We don't wish to look for the negative side of LDS history, we just want the truth to be made known. There is an important work under way in these the last days. Zion is coming.
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
Sunday, December 20, 2015
Emotional Hijacking
For a little bit of back ground, it is important for readers to know that I have had more than my fair share dealing with those who suffer from varied forms of emotional dysfunction. Important things were learned. I may have had a lot of experience with people suffering these things, may have read and watched tons of research on at least some disorders, and taken some psychology classes back in college days, but I am no professional. I hope these things can be of help to others. You just may need my experiences to better frame or endure what ever it is you are experiencing or may one day.
What is Emotional Instability?
When a person depends more upon their corrupted emotions more than their intellect or thinking part of the brain (much larger than the Amygdala or emotional portions I should add), it causes intense and out of proportion responses, thinking and actions. When some form of corruption occurs, usually during childhood, the person becomes emotionally unbalanced. The balanced and regulated emotional part is not in harmony with the intellectual portion of the brain. The small fight or flight portion is trying to rule the stage all too often. The emotional part of the brain is relied upon and trusted excessively. To be well balanced means that the small emotional portions of the brain are working along side with and in concert with the intellectual portions. The intellect or thinking mind should be your control center, not your emotions. It is often said that some people allow their emotions to control them, instead of them controlling their emotions. Emotional hijacking of the intellect can be so severe that it can actually warp the persons mental understanding of events and their view of the world around them. That view or translation of things within them may be different than what actually occurs in their world. Emotions can actually hijack actual reality or truth in the mind. It is true that our emotions can trick us. They can lie to us and sometimes cannot be trusted.
How Does Emotional Corruption Occur?
The simple answer is that this world (rather the people in it) is so corrupting that all forms of corruption and especially mental disorders are soaring through the roof. Bad behavior creates more bad behavior. The abused become abusive in some form or fashion, even if they don't realize at times (or all the time). The manipulated become manipulative(whether knowingly or not, they are still using fear or anger to control and push someone else to emotionally respond to their demands). Corruption breeds more corruption. The hurt can cause more hurt. The real answer is that a person becomes emotionally unstable when suffering repeated dramatic and/or traumatic experiences. They can also copy the behaviors from family, even if they do not directly suffer these experiences. These people may or may not have been born with general insecurity or some form of underlying issue in their genes.
Experienced emotional disruption and then corruption usually occurs as a young child, during the years of 0-3 when a persons view of the world is shaped. A time their personality and mood really begins to be ingrained into them for the rest of their lives. These aspects of the brain develop first, then the greater intellect. Many factors can cause these negative experiences. Obviously frequency and severity matters most. Physical abuse is obvious. Verbal abuse also. Neglect or ignoring children causes problems. Sheltering or spoiling too much can cause children (and later as adults) to rely too much on others, less independence and less ability to cope with and deal with things on their own. Simply not giving just the right amount of validation, comfort and love to a young child can cause problems.
It is estimated that about 25% of the population has a serious disorder. That number grows every year. This is the known disorders found in order to be counted. I have heard many Dr's state that the actual number is probably half of all people, as probably half go un-reported or un-diagnosed. I bet they are pretty accurate in this modern world full of corruption every where we turn. But the greatest corruption occurs within our own homes. If satan wants to destroy any good chance of coming back to God, then surely this is the avenue to best corrupt mankind with.
How Does It Manifest?
Well, if you see the ever growing bible that Psychologists use, the DSM IV and soon the larger than ever DSM V (the man made bible for the mental health industry to put labels and billing codes in order to get paid by insurance companies), it contains all kinds of ways emotional deregulation or corruption can manifest. Many mental health professionals agree that just about any body nowadays can be diagnosed with at least five disorders found inside the DSM, as they have put a label and name to so many different manifestations. These labels can range from anger management issues, or mood disorders like Anxiety or Bipolar (long manic and depression states), to personality disorders such as NPD and BPD. I have had experience living with all of these specifically mentioned manifestations. You can do some youtube or google searches on these disorders in order to get a better view of what it is like living with people who suffer these things. Still, you will never know what it is like unless you actually live it with someone. It is draining. It is intense. You can be left burnt out and less productive in all aspects of your life if you are not careful. Especially for those who never actually discover what the heck is going on... as the non-sufferer can become so emotionally unstable and confused trying to figure it all out and dealing with it properly. We need understanding for both those who suffer and those who deal with those that suffer. Both can suffer.
The severity and frequency of violent words or actions or neglect during childhood are the deciding factors on just how deeply corrupt of disorderly a person can manifest. A person can be so deeply wounded during childhood, that they can actually have a distorted emotional mind that can cause that person to be a problem child and actually become worse when placed into a more responsible station such as adulthood or marriage. More personal responsibility and the large change in circumstances is enough to cause the person to manifest more deeply in early adulthood. This is why most of the major personality disorders are diagnosed in early adulthood, as the emotional dysfunction manifests so strongly at that point in time.
Who Is To Blame?
No one wants to have insecurity of any sort, and definitely does not want to behave and over react the way they do (well, except maybe the socio and psychopaths, but that's another issue to discern). Can we really hold them accountable for something they actually do not want to have? If so, how much? Should society try to make a little elbow room for them in legal troubles they so often get into because of having something they did not choose to have in the first place? Sad truth is, people get these deeply rooted and unwanted manifestations derived from those closest to them. Family in most cases. It is an ugly cycle that must be broken, or it will go on and on, generation to generation. You can try to blame that person acting out, or their parent... but likely each person learned behaviors and/or received some kind of insecure gene trait from their parent(s) who learned it from their parent(s), etc. So think about the next time you want to avoid or judge someone who is more hurt and affected by unwanted emotional corruption passed down to them.
How Can We Help Those Who Have It?
When a person is acting out in some form or other, they are showing others around them that an emotional hijacking is occurring. If you over react to their over reaction, you are only going to cause the situation to become even more difficult. If both the sufferers and the non-sufferers don't research and read up on how to best deal with these issues, the problems may never be corrected or most likely worsen. Bad experiences and problems will continue to be the norm for them and you. A war zone at home will continue, when love and peace at home is what we all want.
Some, such as those with NPD, are so deeply fragile within, that they cannot even accept that they are causing the problems, for fear of shame and guilt that would put them into such a depressed state that they frantically try to avoid at all costs. If they can't even accept they have any issues, how can change ever occur? You simply try to help them see what they are doing, because it is fair on your part and emotionally healthy and you are trying so frantically to get the chaos to decrease or cease, they take that as negative criticism and only over react even more... even to the point that their deeply routed hurt and corrupted emotional mind will alter their views of reality, and begin to see you as the villain and cause and the one to blame for it all. Trust me, you start to question them after hearing it so often, your own self worth begins to be affected. You will frantically search your own self endlessly trying to fix anything within you that needs correction. You will frantically panic at times seeing your own self view becoming distorted, your own emotions getting offended, and fear losing your own good mental sanity. And after trying to deal with all the chaos for so long, trying everything to help the person and have more positive experiences with them, they begin to falsely accuse and blame you for the verbal/physical/emotional abuse they in actuality cause you. It all gets so chaotic, and you are spending almost every hour of the day trying to figure things out and help them and yourself improve, that you get so burnt out that almost every other area of your life is affected. You get less productive in nearly everything. You will fear your own loss of balanced mental state. And if that were not enough to get your mental mind all twisted inside out, your emotional mind begins to suffer to much drama and can become affected in adverse ways. You could actually end up with secondary physical ailments and health issues. More than that, being falsely accused in front of friends, family and police, which is a common practice by severely affected people, could have you sitting somewhere you don't rightly belong in the first place (and for a man to lose his innate ability to protect his family with self defense equipment, that is hard for a man to accept in the case of a false DV accusation to police that could lose his rights to those things). The problems will continue that you will just give up thinking that these types of problems are just too darn big to handle and fix anymore.
So, what is the answer? If you married someone like this, or your have a parent or brother/sister/uncle/aunt/Grandma/etc who has these issues, what do you do? Do you suffer as long as you can and then run? Do you do what most of the videos and blogs about NPD or BPD on the internet tell you, to RUN away or avoid as much as possible as soon as you realize you are around such a deeply emotionally injured person? At what point does all the chaos the person attracts like a magnet start to adversely affect you, or even your children like in the case of remarrying and step kids are involved? When does it become unjust for you or your children to continue a relationship in a marriage with such things occurring? How do you balance properly and weigh these things out in the scales of justice? Are you enabling abuse to continue by the sufferer, just by remaining in a relationship, such as a marriage? When is it right to hold the person responsible or accountable for their choosing to misbehave towards you or others, which is really occurring because of their emotional hijacking and the exploding in their mind causing them to un-wantingly act and behave as they are? If you have a child, step-child and as is very common with an adopted child, you can't just leave them like you can a spouse or ship them to Siberia. What then? What if YOU were the severely suffering injured person manifesting in over reacting ways, what would you want? Would you not already have severe headaches and fireworks exploding every which way in your mind to continue causing you enough drama, how would you feel when you start to worry about those closest to you abandoning you for your horrible (but remember, behavior you don't want and never chose with your free agency to have) behaviors? Would that fear alone not cause more trauma in your already out of order psyche?
