Joseph Smith's Monogamy

[SouthernMo]

6 hours ago, Investigator said:

I’m pretty sure believing Joseph and Emma were liars and hypocrites is to have them in derision. I chose not to do that.

But Brigham Young and those who followed him you will deride?

[ALarson]

6 hours ago, Investigator said:

Joseph preached against plural marriage and excommunicated those found to be practicing it.

That is not true.  He only excommunicated those like John Bennett who took the principle and went rogue (practicing spiritual wifery).

Why didn't Joseph excommunicate those who had children with their second wives while he was still living?  He remained close to those men and they held positions of leadership and trust (Heber C. Kimball and William Clayton).  He did not excommunicate Brigham Young or any of the other trusted leaders who lived polygamy before he was killed.

 

6 hours ago, Investigator said:

I’m pretty sure believing Joseph and Emma were liars and hypocrites is to have them in derision.

And yet you will believe that all others involved are liars (including other Prophets and Joseph's wives who were good and faithful women).

One other question is why would Brigham Young go to such great lengths to avoid teaching that polygamy started with him?  He never shied away from teaching new doctrine and owning it.  What do you believe his motivation would have been for altering all the journals, rewriting histories, and convincing dozens of members of the church to outright lie for him? 

Edited January 26, 2019 by ALarson

[Investigator]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

The problem here is that Joseph didn't excommunicate those found practicing it.  Leaving aside for one moment the question of Joseph and Hyrum living polygamy we can look at those who did.

We have the contemporary records of those who received their endowments, marriage sealings, and second anointings from Joseph.   Virtually every documented Nauvoo polygamist falls into that category. 

You list the plural children of Heber C. Kimball and William Clayton that were born during Joseph's lifetime.  In contemporary records these same men were inducted into Joseph's most elite circles, not excommunicated.

• MARRIAGE. v. 4 "Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy; we declare that we believe that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in the case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again." 1835 Doctrine and Covenants, C1, p. 251 (1835)

  "...What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one." (Joseph Smith)

• Joseph Smith refers people to extract from Doctrine and Covenants on Marriage which disavows polygamy, stating that this is "the only rule allowed by the church." Times and Seasons, vol. 3, p. 909 (1842).  See bottom half of left-hand column.

• Joseph Smith repeats again statement from Doctrine and Covenants on Marriage to deny all allegations of polygamy being practice. Times and Seasons, vol. 3, p. 939 (1842)

•  Joseph and Hyrum Smith announce the excommunication of Hiram Brown, a member of the Church, for "preaching Polygamy, and other false and corrupt doctrines, in the county of Lapeer, state of Michigan." Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 423 (1844)

• Hyrum Smith, with full knowledge and consent of his brother Joseph, publishes statement categorically denying any teaching of plural wives or polygamy, and that all such teaching is false doctrine.

  • “… some of your elders say, that a man having a certain priesthood, may has as many wives as he pleases, and that doctrine is taught here: I say unto you that that man teaches false doctrine, for there is no such doctrine taught here; neither is there any such thing practiced here.”  Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 474 (March, 1844)

• Statement denouncing teaching of plural wives as fiendish. States that the spiritual wife system merely allows a man to be married to another wife for time and eternity if his first wife dies. Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 715 (1844)  See bottom half of right column A.

• "...What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers." (History of the Church, vol 6, p. 411) Joseph Smith made this statement preaching from the stand to the Latter-day Saints in Nauvoo on Sunday May 26, 1844.  

[Investigator]

1 hour ago, SouthernMo said:

But Brigham Young and those who followed him you will deride?

Were Brigham Young or any who followed him ever vouched for personally by our Lord?

 

I believe the scripture in the Doctrine and Covenants 21:4 wherein the Lord, speaking of Joseph Smith said, “…thou shalt give ^aheed unto all his words and ^bcommandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all ^choliness before me” and in D&C 28:3 “And thou shalt be obedient unto the things which I shall give unto him, even as ^aAaron, to ^bdeclare faithfully the commandments and the revelations, with power and ^cauthority unto the church.”

[SouthernMo]

25 minutes ago, Investigator said:

Were Brigham Young or any who followed him ever vouched for personally by our Lord?

