All Activity

I have held to the thought process, that the terms and phrases used in Biblical times, was used in a way for that specific time to understand, and for future generations to adapt to the understanding of their own time. So, to carry on what Stargazer has touched on. The term/phrase of Mansion, could relate to a celestial body.

I listened to the video and Don made a few really interesting points about Emma and polygamy. One was that a few years before her birth, a pastor in her family's community was kicked out of the congregation for preaching an immoral practice from the Bible. Don has another historian friend who hypothesizes that could have been polygamy (any other immoral practice in the Bible?). If it was, that would mean she grew up in a community that had a bad experience with polygamy and would have colored her own view of it. The other point is that Jacob (in Jacob 2) mentions a revelation from Lehi telling the Lehites to not practice polygamy. That revelation is not recorded anywhere in the Book of Mormon. But it could have been in the lost Book of Lehi. And Emma would have likely been the transcriber for it (as she was the first transcriber for Joseph). That would have also had an impact on her view of polygamy. A paraphrase of that quote was in the video. Around the 1:10:00 mark. Also a few other quotes from her against polygamy were also mentioned. Don makes an interesting point around this. He points out how Joseph told William Clayton to burn or bury the records of the Council of Fifty. He says that is an indication that Joseph tried to hide/destroy things that could be damaging to him. And many of the stories about the burning of the Section 132 have Joseph burning the section, not Emma. So, Don proposes that Joseph did burn the paper to ensure that it wouldn't fall in the wrong hands and get him killed. And Emma saw that and misunderstood that to mean that Joseph was giving up polygamy (similar to how William Marks also believed that). And so Emma was trying to follow his wishes and example by denying polygamy after his death because he was giving up. She also had seen what it did to her husband (polygamy was a main reason he was killed) and she didn't want the same thing to happen to her sons. So she would deny it to her sons to ensure they didn't follow their father's lead.

You're limiting Heavenly Father's dreams for you, though. Here's what He wants for you, if you're willing: Revelation 3:21 - "To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne." In other words, there's a throne waiting for you, if you'll have it. Matthew 28:21 - One of the parables - "His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord." How many things? Romans 8:16-17 - "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God: And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together." Some key words here are "heirs of God," "joint-heirs with Christ," "glorified." Kinda harks to Rev. 3:21, don't it? 1 John 3:2 - "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is." The key phrase here is "we shall be like him." Like who? God. When Jesus tells his disciples to be perfect like their Father in Heaven is perfect, is this an impossible command? Does Jesus give commands He knows cannot be obeyed? You seem to want to deny that God wants you to be like Him. This is a typical Platonic and Aristotelian case of the "Ideals." You can't be ideal, say the pagan philosophers. You're nothing but dirt; maybe a higher quality of dirt, but dirt nonetheless. Unfortunately, this contradicts scripture.

As Paul once aptly put it, we see but through a glass, darkly. A person living in Paul's day is not going to imagine a planet, is he? Even though there are sufficient indications in canonized scripture that the eternal reward of the faithful is greater than we can imagine, even the King James translators restricted themselves to a fancy building referred to as a mansion. To a person living as a regular person in Judea at the time of Jesus, what did they imagine it to be? Of course, we with our astronomical knowledge expand it to a planet. And if a planet, why not a solar system, or perhaps an entire galaxy! I go so far as a universe. Why not? I have no idea. But I get the impression that most Christians imagine heaven to be a place just like Earth, but with better real estate, luxury food, and terabit internet. Considering the "In my Father's house are many mansions" quote, how opulent are these mansions, anyway? But it turns out that the term "mansion" in the KJV means something quite different now than it did in King Jimmy's time. Here's an interesting video on the subject I found:

Everyone in all ages have been fettered by the prevailing notions of their days. Unfortunately, many prefer the siren call of presentism rather than a consideration of the surrounding culture for historical persons.

