|
|
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Hello! I'm new here and just wanted to pop in and join some of the discussion regarding polygamy, Big Love, and the FLDS Church. I was born and raised in the FLDS Church, my father had 4 wives and 31 children; I was his 28th child. I left the FLDS when I was 19 and joined the Marines to get away. I am now a Baptist Minister working in prison minister and Christian Theological Education (discipleship). I've also written a book about my experiences growing up in a polygamist Mormon home. Its the first book from the male perspective. Most folks out there don't understand the pressure that young men are under to be worthy of remaining in the community. If each worthy man has to have at least three wives to progress to godhood, then for every plural wife he takes a young man has to be driven from the community. If he has three wives, then two of them are plural wives, and two men have to go! That means that right off the bat at least 2/3rds of the male population in a polygamist community have to go. But the elite aren't content with just three wives. Many have more than that. Winston Blackmore who was resently arrested in Canada has 20 wives. That means that 19 are extra and 19 young men have to leave just for him to have those wives. Warren Jeffs is rumored to have over 120 wives. That means 119 young men have to go just for this one man to have that many wives. A conservative estimate would be that 75% of the male population has to be found unworthy and driven from the community. Now...imagine that you're a mother in that community and you have 4 sons. Which 1 gets to stay and which 3 are you going to allow them to drive from your life? The weeding out process is a silent process. There aren't clear cut rules, its hidden, its secret, its political. -- -Brian Mackert Minister & Author of "Illegitimate - How a Loving God Rescued a Son of Polygamy". -- Edited by Illegitimate at 04/03/2009 6:02 AM PDT -- Edited by Illegitimate at 04/03/2009 6:04 AM PDT
|
Posts:
2,714
Registered:
3/27/06
|
|
(49 of 94)
Apr 9, 2009 12:36 PM
|
> I will concede that Eastern religions are all about
> subduing the flesh, and there are many different
> brands of Baptists. It seems to me that you are
> familar with the more legalistic brand of Baptists.
> I have a sister who is one. I believe that we have
> e more freedom in Christ than probably most Baptists,
> but then I consider myself a Christian more than a
> Baptist. I just happen to have been baptised and
> Licensed into the Ministry by a Baptist Church.
Well sir, I hear that. I felt that way as well. My first wife was a BA Christian girl from a small SBC Baptist church. She had a sister who once went to a Bible College along with her husband under the auspices of Independent Baptists -- that was pretty much the only type of Baptist church that all of her relatives belonged to in the small farming community we would often go visit. Of course they had all sorts of bad things to say about the SBC and how they weren't really Baptists at all anymore and that it was only a matter of time before that liberal seminary in Dallas denied the inerrancy of the scriptures and the virgin birth and then where would be? Armagaeddon, that's where!
Yeah, I've seen a lot of the Baptist flame wars -- I tended to just be a neutral observer -- the last few years of my marriage I was more of a Charismatic than I was closely aligned with Baptist beliefs anyway.
> Actually I take it as a compliment. I get told that
> a lot by the prisoners that I minister to in the
> jails. I believe that you can be a real person with
> real thoughts and feelings that are human rather than
> super-human and super-religious and be a minister at
> the same time.
Yessir, it was meant as a compliment to you -- I just didn't want you to think that my opinion was coming from an extremely ignorant position (I think my position is more accurately described as mildly ignorant about most things  )
Prison ministry, huh? Cool.
Have you ever read anything by Chuck Colson or Susan Atkins? Colson's book, "Born Again" and maybe one or two others about his prison ministry were influential on me and Atkins' book "Child of Satan, Child of God" was just absolutely one of the best spiritual books I've ever read and a great view of being a Christian in prison, IMHO.
--
"I believe the church and its leaders are in grave error on polygamy, and on the kinds of marriages and families it creates. I can't forsake my family." Sister Barbara Dutton Henrickson
--
Edited by JustHangin at 04/09/2009 10:04 AM PDT
|
|
|
Posts:
23
Registered:
4/3/09
|
|
(48 of 94)
Apr 9, 2009 12:11 PM
|
> marion wrote:
> Btw, I looked to see if your book is in the library
> (NYC), but it's not. I'm not buying any more books
> at the moment - no space and temporarily no income -
> but I'm interested to read it.
