D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a Mormon

  • user warning: Table './exmo_08072012/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: SELECT data, created, headers, expire, serialized FROM cache_filter WHERE cid = '2:b8f2cb305b4e4b6a3c7126eb18cf2da8' in /home/exmormon/public_html/d6/drupal/includes/cache.inc on line 27.
  • user warning: Table './exmo_08072012/cache_filter' is marked as crashed and should be repaired query: UPDATE cache_filter SET data = '<p>Ex-CultMember June 2013</p>\n<p>So, somehow LDS Inc has NOT subtly taken out or changed the wording in D&amp;C 132, which to me is one of the most appalling and testimony damaging official, church approved literature out there.</p>\n<p>There\'s so many crazy things in there such as:</p>\n<p>1) Exposing the fact that Joseph Smith DID practice polygamy<br />\n2) That the purpose of polygamy was to \"multiply and replenish the Earth,\" and NOT to help out widows whose husbands died, as so often is spouted by Mormons.<br />\n3) As such, Joseph Smith would have been DISOBEYING this commandment if he was NOT having sex with those wives that were already given to him.<br />\n4) Emma is commanded to accept Joseph\'s other wives that were \"given\" unto him, otherwise she would be \"destroyed.\"<br />\n5) Concubines, not even considered wives (sex slaves?), having the SOLE PURPOSE of being a baby making machine for a man, was a GOOD thing (??!!) as long as they were \"given\" unto him by God.<br />\n6) A man can even have \"ten virgins.\"<br />\n7) A man can have sex with at least ten virgins, but these women will be destroyed if they have sex with anyone else.</p>\n<p>I bet most Mormons are not aware of the information contained in this revelation due to the fact that most have probably never actually read it in full, or at best, skimmed it over since it has disturbing material. The fact that it is one of the last sections probably means a lot of members rarely get to it if they are trying to read the D&amp;C from the beginning. And most of the time when Mormons read the D&amp;C its only for some class which selectively quotes from certain verses. I\'m sure if section 132 is quoted they are very selective about which verses to read from. It\'s a VERY wordy and lengthy revelation and you don\'t get to the juicy stuff until the second half.</p>\n<p>Did anyone ever read this as a TBM? What did you think? It would seem to be a very \"anti-Mormon\" revelation if it wasn\'t still in their scriptures.</p>\n<p>If you are having difficulty getting TBM\'s to read anything critical of Mormonism, or have a TBM you would like to get thinking but would be afraid of giving them anti-literature, just tell them to read this section. I bet there\'s a lot of young women in the church that would be absolutely ROCKED if they ever took the time to read this revelation in full. If I had a TBM niece or sister, I\'d say, \"check out D&amp;C 132 and let me know what you think.\"</p>\n<p>This actually might be a gateway source for many Mormons we are trying to get to look at the truth, but won\'t.</p>\n<p>Lasvegasrichard<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nThe part that always stood out to me is where it states that failure to practice polygamy resulted in damnation . Even though Brigham Young was very explicit in just that , apologists today deny that is what it means . You have to ask then why were they practicing at all then ?</p>\n<hr />\nnofear<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nI hated this section and wondered how i could believe in a religion that supported this way of thinking.\n<hr />\nrationalguy<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nThe Most Correct Book has so much repugnant doctrine like that along with the built-in racism expressed in \"white and delightsome/dark and loathsome\" that I can\'t see why the don\'t question it. Besides, it\'s a dead-boring piece of crap literature with stilted grammar obviously designed to fool the average 19th century person. It\'s a crock.\n<hr />\n<p>anon for this comment<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nNot only do Mormons need to READ section 132, they need to STUDY it. They need to research church history and find out how those revelations played out in the lives of the women who were subjected to those revelations.</p>\n<p>If every Mormon did that, I think that there would be an exodus of women like the church has never seen. If the women in mormonism ever wake-up, the church is in real trouble. I was encouraged by the post from baby center a couple days ago.</p>\n<hr />\nreleve<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nI read section 132 for the first time while teaching Gosple Doctrine. That would have been sometime in the late 90s. I was appalled. I don\'t know how any woman could read that and not be appalled. Did I do anything about it? No. In 2008 I read Rough Stone Rolling and then went back and read 132 again. I still didn\'t like what I read, but I still didn\'t do anything about it. I could say that I put it on my shelf, but I\'m a better housekeeper than that. I would never put anything that filthy on a shelf. After I finally got the gumption to leave, this year, I read it again and came to the conclusion that either God was a misogynist or Joseph was. I pick Joseph, although, I\'m not so sure about God.