 

I believe the scripture in the Doctrine and Covenants 21:4 wherein the Lord, speaking of Joseph Smith said, “…thou shalt give ^aheed unto all his words and ^bcommandments which he shall give unto you as he receiveth them, walking in all ^choliness before me” and in D&C 28:3 “And thou shalt be obedient unto the things which I shall give unto him, even as ^aAaron, to ^bdeclare faithfully the commandments and the revelations, with power and ^cauthority unto the church.”

I see your perspective - it has value!

Im still working that out. There is no question Brigham Young did not have a clear mandate from Joseph Smith not the Lord to take the authority he eventually did. 

What that means today - I’m not sure.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Investigator said:

• MARRIAGE. v. 4 "Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy; we declare that we believe that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in the case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again." 1835 Doctrine and Covenants, C1, p. 251 (1835)

  "...What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one." (Joseph Smith)

• Joseph Smith refers people to extract from Doctrine and Covenants on Marriage which disavows polygamy, stating that this is "the only rule allowed by the church." Times and Seasons, vol. 3, p. 909 (1842).  See bottom half of left-hand column.

• Joseph Smith repeats again statement from Doctrine and Covenants on Marriage to deny all allegations of polygamy being practice. Times and Seasons, vol. 3, p. 939 (1842)

•  Joseph and Hyrum Smith announce the excommunication of Hiram Brown, a member of the Church, for "preaching Polygamy, and other false and corrupt doctrines, in the county of Lapeer, state of Michigan." Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 423 (1844)

• Hyrum Smith, with full knowledge and consent of his brother Joseph, publishes statement categorically denying any teaching of plural wives or polygamy, and that all such teaching is false doctrine.

  • “… some of your elders say, that a man having a certain priesthood, may has as many wives as he pleases, and that doctrine is taught here: I say unto you that that man teaches false doctrine, for there is no such doctrine taught here; neither is there any such thing practiced here.”  Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 474 (March, 1844)

• Statement denouncing teaching of plural wives as fiendish. States that the spiritual wife system merely allows a man to be married to another wife for time and eternity if his first wife dies. Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 715 (1844)  See bottom half of right column A.

• "...What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers." (History of the Church, vol 6, p. 411) Joseph Smith made this statement preaching from the stand to the Latter-day Saints in Nauvoo on Sunday May 26, 1844.  

None of which addresses the history of the quorum of the anointed.  Around 30 men known to have entered polygamy during Joseph's life.  Almost all of them not only not excommunicated but instead inducted into Joseph's most inner circles of priesthood and given the temple ordinances first.

I don't care what public proclamations you quote.  The private historical events disagree with them.

Edited January 26, 2019 by JLHPROF

[Thinking]

On 1/24/2019 at 4:34 PM, Investigator said:

Oh quite contraire, Joseph Smith did not ever teach plural marriage. To the contrary, he and his brother were continuously preaching against it and excommunicating those who were involved in it right up until his martyrdom.

He never taught it publicly.

[Investigator]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

None of which addresses the history of the quorum of the anointed.  Around 30 men known to have entered polygamy during Joseph's life.  Almost all of them not only not excommunicated but instead inducted into Joseph's most inner circles of priesthood and given the temple ordinances first.

I don't care what public proclamations you quote.  The private historical events disagree with them.

Documentation please?

[ALarson]

16 hours ago, Investigator said:

Documentation please?

How about you provide documentation that Joseph excommunicated Heber C. Kimball and William Clayton?

You continue to claim this:

"Joseph preached against plural marriage and excommunicated those found to be practicing it."

Where is your source for the excommunication of the two men above (who had children with their second wives while Joseph was alive)?

[Investigator]

1 hour ago, ALarson said:

How about you provide documentation that Joseph excommunicated Heber C. Kimball and William Clayton?

You continue to claim this:

"Joseph preached against plural marriage and excommunicated those found to be practicing it."

Where is your source for the excommunication of the two men above (who had children with their second wives while Joseph was alive)?