I wonder if she was "willing to alter stuff on plural marriage" because she was personally so troubled by it. She wanted to create a narrative that conformed to her preferences on that subject. Perhaps notably, her sons stated that they "apologized to our mother for putting the questions respecting polygamy and plural wives, as we felt we ought to do." Even decades later, the topic was very painful to her. I don't know that she had a motive to substantively depart from the truth as to other matters in her life. See here: See here: Thanks, -Smac

Expounding on my own opinion and beliefs of what happened would require their own thread, so I won't do that here, maybe I'll write about it this weekend. For now I'll just say that I think proper historical practice for a 1 hour 45 minute video of Emma Smith would be to prioritize her own contemporary words over the many-years-later words of others.

Excerpt from - "Ask the Pope or Ask an Atheist”: Ask the female atheist “Tell me about God” She will narrow her eyes and say “God? There is no God. He does not exist!” Miraculous. Even without existing God wears a suit and tie.

I doubt it if we are talking about her then beliefs and the current doctrines and not about her being given a chance to learn the development and reasons for the changes. Same with the Restored Church though. Neither are excellent matches for how doctrine was understood in Joseph’s time, which I assume is the set of beliefs Emma most likely possessed, whether she accepted up to Kirtland and no further or she also accepted some, many or all at some time of the innovations of Nauvoo. But I don’t see that as a negative, but to be expected. Change to me is a sign of possible continuing revelation, which to me is an essential sign of God’s Church. I think how much trust would depend in part on the time of the references. By 1879, it seems she is willing to present the history in ways that most appeal to her, which to me makes anything she says problematic. If she is willing to alter stuff on plural marriage, why not other stuff. But that doesn’t mean to me we should automatically label earlier material as untrustworthy. We should be looking at factors likely contributing to her choice to misrepresent, go with the more ideal image, seeing when they occurred and look at the rest of what she in the time/context, compare those to what we know elsewhere to see how we might use her comments with care. She died in April, 1879. Interview was in early February. Do we know anything about the state of her health, both physical or mental? She wouldn’t be the first senior who truly believed her own version of history in the last years of her life, even with that version obviously being wrong (My grandmother, for example, insisted her husband’s name was Leroy and Roy was his nickname even when confronted, Leroy was the middle name of one of her sons, arrived at by combining her name that started with Le with Roy most likely). Sometimes dementia is obvious, but lots of times seniors are very convincing that they are representing things correctly.

- Position - If “A” looks up to “B” Then by nature of the physical universe “B” must look down on “A” Rather like two birds Positioned One on a tree And one on the ground. Or so thought Marjorie Who had always wanted to marry A man she could look up to But wondered where that Would place her If she did. Imagine her astonishment When she met Michael and found That together they stood Physics on its head. You could never Draw this on paper For it defies design But year after year They lived a strange Arrangement That by all known laws Could not occur: She looked up to him And he looked up to her.

- Short Roots - The tree At the church next door to me Turned up its roots and died. They had tried To brace its leaning, But it lowered And lowered, And then there it lay— Leaves in grass And matted roots in air, Like a loafer on a summer day. “Look there,” Said the gardener, “Short roots—all the growth went up— Big branches—short roots.”“ How come?” I asked. “Too much water. This tree had it too good. It never had to hunt for drink.” Especially in thirsty times, My memory steps outside, And looks at the tree At the church next door to me That turned up its roots and died.

- The Lesson - Yes, my fretting, Frowning child, I could cross The room to you More easily. But I’ve already Learned to walk, So I make you Come to me. Let go now— There! You see? Oh, remember This simple lesson, Child, And when In later years You cry out With tight fists And tears— “Oh, help me, God—please.”— Just listen And you’ll hear A silent voice: "I would, child, I would. But it’s you, Not I, Who needs to try Godhood.”

- The Woman - God fashioned me For feeding; And set me in A hungry land. I give -- To satisfy The unconscious appetite Of the unborn, And the child's First thirsting need. I give -- To be Sweet sustenance To aching man, And then Quiet comfort To a weary, wanting World. There is much Hunger here. Oh, Father -- fill me, That I may nourish Generously.

- Mother To Child - Look -- Your little fist Fits mine Like the pit In a plum. One day And one size, These two hands will Clasp companionably. Help me, child Forgive me When I fail you. I'm your mother, True, But in the end Merely an older equal Doing her faltering best For a dear Small friend.

