone needs to share mine.

It is classic stage three in Fowler's system and that is perfectly fine and where most religious people wind up, according to him. Nothing at all wrong with it.

[UtahDan]

I thought it was part of "the restoration of all things." Sometimes these have logical explanations and sometimes they don't (see any WoW discussion). Personally, I'm not sure I have the faith to give it a shot were it to come back and I somehow lost the lottery and was asked to participate.

I think I could handle most anything but that. The second the prophet asks if he can marry my wife, I apostatize on the spot.

[tooblue]

Do either of you have any interests in life that are just interesting/stimulating as opposed to productive? No sarcasm, sincere question.

I am perfectly willing to grant that the approach Indy has articulated and that Gidg. has also adopted is legitimate as long no one insists that I share that view. I definitely don't insist that anyone needs to share mine.

It is classic stage three in Fowler's system and that is perfectly fine and where most religious people wind up, according to him. Nothing at all wrong with it.

Why do you express such a need to codify individuals? Perhaps Indy and Gidg are not only in Stage three but four and six simultaneously, or in any other stage as the situation demands? Beings assigned to a specific stage are not alive in the flesh but rather alive in the mind of the codifier. They become a caricature -- a true and yet greatly exaggerated likeness. A likeness that is easier to understand and removed from the complexity inherent in the human condition. In my mind it only serves to render individuals as easily prosecutable entities which is not demonstrative of an inquisitive mind and undermines your sincerity.

[UtahDan]

Why do you express such a need to codify individuals? Perhaps Indy and Gidg are not only in Stage three but four and six simultaneously, or in any other stage as the situation demands? Beings assigned to a specific stage are not alive in the flesh but rather alive in the mind of the codifier. They become a caricature -- a true and yet greatly exaggerated likeness. A likeness that is easier to understand and removed from the complexity inherent in the human condition. In my mind it only serves to render individuals as easily prosecutable entities which is not demonstrative of an inquisitive mind and undermines your sincerity.

You were making a good point right up until you questioned my sincerity and inquisitiveness.

[OhioBlue]

What bothers me is the disproportionate importance that is too often placed on these areas of dissonance. For me, the purpose of the Gospel is utilitarian and getting caught up in deutero-Isaiah, mitochondrial DNA or polygamy or what have you are just distracting tangents that even if resolved won't provide any additional utility. They won't help me love my wife and children, they won't help me serve my fellow man, they won't help me forgive or repent, they won't make me strive to be a better man.

I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to experiment upon the word to find out for myself if it bears good fruit. I don't have to resolve those areas of dissonance in order to act upon the spiritual promptings I receive from time to time to know that I am led by God inasmuch as I am willing to follow Him. The sum of these personal experiences over the course of an increasingly long life provide me a sufficiently reinforced independent witness of the truthfulness of the Gospel.

I'm not saying that there is no value in striving to reconcile the tension between the spiritual and intellectual, but I think for some they allow that struggle to needlessly overwhelm them. What are the core values and purposes of the Gospel? Do these issues materially affect my day to day life and how I attempt to integrate those core values? If we aren't constantly asking these questions and seeking to re-evaluate, we can lose sight of ultimate goal.

Faith is the first principle of the gospel. It is the principle that effectively states that sometimes, the spiritual simply has to win out over the intellectual if we are to progress. Rather than trying to buck that notion, there is a great deal of peace with intellectually accepting the fact that resolution is not always going to happen and then get about the business of trying to become more like the Savior.

Fire away.

Amen.

(Can I say that in this forum?)