So if we do choose to move away, or leave a spouse, or even try to avoid/ignore, how much more damaged will that person then become? Sometimes the sufferer can't stand the thought of you abandoning them, so they begin to distort their own reality and convince themselves that you are the cause of issues and turn on you. They will leave you because they sense you having a hard time with their behaviors... before you can leave them. They normally love you with a serious passion you've never experienced before, they normally call you the greatest person on earth, their angel, their everything, but all of a sudden, while you are trying so hard to stay and help the person and fix problems, they hypocritically do to you what they are afraid of you doing to them one day. They never want you to leave them. But oh, they have no problem talking about or threatening to leave you all the time, or actually do it in the end. You were doing all to be there for them and help them, even suffering tremendous hurt to yourself, hoping for a better day. Hoping for enough change to take place so that more positive times can be hard more than the negative. That leaves the non-sufferer in a confused state for a long time with that "love me but don't leave me, and if I think you will, I will leave you first because it will hurt me too much" event. They dread and then cause their own worst fear to occur. They self destruct and actually fight against what they want most in many cases. Add to all this that they are so distracted with their OWN problems, they either cannot see or find it very hard to see the suffering of others. They lack empathy.
You can see why things become so confusing for those who live with sufferers. They don't know what to do. Up becomes down. Down becomes up. You have the hardest time judging what is the most right and charitable thing for all involved. Again, you will never actually completely understand what I am talking about, unless you have walked in the shoes of a sufferer or one who has a relationship with one.
Maybe the New Testament teachings by the Lord are more effective than we think at first glance. Maybe He gave the recipe for success for these very things. Did not the Lord state to overcome "all things"? To even Love your "enemies". Love those who seem to despitefully use you?
Is not the answer then to return love and compassion even when some one (whether a child or adult) is acting out, verbally or emotionally "throwing up" on you or dishing out the most unloving and un-empathic spew on you?
Their over reacting or anger outburst is really a sign that they need your help calming them down. We should avoid taking it too personal, but see the negative thoughts and behaviors as a serious expression or way of speaking out for help while they are emotionally "drowining". Instead of taking offense, to instead see that hey, this person has been emotionally wounded as a child and never obtained the proper peace, comfort and love, and has a hard time regulating or coping with stress as an adult?
We need to stay "grounded" and balanced, and improve our own emotions when faced with the emotionally hijacked persons who do not want to behave properly or hurt you as they are, so that we can be of any help to them.
So if your child (or even an adult you have a relationship with) acts out, maybe hitting you, verbally throwing up on you, kicking, screaming, out of control, falsely accusing you of this or that, or any other kind of uncontrolled bout of rage or depression they are under, what can you do?
Remember this simple to learn 2 step system:
1: DO NOT OVER REACT YOURSELF. This is easier said than done when someone is actively and often acting out by hurting you. The mortal response when being attacked or hurt is to run or fight. The person over reacting is already in that mental mode, you have to avoid as much as possible to have your fight or flight automatic responses activated. This is extremely difficult and will take time. Do it as soon as possible.
2: Return the hate with love. Take offense but do not return it. This is also WAY harder to do than said. But what is it that the sufferer lacked in childhood? Maybe you lacked some yourself in some way? They were likely abused, neglected and/or ignored. Along with all that obviously comes the lack of empathy or concern from those closest to them, lack of comfort when they needed comforting. Instead of comfort and proper teaching on how to behave or act, they received hate or neglect, yelling, hitting, or some other abusive and forceful tactic. They do not learn proper empathy or care and concern for others because a parent (in probably most cases) didn't teach them or ripped it out of them if they had any to start with. So, the only way to truly help the over-reacting emotional sufferer, is to give them lots of what they did not get as a child. In the face of anger, in the face of serious hate, in the face of serious offense to you, even in the face of false police reports and extreme fear... give love as best you can. When they are acting out, tell them you understand he/she is offended or hurt (validate - something their care giver in childhood probably never did out of neglect), remember they are feeling upset or offended and losing emotional control, AND GIVE THEM A HUG AND ALL THE LOVE AND CONCERN YOU CAN MUSTER UP to help calm them. You will feel the usual human impulse to over react, to return an insult for an insult or to accept a threat to divorce they only spewed onto you out of anger, but avoid it. They need you more than ever. They need your comfort and compassion. They also need to see your example on how to act and behave with others. You can hopefully help to re-install the care and concern for others they had lost long ago.
Do remember, that a therapist is likely necessary, but likely won't be able to be there all the time like you are, or may not be comfortable or even able to offer up validation and love like you can.
You are human too, so don't get to hard on yourself when you or the sufferer don't have expectations immediately met. If both can better understand each other's plight ("put yourself in the other persons shoes" – very hard for the sufferer to actually do since they are so consumed in their own emotions and problems), and love is given instead of more offense or fighting, then situations can improve and brokenness can have hope to be repaired. The only hope for them is to give back to them what they should have received when a young child, and have patience on both sufferer and their family/friends who deal with them. If the family member dealing with a sufferer over reacts, they will feel a remorse and shame that can eat them alive inside. They may think to just give up, because they are not strong enough to handle it all or to react in a better way.
Both parties need to take "inventory" of themselves and do all they can to improve their own mental and emotional states to endure such things. We all need to do these things anyway to "overcome all things"... to be able to better handle and deal with anyone who might come in our path in the future.
Provide an Environment for Change to Take Place
There is a little more to it than the first two simple steps above. In addition to the two steps above, you will need a team of people to support both the family and the sufferer. Find a good therapist who will actually work with and effectively teach the sufferer how to better react and respond to things in life. Beware of drug use by Psychiatrists. Some will get sufferers hooked on a wild concoction of all kinds of meds. Patients can eventually build up a immunity to them, and many have other threatening side effects. Remember that with personality disorders, they are learned behaviors deeply routed within them. And they so quickly fluctuate between love to hate, or anger to depression, that by the time the one med taken to decrease aggression kicks in, they could already be in a depressed state which will adversely affect them, or vice-versa. With mood disorders, they actually suffer a chemical imbalance, and their mood swings usually last longer (aggressive/mad or sad/depressed a long time). Meds can have an actual effect for these patients. Someone with BPD could take the same med, and hardly notice any difference. The drugs side effects outweigh it's benefits. Someone with Bipolar will feel "night and day" differences.
You will also need to discuss the problems with other very close family members or family friends (not everyone needs to know). You will need their support. They will need to understand what the heck is going on in your home, for both you and the sufferer, so that they don't think you guilty of just not loving your companion/relative properly or wondering why you seem disgruntled or distant towards him/her, or even perhaps they see you over reacting one day and wondering how the heck you impulsively acted like that. One of the hardest parts after the non-sufferer is enduring all the chaos, is that the emotionally unstable can look very loving, friendly, compassionate and outgoing in public or around friends or more distant family (and this is likely why you fell for this person in the first place who covered up the bad by projecting a good show in the beginning)... but at home, in private, is where the chaos is occurring. People feel more safe to unleash their vomit on each other in intimate or family relationships, thinking the other person should "understand me" or will never abandon them. The sufferer does not want others to know about their bad behaviors. And the nons (well they were non sufferers at one point and certainly can suffer too enduring chaos) don't want others bothered by private affairs and usually too busy trying to fix everything to even have time to begin to explain it. When things are out in the open, both parties will feel more satisfied and safe, and will feel better able to get through and conquer what needs done, with the extra support.
If you suffer from emotional issues, the best thing you can do to begin the path to change, is to admit weaknesses to the people closest to you. Do not be afraid to seek professional help. Don't be afraid of being labeled with a title of how your instability manifests. What matters is that there are people and methods that can help you, if you first admit and accept you have a problem. Then seeking ways to fix the issues can take place. You never can if you cannot identify your own failings. This is the only way for you to have a happier life and for others to be happier around you. You also have the innate desire to not be abandoned by those closest to you, so do what it takes to not lose them. You need help and assistance from every where you can to overcome the corruption from childhood. It is the only responsible thing to do for yourself and those who you do not want to leave you.
If you suffer from emotional issues, the best thing you can do to begin the path to change, is to admit weaknesses to the people closest to you. Do not be afraid to seek professional help. Don't be afraid of being labeled with a title of how your instability manifests. What matters is that there are people and methods that can help you, if you first admit and accept you have a problem. Then seeking ways to fix the issues can take place. You never can if you cannot identify your own failings. This is the only way for you to have a happier life and for others to be happier around you. You also have the innate desire to not be abandoned by those closest to you, so do what it takes to not lose them. You need help and assistance from every where you can to overcome the corruption from childhood. It is the only responsible thing to do for yourself and those who you do not want to leave you.