Another one of her poems of Heavenly Mother: - Jesus Remembered - I am imagining this morning After my amen in his name That when our Mother helped Jesus prepare for his thirty-three-year mission into the world’s wilderness She laid a hand on his heart and said: Don’t forget this: Of the many people you will teach And bless and heal, pay special attention To the ones who look like me. Things have gone awry, as we knew They might and many are badly used Especially your sisters who are seen as Property and positioned five feet lower In the temple than the men And are kept from the scriptures And from speaking And are subordinate everywhere And oh the daily prayers your Father hears From our dear Jewish boys: “Praised be God that he has not Created me a woman.” You will not forget your Mother’s words. You will pay special attention To the ones who look like me. I am imagining that She watched carefully As he walked the dusty earth doing shocking things That made their way into my Bible And perhaps into his Mother’s journal: He spoke today to a woman in public— A Samaritan!—at Jacob’s well— Disreputable act, they say. He calls women from their houses to come and listen And follow him as disciples, ministering to him. Unheard of, they say. Today he allowed a woman (of ill repute they say) To wash his feet with her tears And dry them with her hair. I wept. He performs miracle after miracle at the request Of those who look like me. He saved a woman from stoning by calling out Our dear hypocritical boys The scribes and Pharisees. Ah, to sweet Martha and Mary He speaks of the life of the spirit and the mind As “the better part” of the busyness of women. He calls women to pray, to lead To preach the gospel—such good news! He remembered! Sitting here now with the thin pages that Softly rustle as I turn them, I feel Jesus laying a hand on my heart and saying to me: Do what ye have seen me do. And I believe he asks me to pay special attention To those who look like our Mother. I remember.

- Time for the Gulls - It’s time, Father, For the gulls, I think. My arms shake From flailing my field. I sink, Broken as the little stalks Beneath their devouring burden. I yield it all to you, Who alone can touch all things. It’s time, Father, For the gulls. I will be still, And listen for their wings.

- My Season - Seeing the tree Beneath a baptism of snow, You may call her barren. But is it so? And for all your watchings On a March night When the twigs seem dark And the bark Feels cold to your hand -- Can you call her fruitless And so leave? She smiles, Calm in the station Of seasons And in the ordination Of sun, and sap, and spring. As for me? You turn away, Impatient with the promises you've seen. But -- inside I fill And pulse and flow With the urgency of green. I've a season, Like the tree. And all your Faithless doubts Will not destroy The rising spring In me.

- ASKING FATHER - I tiptoed into prayer. Hesitantly: "Father, do you mind that I am giving so much attention to Her these days?" There were no words. There was thought. I thought there was an instant embrace warm, I thought, and soft and strong that drew me in so close and drew the Mother in so close and there we were held tight in a circle of three a familial trinity. That's what I thought. What I know is this: tears on my cheeks. Amen.

This is the title poem of her very first poetry anthology, "Beginnings": - Beginnings - Today You came running With a small specked egg Warm in your hand. You could barely understand, I know, As I told you of Beginnings– Of egg and bird. Told, too, That years ago you began, Smaller than sight. And then, As egg yearns for sky And seed stretches to tree, You became– Like me. Oh, But there’s so much more. You and I, child, Have just begun. Think: Worlds from now What might we be?– We, who are seed Of Deity.

This is one of her many poems referencing Heavenly Mother: - A Motherless House - I live in a Motherless house, A broken home. How it happened I cannot learn. When I had words enough to ask “Where is my Mother?” No one seemed to know, And no one thought it strange That no one else knew either. I live in a Motherless house. They are good to me here, But I find that no kindly Patriarchal care eases the pain. I yearn for the day Someone will look at me and say, “You certainly do look like your Mother.” I walk the rooms, Search the closets, Look for something that might Have belonged to her— A letter, a dress, a chair. Would she not have left a note? I close my eyes And work to bring back her touch, her face. Surely there must have been A Motherly embrace I can call back for comfort. I live in a Motherless house, Motherless and without a trace. Who could have done this? Who would tear an unweaned infant From its Mother’s arms And clear the place of every souvenir? I live in a Motherless house.

