Why do Mormon Churches have "Too Many Women?"

[OtherCheek]

That kinda destroys your last post where you said:



So God gave men polygamy so that the women would not be deprived, yet he took polygamy away and the women will not be deprived. So, in effect, polygamy was never needed in the first place, since they got along without it for the last 100+ years and "life is not fair"

No, it doesn't negate it. Some faithful LDS couples are childless through no fault of their own in this life, but I believe God still wants them to have the blessing of motherhood and fatherhood. Their desires for children, though not met in this life, can still be met in the next.

[Cow Poke]

It is a core LDS doctrine that the Institutions of Marriage and Family are ordained of God, and are central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.
http://www.lds.org/family/proclamation?lang=eng

One can extrapolate from our doctrine on this matter, that there are no single persons in the highest order of heaven, but that men and women inherit that glory as husband and wife and not singles. If one of the parties is unfaithful to their temple marriage covenants, (which is a 3-way covenant), or is personally unworthy to receive this greatest of God's rewards, (Exaltation), then the other spouse who IS faithful won't be deprived of his or her blessings just because of the unfaithfulness of the one.

A study of memberships AND activity rates in the Church have always indicated that men, generally speaking, are more likely than women to become inactive, fall away, be unfaithful, neglect their duties and responsibilities as fathers and Priesthood holders and JOIN the Church (as adults) at lower rates than women. My own observation in Taiwan, where I served my mission, was that there were 3 times more women than men in the various wards and branches of the Church in that nation. I have heard similar things regarding other countries too.

So, in effect, what happens to single people. Lottie Moon, for example, who spent her whole life in China as a missionary, and never married?

I know CP want's to characterize everything I say as an official Church statement

That is a flat out lie, OC. You know better, and I have REPEATEDLY pointed out that even your "official" Church stuff isn't official.

but it is my opinion rather that God does not wish to deprive his daughters of his greatest eternal rewards simply because there is a deficiency of worthy men.

Now others can make fun of this belief, and call it horsehockey or whatever they want to, but that's their problem and not mine.

My My, we're getting TESTY, aren't we? (And, by "we", of course, I mean YOU )

[Cow Poke]

No blessing is deprived the faithful. If a husband on earth is unfaithful, and unworthy to inherit the state of Exaltation, the woman isn't stuck, but can give herself to another (by her and his mutual free will and choosing), who IS worthy.

Um... "give herself to another"???? Is that written down somewhere?

[One Bad Pig]

No blessing is deprived the faithful. If a husband on earth is unfaithful, and unworthy to inherit the state of Exaltation, the woman isn't stuck, but can give herself to another (by her and his mutual free will and choosing), who IS worthy.

Interesting. Given that line of reasoning, it looks like a devout Mormon woman is free to enter into an intimate relationship with a devout Mormon man if her eternally sealed husband is unfaithful to the church. That would explain Joseph Smith's dealings with others' wives.

[Sparko]

No, it doesn't negate it. Some faithful LDS couples are childless through no fault of their own in this life, but I believe God still wants them to have the blessing of motherhood and fatherhood. Their desires for children, though not met in this life, can still be met in the next.

trying to change the subject again? You keep painting yourself into corners and then pretending like you are there because you planned it that way.

You first claimed that God gave polygamy because he didn't want women to have to do without the blessings they deserved.

THEN you said that "life is not fair" and that basically nowadays they had to do without the blessings they deserved. BUT that God would fix it all in heaven.

well then OC, if God is gonna fix it all in heaven, then there was no need to "fix" things back in the 19th century, was there? You can't have it both ways.

You are arguing two opposing viewpoints.

[One Bad Pig]

trying to change the subject again? You keep painting yourself into corners and then pretending like you are there because you planned it that way.

You first claimed that God gave polygamy because he didn't want women to have to do without the blessings they deserved.

THEN you said that "life is not fair" and that basically nowadays they had to do without the blessings they deserved. BUT that God would fix it all in heaven.

well then OC, if God is gonna fix it all in heaven, then there was no need to "fix" things back in the 19th century, was there? You can't have it both ways.

You are arguing two opposing viewpoints.

Er, isn't one of the reasons we should be willing to endure hardship in this life the hope of reward in the next? In this life, while sin is yet present, we can expect suffering and not getting what we want. In the next, sin is no longer present, and we receive our eternal reward.

[Cow Poke]

Interesting. Given that line of reasoning, it looks like a devout Mormon woman is free to enter into an intimate relationship with a devout Mormon man if her eternally sealed husband is unfaithful to the church. That would explain Joseph Smith's dealings with others' wives.