Quote

 According to an analysis by George D. Smith, there were a total of 42 alleged plural marriage unions involving 25 men (excluding Joseph Smith’s alleged activity) while Joseph was alive. There were 5 such unions in 1842, 21 in 1843, and 14 more before Joseph’s death in June 1844.

One would expect that during this time there would have been a rash of children born from these unions. However, an analysis by Gary Bergera states that there were only four children potentially born from polygamous relationships prior to Joseph’s death:

● Lucina Cahoon (about 1843)

● Adelmon/Adelbert Kimball (1842)

● Adelbert Daniel Clayton (2/18/1844)

● George Noble (2/2/1844)

Further investigation of these births reveals that the actual number of children is even smaller. In the case of Lucina Cahoon, there is scant evidence that this child ever existed. The only evidence is a record from a descendant of Reynolds Cahoon, the alleged father, in a family history published in 1960. The only information provided is the name of the child, a birthdate of “about 1843, probably Nauvoo”. Given the uncertainty of the birth date or even location, and the source being nearly 120 years after the fact, this birth is questionable at best. A discerning observer would not likely rely on this as proof of a child born from a polygamous union during Joseph’s lifetime.

The data for the next child, Adelmon or Adelbert Kimball, is conflicted, but Adelmon was born about Oct 1842 and died Apr 1843. He was born to Sarah Peak, the first alleged plural wife to Heber C Kimball. Before Sarah married Heber, she was married to William Noon. William and Sarah moved to Nauvoo from England in 1841, but for unknown reasons, William abandoned his family and returned to England. William and Sarah are shown in various sources to have had three children. Their final child was named Adelmon, born in 1842, and died Apr 1843.

In other sources Sarah Peak is shown to have given birth to a child named Adelbert with her new husband, Heber C Kimball. This child is also shown to have been born in Oct 1842 and died in Apr 1843. However, it’s not possible for Sarah to have delivered two children who were born and died at the same time and fathered by two different men. The conclusion, then, is that it’s the same child (as some family histories show).  Adelmon was either the son of William Noon and later claimed by Kimball to be his; or, Adelmon was Kimball’s son but was easily explained as the last child conceived with William Noon before William abandoned his family. Regardless, in the theory that Joseph Smith was a monogamist, this child would not have raised eyebrows in Nauvoo as he would have easily been attributed to William Noon. As such, this child is not valid proof that plural marriage was being practiced with Joseph’s consent.

The third child, Adelbert Daniel Clayton, is a somewhat similar story to that of Adelbert Kimball. The fact they share a first name seems an interesting coincidence. The birth of the Clayton child is supported by some historical evidence. There is an entry in William Clayton’s journal on Feb 18, 1844 referencing the birth of a child to Margaret Moon, Clayton’s first plural wife. Little Adelbert passed away six months later. While this is a compelling case of a child 11 born from plural marriage before the death of Joseph, there are problems with Clayton’s journal that call into question the validity of the narrative surrounding his relationship with Margaret Moon. These problems are discussed in greater detail later in this paper. Regardless, a reasonable observer could conclude that this child was indeed born from a polygamous relationship during Joseph’s lifetime.

The final child, George Noble, was born just a few months before Joseph died. There is, however, very little information to analyze the parents’ relationship. The mother, Sarah Noble, died in 1847 while attempting to trek west. George was born across the river from Nauvoo in Montrose, IA. He is shown in multiple histories as being the first child born from a polygamous marriage. Given the evidence of the other three child­ candidates, that distinction may very well  be true. However, even if true, there is no evidence that Joseph was aware of this child’s birth. The geographic distance from Nauvoo and the relative chaos that enveloped Joseph’s life in his final months could have been enough to prevent his knowledge of this child.

It would be reasonable to conclude there were most likely two children born into polygamy during Joseph’s lifetime. Whether Joseph was aware of the circumstances of these births and approved is debatable. More importantly, it’s puzzling that over the course of 3 years (1842­1844) there were 25 men working to father children with 40 different women and only 2 children could be mustered. As an example of this anomaly, consider the case of Brigham Young. Young sired 57 children throughout his life but was unable to produce a polygamous child until a year after Joseph died despite allegedly entering polygamy in 1842 and having 4 polygamous wives at the time of Joseph’s death in June 1844. By contrast, Brigham’s legal wife, Mary Ann Angell, bore him a child in 1842 and 1844. If it’s true that these men were practicing plural marriage at Joseph’s behest, there should have been many births during this time period... (Joseph Smith's Monogamy referenced earlier)

Joseph excommunicated those he knew to be practicing plural marriage. Those who were practicing it knew he did not approve of it so they practiced in secret.