In honor of Carol Lynn Pearson's passing, I wanted a thread to be able to share her poems. I happen to love the field of poetry myself, but I've never gotten a hold of any of her anthologies as my local libraries don't carry any of her works. If you happen to know a poem of hers that I don't have included please post it too. This was one she wrote referencing her future passing: TO THOSE WHO HAVE LOVED ME When I am gone Let me lie in state in your heart for a day or two or more. Then plant me deep in the soil of your best work And let me help toward harvest.

Yes. Likely for a variety of reasons. Pretty much. See here: The RLDS/COC folks believe theirs is the legitimate successor to the Church organized by Joseph Smith in 1830. The Latter-day Saints believe that the Church instituted in 1830 has no "successor," and instead has continued to exist from 1830 to today. Reasonable minds can disagree about such things. I wonder if Emma's beliefs would align with those of the CoC, particularly as pertaining to the Book of Mormon. Well, she rejected plural marriage. And she had substantial disagreements with Brigham Young. And she was geographically isolated from the Church led by Brigham Young. As much as we can trust any historical figure. We work with the evidence at hand, and make reasoned conclusions based thereon. I think Emma's utter repudiation/denial of plural marriage originating with Joseph taints her credibility as a historical source on that specific issue, since the evidence of Joseph's involvement in polygamy is pretty much beyond dispute. However, pretty much everything else about which she spoke are matters of opinion or belief or both, or matters about which she was a percipient witness. For example, her statements about the Plates are corroborated by other witnesses. Do you "trust Emma" on that point? If not, why not? Looking at the totality of her life, would you characterize Emma as a good person? An honest one? For the same reason we trust, or do not trust, everyone who has ever lived since Jesus Christ: Because she was human, and hence had foibles and weaknesses and errors, just like all of us, but she also had strengths and virtues and was a percipient witness to many things. Again, I am curious as to your perspective on the Plates. Do you "trust her" insofar as her statements about the Plates are corroborated by the other witnesses? I appreciate your input. Thanks, -Smac

But it seems clear she rejected BY's claims to lead the church and rejected plural marriage. Isn't the church she claimed to adhere to the one we now call The Community Of Christ? And she rejected the Church that you believe is the one Joseph founded. Also, how much can we trust Emma. She denied that Joseph introduced and practice plural marriage, yet as you note, the historical records supports the position the Joseph was indeed the one responsible for introducing plural marriage. So how can we trust her?

So what do they conclude she saw these teachings as since it seems at times she rejected them as revelation? I'm not sure they reach a conclusion one way or another (BTW, what you are quoting is not me, but the Grok summary). The "at times" seems to be an important part of your question. I think Emma went through terrible trials throughout much of her life. I surmise that by 1879, her hostility against polygamy had come to affect her perspective on it. Her 1879 statement about Joseph's polygamy ("At one time my husband came to me and asked me if I had heard certain rumors about spiritual marriages, or anything of the kind; and assured me that if I had, that they were without foundation; that there was no such doctrine, and never should be with his knowledge, or consent."), must be construed in light of the clear and extensive evidence we now have that Joseph did introduce the concept and practice of plural marriage. Emma's 1879 statement is dated, but not the statement within it which she attributes to Joseph ("At one time..."). Per the Hales: Assuming there is some accuracy to Emma's statement, we don't know when in the above timeline it happened. The reference to John C. Bennett is interesting. The Hales wrote a good article, "John C. Bennett's Spiritual Wifery." A summary: I have wondered, but not really investigated, whether by 1879 Emma, who despised even the religious practice of plural marriage introduced by Joseph Smith, had come to conflate it with the illicit "spiritual wifery" depredations arising from John C. Bennett's behaviors. A few thoughts along these lines: Strong negative association with the term: “Spiritual wifery” / “spiritual wife system” was publicly and scandalously tied to Bennett’s conduct in 1842. Joseph, Hyrum, Emma (in Relief Society), and other leaders repeatedly denounced it. The phrase carried a strong connotation of unauthorized, illicit sexual behavior. Emma’s deep and longstanding opposition: Emma opposed plural marriage during Joseph’s lifetime (with only brief, reluctant periods of acquiescence) and rejected it completely afterward. She taught her children that Joseph never practiced or taught it and blamed its introduction on Brigham Young and others. Over 35 years, her rejection hardened into a clear, consistent public position. Time and memory: The 1879 interview occurred 35+ years after the events. Memory can be reconstructive. It is not uncommon for people to simplify or merge related but distinct painful experiences over decades, especially when they already view both negatively. Rhetorical and religious incentives: Emma was aligned with the Reorganized Church tradition, which rejected polygamy and taught that it originated after Joseph’s death. Framing any form of “spiritual” or plural marriage as something Joseph himself rejected (and associating it with the disreputable Bennett episode) fit the narrative she and her sons maintained. Language in the 1879 statement itself: Emma does not carefully distinguish categories. She groups “polygamy,” “spiritual wives,” and “spiritual marriages/wifery” together and issues a blanket denial that Joseph taught or practiced any of it. This is consistent with conflation. Thanks, -Smac