\n<hr />\nphilosopherexmo<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nI haven\'t visited this board for ages, but I dropped in for old-times sake and really appreciated this post as it brought back my whole exit story, which I\'ve never really told anyone before. Lucky you, here it is.. at least the short version :)\n<p>As odd as it may sound, I can trace the \"crisis of faith\" that lead to me leaving the church to D&amp;C 132. In my early teens I was really active in the church and a big online chat room apologist. You know the type. I decided to read the Book of Mormon from cover to cover for about the 600th time.. but this time I actually made it past 2nd Nephi. In fact, I made it all the way to D&amp;C 132.</p>\n<p>I don\'t remember the exact content of that section, and have no real desire to re-read it, but I remember that something about the casual way Joseph Smith was chatting up god, and the nature of their conversation wouldn\'t compute. It was the first time I read a single piece of church doctrine with anything approaching skepticism.. and I had no clue how to proceed.</p>\n<p>I met with my bishop because I was in a complete spiritual panic. I couldn\'t read past this chapter in the D&amp;C.. it really bothered me. It was like.. Reader\'s Block. Crazy, I\'m sure, but I just kept reading it over and over and couldn\'t read the next chapter.</p>\n<p>After meeting with the bishop I decided to take another run at it.. like a long jumper, I suppose, lol. I decided I needed to read the entire bible, then start the BOM over and power through satan\'s influence, or whatever nonsense I thought at the time, so I could get all the way through my prized set of scriptures.</p>\n<p>Well, reading the bible was not the right way to resolve my crisis of faith. That feeling of budding skepticism just got magnified as I read it. I made it through the bible somehow but with a list of grievances I expected my bishop to resolve for me somehow.. and when that didn\'t happen I was on my way out of the church for good before I really realized it.</p>\n<p>The last meeting I had with my bishop ended with him saying I had to WANT the church to be true before I could move toward KNOWING it was true. I think his heart broke a little bit when I told him I didn\'t want the church to be true. I think mine did too. It was a question I didn\'t think I had considered before, but I knew the answer immediately. Even then, young and stupid, I understood that wanting something to be true didn\'t make it any more or less likely to be true, but somehow just hearing the question and my answer aloud rewired my brain a little.</p>\n<p>Right after that meeting with my bishop I did baptisms for the dead for the first time and had a bona-fide religious experience. I felt like I was one with the universe, touching the veil, or whatever--it\'s hard to describe but it was moving and I was almost delirious with warm-tinglies. In that moment time felt like it was completely still and I thought, \"Ok.. this is it. This is the best evidence I am going to have that the church is true. Now what?\" It was really a bittersweet moment but from then on I decided faith just wasn\'t something I was capable of.</p>\n<p>I studied religions for a while, like a shopper overwhelmed with shampoo choices at the market.</p>\n<p>The day I realized the actual root of my problem (that I was an agnostic/atheist trying to be a gnostic/theist) might have been the first time I conciously felt comfortable in my own brain. I don\'t like to admit how long it took me to feel that my lack of faith was anything other than a personal failure and source of shame.</p>\n<p>I hope I\'m not the only nutcase who went through something similar. :)</p>\n<p>I guess all I really wanted to say after all that rambling was this: Thanks D&amp;C 132. It took a lot to put a tiny crack in my credulity, but you were effectively ridiculous and I\'ll never forget what you did for me.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>NYCGal<br />\nThanks for your story<br />\nIt was similar to mine. Polygamy and Section 132 were very troubling to me as a TBM teen.</p>\n<p>Like you, I, too, felt something of an \"epiphany\" in the SL Temple doing baptisms for the dead. I felt religious and \"special\" doing it. The room was all white, and everyone was dressed in white and I let myself be somewhat carried away by it. I don\'t know why now that I look back, but I was 14 and impressionable.</p>\n<p>Still, it wasn\'t enough to stop me from analyzing church doctrine, learning of polygamy in the hereafter, seeing misogyny everywhere in a patriarchal system and reading \"No Man Knows My History\" (which a member of the bishopric had cautioned me to never read as it would destroy my testimony).</p>\n<p>Ultimately I concluded it\'s not true. It\'s just not true. And, if it\'s not true, what is the point?</p>\n<hr />\nfreebird<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nOddly I had a church member quote me D&amp;C 132 in an effort to get me to come back to church.\n<p>I was horrified by it. This is also where you find out Mormons believe that we will become gods, correct? To a person raised in Christianity and hoodwinked into believing Mormonism was Christian, those beliefs were extremely upsetting. I almost felt I had betrayed Jesus.</p>\n<p>Now I am dabbling more and more with coming to terms with the fact that I most likely am an atheist. It\'s a long road for me. Intellectually I know that religion is man made, but I still want to believe in an afterlife/god.