[Investigator]

21 hours ago, Thinking said:

He never taught it publicly.

I see, you believe Joseph taught one thing and did another, the very definition of hypocrisy and lying. By doing so you hold Joseph in derision.  (D&C 122)

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Investigator said:

I see, you believe Joseph taught one thing and did another, the very definition of hypocrisy and lying. By doing so you hold Joseph in derision.  (D&C 122)

By considering Joseph completely ignorant of his closest associate's polygamous relationships you aren't exactly paying him a compliment either.

Quote

According to an analysis by George D. Smith, there were a total of 42 alleged plural marriage unions involving 25 men (excluding Joseph Smith’s alleged activity) while Joseph was alive. There were 5 such unions in 1842, 21 in 1843, and 14 more before Joseph’s death in June 1844.

Do you believe this accurate?  And Joseph completely  ignorant and uninvolved in all of them.  Despite most of them being apostles, his personal secretaries, etc.

And all these sealings performed without any deference to his holding the priesthood keys.

I mean really, given D&C 132 who do you think sealed Heber, or Brigham, or Willard Richards or William Clayton, or Orson Pratt to their Nauvoo plural wives?

It's not an issue of derision.  Joseph simply wasn't that blind.

Edited January 27, 2019 by JLHPROF

[CA Steve]

7 minutes ago, Investigator said:

I see, you believe Joseph taught one thing and did another, the very definition of hypocrisy and lying. By doing so you hold Joseph in derision.  (D&C 122)

 We also know he was involved in at least two other areas where high secrecy was maintained, the Quorum of the Anointed and the Council of the Fifty. Was he being deceptive there also?

I am wondering how big a deal Joseph's marital status is to you? For me, his involvement in polygamy is not by itself enough to decide his prophetic status. I believe without question he was involved and that both public and private (back then) documents show that and show that he was being very deceptive about it for good reason. He knew what the public reaction would be

 

[Investigator]

2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

By considering Joseph completely ignorant of his closest associate's polygamous relationships you aren't exactly paying him a compliment either.

Calling Joseph a hypocrite and a liar is not the same as saying he did not know.

Do you believe this accurate?  And Joseph completely  ignorant and uninvolved in all of them.  Despite most of them being apostles, his personal secretaries, etc.

And all these sealings performed without any deference to his holding the priesthood keys.

I mean really, given D&C 132 who do you think sealed Heber, or Brigham, or Willard Richards or William Clayton, or Orson Pratt to their Nauvoo plural wives?

132 was added way after Joseph's time, most of which should not be attributed to Joseph, but that is another topic. Sealings are not the same as plural marriage.

It's not an issue of derision.  Joseph simply wasn't that blind.

It is an issue of derision to say that Joseph taught one thing and lived another. I seek to receive counsel, authority, and blessings constantly from under his hand, which is impossible to do if I believe he was a liar and a hypocrite. 

 

[JLHPROF]

46 minutes ago, Investigator said:

It is an issue of derision to say that Joseph taught one thing and lived another. I seek to receive counsel, authority, and blessings constantly from under his hand, which is impossible to do if I believe he was a liar and a hypocrite. 

Except that's exactly what happened.  It may be hard to prove from contemporary documents but it is much harder to reasonably deny his involvement given the historical circumstances.

There is so much circumstantial evidence that for Joseph to be uninvolved is truly an impossibility.  He would have to have been absent from Nauvoo from 1842-1844.

Brigham a polygamist since 1841, Heber since 1842

His brother William in 1843, along with Orson Pratt, William Clayton, Willard Richards, Orson Hyde, Parley P. Pratt, Amasa Lyman, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff etc.

All Joseph's closest associates polygamists - number of excommunications =0.