Um, she did: "Sister Emma, in speaking of the condition of the Church after her husband’s death, said to me, “I was threatened by Brigham Young because I opposed and denounced his measures and would not go west with them. At that time, they did not know where they were going themselves, but he told me that he would yet bring me prostrate to his feet.” (Early History of the Reorganization, Apostle Edmund C. Briggs, pp. 88, 93-95) She says she opposed and denounced Brigham Young, Thank you for your response. She says she "opposed and denounced" Brigham Young about "his measures." To what do you think she was referring here? I can understand and appreciate that perspective, even if I do not fully share it. From later on in the interview: Her beef with Brigham Young may have influenced her perspective about whether "the Church (that went west)," the group led by the individual with whom she had substantial personal, financial and religious disagreements, amounted to the "Mormonism" of which she spoke in 1879. For herself, she separated the two. For myself, I think the Church as now constituted and led by Pres. Oaks is the same one that Joseph founded in 1830. My assessment is that the “measures” Emma most consistently opposed were plural marriage (polygamy) and, secondarily, Brigham Young’s leadership claims and the associated financial/property decisions after Joseph’s death. Her perspective on Brigham became strongly negative. From FAIR: Brigham and Emma did not agree on the disposition of Joseph's estate Furthermore, Brigham and Emma did not agree on the disposition of Joseph's estate. Illinois law at the time held that no church could hold more than ten acres of property, and so much of the church's properties were held in Joseph's name. At the same time, much of the Church's debt was held by Joseph as a private citizen—thus, Emma was liable for Joseph/the Church's debts, but had a less clear claim on the Church's lands that Joseph held as Trustee-in-Trust. Emma's repudiation/denial of Joseph's plural marriages contravene the great weight of historical evidence. Brigham Young's accusation of poisoning was, as Bro. Bushman put it, "unfounded." Both Emma and Brigham did tremendous things to advance the Lord's work. And both of them had substantial flaws in their behavior and temperament as well. Hence the value of the Atonement in their - and our - lives. Also, what are your thoughts about this statement attributed to Emma? The question, I suppose, is what she thought of to be "Mormonism" at this point in time. She was 74 when she was interviewed by her son, and had suffered challenges and tribulations far worse than anything most of us will encounter. Also, her inconsistent approach to polygamy was well-known. Her conflict about it was deep-seated. From FAIR: Emma did teach her children that Joseph had never taught the doctrine of plural marriage, and blamed its introduction on Brigham Young Emma never denied Joseph's prophetic calling; she did, however, teach her children that Joseph had never taught the doctrine of plural marriage, and blamed its introduction on Brigham Young. Torn between two certitudes—her conviction of Joseph's prophetic calling, and her hatred of plural marriage—Emma had difficult choices to make for which we ought not to judge her. But, the critics ought to let all of Emma speak for herself—she had a great trial, but also had great knowledge. That she continued to support Joseph's calling and remain with him, despite her feelings about plural marriage, speaks much of her convictions. As she told Parley P. Pratt years later: Allen J. Stout: "from moments of passionate denunciation [Emma] would subside into tearful repentance and acknowledge that her violent opposition to that principle was instigated by the power of darkness" Emma Smith: "The principle is right but I am jealous hearted. Now never tell anybody that you heard me find fault with that [principle;] we have got to humble ourselves and repent of it Emma's inner conflict was also dramatized in another report: Emma Smith: "I desire a fruitful, active mind, that I may be able to comprehend the designs of God, when revealed through his servants without doubting" Emma asked Joseph for a blessing not long before