>
> Get out! NYC doesn't have it? Marion, can you do a
> loan from another county or state? I wonder if you
> can get it from my county? You'd enjoy it because
> it's different. Brian gives you a lot of facts that
> the other books didn't give, I think because he was a
> boy and might've had access to those facts or men
> just perceive things different etc.
>
> For example, Brian described the whole power play
> with the Jeffs and the Prophets. Briefly. But I
> totally understood it. From the other books, I
> somehow missed some of that?
I'm soooo glad that it gives more than the others do on the political and power struggles within the polygamist communities. It was this power struggle that lead me to believe that religion was an invention of man created to control, manipulate, and concolidate power over other people to enrich a few. It wasn't until I found Christ that I realized that God was real and that religion is man reaching up to God and that the Gospel is God reaching down to man.
--
-Brian Mackert
Minister & Author of "Illegitimate - How a Loving God Rescued a Son of Polygamy."
|
|
|
Posts:
23
Registered:
4/3/09
|
|
(47 of 94)
Apr 9, 2009 12:06 PM
|
> I'm reading Brian's book and I'm almost done. It's a
> good book. I've read Escape and Elisa Wall's book
> and a few others. Brian's book is different because
> it is from a man's perspective.
>
> Big Love friends, go get the book!
>
> Brian, I was raised Fundamentalist Baptist.
Correction!!!!
I was raised Fundamentalist Mormon...I am now a Baptist Minister, and not the Legalistic Fundamentalist Baptists either. SBC Baptist.
--
-Brian Mackert
Minister & Author of "Illegitimate - How a Loving God Rescued a Son of Polygamy."
|
|
|
Posts:
23
Registered:
4/3/09
|
|
(46 of 94)
Apr 9, 2009 11:59 AM
|
> Have you read what the Apostle Paul wrote in 1
> Corinthians 6 & 7?
>
> I think this portion from 6:12 & 13 tells where
> Paul's heart really is on this matter:
> 12"Everything is permissible for me"but not
> everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible
> for me"but I will not be mastered by anything.
> 13"Food for the stomach and the stomach for food"but
> God will destroy them both.
> http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corint
> hians%206:12-13;&version=31;
>
> I think the concept here is that the flesh is not
> something that Paul is encouraging the church at
> Corinth to dwell on -- he is saying that it's good to
> avoid being mastered by the flesh.
>
> Paul clearly says in the text of 1 Cor 7:1-9 that it
> is better for believers to be unmarried and at least
> implies that it is because that way they would have
> more time to spend in the service of God's Kingdom.
> I'll just quote vs 8&9 and leave a link for 1-9:
> 8Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is
> good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9But if
> they cannot control themselves, they should marry,
> for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
> http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corint
> hians%207:%201-9;&version=31;
>
> In general, I think it's pretty much down the middle
> of Biblical teaching to say that a loving married
> relationship is good, but that it would be beneficial
> for servants of God to deny all the allures of the
> flesh, wouldn't you, Brian?
JH...I agree with much of what you have said and it is This very passage in chapter 7 that I refer to when pointing out that Paul's exhortation to leaders being the husbands of one wife doesn't mean "at least one wife" as many polygamists claim. A single person is more suited for ministry and service to God, but not ALL are called to that level of service and not ALL have that level of self control and Paul gives allowance for those who don't by saying that it is better to marry than to burn with lust, and by allowing a married man to be a leader in the church. And I agree with Paul.
I think that we all would be better off practicing self-control when it comes to sexual desire or any other desire of the flesh, but God also allows for an appropriate context for fulfilling our sexual desire and that is through marriage.
--
-Brian Mackert
Minister & Author of "Illegitimate - How a Loving God Rescued a Son of Polygamy."
|
|
|
Posts:
23
Registered:
4/3/09
|
|
(45 of 94)
Apr 9, 2009 11:52 AM
|
> Brian it would be helpful for you to quote me when
> you want to disagree with something I said
Okay...still figuring out the site with all it's buttons and I just now saw the "quote original" button so we should be good from here on out JH.