Ok, so an environment is now established where the emotional sufferer can now have a chance to succeed. But it is still only a chance for them to change. THEY must do what it takes to change. You can give them every tool they need and the time to make the change, but they have to choose to understand and make the changes. They must have the desire to do so. That desire cannot be just to appease you at the time. You cannot really convince them to change by teaching them all the skills and coping techniques they need to succeed. They have to understand and digest what you are telling them. And since their emotions have run the majority of behaviors and decision making most of their lives, it is going to take some time to make adjustments. Even if some change or enough change occurs, some can relapse even after years of therapy and having a decent environment where change can be a possibility. Some may enter a mental hospital for a time. Some may take decades to be able to react and behave on an acceptable level, but may never really remove all of the fireworks of emotions that may still go off in their minds. Some can change completely that no one will know they even have or had emotional issues. But if they give up at some point, or at many points, or even finally push you or throw you out of the marriage, just know that YOU did all YOU could to provide an environment where change could take place. You need to make sure that you are not held accountable before God for some failure on your end. Try your best and make things as comfortable for both of you and do all you can to help them improve. At the same time, you must also consider that you cannot allow yourself (or your children as in the case of remarried families) to be emotionally damaged or enabling abuse to go on forever. If a time comes that you just cannot physically and mentally handle it anymore, than prayerfully consider if you have done all you can for you and the sufferer first, then do what ever is necessary for you (and/or your children). This is something between you and God to decide. Remind yourself that some disorders even the well experienced therapists never really understand it unless they live with someone who had it, and that even they sometimes cannot remain with some patients for long. If the well trained and experienced professionals sometimes fail, do not be so hard on yourself if you do. How long a person can stay the course with a really abusive sufferer varies for each individual person. Not everyone is emotionally or mentally strong enough to handle some disorders or situations. Someone who has researched and understands a great deal about emotional disorders and how to best handle it all, will be a much more effective assistant. They will also suffer less drama within themselves as they understand how to handle stressful events better and learn to not take the rough events directed towards them so personally. Some situations may become too unsafe or too violent to remain in for too long. You surely cannot be expected to enable or allow excessive abuse to continue to the point that it begins to damage yourself or loved ones. The risk for remaining in that environment for too long (for you and possibly others) may outweigh the necessity to try and save/help the one sufferer. My only advice is to make sure you do all you could to lessen chaos on your end, create an environment for change and give as much time as you can for them to change. We need to make sure we are justified and prayerfully consider what is the best course to take in such cases were removal is necessary.
If you are one of the emotional sufferers since childhood, DO NOT get so depressed if your partner feels that he/she cannot mentally and emotionally deal with it all at some point. If he/she needs some space for a few weeks or even moves on at some point, try to be understanding on their part. Be sad for sure, but it is not the end of the world as you may feel. Try not to overly fear that such a possibility can happen or become so negative and actually cause it to happen, but be understanding with that person in case it ever does. After today, you should have learned that we cannot always trust our emotions, that we have to get all the intellect and understanding we can on anything really important to us, and that we have to be understanding of the other persons mortal weaknesses in case failure does occur on either end. What matters is that both sides tried all they could to make things better.
The best thing ALL OF US can do is logically see things through with our intellect (and ask God to improve our intellect through the usual course of events than you may not even notice He is using to teach you and/or direct revelation), and not through or only through our emotions. Then act accordingly.
A Gospel View Of Emotions:
Some times our emotions can trick us. They can alter our perceptions of reality. Our own emotional mind can lie to us. We could misjudge an emotional feeling within us, for a revelation that should only be directed into your intellect. What you hear from God might just give you a negative feeling in your body. Some words/understanding/visions from Heaven cause us to rejoice or be comforted. Good times in deed. Just realize that sometimes our emotions are felt based upon our own current logical understandings as well. OUR understandings may be correct or incorrect. It could be a certain gospel topic that someone does not want to think is possible. And when we go to pray on the matter, instead of looking for understanding into our intellect, we are more concentrated on the emotional responses we are feeling. If it is out of order for the emotionally unstable, it can be out of order in this sense as well. This is also necessary to "overcome all things" in this regard. You will need to know the difference between revelation and feeling answers coming from your emotional mind (felt in different parts of your body) or even your sub-conscience portions of your mind. I have mistaken often these things. Still working on knowing the difference myself. That is just a part of the journey we all have to go through. So, understand that if you find yourself going through some serious hard things with others, just realize it may just be exactly what YOU need at that time. You have things to learn by experience to really understand and change yourself. We all do.
These mental corruptions are taking place every where. Even among the LDS remnant gathering, these things I have seen among us too. I am more understanding of the signs and characteristics of many of mental disorders, and can see some affected in one way or another. I am not going to do the judgemental thing and point you out or try to fix others publicly or in some incorrect manner, but hopefully this post can help everyone be better understanding and better prepared to handle those who do suffer. For they truly suffer mentally, emotionally and usually physically too.
The best balanced mind is one where the intellect rules and is in concert with the emotional mind, and also with your spiritual mind which receives the words and understanding the Spirit of God. They all must work in unison, or be "perfect in all things". At least as perfect as a mortal can become. This is the closest thing to perfection that we can obtain. Even then, we still fall short and only HE (the Father and Son working together) will carry you the rest of the way.
Thursday, December 3, 2015
Intending To Make Mistakes
Denver Snuffer stated in http://denversnuffer.com/2015/11/a-gospel-of-christ/ when referring to Joseph Smith making contradicting histories of his first vision, that "I... intend to make different mistakes".
Denver has said much about not wanting people to follow or depend too much upon him. I find it interesting that so many are so interested in nearly every thing he writes or states on most every subject, except for his pre-2014 statements on the history of plural marriage (specifically all the posts he wrote on his blog in June 2012). Snuffer plainly explained that Joseph Smith was involved with Plural Marriage. That D&C 132 is a collection of revelations given to Joseph (with just a few word changes by Brigham Young). That Joseph Smith obtained calling and election and merited the sealing power for being obedient to the command for him to live it. Snuffer plainly explained how God does allow some of His people to have plural wives (if commanded, or allowed for those who have sealing authority), and that the un-authorized by God living of plural marriage is an abomination. After 2014, he seems to change his tone on the topic, as if he is trying to allow people to now assume Joseph never lived it and that plural marriage is always an abomination. He states that Joseph did not commit adultery. I agree. I still agree even if Joseph Smith actually had relations with some of his plural wives (William Clayton had a son while Joseph was alive in Nauvoo, and others had children from plural wives like Abraham, Jacob/Israel and others in our scriptures). For me, I look at every statement Snuffer makes on the topic, and look at it all as a whole. If something contradicts, I ask why. As any one should. All this reminds me of when the Lord said I come not to bring piece, but a sword. A two-edged sword that cuts both ways.
On Nov. 1st I emailed and asked Denver what he meant when he stated on his blog October 31st that "God does not justify carnal relations except between one man and his one wife". His reply came a couple hours later. I feel safe only sharing what Denver states publicly. I can say one comment agrees with his pre-2014 statements on the topic and I so would love to share it here. On Nov. 4th he posted a blog and only mentioned one of the many things he had stated to me privately. That one thing was about Cain (should read the seed of Cain) being the first one recorded in the biblical record to live it. He stated in his blog "...the adulterous taking of multiple wives is a pattern originated by Cain and later imitated by Brigham Young". I also agree with Snuffer with this statement. Obviously a murderer like cain or his son lamech is not allowed to be one of God's people who can rightly be authorized to live such a system. Denver had stated in the past that the un-authorized taking of multiple wives is adulterous and abominable, and I agree. He also said the practice/teaching of PM that Brigham Young warped it into (and carried on by the different fundamentalist groups and independents) needs to come to an end, - I also agree with.
In his recent Mormon History talk found here: http://denversnuffer.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Mormon-History.pdf Snuffer reminds us that he will talk more about some topics as promised. Snuffer had previously told me in person, at the end of the St George Lecture in 2014, that he will explain more about this topic, after I commented to him that he stated some can be allowed or commanded to live as he discussed in his book Passing The Heavenly Gift and on his blog (for heavens sakes actually read what he wrote on the topic in PTHG chapter 6 - his words there also agree with his many blog posts and other lectures). Likely a topic to fully explain when people are ready to actually digest it all properly. After some make a public display of their own judgemental and divisive weaknesses, and others learn to forgive them for it I suppose. Another test to pass? Some more filtering going on? More foundational Kingdom teachings need to be understood first?
Snuffer not explaining it all now, is enough to help others understand that there is something hard to share on this topic that most are not ready for. If Joseph Smith did not actually live this familial system, just like Abraham, Jacob, Moses and others had... then why not simply say so and clearly settle the case? That explanation seems easy.
Now if you read my "Sorting IT Out" post, you will recognize that I had some serious questions about Denver's statement on Oct 31st about acceptable relations should only be between a man and his wife. Denver's comment there was more geared to open relations (like the secret adulterous/fornicative spiritual wifery that Bennett and Higby and others were doing after they HAD heard a little about Joseph's authorized plural marriages) and gay relations. But the one man and one woman comment (along with his other recent contradictory, anti-accept plural marriage principle statements the past year) was enough to push me to contact him. In 2010 I had quite a few conversations with him via email. But he told me to read all his books first and stopped replying to me and other friends later that same year. He was busy with his books and lots of people were starting to contact him. I hadn't received a reply from him in years. I didn't know if I would get a response. My main question to him on Nov. 1st was "Are you saying no one in our day... could be be 132 justified like you use to write prior to 2014?" After getting one response from him, there was one little vague statement that really caught me off guard and caused some serious confusion. That statement, paired with his recent image of God being a man and a woman statements, caused me to take it to the Lord on Nov 1st. An answer came the next day. It was additional information I had not understand on top of the years of research and understanding I already had on the topic. I did not like it. I was hoping I had received false revelation. I was hoping what Denver had been saying publicly and privately to me was incorrect. Hoping there was a mistake intentionally being made by him. I went back to the scriptures in D&C 132 and Jacob ch 2. Certain words seemed to jump out at me and made more sense than ever. I still struggled with the new information.
