Polygamy justification?

[UtahDan]

I belive that God's "morality" is not in lockstep with Western morality. And I would include the Nephi/Laban story, impregnation of Mary and modern-day polygamy as just a few examples of that. I believe that some attempt to dictate to God what his moral calculus should be and we simply don't have sufficient perspective or intelligence to make it fly.

Interesting. So your resolution is essentially that if God can tell Nephi to slay Laban, he can command Joseph to marry and sleep with the wives of his peers and that while that may seem strange to us now, our morality cannot be imposed on God.

I asked for another way out, and you gave me one. Simply accept events at face value as the will of God and avoid the conflict of "God couldn't possibly have said that." It works, not for me, but it works. I tend to think our two approaches are two points on a line (not the ends of that line mind you) which roughly represent the main two ways members deal with these sorts of things.

[Jarid in Cedar]

Can you please keep your apostate jadedness out of this thread, dude? Angels with swords threatened his life; what would you have done?

I am apostate here me growl

[UtahDan]

I'm a computer programmer. I often have a lot of different projects on my plate. In order to implement all of that stuff on time, I often neglect to fully document the process leading up to the design and development of the code.

As such, I can understand where Joseph is coming from in this regard. His concern was restoring the Gospel of Jesus Christ and moving the Kingdom forward in the short time he had to do so, rather than worrying about articulating and documenting an airtight defense of himself.

I don't know about this. It is certainly true, however, that Joseph talks agreat deal about some things and very little about others. For example, if memory serves, the first missionaries go out into the field preaching the restoration on the strength of the BOM, never having heard about the first vision because Joseph didn't talk much or at all about it. Not until later anyway.

I don't know that I buy that he was too busy with other things to explain it. It would be much easier for me to accept that he himself didn't know (which if you accept the story about the angel and the sword kind of makes sense, else why the need to compel him?).

[Jeff Lebowski]

I think everyone here is willing to accept imperfections in a prophet. Just how far are you willing to go with that acceptance? Where is the threshold? I think that varies quite a bit from person to person.

[Indy Coug]

Interesting. So your resolution is essentially that if God can tell Nephi to slay Laban, he can command Joseph to marry and sleep with the wives of his peers and that while that may seem strange to us now, our morality cannot be imposed on God.

I asked for another way out, and you gave me one. Simply accept events at face value as the will of God and avoid the conflict of "God couldn't possibly have said that." It works, not for me, but it works. I tend to think our two approaches are two points on a line (not the ends of that line mind you) which roughly represent the main two ways members deal with these sorts of things.

How in the world can any of us really know whether or not "God couldn't possibly have said that"? What is our measuring stick and where did that measuring stick come from?

We have the scriptures, but clearly for some it becomes a pick-and-choose exercise of conveniently ascribing potentially morally troubling events as poor translation, fantastical myth or pure allegory.

[wuapinmon]

How in the world can any of us really know whether or not "God couldn't possibly have said that"? What is our measuring stick and where did that measuring stick come from?

We have the scriptures, but clearly for some it becomes a pick-and-choose exercise of conveniently ascribing potentially morally troubling events as poor translation, fantastical myth or pure allegory.

Well, as I understand it, there are 15 (+/- 4) dudes walking around who are prophets, seers, and revelators. I think they could clarify this if they wanted.

[Jarid in Cedar]

I think everyone here is willing to accept imperfections in a prophet. Just how far are you willing to go with that acceptance? Where is the threshold? I think that varies quite a bit from person to person.

This is a great point. I am willing to accept imperfection from a prophet, but the doctrine needs to be nearly flawless. When doctrine is proposed that covers some of your imperfections, it diminishes your claim as a prophet.

[Jeff Lebowski]

This is a great point. I am willing to accept imperfection from a prophet, but the doctrine needs to be nearly flawless. When doctrine is proposed that covers some of your imperfections, it diminishes your claim as a prophet.

Why would you expect to get flawless doctrine from a flawed prophet?

[Jarid in Cedar]

How in the world can any of us really know whether or not "God couldn't possibly have said that"? What is our measuring stick and where did that measuring stick come from?

We have the scriptures, but clearly for some it becomes a pick-and-choose exercise of conveniently ascribing potentially morally troubling events as poor translation, fantastical myth or pure allegory.

That is the trouble with scripture in general, you can scour it for passages that support and refute almost any position.

[Indy Coug]

Well, as I understand it, there are 15 (+/- 4) dudes walking around who are prophets, seers, and revelators. I think they could clarify this if they wanted.

Really? I think prophets are continually surprised by what God thinks. It's clear in at least a couple of instances you feel perfectly comfortable drawing a line in the sand, but what are you using as your irrefutable, irrevocable set of standards or rules to do so?

[Indy Coug]

That is the trouble with scripture in general, you can scour it for passages that support and refute almost any position.

OK, that brings us back to my original point: How do we know what God would or wouldn't possibly say or do in all situations?

[UtahDan]

How in the world can any of us really know whether or not "God couldn't possibly have said that"? What is our measuring stick and where did that measuring stick come from?

We have the scriptures, but clearly for some it becomes a pick-and-choose exercise of conveniently ascribing potentially morally troubling events as poor translation, fantastical myth or pure allegory.

You have said it, the measuring stick is everything else that has been revealed, though as I think you are suggesting, it is possible to find scripture to support a wide variety of not necessarily compatible views.

Still, the idea of polyandry is not anything there is precedence for among other authoritative sources and is very much contrary to not just western values but the morality of most every society. You are correct that none of this is binding on God as you are to say that people do in fact pick and choose what they do not view as literal. I clearly do this because some of the "facts" are hard for me to accept. And you are right that I have no way to know the mind of God. On the other hand, it is not hard to imagine 100 things that might be revealed that you would have a very hard time believing were the will of God. I think that line exists somewhere for everyone.

[Jarid in Cedar]

Why would you expect to get flawless doctrine from a flawed prophet?

To me, this is where the other members of the presidency, quorum of the 12 should intercede. They are supposed to be inspired as well. If a doctrine is set forth that is flawed, they should be in a position to refute/correct it.

To turn that question around, if flawed doctrine can come from a flawed prophet, how does the average person choose which doctrines are correct and which doctrines are flawed?

[UtahDan]

OK, that brings us back to my original point: How do we know what God would or wouldn't possibly say or do in all situations?

It remains a good question. For example, if it were to be revealed that we would have a BBQ every week for sacrament instead of bread and water and that the BBQ would consist of one of the children from the Sunbeam class could anyone say for sure that God was not really behind that? Of course not. But it would conflict with everything else we know and would make God seem cruel and capricious.

Can God do things that to men seem cruel and capricious and that don't jibe with everything else we know? Well, if he can command polyandry then clearly yes. So anything, really, is possible. But I am not letting my Sunbeam become someone's meal nor would I allow my wife to marry another. The angel with his sword can take his best shot at me.

On the other hand, as I think you are right to point out, you can take that to an extreme and use it as justification not to follow any counsel. For me, I don't think is an issue where you chose one or the other, but rather a tension to be grappled with for a lifetime. Just my take.

[wuapinmon]

Really? I think prophets are continually surprised by what God thinks. It's clear in at least a couple of instances you feel perfectly comfortable drawing a line in the sand, but what are you using as your irrefutable, irrevocable set of standards or rules to do so?

I think this is fodder for another thread..............when I joined the Church, I was excited to have a "living prophet" on the Earth, and since then, well I'm not sure that if I shared my feelings they wouldn't get savaged...I just say that my expectations, as a convert, would be that a prophet would be far more vocal. I feel like the prophet is like the Irish National Soccer Team.