</p>\n<hr />\nness<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nThey don\'t think about it! Thinking leads to doubt, doubt leads to questioning, questioning leads to apostacy!<br />\nOne of my best TBM friends, on her wedding day, I don\'t remember how polygamy came up... but I remember her saying that \"Women have to accept that their husbands will take extra wives in the next life, if you read DC 132.... but I don\'t want to think about that!\"\n<p>I had to just ignore it, or explain away that I just didn\'t understand God\'s way. It was too depressing to have that in the back of your mind all your life, so I confronted it, studied, asked questions, and here I am now! ;)</p>\n<hr />\n<p>rutabaga<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nWhen I outed myself to the bishop, Section 132 was my text. I went through all my concerns with it, he pretty much blew them off. \"It doesn\'t mean that at all.\"</p>\n<p>I suggested he take 132, cross out the names Joseph and Emma and insert Steve and Doris, his and his wife\'s name. Then go home and read it with your wife.</p>\n<p>Its been a few years now, I\'m waiting for his report.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>allegro<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nI accepted the fact that polygamy was an eternal principle and would be reinstated at some point-either while I was alive or after. It was on me to reconcile to it. If a person will not reconcile to it, then they are not faithful enough.<br />\nIt has been taken away for awhile because the prophet can receive new revelation, and we have to abide by the laws of the land.<br />\nAnyway, that is how I thought about it, and then I read In Sacred Lonliness, found this board and the rest is history.</p>\n<hr />\nbizquick<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\n\"I could say that I put it on my shelf, but I\'m a better housekeeper than that. I would never put anything that filthy on a shelf.\"\n<p>Quote of the week right there...</p>\n<hr />\nBrethren,adieu<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nMy believing wife refuses to read 132. She is comfortable in her mormon bubble, and won\'t read anything that might damage her faith, including the church\'s own canonized scripture.\n<p>I used to not understand why the church hasn\'t removed it, but I think I know why. To take it out would be the equivalent of conceding that Joseph Smith was not a prophet, or at least became a fallen prophet. It would be an admission that polygamy was wrong, and therefore brigham young was wrong, and therefore, the brighamite branch of the church was wrong.</p>\n<p>More importantly, 132 is the only scriptural reference to eternal marriage.</p>\n<p>I think the church hopes that everyone just gets tired of reading 132 before they get to the second half of the section, where all the juicy stuff is. It is quite exhausting to go through those two verses about eternal marriage and sealing.<br />\nv</p>\n<p>dragoneer27<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nI remember studying DC 132 in seminary. We talked about the part when god threatens Emma with destruction and the seminary teacher said something about how uncomfortable that made her feel. That didn\'t seem to waiver her testimony though. When I was a TBM (now I\'m a disbelieving active Mormon, or DAM if you will) I rationalized that god is the one who decides what is right and wrong. I think a lot of TBMs think that way or try not to think about it. When I was first exploring atheism I cam across a podcast Life After Faith and the host mentioned that at one point he realized that even if the Bible is true the god portrayed in it was not the kind of god he\'d want to live with. I think a lot of TBMs who aren\'t familiar with 132 would have their testimonies rattled after reading but would go into apologetic mode to mitigate the cog dis. I guess if you do show this to a TBM be sure to also ask if this the kind of place they want to spend eternity. By the way, threatening Emma with destruction flies in the face of how a priesthood leader should lead as outlined in DC 121. I guess using gentleness and tenderness is only for the low level managers and not the CEO.</p>\n<hr />\nAmIDarkNow?<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nI did as a good mormon should do. I shared my scriptures with my co-workers. Can\'t be more mormon than that right?\n<p>I shared D&amp;C 132.</p>\n<p>They freaked out.</p>\n<p>An anti-missionaires work is never done.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>freebird<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nMy bishop told me that he was very uncomfortable when people tried to \"interpret\" scriptures. He said they lost the HG when they did that.</p>\n<p>I thought that was a super weird comment. If no one can read and interpret the scriptures then how do we decide what they mean?</p>\n<p>Oh of course! God told JS and then he told all of us what it meant. No need for us lowly masses to try to understand.</p>\n<p>And once we do decide to interpret it for ourselves we all tend to run away fast.</p>\n<hr />\nrationalguy<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\n&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;&gt;My bishop told me that he was very uncomfortable when people tried to \"interpret\" scriptures. He said they lost the HG when they did that.