Whereas those who opposed plural marriage amongst Church leaders in Nauvoo who all fell into disfavor with Joseph - William Law, excommunicated; Sidney Rigdon, attempted to drop him from Church Presidency; Austin Cowles, excommunicated.

[Tacenda]

27 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Except that's exactly what happened.  It may be hard to prove from contemporary documents but it is much harder to reasonably deny his involvement given the historical circumstances.

There is so much circumstantial evidence that for Joseph to be uninvolved is truly an impossibility.  He would have to have been absent from Nauvoo from 1842-1844.

Brigham a polygamist since 1841, Heber since 1842

His brother William in 1843, along with Orson Pratt, William Clayton, Willard Richards, Orson Hyde, Parley P. Pratt, Amasa Lyman, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff etc.

All Joseph's closest associates polygamists - number of excommunications =0.

Whereas those who opposed plural marriage amongst Church leaders in Nauvoo who all fell into disfavor with Joseph - William Law, excommunicated; Sidney Rigdon, attempted to drop him from Church Presidency; Austin Cowles, excommunicated.

It's weird how I grew up thinking that William Law was a bad anti Mormon. Turns out he did the right thing by not accepting polygamy and seeing other things that were not right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Law_(Latter_Day_Saints)

Edited January 27, 2019 by Tacenda

[JLHPROF]

18 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

It's weird how I grew up thinking that William Law was a bad anti Mormon. Turns out he did the right thing by not accepting polygamy and seeing other things that were not right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Law_(Latter_Day_Saints)

Alexander Neibaur, Diary - May 24, 1844
Told about Wm. [William] Law—wished to be married to his wife for eternity. Mr. [Joseph] Smith would inquire of the Lord, answered no because Law was a adulterous person. Mrs. Law wanted to know why she could not be married to Mr. Law. Mr. [Joseph Smith] S. said [he] would not wound her feelings be telling her. Some days after, Mr. [Joseph] Smith going toward his office. Mrs. Law stood in the door, beckoned to him the once did not know whether she beckoned to him, went across to inquire. Yes, please to walk in, no one but herself in the house, she drawing her arms around him, if you won't seal me to my husband seal myself unto you, he said, stand away and pushing her gently aside giving her a denial and going out. When Mr. [William] Law came home he inquired who had been in his absence, she said no one but Br. Joseph, he then demanded what had passed. Mrs. L. [Law] then told Joseph wanted her to married to him—

[pogi]

On 1/26/2019 at 11:37 AM, Investigator said:

Were Brigham Young or any who followed him ever vouched for personally by our Lord?

First, just to clarify, would it be correct to say that you believe that Joseph was a prophet of God and that the COJCOLDS is now in apostasy? 

Do you belong to another branch of Mormonism or something?

Second, to answer your question (and I can only answer for myself), yes.

[Alan]

On 1/26/2019 at 4:45 PM, ttribe said:

Except, of course, it has been pretty well documented that the denials were motivated (at least partially) by fear of additional persecution.

Actually, it hasn't. It has been assumed that must have been the reason, but as for documented?... no. Unless you count the documents which simply repeat these assumptions as "documented".

[ALarson]

8 hours ago, Alan said:

Actually, it hasn't. It has been assumed that must have been the reason, but as for documented?... no. Unless you count the documents which simply repeat these assumptions as "documented".

Alan, I've asked Investigator this, but no answer from him yet.....

Do you have a belief as to why Brigham Young (and others) would have gone to such great lengths, spend the tremendous amount of time it would had to have taken to alter journals, etc. and convince so many other good, faithful members of the church to lie?  What was his motivation?  He never had any problem holding back and owning new doctrines and teachings that they originated with him.  Why would he need to "blame" polygamy on Joseph who he dearly loved?

And also, iirc, on past threads related to this topic, you haven't not ever really addressed the William Clayton Nauvoo journal and other contemporary writings and records discussing Joseph's polygamy.  You seem to just fade away when presented with them.  Have you taken the time to search any of those out and read them?  

Edited January 29, 2019 by ALarson

[Alan]

11 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Alan, I've asked Investigator this, but no answer from him yet.....