But, who determines if the husband is unfaithful to the Church? The woman? In Smith's case, was Smith free to determine the faithfulness of the husband of the wife he wanted to marry?

[Sparko]

Er, isn't one of the reasons we should be willing to endure hardship in this life the hope of reward in the next? In this life, while sin is yet present, we can expect suffering and not getting what we want. In the next, sin is no longer present, and we receive our eternal reward.

that's not what I am talking about.

I am talking about OC trying to have his cake and eat it too.

In order to excuse polygamy he said:

"but it is my opinion rather that God does not wish to deprive his daughters of his greatest eternal rewards simply because there is a deficiency of worthy men."

so I asked him if that was the reason he allowed polygamy before, then what about NOW? what about the extra women that there are now?

and he said:

"Many things in this life are just "not fair". That's the way life is. It is in the next life that things are made up to God's faithful, and no blessing will be deprived of God's worthy sons and daughters."


so in the first case, God had to make polygamy because there were too many women, in order for the women to not miss out on eternal blessings. Which means that if he did not allow polygamy, then they would miss out on them. But in the second case (today) it's tough cookie! but God will make it better in the next life.

Well if Tough cookie, God will make it better in the next life is good enough for today, then it was good enough for yesterday, and polygamy was not needed. Or if polygamy WAS needed to allow them to get their eternal rewards, then it would still be needed today! He can't have it both ways.

[Cow Poke]

that's not what I am talking about.

I am talking about OC trying to have his cake and eat it too.

In order to excuse polygamy he said:

"but it is my opinion rather that God does not wish to deprive his daughters of his greatest eternal rewards simply because there is a deficiency of worthy men."

so I asked him if that was the reason he allowed polygamy before, then what about NOW? what about the extra women that there are now?

and he said:

"Many things in this life are just "not fair". That's the way life is. It is in the next life that things are made up to God's faithful, and no blessing will be deprived of God's worthy sons and daughters."


so in the first case, God had to make polygamy because there were too many women, in order for the women to not miss out on eternal blessings. Which means that if he did not allow polygamy, then they would miss out on them. But in the second case (today) it's tough cookie! but God will make it better in the next life.

Well if Tough cookie, God will make it better in the next life is good enough for today, then it was good enough for yesterday, and polygamy was not needed. Or if polygamy WAS needed to allow them to get their eternal rewards, then it would still be needed today! He can't have it both ways.

This made WAY too much sense. You're out of rum, aren't you.

[One Bad Pig]

But, who determines if the husband is unfaithful to the Church? The woman? In Smith's case, was Smith free to determine the faithfulness of the husband of the wife he wanted to marry?

God's anointed prophet and leader of the Restoration? But of course! Rank hath its privileges, after all.

[Cow Poke]

God's anointed prophet and leader of the Restoration? But of course! Rank hath its privileges, after all.

Well, yeah, there's that!

[OtherCheek]

trying to change the subject again? You keep painting yourself into corners and then pretending like you are there because you planned it that way.

You first claimed that God gave polygamy because he didn't want women to have to do without the blessings they deserved.

THEN you said that "life is not fair" and that basically nowadays they had to do without the blessings they deserved. BUT that God would fix it all in heaven.

well then OC, if God is gonna fix it all in heaven, then there was no need to "fix" things back in the 19th century, was there? You can't have it both ways.

You are arguing two opposing viewpoints.

I guess you would argue that God won't provide things in this life, if he can provide it all perfectly in the next.

[Cerebrum123]

God's anointed prophet and leader of the Restoration? But of course! Rank hath its privileges, after all.

Kind of like Mohammed was allowed to marry as many wives as he wanted while "other believers" were only allowed up to 4. Not to mention that he was allowed to marry his adopted son's ex-wife, and that was a big no-no in that culture, but it was OK for Mohammed, because a new "revelation" allowed for all Muslims to marry their adopted son's ex-wives. And then pretty much right after that(presumably due to the scandal it caused) a new "revelation" made it so that adoption was no longer even valid in Islam. I guess rank really DOES have privileges, doesn't it? Seems to me like Joseph Smith learned a few tricks from Mohammed's playbook if you ask me.

[Sparko]

I guess you would argue that God won't provide things in this life, if he can provide it all perfectly in the next.

that seems to be one of your arguments. along with the exact opposite.

[Cow Poke]

Do we know if Smith "married" any old or "less than beautiful" women, or widows?