-- I will
> concede that the original point I made, here:
> I think this is generally true of any religion
> that takes its mission seriously
>
> was a bit over the top, but really shouldn't you
> concede that I did narrow it down a bit when I
> mentioned these specific ones that I was generally
> referring to and more interested in including in the
> discussion than all religions in general:
> whether it be FLDS, flds, LDS, most Eastern
> religions and even Baptists
I will concede that Eastern religions are all about subduing the flesh, and there are many different brands of Baptists. It seems to me that you are familar with the more legalistic brand of Baptists. I have a sister who is one. I believe that we have more freedom in Christ than probably most Baptists, but then I consider myself a Christian more than a Baptist. I just happen to have been baptised and Licensed into the Ministry by a Baptist Church.
>
> You seem pretty cool for a Baptist minister Brian --
> and I've known quite a few Baptist ministers pretty
> well, so I hope you don't take that as an insult from
> an ignorant position.
Actually I take it as a compliment. I get told that a lot by the prisoners that I minister to in the jails. I believe that you can be a real person with real thoughts and feelings that are human rather than super-human and super-religious and be a minister at the same time.
--
-Brian Mackert
Minister & Author of "Illegitimate - How a Loving God Rescued a Son of Polygamy."
|
|
|
Posts:
628
Registered:
7/6/07
|
|
(44 of 94)
Apr 9, 2009 9:01 AM
|
marion wrote:
Btw, I looked to see if your book is in the library (NYC), but it's not. I'm not buying any more books at the moment - no space and temporarily no income - but I'm interested to read it.
Get out! NYC doesn't have it? Marion, can you do a loan from another county or state? I wonder if you can get it from my county? You'd enjoy it because it's different. Brian gives you a lot of facts that the other books didn't give, I think because he was a boy and might've had access to those facts or men just perceive things different etc.
For example, Brian described the whole power play with the Jeffs and the Prophets. Briefly. But I totally understood it. From the other books, I somehow missed some of that?
I'm not buying any books any more either. I tell people I'm using my "collection" paid for with my tax money and it's right down the street.  I have 180 books checked out...all of our cards are maxed out.
|
|
|
Posts:
628
Registered:
7/6/07
|
|
(43 of 94)
Apr 9, 2009 8:47 AM
|
I'm reading Brian's book and I'm almost done. It's a good book. I've read Escape and Elisa Wall's book and a few others. Brian's book is different because it is from a man's perspective.
Big Love friends, go get the book!
Brian, I was raised Fundamentalist Baptist.
Have a blessed holdiay for those celebrating this week.
--
Edited by Marigoldmama at 04/09/2009 5:47 AM PDT
|
|
|
Posts:
1,216
Registered:
8/10/07
|
|
(42 of 94)
Apr 9, 2009 12:50 AM
|
> Are you EV's wife "T"?
>
> --
No. . .EV's wife is Titannia. . . .
--
Bitches are not born. . . they are made.
|
|
|
Posts:
1,216
Registered:
8/10/07
|
|
(41 of 94)
Apr 9, 2009 12:45 AM
|
>
> Besides, there's nothing interesting to talk about
> here lately and my friends don't even return my PM's> -- so, what was it about this club that was worth the > price of admission?
>
Friends will. . .as soon as they are all caught up!!!!
yea. . .as soon as the season ends we sorta get into that weird space. But i don't want what happened last time to happen again, where everyone decided to take a break from each other, after everyone banished everyone else to the "outer darkness". . .
Just trying to keep everything light here. . .
--
Bitches are not born. . . they are made.
|
|
|
Posts:
17,844
Registered:
4/21/03
|
|
(40 of 94)
Apr 8, 2009 5:19 PM
|
> Have you read the Biblical book of Porn call the
> "Song of Solomon"?
I would not consider it porn, although it's meant to be somewhat erotic.
But I agree with you about the Original Blessing.
> Polygamy isn't condemned in the Bible...but it isn't
> commanded either, and the Bible makes it clear that
> God's intended will for marriage is a monogamist
> relationship. There is a difference between God's
> intended will and His permissive will. Let's use
> divorce as an example. God never intended divorce to
> be a part of marriage, but because of the hardness of
> man's heart he allowed it...therefore divorce is part
> of God's permissive will, but not His intended will
> for marriage. The same is true of polygamy.
Revealing, IMO, that the Bible was in fact written by MEN. Why would God allow polygyny, but not polyandry? Why is female sexuality so absolutely condemned?
> Jesus
> said that in the beginning God created man and woman
> and the "two became one flesh", not the "three or
> four or half dozen or more became one flesh". God's
> intended will is monogamy and His permissive will
> allows for polygamist marriages as well.