Do you have a belief as to why Brigham Young (and others) would have gone to such great lengths, spend the tremendous amount of time it would had to have taken to alter journals, etc. and convince so many other good, faithful members of the church to lie?  What was his motivation?  He never had any problem holding back and owning new doctrines and teachings that they originated with him.  Why would he need to "blame" polygamy on Joseph who he dearly loved?

And also, iirc, on past threads related to this topic, you haven't not ever really addressed the William Clayton Nauvoo journal and other contemporary writings and records discussing Joseph's polygamy.  You seem to just fade away when presented with them.  Have you taken the time to search any of those out and read them?  

It's not as simple as that.

It is my belief that sealing and marriage became conflated quite early on. This remains the case today. In the US and Canada a wedding/marriage can be performed in the temple. It is not distinguishable from sealing. Whereas here in the UK and most other countries, the wedding/marriage is performed separately in a church, government or other authorized building, and the sealing is performed later in the temple.

I have been to both and can confirm that the two ordinances (temple wedding and temple sealing) are identical in every way. In England it is a sealing only, in the US it doubles as a wedding.

So for me it is easy to understand how the sealing morphed into a marriage very quickly when they were the same ordinance.

I believe Joseph was sealed to a number of people for family/dynastical reasons, but he was married only to Emma.

[ALarson]

1 minute ago, Alan said:

It's not as simple as that.

It is my belief that sealing and marriage became conflated quite early on. This remains the case today. In the US and Canada a wedding/marriage can be performed in the temple. It is not distinguishable from sealing. Whereas here in the UK and most other countries, the wedding/marriage is performed separately in a church, government or other authorized building, and the sealing is performed later in the temple.

I have been to both and can confirm that the two ordinances (temple wedding and temple sealing) are identical in every way. In England it is a sealing only, in the US it doubles as a wedding.

So for me it is easy to understand how the sealing morphed into a marriage very quickly when they were the same ordinance.

I believe Joseph was sealed to a number of people for family/dynastical reasons, but he was married only to Emma.

You did not answer my question.

What motivated Brigham Young to change all the journals (as I believe you have stated) and go to such great lengths to get so many good members of the church to lie about Joseph?  Why wouldn't he have just stated that polygamy originated with him?  He was not one to shy away from new teachings and doctrines.  To be successful at accomplishing this huge conspiracy theory you believe in, Brigham Young would have had to spend a great deal of time and energy carrying it out, not to mention convincing so many to tell lies about their beloved Prophet, Joseph Smith.

Why would he do that?

[Tacenda]

On 1/27/2019 at 2:38 PM, JLHPROF said:

Alexander Neibaur, Diary - May 24, 1844
Told about Wm. [William] Law—wished to be married to his wife for eternity. Mr. [Joseph] Smith would inquire of the Lord, answered no because Law was a adulterous person. Mrs. Law wanted to know why she could not be married to Mr. Law. Mr. [Joseph Smith] S. said [he] would not wound her feelings be telling her. Some days after, Mr. [Joseph] Smith going toward his office. Mrs. Law stood in the door, beckoned to him the once did not know whether she beckoned to him, went across to inquire. Yes, please to walk in, no one but herself in the house, she drawing her arms around him, if you won't seal me to my husband seal myself unto you, he said, stand away and pushing her gently aside giving her a denial and going out. When Mr. [William] Law came home he inquired who had been in his absence, she said no one but Br. Joseph, he then demanded what had passed. Mrs. L. [Law] then told Joseph wanted her to married to him—

Thanks, I guess I really need to research Law more, didn't even read the full article on Wiki to see about his confessed adultery to Joseph. Trying to find the interview with the Tribune that he gave later on.

[Alan]

1 hour ago, ALarson said:

You did not answer my question.

What motivated Brigham Young to change all the journals (as I believe you have stated) and go to such great lengths to get so many good members of the church to lie about Joseph?  Why wouldn't he have just stated that polygamy originated with him?  He was not one to shy away from new teachings and doctrines.  To be successful at accomplishing this huge conspiracy theory you believe in, Brigham Young would have had to spend a great deal of time and energy carrying it out, not to mention convincing so many to tell lies about their beloved Prophet, Joseph Smith.