&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;&lt;\n<p>OMG! How many more tactics like this, as well as \"It\'s not essential to your salvation\" and \"This will be worked out in the next life\" can they come up with???</p>\n<p>These dodges were always super transparent to me.. A church that claims current-day revelation and has to use these is obviously fake, fake fake!</p>\n<hr />\n<p>nickname<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nThey don\'t read it. I know I never read the D&amp;C. I read the Bible, BoM, and PoGP all the way through, but never the D&amp;C. It isn\'t really conducive to just sitting down and reading straight through it. So I just grabbed bits and pieces from it for talks or lessons or whatever, but never had any idea (or interest in) the context.</p>\n<hr />\nanon for this comment<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nI think that the church hopes that the members keep insisting on living in ignorance. For the church to remove 132 would suddenly cause people to read something that most members probably never read. If they did, they ignored most of what it said, and blamed themselves for not being capable of having a deeper understanding of the gospel.\n<hr />\n<p>Joy<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nMy temple ex-husband used to quote D &amp; C 132 to me while he was beating me, and throwing me around the room. I had to run away and hide, to save my life. My parents and the Mormons disapproved. They excused and condoned abuse, as all Mormons do, according to D &amp; C 132 and other Mormon scriptures and behaviors. My thug ex-husband got married in the temple the day our divorce was final. He beat her, too. Several years later, she divorced him, and he married his third temple wife. This creep believes that all 3 of us, and our children by other husbands will be his property in the Celestial Kingdom. What a SICK cult!</p>\n<p>He and his cult de-humanized me. I felt separated from God and from my self. Words cannot express how much I hate the Mormon cult, and the monster who left physical and mental scars that still cause me to suffer. Surgeries and therapy sessions, and I still may never be comfortable with Mormons.</p>\n<p>I hated those scriptures and the cult, and how it all worked against my happiness, and how it ruined every moment I was involved in it. Why did I allow it in my life? Why do people allow it now?</p>\n<hr />\n<p>Ex-CultMember<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nWow. That\'s crazy. He sounds like he belongs in the Taliban.</p>\n<hr />\nfrogdogs<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nI\'m probably not unique at all in this, but as a TBM teen I never actually read it. I knew it existed but not the exact contents.\n<p>I was more into reading the BoM whilst trying to wrest results from Moroni\'s promise. D&amp;C excerpts were only encountered in seminary or sunday school.</p>\n<p>Shortly after H.S. graduation when my doubts were at their all time high, I finally took out my triple and turned to D&amp;C 132 and read the entire thing.</p>\n<p>I remember feeling a little sick to my stomach, as well as embarrassed. Just look at this abomination of a so-called \"scripture\"! How could it have been there, right in front of my face the whole time, and I hadn\'t decided to read it?</p>\n<p>So - probably I was typical. Ignored it as a TBM and played the usual game of Make Believe. I was only able to actually read it and admit to myself how utterly repulsive and transparent it is as I was finding the nearest exit.</p>\n<hr />\n<p>moronistrombone<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\n52 And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, areceive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.</p>\n<p>What does \"pure\" mean here?</p>\n<hr />\n<p>Ex-CultMember<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nIts a strange caveat, but to me it sounds like any of Joseph Smith\'s women who screwed around with anyone (besides him) as an unmarried woman.</p>\n<hr />\nanointedone<br />\nRe: D&amp;C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?<br />\nThis was my favourite scripture as a TBM. The ability to bypass the angels of heaven, the noble principle of plural marriage, becoming gods. Ecstacy how divine, how noble and pure.\n<p>Now, what utter hogwash. It was just an excuse for Joseph to have have any woman he desired and make Emma feel bad. A lying serial adulterer.</p>\n<p>Why was the \'revelation\' so long coming ( he practised Plural marriage from about 1832, but the revelation is received in 1844 I think)? Because Emma threatened that if he didn\'t give it up, she would take additional husbands. Hyrum told Joseph to write dowm the revelation so that Emma could accept it. Joseph said \"you don\'t know Emma like I do\". Nevertheless, Joseph spent 2 hours dictating the revelation and presented it to Emma. What did she do? Apparently she threw it on the fire (there was another copy). that\'s what she thought of it.</p>\n<p>Joseph was a lying, serial adulterer and never received a revelation from Jesus Christ.</p>\n<p>How could I have been so deluded. Probably the same way millions are today. Shame on you lying apostles who perpetuate a scam.</p>\n<p>\"Recovery from Mormonism - www.exmormon.org\"</p>\n', created = 1495893219, expire = 1495979619, headers = '', serialized = 0 WHERE cid = '2:b8f2cb305b4e4b6a3c7126eb18cf2da8' in /home/exmormon/public_html/d6/drupal/includes/cache.inc on line 112.