Well, I wanted clarification, some confirmation on my possible revelation that was causing me so much confusion. Good or bad for doing so, it didn't matter at the time. I was eager to settle it. I emailed some follow up questions and responses. 2 or 3 emails were sent to him for a couple weeks. No reply. He only made a public post about cain's seed living it in the Bible, and recently gave more subtle little hints, but not much was really expressed in his Mormon History talk and paper that came out yesterday... where he again states that more details will be given in the future. That could be a public answer to show he wants to put off answerering my private questions, but I really wanted clarification from him on his own reply he had made to me and to see if I was heading towards further light or darkness on the topic. I was still in a bit of mental agony for those three weeks. Too many questions. Too many contradictions with scripture and some of Joseph Smith's words and actions (if and where recorded accurately). Too many buts and what ifs.
On Nov. 22nd, while having a nice spiritual Sunday afternoon, I was again reading chapter 6 of Passing the Heavenly Gift. Denver's use and quoting of the words from D&C 132. I looked at the D&C 132 verses again. I stared out the window as I often do to ponder. I ask. How can some of God's people (as stated in Jacob 2 and as Denver had stated about Joseph living it) be allowed to live plural marriage in mortality, if there is only one man and one woman in God's Kingdom (image of God end state of being)? Why would God permit something for time only? Only one Queen out of all of the wives of all those great prophets of the past make it with one King/Man? The other wives who don't make queenship, are recycled into another mortality in another creation cycle and have no claim at all on their man they had hopes and expectations to be with in eternity? Why was Joseph sealing plural wives to himself, even some who were married for time, if they do not go with him in God's Kingdom/eternity? These were the questions for three weeks that were bothering me. How could my new understanding jive with what Joseph apparantly did, what Abraham, Isaac and Jacob lived? How could my own previous revelations on the matter agree with the new understanding? Something must be amiss. Was I deceived somewhere? Where? Is Denver intending to be contradictory intentionally to keep people from relying too much upon him and not enough on the Lord?
I ponder some more. Some information began flowing. All I can say is that the explanations that went on for some time was one of the biggest relief or ah-hah moments I've had. It made more sense. It relaxed my little mental agony going on for weeks. Boy does Snuffer have some things to explain in the future. Some questions still remain, but I think I got enough to help settle my mind. We have to first understand single salvation vs couple exaltation, sealing authority, raising up seed to the Lord (in all the many different ways), reflect on C&E promises, realize that some standings in eternity are not "eternal" or forever but in deed more glorious a standing than being recycled into another mortal probation in a different creation period, etc.
I hope this helps to relieve the minds of some friends that are really struggling with recent comments Snuffer has been saying on this certain topic. They are personally living this familial system. (No, I am not, nor am I looking to. And yes, I have been falsely accused of wanting to add another LDS remnant community member into my family... for simply trying to explain scriptural and church history and my understandings on this topic).
As Snuffer stated in his paper this week on Mormon History, the answers do come if you keep pondering and asking. Some of the words he used in his paper actually matched some of the exact words the Lord had used to explain some things to me on Nov. 22nd.
Answers happen. It may take some time to be prepared to see it, and likely will be given here and there, when you are ready to receive it. Many topics take some foundational ideas to first be understood, before really seeing the bigger picture.
Anyways, go to the Lord to confirm and for explanations. They come. Through the veil process is a harder ordeal (it really is info given to your spirit from the Spirit which has to trickle down via hard to hear words and enlightenment into your mortal understanding) but I see the wisdom in it. Part of the journey. The mortal man still wishes the Lord would just reveal Himself in the flesh and explain things easily and quickly. Sure would be cool to go up and hang with Moses and other angels like Denver and others have done! Would to God that we were all near or on that level.
It is so much easier to understand a greater view of things, when you peer into eternity for a few minutes and get a fuller explanation.
Sometimes frustration for a time can keep motivating you to keep seeking for answers.
Snuffer could explain the truth on the topic now. I could try to explain what I now understand. Snuffer obviously has reasons not to dive too far into it at this time, otherwise he would have cleared things up. I see the wisdom in not declaring it openly. I am sure there is more to learn, but I am satisfied for now. My increase of intelligence on the matter is comforting. I'm sure there is more to learn, seems there always is! Frustration is not always a bad thing, it can be motivational.
I am just another fool on the same trek. A trek I have been on since 2008 after discovering what is really necessary to live in God's Kingdom forever. I have had some revelations through the veil. Had a couple visions. Had very small conversations spiritually, thru the veil with Angels (hey maybe some physical ones unaware). Understandings have increased over time with a little here and a little there. I remember for about 2 yrs being woken up numerous times hearing some kind of scripture-like instruction being given that I wish my mortal mind could diligently receive and remember. Have felt un-explainable glorious things at times and realized later what it meant. I have had some failures. I have also faced evil things that I never thought possible and don't want to discuss. I have seen hell do all they can through weaknesses of others close to me. Have heard great things that I sometimes think cannot be. I still to this day lament and desire with all my heart to be much further along the path than I am, as I am sure most probably feel.
But I want and am willing to understand all things. Wading in the deep end is not a problem for me either. I seek and ask always. If I lack intelligent understanding, I want it. If I misunderstand anything, I want correction. If the Lord has something to show me I need to work on, I want to hear it. I don't get offended if people don't yet understand what I do or have a different opinion on a topic (maybe a little bothered at personal opinions expressed that show a lack of research/pondering). I will not stop meeting with you or falsely assume negative things about you for trying to figure out some truth (this has happened to me in our growing LDS remnant community that hopes to one day be a part of Zion).
Hold to the Rod, He wants you to weary Him. He wants you to take your questions to Him. If Snuffer or others don't want to share something, go to the Lord and do all to pierce that veil (yes, it sometimes seems like a solid brick wall). Never give up, no matter how hard things in your life become, or how distant you think you are to Him. No matter how confused you are on some topic. Questions and misunderstandings are an opportunity. Problems that the adversary is allowed to cause you while on your trek are also opportunities. Take them as they come, and endure them well. Your salvation and/or exaltation depends on it.
To the truth, and nothing but. I care less about the misunderstandings and opinions of men. What I really want is the truth on everything I can, from The Source.
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
Sunday, November 8, 2015
Sorting IT Out
Denver
Snuffer:
“ Plural wives is as unpleasant a topic as you encounter in our religion. However, its unpleasantness does not detract from the importance of sorting it out. Given the various conflicting charges and countercharges, it is a relief to just accept a superficial account and hope it is true. That applies to both sides. Both those who reject the practice, as well as those who welcome it, need to be willing to sort through it and reach the correct conclusion.”
Catch that? BOTH camps need to be willing to reach the CORRECT CONCLUSION.
Snuffer had formerly discussed plurality and was writing as if he was in the 'for it'(Joseph and his close friends/family was involved in Nauvoo) camp prior to 2014. He stated it is possible in two rare instances and explained (mainly in June 2012 blog posts and in PTHG ch. 6) how it was allowed or commanded. Post summer-2014 he started to say things differently. Exactly one week ago he stated that the image of God is one male and one female. Add both of his ideas together. If they are both accurate, then the only conclusion left is staring us in the face of why God allowed some of HIS PEOPLE to live it and for what purpose.
The D&C, the Bible and the Book Of Mormon all contain history and talk about plural marriage. Cain's son Lamech may have been the first recorded person to live it in the bible (and also a murderer), but that alone does not make it abominable. Denver stated more than once that Joseph Smith was commanded to live it and merited his Calling and Election. God in fact commanded Abraham and Sarah to live it. His grandson's Jacob/Israel(raised 12 sons of Israel with 4 wives at the same time) and Esau both lived it. King David was asked why he committed adultery and caused the death of Uriah, and essentially says I gave you all your wives (had 300) and I would have given you more, why do this? Take another man's wife and causing his death is enough to lose your station. King Saul and Solomon are recorded as having wives as well many others in the Old Testament.
Snuffer stated that Joseph Smith obtained his calling and election promises for being obedient to obeying the command to practice it. Along with Snuffer's pre-2014 pro-plurality talk, there is also a ton of church history, court documents, affidavits, newspapers(do actually read the Nauvoo Expositor), journals, history of the church, misunderstandings of other members close to Joseph who were vaguely hearing about Joseph's living of it, and more that backs up the fact that plural marriage was being lived by Joseph, William Clayton, Brigham Young, Heber C Kimball, Hyrum Smith and others in Nauvoo. William Clayton in fact had a son with a plural wife in Nauvoo and was worried about the church members finding out. Joseph simply says don't worry about it, if they find out, he would cut him off publicly and then bring him right back (paraphrasing). There is too much evidence to simply brush it off as some grand dishonest scheme put together by Brigham Young and friends after that time. Before anyone can even think to closely judge the matter right, you must first read all the scriptures that discuss the topic. Then read the books: Joseph Smith's Quorum of the Anointed by Anderson/Bergera and An Intimate Chronicle-The Journals of William Clayton. Denver also stated that Brian Hale's work is the most exhaustive, so his three volumes of Joseph Smith's Polygamy are a must read as well. Feel free to even contact Hales on facebook or via his website: www.JosephSmithsPolygamy.com
Denver has stated that the image of a God is one man with one woman. This is obviously the final end state of being. This single statement seems to contradict the possibility of polygany, and the anti-PM-in-Nauvoo supporters shout yes, we were right! If this statement is true, then the “proxy for time only wives” of Joseph will not ever be in eternity with him? Is it for time concubinage? They become adopted daughters in his family whom he will never create as a God with in eternity, or??? Joseph told women in his proposals that they would be eternally blessed, and they thought they would be with him forever. Seems odd God would give plural wives for time, and even if more than one wife becomes eternal quality in the end, that only one perfect match would remain his. Those women’s hopes and expectations to be with Joseph are broken in the end? Was Joseph, as connected as he was, not working with the fuller vision of it all? The Lord stated at the end of D&C 132 that He would give more on the matter... but was Joseph too busy with everything on his plate and didn't inquire more? But this is serious stuff! Would not the Lord say, “oh by the way, your view on PM is a little skewed, before getting too carried away with it, here is the rest of the story...”. Joseph said ALL that the Lord gives him he can take with him. Isn’t that a part of what sealing power is for?