he went to Carthage. Joseph told her to write the best blessing she could, and he would sign it upon his return. Wrote Emma: When I consider Emma's statements about polygamy, Brigham Young, the "Church" (the one that went West), and the translation of the Book of Mormon, and so on, I consider it in the context of her life and circumstances, her perspective and knowledge and information, and her foibles and weaknesses, and also in light of Mormon 9:31 ("Condemn me not because of mine imperfection, neither my father, because of his imperfection, neither them who have written before him; but rather give thanks unto God that he hath made manifest unto you our imperfections, that ye may learn to be more wise than we have been."). I wonder if the "new-fangled notion" was plural marriage, and if plural marriage had become, for her, a dealbreaker in terms of the authority of the Church led west by Brigham Young. She did that too: "At one time my husband came to me and asked me if I had heard certain rumors about spiritual marriages, or anything of the kind; and assured me that if I had, that they were without foundation; that there was no such doctrine, and never should be with his knowledge, or consent. I know that he had no other wife or wives than myself, in any sense, either spiritual or otherwise." (1 October 1879 - "Last Testimony of Sister Emma," Saint's Herald, Vol. 26, No 19 p. 289.) Again, Emma's approach to polygamy was inconsistent, with her acknowledging and accepting it at times and denouncing and attempting to thwart it at others. From the above link: "Allen J. Stout, who served as a bodyguard for Joseph, recounted a conversation he overheard in the Mansion House between Joseph and his tormented wife. A summary of his account states that 'from moments of passionate denunciation [Emma] would subside into tearful repentance and acknowledge that her violent opposition to that principle was instigated by the power of darkness; that Satan was doing his utmost to destroy her, etc. And solemnly came the Prophet's inspired warning: "Yes, and he will accomplish your overthrow, if you do not heed my counsel."'" "Maria Jane Johnston, who lived with Emma as a servant girl, recalled the Prophet's wife looking very downcast one day and telling her that the principle of plural marriage was right and came from Heavenly Father. 'What I said I have got [to] repent of,' lamented Emma. 'The principle is right but I am jealous hearted. Now never tell anybody that you heard me find fault with that [principle;] we have got to humble ourselves and repent of it.'" "At one time my husband came to me and asked me if I had heard certain rumors about spiritual marriages, or anything of the kind; and assured me that if I had, that they were without foundation; that there was no such doctrine, and never should be with his knowledge, or consent. I know that he had no other wife or wives than myself, in any sense, either spiritual or otherwise." What are we to make of the inconsistency? For me, I think claiming that Emma "flatly denied plural marriage" is a half-truth that needs context and clarification. Well, yes. Her sons reported that statement in 1879. We have other historical sources indicating that she had at times accepted the principle of plural marriage ("The principle is right but I am jealous hearted. Now never tell anybody that you heard me find fault with that [principle;] we have got to humble ourselves and repent of it."). So did Emma accept the principle of plural marriage or not? A "flat" answer either way does not seem to work. No. But then, they also did not include the "super relevant quotes" above (e.g., "'The principle is right but I am jealous hearted. Now never tell anybody that you heard me find fault with that [principle;] we have got to humble ourselves and repent of it.'"). The YouTube video was not, I think, intended to be an exhaustive analysis of Emma's particularized statements about any given topic, but rather an assessment of her life overall. Indeed, I think Don Bradley was speaking against the idea of using Emma "a premise in arguments about polygamy, succession, or Church history," but rather treating her "as a full person." Thank you for taking time to share your thoughts. -Smac