Ex-CultMember June 2013

So, somehow LDS Inc has NOT subtly taken out or changed the wording in D&C 132, which to me is one of the most appalling and testimony damaging official, church approved literature out there.

There's so many crazy things in there such as:

1) Exposing the fact that Joseph Smith DID practice polygamy
2) That the purpose of polygamy was to "multiply and replenish the Earth," and NOT to help out widows whose husbands died, as so often is spouted by Mormons.
3) As such, Joseph Smith would have been DISOBEYING this commandment if he was NOT having sex with those wives that were already given to him.
4) Emma is commanded to accept Joseph's other wives that were "given" unto him, otherwise she would be "destroyed."
5) Concubines, not even considered wives (sex slaves?), having the SOLE PURPOSE of being a baby making machine for a man, was a GOOD thing (??!!) as long as they were "given" unto him by God.
6) A man can even have "ten virgins."
7) A man can have sex with at least ten virgins, but these women will be destroyed if they have sex with anyone else.

I bet most Mormons are not aware of the information contained in this revelation due to the fact that most have probably never actually read it in full, or at best, skimmed it over since it has disturbing material. The fact that it is one of the last sections probably means a lot of members rarely get to it if they are trying to read the D&C from the beginning. And most of the time when Mormons read the D&C its only for some class which selectively quotes from certain verses. I'm sure if section 132 is quoted they are very selective about which verses to read from. It's a VERY wordy and lengthy revelation and you don't get to the juicy stuff until the second half.

Did anyone ever read this as a TBM? What did you think? It would seem to be a very "anti-Mormon" revelation if it wasn't still in their scriptures.

If you are having difficulty getting TBM's to read anything critical of Mormonism, or have a TBM you would like to get thinking but would be afraid of giving them anti-literature, just tell them to read this section. I bet there's a lot of young women in the church that would be absolutely ROCKED if they ever took the time to read this revelation in full. If I had a TBM niece or sister, I'd say, "check out D&C 132 and let me know what you think."

This actually might be a gateway source for many Mormons we are trying to get to look at the truth, but won't.

Lasvegasrichard
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
The part that always stood out to me is where it states that failure to practice polygamy resulted in damnation . Even though Brigham Young was very explicit in just that , apologists today deny that is what it means . You have to ask then why were they practicing at all then ?


nofear
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
I hated this section and wondered how i could believe in a religion that supported this way of thinking.
rationalguy
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
The Most Correct Book has so much repugnant doctrine like that along with the built-in racism expressed in "white and delightsome/dark and loathsome" that I can't see why the don't question it. Besides, it's a dead-boring piece of crap literature with stilted grammar obviously designed to fool the average 19th century person. It's a crock.

anon for this comment
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
Not only do Mormons need to READ section 132, they need to STUDY it. They need to research church history and find out how those revelations played out in the lives of the women who were subjected to those revelations.