Compare with the following two quotes:
---
Faithful member Mary Elizabeth Lighner publicy stated:
"Much has come and gone from me through the powers and vicissitudes of this Church. I have been in almost every mob. I have been driven about and told I would be shot and had a gun pointed at me, but I stayed with the Church until it was driven from Nauvoo. The words of the Prophet that had been revealed to him always have been with me from the beginning to the end of the gospel. Every principle that has been given in the Church by the prophet is true. I know whereon I stand, I know what I believe, I know what I know and I know what I testify to you is the living truth. As I expect to meet it at the bar of the eternal Jehovah, it is true. And when you stand before the bar you will know. He preached polygamy and he not only preached it, but he practiced it. I am a living witness to it. It was given to him before he gave it to the Church. An angel came to him and the last time he came with a drawn sword in his hand and told Joseph if he did not go into that principle, he would slay him."
"Well," said I, "don't you think it was an angel of the devil that told you these things?" Said he, "No, it was an angel of God. God Almighty showed me the difference between an angel of light and Satan's angels. The angel came to me three times between the years of 1834 and 1842 and said I was to obey that principle or he would slay me. "But," said he, "they called me a false and fallen prophet but I am more in favor with my God this day than I ever was in all my life before. I know that I shall be saved in the Kingdom of God. I have the oath of God upon it and God cannot lie; all that he gives me I shall take with me for I have that authority and that power conferred upon me."
SOURCE: Testimony of Sister Mary Lightner, Address to Brigham Young University, April 14th, 1905, BYU Archives and Manuscripts, see also http://www.ldshistory.net/pc/merlbyu.htm
---
From copies in archives at the Historical Department, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City, Utah:
A Revelation to Newell K. Whitney, 27 July 1842, and Joseph Smith Elizabeth Ann Whitney, and Sarah Ann Whitney:
"Verily, thus saith the Lord unto my servant N[ewel]. K. Whitney, the thing that my servant Joseph Smith has made known unto you and your Family [his plural marriage to Sarah Ann Whitney] and which you have agreed upon is right in mine eyes and shall be rewarded upon your heads with honor and immortality and eternal life to all your house both old & young because of the lineage of my Preast Hood saith the Lord it shall be upon you and upon your children after you from generation to generation, by virtue of the Holy promise which I now make unto you saith the Lord."
"These are the words which you shall pronounce upon my servant Joseph and your Daughter Sarah Ann. Whitney. They shall take each other by the hand and you shall say 'You both mutually agree," calling them by name, '"to be each other's companion so long as you both shall live preserving yourselves for each other and from all others and also throughout all eternity reserving only those rights which have been given to my servant Joseph by revelation and commandment and by legal Authority in times passed.' If you both agree to covenant and do this then I give you Sarah Ann Whitney, my daughter, to Joseph Smith to be his wife, to observe all the rights between you both that belong to that condition. I do it in my own name and in the name of my wife, your mother, and in the name of my Holy Progenitors, by the right of birth which is of Preast Hood, vested in my by revelation and commandment and promise of the living. God obtained by the Holy Melchisedeck Jethro and other of the Holy Fathers, commanding in the name of the Lord all those Powers to concentrate in you and through to your posterity forever. All these things I do in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ that through this order he may be glorified and that through the power of anointing David may reign King over Israel, which shall hereafter be revealed. Let immortality and eternal life henceforth be sealed upon your heads forever and ever. Amen."
LOCATION: Nauvoo, IL. SOURCE: Original manuscript of Kirtland Revelation Book, Church Historical Department, Ms f 490 # 2, also The Historical Record 6:222 (1887 edition.), also In Sacred Lonliness, p. 348-349
----
What is the next eternal state of all the sealed plural wives(who endure to the end and retain their standing) of the righteous patriarchs and men of old, like Abraham and Jacob(bore 12 sons through his 4 wives at the same time)? I am sure there are blessings for the plural mothers being so faithful and serving God's Sons so that they too inherit greater things in their life to come. But they can never truly lay a hold of expectations to have their husband (if only one goes with him in the end) in eternity? The children she raises on earth for her polygamist husband can be eternal with him, but not the children's earthly mothers who bore them (they would then be considered the righteous seed of her husband and the one wife he brings into eternity)?
Some sought to avoid discussing the matter. Some voiced their opinions here and there, and then shouted a mental or verbal hallelleua when DS started saying things about it in the negative tone since mid-2014. Some went so far as to alienate themselves either mentally, physically or both, from other community members who trusted the scriptures, Joseph's history and who agreed with Denver's numerous writings and clarifications on the topic prior to 2014. Some went so far to falsely assume and then share wild stories about those who anxiously were engaged in getting to the bottom of it all. My side of the camp apparantly did not have the full story on the topic, but our belief that PM occurred in Nauvoo lines up with Snuffer's. We layed on the other side of the spectrum, while others want to think that PM was an apostate (which amounts to adultery I might add) experiment by righteous Patriarchs and Prophets or think that Joseph never lived it and it was all fabricated by a mass congregation of lying mormons (under Brigham) and false accusers of Joseph Smith.
DS in June 2012 stated we need to both meet in the middle and come to the correct conclusion. Denver had stated some things, both on his blog and privately, that went against my understanding one week ago. I had to contact Denver after this comment and ask him why the flip-flopping. What is he actually trying to say, and why not just publicly declare the truth and settle the matter. He did reply. He made more statements, some which were a little vague, which had me take it to the Lord. An answer came the next day. I wanted to dismiss it. I thought myself deceived somehow. Then I studied the scriptures I mentioned above, and words pop out like confirmations of what I was told. I still find it hard to believe this is it. There has to be more on the subject still. Would love for the Lord or anyone to come and tell me that I am now incorrect. Me being right or wrong is not the matter, the truth matters. The truth is all I ever wanted seeing so much confusion and disorder and division among many groups of mormons (since 2008 when i started "waking up").
Consider all the comments and quotes by Denver Snuffer found in the next section below. Then come back to this point.
Read these scriptures in this order:
Jacob 2:30
D&C 132: 30-31, 34, 37, 48, 55, 63
D&C 132: 31, 37-40, 45-46, 58-59, 64-66
What is the stated reason PM is lived?
Why is it allowed or commanded?
To whom are God's people?
See a promise of eternal wives anywhere?
Notice in 132:48 the words: "whatsoever you give on earth, and to whomsoever you give any one on earth". The only eternal thing mentioned is: "shall be without condemnation on earth and in heaven".
Notice: "I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an hundred-fold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives..." in verse 55.
Notice the words "Abraham received promises concerning his seed, and of the fruit of his loins".
Read Jacob 2:30 again.
The first portion of 132 talks about a man being eternal with A wife. The rest deals with an order of family building possible on earth, and only allowed for God's servants (who obviously have surpassed the telestial hearken to a man though he be a messenger level... for they hearken to the King direct).
Now consider Denver's pre-2014 many comments on this matter and compare to his public recent statements and the statement that the Image of God is one man with one woman. This would be a final state of being in eternity. We are not close to that and could take nearly worlds without end for some to get there.
These things (eternal marriage and the issue of plural wives in time) are a part of the law of the priesthood of the Sons of God (those who actually have Abrahamic promises, those who are "of Abraham, who have eternal promises from the Lord; or those who are close thereto"). If people are not there yet, or still wonder if they really are there, then as Jacob in 2:30 states, and as Denver Snuffer states... they should hearken to the public teachings of God's servants. The un-authorized practices of it needs to end.
Is this the final answer? Plurality can take place in mortality, but not in Eternity? A more complete way to view this topic??? I still have issues and contradictions if so.
"
That having been said, the revelation is rather clear about the conditions for taking plural wives. The first requirement is that the Lord must command it in order to raise up seed. This requirement is not found in Section 132, but is in Jacob 2: 30. This is where the underlying reason is stated for the Lord to give the command. Before you presume you understand this underlying doctrine, I would like to pose a few questions to consider:
-If the foundation for giving the command is found in the Lord wanting to "raise up seed unto Himself" then what is to "raise up seed unto the Lord"?
-Are you certain this is childbearing alone?
-Does having children ever "raise up seed unto the Lord?"
-Was Joseph Smith commanded?
-Did Joseph Smith "raise up seed to the Lord?"
-Why did Joseph Smith only father children with Emma Smith?
-Does the commandment to Joseph mean something other than breeding children with multiple women?
-Can a man "raise up seed unto the Lord" as Joseph Smith did, never fathering a child with any other woman than his wife, Emma?
-Who are the "seed" which Joseph "raised up unto the Lord?"
-How were they made Joseph's seed?
Section 132 gives two conditions for taking plural wives:
-If the Lord commands. (As in 132: 35 where Abraham was commanded.)
-If a man having the correct authority asks and obtains permission. (As in 132: 39 where David asked and the Lord, through Nathan, gave him these wives.)
-If additional wives are taken without the Lord wanting to "raise up seed unto Himself" thereby opening the way, and one of the two foregoing conditions being met, then taking additional wives is an abomination. (As in 132: 38.)
