My feelings about the Principle and its semi-repeal (it's only sort of
repealed) is that if it DOES return before The Millenial, it will be
because the Lord says to renew it.  If it doesn't return, it will because
the Lord says not to.  It will have nothing to do with the church's
political power or lack thereof.  If the Lord had wanted the Principle
continued in the 19th century, all the soldiers and all the governments
of the world couldn't have stopped it.  I haven't given it a great deal
of thought beyond that.  Perhaps the 19th century saints learned what
they needed to learn - they definitely learned to depend on each other,
and not on the outside world (something which I think we do far too much
of today).  There's surely more to be revealed.

Orson Scott Card wrote that many men willingly went to jail to support
the Principle then, and that many more would go to jail today to support
the Principle not being brought back.  As a sick old man who can barely
keep up with one wife, count me among the latter.  Only a much more
righteous generation than our generation could possibly keep this
principle without becoming corrupted -- as it seems several of the 19th
century saints were so corrupted.

*jeep! 
   --Chet 
 "Start by doing what's necessary, then what's possible, and suddenly you
are doing the impossible."

On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 09:00:51 -0900 "John W. Redelfs"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have been reading THE AMERICAN RELIGION by Harold Bloom and I ran 
> across 
> an interesting statement on page 123:
> 
> "And who can believe that the Mormons ever would have turned away 
> from the 
> practice of Celestial Marriage, if it were not for federal pressure? 
>  No 
> one, least of all in Salt Lake City, will be much inclined to accept 
> a 
> religious critic's foretellings, but I cheerfully do prophesy that 
> some 
> day, not too far on in the twenty-first century, the Mormons will 
> have 
> enough political and financial power to sanction polygamy again.  
> Without 
> it, in some form or other, the complete vision of Joseph Smith never 
> can be 
> fulfilled."
> 
> Harold Bloom writes this as an outsider.  He is an unbelieving Jew, 
> an 
> "American gnostic."  I find his statement interesting because I 
> myself have 
> come to the same conclusion for a number of reasons.  What do you 
> think?
> 
> 
> John W. Redelfs                       [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ===========================================
> "There is no place in this work for those who believe only
> in the gospel of doom and gloom.  The gospel is good
> news.  It is a message of triumph." --Gordon B. Hinckley

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
///  ZION LIST CHARTER: Please read it at  ///
///  http://www.zionsbest.com/charter.html      ///
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?aaP9AU.bWix1n.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
--^----------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to