> Why would the Apostle Paul tell Timothy and Titus
> when selecting leaders in the church that they should
> be the husbands of only one wife? Because there were
> Jews who were polygamists (it was rare but permitted
> in their culture) who converted to Christianity.
> These men aren't condemned and run out of the
> e church. Instead Paul disqualifies them for
> leadership because of their family obligations and
> restricts leadership to those who aren't obligated to
> a large family.
True. Paul himself, though, seems to have felt that celibacy was best, but that it was better to marry than to burn. IMO he had an axe to grind against the Roman institution of the Vestal Virgins, a cadre of celibate women who ran the town. Ironically he laid the foundations for a male equivalent--the Vatican.
> Many who read the Bible interpret it from their
> monogamist cultural bias wanting scripture to same
> something that agrees with their cultural norms
> rather than for what it really says.
so true. Polygamy isn't condemned in the Bible, but it is often condemned in secular society because of the double standard it represents.
> In order for polygamy to be condemned you would have
> to charge the practice as a sin and therefore what
> sin is it? It isn't adultery because he isn't having
> sex with another man's wife but with his own wife,
But if you don't recognize that second marriage, it IS adultery. That's the rub.
Your Biblical knowledge on this subject is impeccable, but I hasten to point out that to make a rule that it's a sin to take another man's wife, but not a sin to take another woman's husband, is to invalidate the claim a woman has on her husband, while putting the full force of God and everybody behind the man's claim.
The double standard here, IMO, comes not from God, but from Man, protecting his convenience at the expense of the woman's.
That said, I actually have no problem with consensual polygamy being legal, as long as all parties are truly into it.
--
Guns don't kill people, people kill people, and monkeys do too (if they have a gun).
--
Edited by titannia at 04/08/2009 2:26 PM PDT
|
|
|
Posts:
17,844
Registered:
4/21/03
|
|
(39 of 94)
Apr 8, 2009 5:10 PM
|
> Are you EV's wife "T"?
>
> --
> -Brian Mackert
> Minister & Author of
> "Illegitimate -
> How a Loving God Rescued a Son of Polygamy."
Yes. Two long-winded, argumentative people in the same house. LOL!
--
?Guns don't kill people, people kill people, and monkeys do too (if they have a gun).?
|
|
|
Posts:
2,714
Registered:
3/27/06
|
|
(38 of 94)
Apr 8, 2009 3:35 PM
|
> When Nathan came to King David to confront him about
> his adultery with Uriah's wife and Uriah's murder,
> Nathan didn't condemn David for all the wives and
> concubines that David already had, but he condemned
> David for taking another man's wife to his bed!
> Hmmm...why wasn't David, a man after God's own heart
> t condemned for all his other wives that he took
> before he got greedy and took Uriah's wife?
>
> Just some food for thought.
Yessir, I think that you're very balanced on this subject and much moreso than I've come to expect from any evangelical who took the Bible seriously and knew what they were talking about.
I am very close to totally agreeing with you on the idea of monogamous marriage being on the side of God's perfect will while polygamous marriage was part of His permissive will. I think that good monogamous marriage is a good building block for any polygamous marriages that take place and I think Brigham Young and other Mormon leaders have gone on record for saying things like that also.
I think that your message is an important one and as someone around here has said recently that "sunlight is a natural disinfectant" or something like that -- I think that your message is a very important and timely one.
I'm sure there have been many abuses in the FLDS system, especially after Warren Jeffs took over. I have heard that opinion from another person around here who was as well placed to know that as you were.
My difference with you is subtle, I think -- i just think it's important to make provisions for polygamy to be possible between consenting adults. I do believe that all marriage should be based on the one man, one woman model -- but I think it is important to allow divergences from that and I don't believe that idea is condemned in Christian scripture.
--
"I believe the church and its leaders are in grave error on polygamy, and on the kinds of marriages and families it creates. I can't forsake my family." Sister Barbara Dutton Henrickson
--
Edited by JustHangin at 04/08/2009 12:36 PM PDT
|
|
|
Posts:
2,714
Registered:
3/27/06
|
|
(37 of 94)
Apr 8, 2009 3:20 PM
|
> Have you read the Biblical book of Porn call the
> "Song of Solomon"? Sex is something that God created
> and He called it good when He created them male and
> female and there wasn't any sin yet in the world, and
> before there was sin in the world He commanded them
> to multiply and replenish the earth (another way of
> saying, "get your freak on and have some babies.")