Further, in order to take an additional wife, someone (either the recipient or an officiator) must have the necessary keys to seal the marriage. This is complicated by the fact that there is never but "one man at a time" who holds this authority. (132: 7.) So if Warren Jeffs has these keys, Thomas Monson cannot. But if Owen Allred has the keys, then neither Warren Jeffs nor Thomas Monson can have them. And, of course, if Alex Joseph has them, then that deprives Allred, Jeffs and Thomas Monson.
The problem is, that if you are wrong in guessing which of the groups actually have the keys (because there's only one, mind you), then you are guilty of an abominable practice and you are condemned. You not only will fail to preserve your marriage, you forfeit your exaltation and condemn yourself.
Though I do not often make disclosures of this sort, one of the reasons I am writing this series is because I have asked, and the Lord has told me Warren Jeffs does not hold these keys. Those who follow him thinking he is leading to a better condition in the afterlife have been deceived. I would advise them to abandon that group and repent. Has not his recent behavior taught you he is in error? Has not his last declaration about who can father children made plain the man does not speak for God? Have you not eaten husks long enough? Is it not yet time to return and repent?
Now, if you are of the view that you need to live polygamy, then you need to take every precaution to first know:
-The Lord has, in fact, commanded you; or
-You are in possession of the correct authority and you have asked God and been given His permission; and
-You are capable of "raising up seed unto the Lord" (which means that in the resurrection, you have the ability to take them with you in the ascent through the heavens, passing the sentinels who stand guard along the way, leading your company by the knowledge you have to endure that fiery ascent back to the Throne of God.)
If there is any part of that you do not understand, then you are utterly incapable of satisfying the conditions and you should run from this idea because you are not capable of living the conditions. If you understand and think you have authority to go forward, then I would further caution you that this is not something men take on themselves, but something which God or His ministering angels alone supervise. Do not trust some sentimental feeling, or "burning in the loins." These are serious matters, not to be trifled with by the foolish and aspiring - and NEVER an invitation to the carnal
Before proceeding further, it
is important to recognize that this is not an inconsequential matter. If someone
guesses they can have plural wives and they are wrong, they have gone too far.
They are taking a dangerous step. They risk eternity. Therefore this topic
should not be approached casually, or because someone "thinks" this is proper.
Either they know because God has instructed them by commandment, exclusively for
the limited reasons it is allowed to be practiced, or they are involved in a
serious, grievous sin.
In Section 132, words like "he hath broken his vow and hath committed adultery" are included for those who proceed absent the Lord's command. (D&C 132: 43.) Those who go too far can "fall from his exaltation" when these things are done in violation of God's will. (D&C 132: 39.)
In Jacob, the improper taking of an additional wife is called "whoredoms and an abomination" by the Lord. (Jacob 2: 28.)
Those who proceed in our dispensation in the absence of the Lord's direct command to them are included among those the Lord described as gentiles filled with "whoredoms, and of secret abominations." (3 Ne. 16: 10.) If you are engaged in the practice, and recognize it is an abomination, and you will "repent and return unto [God's ways], saith the Father, behold they shall be numbered among my people, O house of Israel." (3 Ne. 16: 13.)
None but fools will trifle with this topic.
in other words, whatever
happened between 1829 and 1843 is bound to be extremely difficult to accurately
recreate. Those involved were trying to cover it up, and make it difficult and
hopefully impossible to know it took place. They did not want it
public.
Moreover, not everyone who was taken into confidence by Joseph was trustworthy, or honorable.
--------------------End of Snuffer statements on PM.
So, is this the correct view, the middle road that both camps needed to come to conclude or not? Is there more to the story still?
Have you researched everything on this topic, and talked with God on the matter? What do you see?
“ Plural wives is as unpleasant a topic as you encounter in our religion. However, its unpleasantness does not detract from the importance of sorting it out. Given the various conflicting charges and countercharges, it is a relief to just accept a superficial account and hope it is true. That applies to both sides. Both those who reject the practice, as well as those who welcome it, need to be willing to sort through it and reach the correct conclusion.”
Catch that? BOTH camps need to be willing to reach the CORRECT CONCLUSION.
Snuffer had formerly discussed plurality and was writing as if he was in the 'for it'(Joseph and his close friends/family was involved in Nauvoo) camp prior to 2014. He stated it is possible in two rare instances and explained (mainly in June 2012 blog posts and in PTHG ch. 6) how it was allowed or commanded. Post summer-2014 he started to say things differently. Exactly one week ago he stated that the image of God is one male and one female. Add both of his ideas together. If they are both accurate, then the only conclusion left is staring us in the face of why God allowed some of HIS PEOPLE to live it and for what purpose.
The D&C, the Bible and the Book Of Mormon all contain history and talk about plural marriage. Cain's son Lamech may have been the first recorded person to live it in the bible (and also a murderer), but that alone does not make it abominable. Denver stated more than once that Joseph Smith was commanded to live it and merited his Calling and Election. God in fact commanded Abraham and Sarah to live it. His grandson's Jacob/Israel(raised 12 sons of Israel with 4 wives at the same time) and Esau both lived it. King David was asked why he committed adultery and caused the death of Uriah, and essentially says I gave you all your wives (had 300) and I would have given you more, why do this? Take another man's wife and causing his death is enough to lose your station. King Saul and Solomon are recorded as having wives as well many others in the Old Testament.
Snuffer stated that Joseph Smith obtained his calling and election promises for being obedient to obeying the command to practice it. Along with Snuffer's pre-2014 pro-plurality talk, there is also a ton of church history, court documents, affidavits, newspapers(do actually read the Nauvoo Expositor), journals, history of the church, misunderstandings of other members close to Joseph who were vaguely hearing about Joseph's living of it, and more that backs up the fact that plural marriage was being lived by Joseph, William Clayton, Brigham Young, Heber C Kimball, Hyrum Smith and others in Nauvoo. William Clayton in fact had a son with a plural wife in Nauvoo and was worried about the church members finding out. Joseph simply says don't worry about it, if they find out, he would cut him off publicly and then bring him right back (paraphrasing). There is too much evidence to simply brush it off as some grand dishonest scheme put together by Brigham Young and friends after that time. Before anyone can even think to closely judge the matter right, you must first read all the scriptures that discuss the topic. Then read the books: Joseph Smith's Quorum of the Anointed by Anderson/Bergera and An Intimate Chronicle-The Journals of William Clayton. Denver also stated that Brian Hale's work is the most exhaustive, so his three volumes of Joseph Smith's Polygamy are a must read as well. Feel free to even contact Hales on facebook or via his website: www.JosephSmithsPolygamy.com
Denver has stated that the image of a God is one man with one woman. This is obviously the final end state of being. This single statement seems to contradict the possibility of polygany, and the anti-PM-in-Nauvoo supporters shout yes, we were right! If this statement is true, then the “proxy for time only wives” of Joseph will not ever be in eternity with him? Is it for time concubinage? They become adopted daughters in his family whom he will never create as a God with in eternity, or??? Joseph told women in his proposals that they would be eternally blessed, and they thought they would be with him forever. Seems odd God would give plural wives for time, and even if more than one wife becomes eternal quality in the end, that only one perfect match would remain his. Those women’s hopes and expectations to be with Joseph are broken in the end? Was Joseph, as connected as he was, not working with the fuller vision of it all? The Lord stated at the end of D&C 132 that He would give more on the matter... but was Joseph too busy with everything on his plate and didn't inquire more? But this is serious stuff! Would not the Lord say, “oh by the way, your view on PM is a little skewed, before getting too carried away with it, here is the rest of the story...”. Joseph said ALL that the Lord gives him he can take with him. Isn’t that a part of what sealing power is for?
Compare with the following two quotes:
---
Faithful member Mary Elizabeth Lighner publicy stated:
"Much has come and gone from me through the powers and vicissitudes of this Church. I have been in almost every mob. I have been driven about and told I would be shot and had a gun pointed at me, but I stayed with the Church until it was driven from Nauvoo. The words of the Prophet that had been revealed to him always have been with me from the beginning to the end of the gospel. Every principle that has been given in the Church by the prophet is true. I know whereon I stand, I know what I believe, I know what I know and I know what I testify to you is the living truth. As I expect to meet it at the bar of the eternal Jehovah, it is true. And when you stand before the bar you will know. He preached polygamy and he not only preached it, but he practiced it. I am a living witness to it. It was given to him before he gave it to the Church. An angel came to him and the last time he came with a drawn sword in his hand and told Joseph if he did not go into that principle, he would slay him."
"Well," said I, "don't you think it was an angel of the devil that told you these things?" Said he, "No, it was an angel of God. God Almighty showed me the difference between an angel of light and Satan's angels. The angel came to me three times between the years of 1834 and 1842 and said I was to obey that principle or he would slay me. "But," said he, "they called me a false and fallen prophet but I am more in favor with my God this day than I ever was in all my life before. I know that I shall be saved in the Kingdom of God. I have the oath of God upon it and God cannot lie; all that he gives me I shall take with me for I have that authority and that power conferred upon me."