Why would he do that?

Brigham has admitted that the idea of plural marriage in the church came to him while serving as a missionary in England, long before he ever heard it spoken of in the church. He considered it a personal revelation on the subject. So irrespective of Joseph, I think he was very keen on the idea. He became aware that Joseph was being sealed to multiple people and conflated the two.

It is a known fact that journals and even the official church history was doctored after the martyrdom. In fact, no historian disputes it. The motivation for the changes is where the controversy lies. Some claim that it was to "clarify", while others, even at the time the changes were made, say it was to alter the facts to align them with the new order of things.

It wasn't a huge conspiracy. It was tweeking. A bit like Pres. Hinckley's sermon about railway tracks. Just moving them a couple of inches at the junction can send a train thousands of miles in another direction. Imagine you are an old woman in Utah. You remember being sealed to Joseph in Nauvoo many years earlier. Through repetition, marriage and sealing have become so conflated that they are considered one and the same thing They are indistinguishable, as they still are in US temples to this very day. Sealing, marriage.... it's all the same thing. So when someone asks her whether she was married to Joseph Smith, she's going to say she was. She'll even sign an affidavit.

But of course there were people who claimed at the time that there was no heaven sanctioned polygamy in the church, not least Joseph Smith himself.

To claim that Brigham wouldn't have superimposed his understanding upon a previous practice is simply ignoring the facts. For example, priesthood and race, or Adam/God. In fact, those two things alone should cause us to suspect Brigham was very much inclined to do this.

[ALarson]

16 minutes ago, Alan said:

Brigham has admitted that the idea of plural marriage in the church came to him while serving as a missionary in England, long before he ever heard it spoken of in the church. He considered it a personal revelation on the subject. So irrespective of Joseph, I think he was very keen on the idea. He became aware that Joseph was being sealed to multiple people and conflated the two.

It is a known fact that journals and even the official church history was doctored after the martyrdom. In fact, no historian disputes it. The motivation for the changes is where the controversy lies. Some claim that it was to "clarify", while others, even at the time the changes were made, say it was to alter the facts to align them with the new order of things.

Thanks for the reply (and explaining what you believe).

I'm going to issue a CFR that it's a "known fact" that journals were "doctored".  (I am aware that some of the official church history was rewritten regarding certain occurrences or details...but not specifically about polygamy.)

Please name which journals and give the evidence that proves they were definitely altered?   Please provide the sources that make this a "known fact".

16 minutes ago, Alan said:

It wasn't a huge conspiracy. It was tweeking. A bit like Pres. Hinckley's sermon about railway tracks. Just moving them a couple of inches at the junction can send a train thousands of miles in another direction. Imagine you are an old woman in Utah. You remember being sealed to Joseph in Nauvoo many years earlier. Through repetition, marriage and sealing have become so conflated that they are considered one and the same thing They are indistinguishable, as they still are in US temples to this very day. Sealing, marriage.... it's all the same thing. So when someone asks her whether she was married to Joseph Smith, she's going to say she was. She'll even sign an affidavit.

But of course there were people who claimed at the time that there was no heaven sanctioned polygamy in the church, not least Joseph Smith himself.

To claim that Brigham wouldn't have superimposed his understanding upon a previous practice is simply ignoring the facts. For example, priesthood and race, or Adam/God. In fact, those two things alone should cause us to suspect Brigham was very much inclined to do this.

You can't be serious about the part I put in bold above.  "Tweeking"?  Dozens would have had to be in on it and lied (some under oath).  Many of the Prophets of the church would have had to be in on it and would have needed to continue to lie about their Prophet Joseph throughout their lives.  Women who dearly loved Joseph would have had to tell lies about being his wife.  It would be an overwhelming undertaking to alter all the diaries and journals (if Brigham could even get his hands on all of them).  There are letters written between members at that time (contemporary letters regarding polygamy and Joseph) and so on.  So yes, it is a huge conspiracy theory you believe in.....not just a mere "tweeking".

Edited January 29, 2019 by ALarson