> So sex wasn't sinful but good in the beginning
> g before man fell into a sinful state.
Yeah Brian, I've read the Song of Solomon and I've read "The Happy Hooker" while I was a devout church goer without feeling guilt about it too. My wife and I also were part of a Bible group in our little Baptist church that studuied "The Act of Marriage" by Dr. Tim & Beverly LaHaye quite a few years ago.
Have you read what the Apostle Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 6 & 7?
I think this portion from 6:12 & 13 tells where Paul's heart really is on this matter:
12"Everything is permissible for me"?but not everything is beneficial. "Everything is permissible for me"?but I will not be mastered by anything. 13"Food for the stomach and the stomach for food"?but God will destroy them both.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%206:12-13;&version=31;
I think the concept here is that the flesh is not something that Paul is encouraging the church at Corinth to dwell on -- he is saying that it's good to avoid being mastered by the flesh.
Paul clearly says in the text of 1 Cor 7:1-9 that it is better for believers to be unmarried and at least implies that it is because that way they would have more time to spend in the service of God's Kingdom. I'll just quote vs 8&9 and leave a link for 1-9:
8Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. 9But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%207:%201-9;&version=31;
In general, I think it's pretty much down the middle of Biblical teaching to say that a loving married relationship is good, but that it would be beneficial for servants of God to deny all the allures of the flesh, wouldn't you, Brian?
--
"I believe the church and its leaders are in grave error on polygamy, and on the kinds of marriages and families it creates. I can't forsake my family." Sister Barbara Dutton Henrickson
|
|
|
Posts:
2,714
Registered:
3/27/06
|
|
(36 of 94)
Apr 8, 2009 2:49 PM
|
> Have you read the Biblical book of Porn call the
> "Song of Solomon"? Sex is something that God created
> and He called it good when He created them male and
> female and there wasn't any sin yet in the world, and
> before there was sin in the world He commanded them
> to multiply and replenish the earth (another way of
> saying, "get your freak on and have some babies.")
> So sex wasn't sinful but good in the beginning
> g before man fell into a sinful state.
>
> Yes there are Hindus and Buddhists who believe all
> that about the flesh. The point I was making is that
> your general application to "ALL" religions is in
> error. Not all religions believe that or teach that.
> Pagans and ancient Greek Mythology have very sexual
> l rights performed in them, including "temple
> prostitutes" to have sex with on an altar, so clearly
> your point is in error. Conceed the point and let's
> move on.
Brian it would be helpful for you to quote me when you want to disagree with something I said -- I will concede that the original point I made, here:
I think this is generally true of any religion that takes its mission seriously
was a bit over the top, but really shouldn't you concede that I did narrow it down a bit when I mentioned these specific ones that I was generally referring to and more interested in including in the discussion than all religions in general:
whether it be FLDS, flds, LDS, most Eastern religions and even Baptists
You seem pretty cool for a Baptist minister Brian -- and I've known quite a few Baptist ministers pretty well, so I hope you don't take that as an insult from an ignorant position.
I'll read the rest of the stuff that you seem to be directing at me (it's hard to tell without quotes) but I wanted to address this point first.
--
"I believe the church and its leaders are in grave error on polygamy, and on the kinds of marriages and families it creates. I can't forsake my family." Sister Barbara Dutton Henrickson
|
|
|
Posts:
23
Registered:
4/3/09
|
|
(35 of 94)
Apr 8, 2009 12:18 PM
|
Not all births are recorded and not all that are recorded are done so accurately.
My mother has 7 children. Only one of them has their father's real name listed on the birth certificate accurately. All the other names are fictitious names even though all 7 children are fathered by the same man.
My birth certificate originally said "Clyde Chapman" was my father and then in 1972 was amended to "Clyde Mackert" being my father. It made it look like my mother didn't know who my father was, and that she was having children from three different men because there are three different men's names that appear on the birth certificates of all her children.
My brother David never had a birth certificate and had to submit affidavits from witnesses to get one later in life.
--
-Brian Mackert
Minister & Author of "Illegitimate - How a Loving God Rescued a Son of Polygamy."
|
|
|
|
|