SOURCE: Testimony of Sister Mary Lightner, Address to Brigham Young University, April 14th, 1905, BYU Archives and Manuscripts, see also http://www.ldshistory.net/pc/merlbyu.htm
---
From copies in archives at the Historical Department, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Salt Lake City, Utah:
A Revelation to Newell K. Whitney, 27 July 1842, and Joseph Smith Elizabeth Ann Whitney, and Sarah Ann Whitney:
"Verily, thus saith the Lord unto my servant N[ewel]. K. Whitney, the thing that my servant Joseph Smith has made known unto you and your Family [his plural marriage to Sarah Ann Whitney] and which you have agreed upon is right in mine eyes and shall be rewarded upon your heads with honor and immortality and eternal life to all your house both old & young because of the lineage of my Preast Hood saith the Lord it shall be upon you and upon your children after you from generation to generation, by virtue of the Holy promise which I now make unto you saith the Lord."
"These are the words which you shall pronounce upon my servant Joseph and your Daughter Sarah Ann. Whitney. They shall take each other by the hand and you shall say 'You both mutually agree," calling them by name, '"to be each other's companion so long as you both shall live preserving yourselves for each other and from all others and also throughout all eternity reserving only those rights which have been given to my servant Joseph by revelation and commandment and by legal Authority in times passed.' If you both agree to covenant and do this then I give you Sarah Ann Whitney, my daughter, to Joseph Smith to be his wife, to observe all the rights between you both that belong to that condition. I do it in my own name and in the name of my wife, your mother, and in the name of my Holy Progenitors, by the right of birth which is of Preast Hood, vested in my by revelation and commandment and promise of the living. God obtained by the Holy Melchisedeck Jethro and other of the Holy Fathers, commanding in the name of the Lord all those Powers to concentrate in you and through to your posterity forever. All these things I do in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ that through this order he may be glorified and that through the power of anointing David may reign King over Israel, which shall hereafter be revealed. Let immortality and eternal life henceforth be sealed upon your heads forever and ever. Amen."
LOCATION: Nauvoo, IL. SOURCE: Original manuscript of Kirtland Revelation Book, Church Historical Department, Ms f 490 # 2, also The Historical Record 6:222 (1887 edition.), also In Sacred Lonliness, p. 348-349
----
What is the next eternal state of all the sealed plural wives(who endure to the end and retain their standing) of the righteous patriarchs and men of old, like Abraham and Jacob(bore 12 sons through his 4 wives at the same time)? I am sure there are blessings for the plural mothers being so faithful and serving God's Sons so that they too inherit greater things in their life to come. But they can never truly lay a hold of expectations to have their husband (if only one goes with him in the end) in eternity? The children she raises on earth for her polygamist husband can be eternal with him, but not the children's earthly mothers who bore them (they would then be considered the righteous seed of her husband and the one wife he brings into eternity)?
Confusion and Contention in the Awaking LDS Remnant
Some sought to avoid discussing the matter. Some voiced their opinions here and there, and then shouted a mental or verbal hallelleua when DS started saying things about it in the negative tone since mid-2014. Some went so far as to alienate themselves either mentally, physically or both, from other community members who trusted the scriptures, Joseph's history and who agreed with Denver's numerous writings and clarifications on the topic prior to 2014. Some went so far to falsely assume and then share wild stories about those who anxiously were engaged in getting to the bottom of it all. My side of the camp apparantly did not have the full story on the topic, but our belief that PM occurred in Nauvoo lines up with Snuffer's. We layed on the other side of the spectrum, while others want to think that PM was an apostate (which amounts to adultery I might add) experiment by righteous Patriarchs and Prophets or think that Joseph never lived it and it was all fabricated by a mass congregation of lying mormons (under Brigham) and false accusers of Joseph Smith.
DS in June 2012 stated we need to both meet in the middle and come to the correct conclusion. Denver had stated some things, both on his blog and privately, that went against my understanding one week ago. I had to contact Denver after this comment and ask him why the flip-flopping. What is he actually trying to say, and why not just publicly declare the truth and settle the matter. He did reply. He made more statements, some which were a little vague, which had me take it to the Lord. An answer came the next day. I wanted to dismiss it. I thought myself deceived somehow. Then I studied the scriptures I mentioned above, and words pop out like confirmations of what I was told. I still find it hard to believe this is it. There has to be more on the subject still. Would love for the Lord or anyone to come and tell me that I am now incorrect. Me being right or wrong is not the matter, the truth matters. The truth is all I ever wanted seeing so much confusion and disorder and division among many groups of mormons (since 2008 when i started "waking up").
The Correct View Left To Conclude?
Consider all the comments and quotes by Denver Snuffer found in the next section below. Then come back to this point.
Read these scriptures in this order:
Jacob 2:30
D&C 132: 30-31, 34, 37, 48, 55, 63
D&C 132: 31, 37-40, 45-46, 58-59, 64-66
What is the stated reason PM is lived?
Why is it allowed or commanded?
To whom are God's people?
See a promise of eternal wives anywhere?
Notice in 132:48 the words: "whatsoever you give on earth, and to whomsoever you give any one on earth". The only eternal thing mentioned is: "shall be without condemnation on earth and in heaven".
Notice: "I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an hundred-fold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives..." in verse 55.
Notice the words "Abraham received promises concerning his seed, and of the fruit of his loins".
Read Jacob 2:30 again.
The first portion of 132 talks about a man being eternal with A wife. The rest deals with an order of family building possible on earth, and only allowed for God's servants (who obviously have surpassed the telestial hearken to a man though he be a messenger level... for they hearken to the King direct).
Now consider Denver's pre-2014 many comments on this matter and compare to his public recent statements and the statement that the Image of God is one man with one woman. This would be a final state of being in eternity. We are not close to that and could take nearly worlds without end for some to get there.
These things (eternal marriage and the issue of plural wives in time) are a part of the law of the priesthood of the Sons of God (those who actually have Abrahamic promises, those who are "of Abraham, who have eternal promises from the Lord; or those who are close thereto"). If people are not there yet, or still wonder if they really are there, then as Jacob in 2:30 states, and as Denver Snuffer states... they should hearken to the public teachings of God's servants. The un-authorized practices of it needs to end.
Is this the final answer? Plurality can take place in mortality, but not in Eternity? A more complete way to view this topic??? I still have issues and contradictions if so.
Former Statements by Snuffer:
Denver has stated in his blog and in Passing the Heavenly Gift: PM was only justifiable in
some very narrow and rare situations (allowed or commanded by God). If people live that without proper
authorization, it is an abomination. He has also stated Joseph was not an adulter. Which I agree. The authorized living of plurality is not adulter, as D&C 132 states. Post 2014, Denver has since seemed to label it all an abomination and said it needs to
come to an end and that he doesn’t believe in it. I am awaiting a more clear response on
why he said one thing for years and has since changed his teachings.
All of the following statements by Denver Snuffer are published here:
Denver Snuffer:"
That having been said, the revelation is rather clear about the conditions for taking plural wives. The first requirement is that the Lord must command it in order to raise up seed. This requirement is not found in Section 132, but is in Jacob 2: 30. This is where the underlying reason is stated for the Lord to give the command. Before you presume you understand this underlying doctrine, I would like to pose a few questions to consider:
-If the foundation for giving the command is found in the Lord wanting to "raise up seed unto Himself" then what is to "raise up seed unto the Lord"?
-Are you certain this is childbearing alone?
-Does having children ever "raise up seed unto the Lord?"
-Was Joseph Smith commanded?
-Did Joseph Smith "raise up seed to the Lord?"
-Why did Joseph Smith only father children with Emma Smith?
-Does the commandment to Joseph mean something other than breeding children with multiple women?
-Can a man "raise up seed unto the Lord" as Joseph Smith did, never fathering a child with any other woman than his wife, Emma?
-Who are the "seed" which Joseph "raised up unto the Lord?"
-How were they made Joseph's seed?
Section 132 gives two conditions for taking plural wives:
-If the Lord commands. (As in 132: 35 where Abraham was commanded.)
-If a man having the correct authority asks and obtains permission. (As in 132: 39 where David asked and the Lord, through Nathan, gave him these wives.)
-If additional wives are taken without the Lord wanting to "raise up seed unto Himself" thereby opening the way, and one of the two foregoing conditions being met, then taking additional wives is an abomination. (As in 132: 38.)
Further, in order to take an additional wife, someone (either the recipient or an officiator) must have the necessary keys to seal the marriage. This is complicated by the fact that there is never but "one man at a time" who holds this authority. (132: 7.) So if Warren Jeffs has these keys, Thomas Monson cannot. But if Owen Allred has the keys, then neither Warren Jeffs nor Thomas Monson can have them. And, of course, if Alex Joseph has them, then that deprives Allred, Jeffs and Thomas Monson.
The problem is, that if you are wrong in guessing which of the groups actually have the keys (because there's only one, mind you), then you are guilty of an abominable practice and you are condemned. You not only will fail to preserve your marriage, you forfeit your exaltation and condemn yourself.
Though I do not often make disclosures of this sort, one of the reasons I am writing this series is because I have asked, and the Lord has told me Warren Jeffs does not hold these keys. Those who follow him thinking he is leading to a better condition in the afterlife have been deceived. I would advise them to abandon that group and repent. Has not his recent behavior taught you he is in error? Has not his last declaration about who can father children made plain the man does not speak for God? Have you not eaten husks long enough? Is it not yet time to return and repent?
Now, if you are of the view that you need to live polygamy, then you need to take every precaution to first know:
-The Lord has, in fact, commanded you; or
-You are in possession of the correct authority and you have asked God and been given His permission; and
-You are capable of "raising up seed unto the Lord" (which means that in the resurrection, you have the ability to take them with you in the ascent through the heavens, passing the sentinels who stand guard along the way, leading your company by the knowledge you have to endure that fiery ascent back to the Throne of God.)
