What if polygamy was never practiced?

[charity]

maxrep, I have looked and cannot find the post which contained the inforamtion. It was on this board, and I am going to start a new topic asking for it.

Could Emma's son have fabricated the account? I suppose. I don't see much to such an account rescuing the family integrity.

[Nighthawke]

maxrep12: There is a very touching account of Emma's last hours. I can't put my hand to the reference. But I am sure someone on the board knows. At her last moments, Emma called out to Joseph. She told her son who was attending her that she saw Joseph, and he was holding their baby in his arms, waiting for her. Emma loved Joseph as he loved her. I am sure she would not appreciate your insults to her beloved husband.

Try "Mormon Enigma", p. 303-304.

[maxrep12]

The story ties loose ends together, reunites his parents and emphasizes what appears to be their saved position. With Josephs name being dragged through the dirt in some circles, this story does polish things up a bit. Who wants to be the son of a charlatan? Creative story telling for faith claims is nothing new. Brother Dunn taught us that lesson.

Again, I am not saying that I am the keeper of knowledge unseen. There are motivations and reasons why people lie, deceive, and cheat. It is entirely possible that the story is true, or false.

Many aside from myself would ascert that Joseph made much of Emma's life an exercise in Anguish. These same folk wished Emma had seen better days.

If their is absolutely no possibility that Joseph was a fraud, then I would be out of bounds now wouldn't I?

[Dale]

Not sure we would be having this speculative conversation if it had not been practiced. But basically without D.&C. 132 no Plurality of Gods idea. The idea of exaltation would be non-existent. Their would be few LDS temples. No need for many temples without Temple work.

[charity]

Thanks, nighthawke. Unfortunately that is not one of the books on my library shelves. I hope those who do will look it up. I would like to know the circumstances. When it was recorded, by whom. Self-recorded, etc.

maxrep12, your suppositions are as likely as any other. If Joseph were not a prophet, that is.

But you know, people who put up the anti-Mormon line are such pessimists. Everyone is lying. Everyone is a fraud or charlatan as you said. Everyone involved with the organization of the Church. People who try to do good are deluded and victims of the wicked. Such a sad view of the world.

[juliann]

Juliann asks that Anna justify her thoughts based on "Network Theory."  I do not know what Network Theory is and a simple explanantion would be appreciated.  It is more meaningful that a summary be given along with a source in such a discussion.

Two problems here....Anna begins her thread by claiming she has "studied" polygamy for some time. She then proceeds to make assumption after assumption...which anyone who has studied can document as questionable immediately. I think that in cases like these the person making unsupported statements is required to back them up. For instance, this:

Posted: Nov 12 2005, 11:51 AM

[Uncle Dale]

...Given the results of these studies, the logical assumption is that polygamy would increase religious committment because it increased personal loyalty to friends and relatives. Monogamy would not create the web of relationships that polygamy did....

Feel free to ignore this question, if you do not wish to get off-track in your

discussion right now -- but have you (or others, perhaps) ever made an

attempt at equating this "web of relationships" with the seemingly cryptic

message of Jacob 2:30a: "For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed

unto me, I will command my people..." ???

I'm just curious. Both my wife and I have lived among polygamous and

polyandrous families in Nepal --- Neither of us saw much evidence that the

practice resulted in "increased religious committment," but it did tend to keep

scattered small lots of property in a single farming family and uphold a rigid

social order. This class-centered social phenomenon was less noticeable among

the Buddhists than the Hindus, but I saw evidence of the rigid class order within

both groups. Younger plural wives (or second and third plural wives) seemed

to fit into a very narrow, "bottom of the heap" class niche -- and, perhaps, in

that sense, they were something like "captives" of their situations and religion.

But then again, none of what I saw may be applicable to your ongoing discussion.

Uncle Dale

[maxrep12]

maxrep12, your suppositions are as likely as any other. If Joseph were not a prophet, that is.

But you know, people who put up the anti-Mormon line are such pessimists. Everyone is lying. Everyone is a fraud or charlatan as you said. Everyone involved with the organization of the Church. People who try to do good are deluded and victims of the wicked. Such a sad view of the world.

According to the first vision, the entirety of mankind is following a fraud or a charlatan, save mormonism. How is that for pessimism?

Charity,

you completely missunderstand me -

1. I hope God exists first of all.

2. I believe that it is much more reasonable that God exists than Joseph was a prophet.

3. I would prefer for the church to be true and to take my lumps as a nonbeliever than to live a life with out any god at all if I had a choice.

4. What I want or think does not change reality, and the same goes for everyone else!

[charity]

maxrep12 wrote: "According to the first vision, the entirety of mankind is following a fraud or a charlatan, save mormonism. How is that for pessimism?"

I don't think view that is exactly correct. A fraud doesn't believe what he is teaching. I think most pastors, priests, evangelists, really believe they are doing the right thing. And as far as they teach the truth they have, they are.

[maxrep12]

Charity,

I appreciate that you have kind things to say about other religeons, and I agree with you.

When God was speaking to Joseph, he didn't have those nice thoughts to share about other religions. One could say that God was pessimistic on that subject, or perhaps that Joseph was feeling a little pessimistic when he was recalling this encounter.

Of course I'm funnin with ya a little here! Please don't feel that those who no longer believe in this curious brand of religion are pessimistic or disagreable people. We are just not a part of the 1 in 10,000 individuals who will believe and actively participate in mormonism. I think if you tried to convert any one of your coworkers or friends, you may start to realize how normal and even keeled non mormons are.

[charity]

maxrep12: I hope you don't feel I mislead you that I don't know any non-Mormons. I know many. My entire birth family, except for 2 cousins, who joined the Church after I did, are not members of the Church. I have many friends who are non-Mormons. I don't know any anti-Mormons, personally, except those I see on this board. Most of the people I know are nice people, who are not rude. That is why I am so surprised when I see rudeness here. But that is another thread.