If every Mormon did that, I think that there would be an exodus of women like the church has never seen. If the women in mormonism ever wake-up, the church is in real trouble. I was encouraged by the post from baby center a couple days ago.


releve
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
I read section 132 for the first time while teaching Gosple Doctrine. That would have been sometime in the late 90s. I was appalled. I don't know how any woman could read that and not be appalled. Did I do anything about it? No. In 2008 I read Rough Stone Rolling and then went back and read 132 again. I still didn't like what I read, but I still didn't do anything about it. I could say that I put it on my shelf, but I'm a better housekeeper than that. I would never put anything that filthy on a shelf. After I finally got the gumption to leave, this year, I read it again and came to the conclusion that either God was a misogynist or Joseph was. I pick Joseph, although, I'm not so sure about God.
philosopherexmo
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
I haven't visited this board for ages, but I dropped in for old-times sake and really appreciated this post as it brought back my whole exit story, which I've never really told anyone before. Lucky you, here it is.. at least the short version :)

As odd as it may sound, I can trace the "crisis of faith" that lead to me leaving the church to D&C 132. In my early teens I was really active in the church and a big online chat room apologist. You know the type. I decided to read the Book of Mormon from cover to cover for about the 600th time.. but this time I actually made it past 2nd Nephi. In fact, I made it all the way to D&C 132.

I don't remember the exact content of that section, and have no real desire to re-read it, but I remember that something about the casual way Joseph Smith was chatting up god, and the nature of their conversation wouldn't compute. It was the first time I read a single piece of church doctrine with anything approaching skepticism.. and I had no clue how to proceed.

I met with my bishop because I was in a complete spiritual panic. I couldn't read past this chapter in the D&C.. it really bothered me. It was like.. Reader's Block. Crazy, I'm sure, but I just kept reading it over and over and couldn't read the next chapter.

After meeting with the bishop I decided to take another run at it.. like a long jumper, I suppose, lol. I decided I needed to read the entire bible, then start the BOM over and power through satan's influence, or whatever nonsense I thought at the time, so I could get all the way through my prized set of scriptures.

Well, reading the bible was not the right way to resolve my crisis of faith. That feeling of budding skepticism just got magnified as I read it. I made it through the bible somehow but with a list of grievances I expected my bishop to resolve for me somehow.. and when that didn't happen I was on my way out of the church for good before I really realized it.

The last meeting I had with my bishop ended with him saying I had to WANT the church to be true before I could move toward KNOWING it was true. I think his heart broke a little bit when I told him I didn't want the church to be true. I think mine did too. It was a question I didn't think I had considered before, but I knew the answer immediately. Even then, young and stupid, I understood that wanting something to be true didn't make it any more or less likely to be true, but somehow just hearing the question and my answer aloud rewired my brain a little.

Right after that meeting with my bishop I did baptisms for the dead for the first time and had a bona-fide religious experience. I felt like I was one with the universe, touching the veil, or whatever--it's hard to describe but it was moving and I was almost delirious with warm-tinglies. In that moment time felt like it was completely still and I thought, "Ok.. this is it. This is the best evidence I am going to have that the church is true. Now what?" It was really a bittersweet moment but from then on I decided faith just wasn't something I was capable of.

I studied religions for a while, like a shopper overwhelmed with shampoo choices at the market.

The day I realized the actual root of my problem (that I was an agnostic/atheist trying to be a gnostic/theist) might have been the first time I conciously felt comfortable in my own brain. I don't like to admit how long it took me to feel that my lack of faith was anything other than a personal failure and source of shame.

I hope I'm not the only nutcase who went through something similar. :)

I guess all I really wanted to say after all that rambling was this: Thanks D&C 132. It took a lot to put a tiny crack in my credulity, but you were effectively ridiculous and I'll never forget what you did for me.


NYCGal
Thanks for your story
It was similar to mine. Polygamy and Section 132 were very troubling to me as a TBM teen.

Like you, I, too, felt something of an "epiphany" in the SL Temple doing baptisms for the dead. I felt religious and "special" doing it. The room was all white, and everyone was dressed in white and I let myself be somewhat carried away by it. I don't know why now that I look back, but I was 14 and impressionable.