If there is any part of that you do not understand, then you are utterly incapable of satisfying the conditions and you should run from this idea because you are not capable of living the conditions. If you understand and think you have authority to go forward, then I would further caution you that this is not something men take on themselves, but something which God or His ministering angels alone supervise. Do not trust some sentimental feeling, or "burning in the loins." These are serious matters, not to be trifled with by the foolish and aspiring - and NEVER an invitation to the carnal
....
In Section 132, words like "he hath broken his vow and hath committed adultery" are included for those who proceed absent the Lord's command. (D&C 132: 43.) Those who go too far can "fall from his exaltation" when these things are done in violation of God's will. (D&C 132: 39.)
In Jacob, the improper taking of an additional wife is called "whoredoms and an abomination" by the Lord. (Jacob 2: 28.)
Those who proceed in our dispensation in the absence of the Lord's direct command to them are included among those the Lord described as gentiles filled with "whoredoms, and of secret abominations." (3 Ne. 16: 10.) If you are engaged in the practice, and recognize it is an abomination, and you will "repent and return unto [God's ways], saith the Father, behold they shall be numbered among my people, O house of Israel." (3 Ne. 16: 13.)
None but fools will trifle with this topic.
.....
The explanation for multiple wives
begins after the explanation of what is required for exaltation. These verses
permit two exceptions to the prior, mandatory requirement that marriage is
limited to a man and a woman who are sealed by God, through His word, by the
Holy Spirit of Promise. These two exceptions will be considered next.
To reaffirm the point of this post: If you guess wrong by taking multiple wives, your mistake is called "whoredoms" and "an abomination" and will condemn you.
To reaffirm the point of this post: If you guess wrong by taking multiple wives, your mistake is called "whoredoms" and "an abomination" and will condemn you.
....
Through Joseph Smith we have two
scriptural sources dealing with plural wives. Jacob 2, in the Book of Mormon condemns the practice as "an abomination,"
but leaves it open to be practiced if the Lord commands. The reason the Lord
would command is to "raise up seed unto [Him]."Section 132, beginning at verse 29, discusses why earlier prophets took more than one wife. It "permits"
taking more than one wife under two conditions. But Section 132 should be read
in light of what Jacob taught regarding the limitations and purpose of having
more than one wife.
....
Moreover, not everyone who was taken into confidence by Joseph was trustworthy, or honorable.
....
Some of what Bennett wrote was true (i.e.,
private taking of multiple wives) and some of it was sensational,
untrue,...
...
In addition to Bennett, others also knew of the
private taking of additional wives.
...
, it becomes apparent that whatever Section 132
permits or does not permit, the principle can be abused
...
Plural wives is as unpleasant a topic as you
encounter in our religion. However, its unpleasantness does not detract from the
importance of sorting it out. Given the various conflicting charges and
countercharges, it is a relief to just accept a superficial account and hope it
is true. That applies to BOTH sides. BOTH those who reject the practice, as well
as those who welcome it, need to be willing to sort through it and reach the
correct conclusion.
---
Did Joseph Receive A Revelation?
Section
132 of the Doctrine & Covenants is not universally accepted as a revelation
received by Joseph Smith. When the discussion cannot proceed beyond whether this
originated from Joseph Smith, by revelation, the discussion goes nowhere.
Therefore, the first step must be to resolve whether the revelation
came through Joseph Smith, or was a later fabrication of Brigham Young and his
inner circle of polygamists.
The following information persuades me Section 132 came through Joseph Smith and was reduced to writing on July 12, 1843:
The Nauvoo Diaries of William Clayton were written chronologically and have the following entries (exactly as in original):
In addition to the foregoing, I checked surrounding public events, and the diary is consistent with other records of those days. For example, the event on July 16th is recorded as having taken place "At Stand in Grove, West of Temple" and appears in a letter of Willard Richards to Brigham Young, the Joseph Smith diary kept by Willard Richards, the Levi Richards Diary and the Willard Richards Diary. The afternoon of the 16th also records a public meeting on the "Temple Stand" in the Franklin Richards, William Clayton, and Levi Richards diaries and in the Letter of Willard Richards to Brigham Young, as well as in the Joseph Smith diary kept by Willard Richards.
Disputes after Joseph's death also confirm a disagreement between Emma and the church over ownership in the Steamboat the Maid of Iowa.
These entries seem credible, and therefore I believe they show Section 132 was recorded on July 12, 1843 and originated from Joseph Smith. In addition, the August 12, 1843 meeting of the Nauvoo High Council records there was "teaching by Hyrum Smith" which four witnesses later confirmed included reading Section 132. These witnesses were Austin Cowles (who rejected the doctrine and left the church), David Fulmer, Thomas Grover, James Allred and Aaron Johnson. Hosea Stout was absent when Hyrum read the document, but was later told about the revelation. When Section 132 became public, Hosea Stout confirmed it "corresponded to what" he was told about the reading in August 1843.
It is possible to believe it a fabrication of Brigham Young. It was not made public until the 1850's, and the public disclosure was on Brigham Young's watch. But the document came into existence while Joseph was church president, and came through him. As much as a person may wish the document did not originate with Joseph Smith, the evidence appears to be more than adequate to show it did. It came from Joseph and was reduced to written form in July 1843.
The following information persuades me Section 132 came through Joseph Smith and was reduced to writing on July 12, 1843:
The Nauvoo Diaries of William Clayton were written chronologically and have the following entries (exactly as in original):
July
11, 1843: At noon rode out to farm with Margt. P.M. J & family rode out in
the carriage.
July
12, 1843: This A.M. I wrote a Revelation consisting of 10 pages on the order of
the priesthood, showing the designs in Moses, Abraham, David and Solomon having
many wives & concubines. After it was wrote Prests. Joseph and Hyrum
presented it and read it to E. who said she did not believe a word of it and
appeared very rebellious. J told me to Deed all the unincumbered lots to E &
the children. He appears much troubled about E.
July
13: 1843: This A.M. J sent for me & when I arrived he called me up into his
private room with E. and there stated an agreement they had mutually entered
into. they both stated their feelings on many subjects & wept considerable.
O may the Lord soften her heart that she may be willing to keep and abide his
Holy Law.
July
15, 1843: Made Deed for 1/2 S. B. Iowa from J. to Emma. Also a Deed to E. for
over 60 city lots.
July
16, 1843: A.M. at home writing bro. Kimballs lecture. P.M. went to the Grove and
heard Pres. J. preach on the law of the priesthood. He stated that Hyrum held
the office of prophet to the church by birthright & he was going to have a
reformation and the saints must regard Hyrum for he has authority. He showed
that a man must enter into an everlasting covenant with his wife in this world
or he will have no claim on her in the next. He said that he could not reveal
the fulness of these things untill the Temple is completed &c.
July
17, 1843: A.M. at the Temple & at Prest. J's. conversed with J. & Hyrum
on the priesthood.
In addition to the foregoing, I checked surrounding public events, and the diary is consistent with other records of those days. For example, the event on July 16th is recorded as having taken place "At Stand in Grove, West of Temple" and appears in a letter of Willard Richards to Brigham Young, the Joseph Smith diary kept by Willard Richards, the Levi Richards Diary and the Willard Richards Diary. The afternoon of the 16th also records a public meeting on the "Temple Stand" in the Franklin Richards, William Clayton, and Levi Richards diaries and in the Letter of Willard Richards to Brigham Young, as well as in the Joseph Smith diary kept by Willard Richards.
Disputes after Joseph's death also confirm a disagreement between Emma and the church over ownership in the Steamboat the Maid of Iowa.
These entries seem credible, and therefore I believe they show Section 132 was recorded on July 12, 1843 and originated from Joseph Smith. In addition, the August 12, 1843 meeting of the Nauvoo High Council records there was "teaching by Hyrum Smith" which four witnesses later confirmed included reading Section 132. These witnesses were Austin Cowles (who rejected the doctrine and left the church), David Fulmer, Thomas Grover, James Allred and Aaron Johnson. Hosea Stout was absent when Hyrum read the document, but was later told about the revelation. When Section 132 became public, Hosea Stout confirmed it "corresponded to what" he was told about the reading in August 1843.
It is possible to believe it a fabrication of Brigham Young. It was not made public until the 1850's, and the public disclosure was on Brigham Young's watch. But the document came into existence while Joseph was church president, and came through him. As much as a person may wish the document did not originate with Joseph Smith, the evidence appears to be more than adequate to show it did. It came from Joseph and was reduced to written form in July 1843.
"
--------------------End of Snuffer statements on PM.
Also see chapter 6 of Passing the Heavenly Gift, and the Marriage and Family chapter in Preserving The Restoration.
Before you can rightly judge the history in Nauvoo on this subject, you must read:
"Joseph Smith's Quorum of the Anointed", 3 Volume set of Brian Hale's exhaustive work "Joseph Smiths Polygamy" and "An Intimate Chronicle-The Journals Of William Clayton"
Before you can rightly judge the history in Nauvoo on this subject, you must read:
"Joseph Smith's Quorum of the Anointed", 3 Volume set of Brian Hale's exhaustive work "Joseph Smiths Polygamy" and "An Intimate Chronicle-The Journals Of William Clayton"
More info on the MANY who lived PM in the bible: http://www.biblicalpolygamy.com/polygamists/
So, is this the correct view, the middle road that both camps needed to come to conclude or not? Is there more to the story still?
Have you researched everything on this topic, and talked with God on the matter? What do you see?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)