Still, it wasn't enough to stop me from analyzing church doctrine, learning of polygamy in the hereafter, seeing misogyny everywhere in a patriarchal system and reading "No Man Knows My History" (which a member of the bishopric had cautioned me to never read as it would destroy my testimony).

Ultimately I concluded it's not true. It's just not true. And, if it's not true, what is the point?


freebird
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
Oddly I had a church member quote me D&C 132 in an effort to get me to come back to church.

I was horrified by it. This is also where you find out Mormons believe that we will become gods, correct? To a person raised in Christianity and hoodwinked into believing Mormonism was Christian, those beliefs were extremely upsetting. I almost felt I had betrayed Jesus.

Now I am dabbling more and more with coming to terms with the fact that I most likely am an atheist. It's a long road for me. Intellectually I know that religion is man made, but I still want to believe in an afterlife/god.


ness
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
They don't think about it! Thinking leads to doubt, doubt leads to questioning, questioning leads to apostacy!
One of my best TBM friends, on her wedding day, I don't remember how polygamy came up... but I remember her saying that "Women have to accept that their husbands will take extra wives in the next life, if you read DC 132.... but I don't want to think about that!"

I had to just ignore it, or explain away that I just didn't understand God's way. It was too depressing to have that in the back of your mind all your life, so I confronted it, studied, asked questions, and here I am now! ;)


rutabaga
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
When I outed myself to the bishop, Section 132 was my text. I went through all my concerns with it, he pretty much blew them off. "It doesn't mean that at all."

I suggested he take 132, cross out the names Joseph and Emma and insert Steve and Doris, his and his wife's name. Then go home and read it with your wife.

Its been a few years now, I'm waiting for his report.


allegro
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
I accepted the fact that polygamy was an eternal principle and would be reinstated at some point-either while I was alive or after. It was on me to reconcile to it. If a person will not reconcile to it, then they are not faithful enough.
It has been taken away for awhile because the prophet can receive new revelation, and we have to abide by the laws of the land.
Anyway, that is how I thought about it, and then I read In Sacred Lonliness, found this board and the rest is history.


bizquick
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
"I could say that I put it on my shelf, but I'm a better housekeeper than that. I would never put anything that filthy on a shelf."

Quote of the week right there...


Brethren,adieu
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
My believing wife refuses to read 132. She is comfortable in her mormon bubble, and won't read anything that might damage her faith, including the church's own canonized scripture.

I used to not understand why the church hasn't removed it, but I think I know why. To take it out would be the equivalent of conceding that Joseph Smith was not a prophet, or at least became a fallen prophet. It would be an admission that polygamy was wrong, and therefore brigham young was wrong, and therefore, the brighamite branch of the church was wrong.

More importantly, 132 is the only scriptural reference to eternal marriage.

I think the church hopes that everyone just gets tired of reading 132 before they get to the second half of the section, where all the juicy stuff is. It is quite exhausting to go through those two verses about eternal marriage and sealing.
v

dragoneer27
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
I remember studying DC 132 in seminary. We talked about the part when god threatens Emma with destruction and the seminary teacher said something about how uncomfortable that made her feel. That didn't seem to waiver her testimony though. When I was a TBM (now I'm a disbelieving active Mormon, or DAM if you will) I rationalized that god is the one who decides what is right and wrong. I think a lot of TBMs think that way or try not to think about it. When I was first exploring atheism I cam across a podcast Life After Faith and the host mentioned that at one point he realized that even if the Bible is true the god portrayed in it was not the kind of god he'd want to live with. I think a lot of TBMs who aren't familiar with 132 would have their testimonies rattled after reading but would go into apologetic mode to mitigate the cog dis. I guess if you do show this to a TBM be sure to also ask if this the kind of place they want to spend eternity. By the way, threatening Emma with destruction flies in the face of how a priesthood leader should lead as outlined in DC 121. I guess using gentleness and tenderness is only for the low level managers and not the CEO.


AmIDarkNow?
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
I did as a good mormon should do. I shared my scriptures with my co-workers. Can't be more mormon than that right?

I shared D&C 132.

They freaked out.

An anti-missionaires work is never done.


freebird
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
My bishop told me that he was very uncomfortable when people tried to "interpret" scriptures. He said they lost the HG when they did that.

I thought that was a super weird comment. If no one can read and interpret the scriptures then how do we decide what they mean?

Oh of course! God told JS and then he told all of us what it meant. No need for us lowly masses to try to understand.

And once we do decide to interpret it for ourselves we all tend to run away fast.


rationalguy
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
>>>>>>My bishop told me that he was very uncomfortable when people tried to "interpret" scriptures. He said they lost the HG when they did that.<<<<<

OMG! How many more tactics like this, as well as "It's not essential to your salvation" and "This will be worked out in the next life" can they come up with???

These dodges were always super transparent to me.. A church that claims current-day revelation and has to use these is obviously fake, fake fake!


nickname
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
They don't read it. I know I never read the D&C. I read the Bible, BoM, and PoGP all the way through, but never the D&C. It isn't really conducive to just sitting down and reading straight through it. So I just grabbed bits and pieces from it for talks or lessons or whatever, but never had any idea (or interest in) the context.


anon for this comment
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
I think that the church hopes that the members keep insisting on living in ignorance. For the church to remove 132 would suddenly cause people to read something that most members probably never read. If they did, they ignored most of what it said, and blamed themselves for not being capable of having a deeper understanding of the gospel.

Joy
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
My temple ex-husband used to quote D & C 132 to me while he was beating me, and throwing me around the room. I had to run away and hide, to save my life. My parents and the Mormons disapproved. They excused and condoned abuse, as all Mormons do, according to D & C 132 and other Mormon scriptures and behaviors. My thug ex-husband got married in the temple the day our divorce was final. He beat her, too. Several years later, she divorced him, and he married his third temple wife. This creep believes that all 3 of us, and our children by other husbands will be his property in the Celestial Kingdom. What a SICK cult!

He and his cult de-humanized me. I felt separated from God and from my self. Words cannot express how much I hate the Mormon cult, and the monster who left physical and mental scars that still cause me to suffer. Surgeries and therapy sessions, and I still may never be comfortable with Mormons.

I hated those scriptures and the cult, and how it all worked against my happiness, and how it ruined every moment I was involved in it. Why did I allow it in my life? Why do people allow it now?


Ex-CultMember
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
Wow. That's crazy. He sounds like he belongs in the Taliban.


frogdogs
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
I'm probably not unique at all in this, but as a TBM teen I never actually read it. I knew it existed but not the exact contents.

I was more into reading the BoM whilst trying to wrest results from Moroni's promise. D&C excerpts were only encountered in seminary or sunday school.

Shortly after H.S. graduation when my doubts were at their all time high, I finally took out my triple and turned to D&C 132 and read the entire thing.

I remember feeling a little sick to my stomach, as well as embarrassed. Just look at this abomination of a so-called "scripture"! How could it have been there, right in front of my face the whole time, and I hadn't decided to read it?

So - probably I was typical. Ignored it as a TBM and played the usual game of Make Believe. I was only able to actually read it and admit to myself how utterly repulsive and transparent it is as I was finding the nearest exit.


moronistrombone
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
52 And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, areceive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.

What does "pure" mean here?


Ex-CultMember
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
Its a strange caveat, but to me it sounds like any of Joseph Smith's women who screwed around with anyone (besides him) as an unmarried woman.


anointedone
Re: D&C 132 - Your Thoughts as a TBM?
This was my favourite scripture as a TBM. The ability to bypass the angels of heaven, the noble principle of plural marriage, becoming gods. Ecstacy how divine, how noble and pure.

Now, what utter hogwash. It was just an excuse for Joseph to have have any woman he desired and make Emma feel bad. A lying serial adulterer.

Why was the 'revelation' so long coming ( he practised Plural marriage from about 1832, but the revelation is received in 1844 I think)? Because Emma threatened that if he didn't give it up, she would take additional husbands. Hyrum told Joseph to write dowm the revelation so that Emma could accept it. Joseph said "you don't know Emma like I do". Nevertheless, Joseph spent 2 hours dictating the revelation and presented it to Emma. What did she do? Apparently she threw it on the fire (there was another copy). that's what she thought of it.

Joseph was a lying, serial adulterer and never received a revelation from Jesus Christ.

How could I have been so deluded. Probably the same way millions are today. Shame on you lying apostles who perpetuate a scam.

"Recovery from Mormonism - www.exmormon.org"