[juliann]

Feel free to ignore this question, if you do not wish to get off-track in your

discussion right now -- but have you (or others, perhaps) ever made an 

attempt at equating this "web of relationships" with the seemingly cryptic

message of Jacob 2:30a: "For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed

unto me, I will command my people..." ???

I see little reason to associate raising up seed with birth rate. So yes, I think network theory works quite well with this verse.

This class-centered social phenomenon was less noticeable among

the Buddhists than the Hindus, but I saw evidence of the rigid class order within

both groups. Younger plural wives (or second and third plural wives) seemed

to fit into a very narrow, "bottom of the heap" class niche -- and, perhaps, in

that sense, they were something like "captives" of their situations and religion.

I doubt that polygamy could exist without political control of women. No one ever goes beyond those situations to explore a situation where women had equal rights. That is what makes Mormon polygamy so intriguing....it played with contemporary social mores in unexpected ways such as giving them the vote and educating them. The problem with comparisons with groups who have complete political control over women is that this situation did not exist in Mormonism...not only that but Utah had the most permissive (and enlightened) divorce laws in the nation. That is why antis have to resort to the "brainwashing" rhetoric to maintain a platform to express their righteous indignation.

[Garden Girl]

Doesn't anyone find it just a little ironic that the Chosen people of God -- the House of Israel -- is the product of a polyamous marriage? JACOB, whose name was changed to Israel, had four wives who gave him a total of 12 sons, who became the 12 tribes of Israel:

Leah: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun (and Dinah a daughter)

Rachel: Joseph, Benjamin

Bilhah: Dan, Naphtali

Zilpah: Gad, Asher

Was this terrible? Outrageous?

Just as polygamy was under the Law in Jacob's time, I believe it was a revealed law in Joseph's time. Because the Church was in danger from the government because of polygamy, it was revealed in 1890 to Pres. Wilford Woodruff that the pactice must be stopped... he wrote in D&C Declaration No. 1 that he was shown by revelation that the temples would be seized and the ordinances would be stopped, both for the living and the dead. The First Presidency would be imprisoned, personal property of the saints would be confiscated.... The saints were to obey the law of the land. Therefore, in 1890 the practice was ceased.

The practice was instituted by command, it was stopped by command. Whether the Church is better off or not (in whose opinion) is irrelevant.

[Uncle Dale]

This class-centered social phenomenon was less noticeable among

the Buddhists than the Hindus, but I saw evidence of the rigid class order within

both groups. Younger plural wives (or second and third plural wives) seemed

to fit into a very narrow, "bottom of the heap" class niche -- and, perhaps, in

that sense, they were something like "captives" of their situations and religion.

I doubt that polygamy could exist without political control of women. No one ever goes beyond those situations to explore a situation where women had equal rights. That is what makes Mormon polygamy so intriguing....it played with contemporary social mores in unexpected ways such as giving them the vote and educating them. The problem with comparisons with groups who have complete political control over women is that this situation did not exist in Mormonism...not only that but Utah had the most permissive (and enlightened) divorce laws in the nation. That is why antis have to resort to the "brainwashing" rhetoric to maintain a platform to express their righteous indignation.

Thank you for taking the time to respond. Other than my own, first-hand

experiences in an entirely different culture and century, I have little information

upon which to base my perceptions, let alone any studied opinions of what went

on at Nauvoo, and in the west, in my ancestors' day and age.

My Great Grandmother Winegar of Fremont Co., Idaho came from an LDS

polygamous family, but I know very little of her story. Mostly I know about the

lives of her RLDS relatives, back in Iowa, (who were also my ancestral family). In

that regard I know just a little about what was then called "plural wifery" among

the followers of "Father Cutler." How the experiences of those secretive Iowa Saints

compared with the Brighamites, I'm not sure -- but my initial studies tell me that

life for the Cutlerite plural wives was not one of much equality.

Still, considering my own complex bloodline, I suppose I cannot say too much

overly critical about past life-styles. After all, without that daughter of that "plural"

Idaho family on my father's father's side of the tree, I would not even exist.

Uncle Dale

[charity]

Uncle Dale. Have you noticed that we don't refer to your religion as any kind of an -ite? Could you please respect our sensibilities and not refer to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as 'Brighamites.' It always sounds like a dig.

[Uncle Dale]

Doesn't anyone find it just a little ironic that the Chosen people of God -- the House of Israel -- is the product of a polyamous marriage?  JACOB, whose name was changed to Israel, had four wives who gave him a total of 12 sons, who became the 12 tribes of Israel...

There is another possibility -- that the 12 sons and 1 daughter of Jacob

were symbolic of an early confederacy of proto-Israelite tribes, and that

the biblical genealogical ties in that extended family were actually the

political constructs of a later day. In such a model, "Benjamin" would have

been the final Transjordanian tribe to join an existing "Israelite" confederacy,

some time prior to the reign of King Saul. In this historical reconstruction,

"Benjamin" would have been more closely "related" to the Ephraimites,

on the north (under whose protection the newcomers fell), than to "Judah"

on the south.

Of course, to those folks who take their biblical stories 100% literally, such an

explanation of "Jacob's polygamy" would probably make no sense at all -- and,

in fact, might sound downright irreligious.

Uncle Dale

[Uncle Dale]

Uncle Dale. Have you noticed that we don't refer to your religion as any kind of an -ite? Could you please respect our sensibilities and not refer to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as 'Brighamites.' It always sounds like a dig.

I don't mean it that way, believe me. -- And, when I get past the

1860s, I do not use the "ites" terminolgy except retrospectively.

This is the vocabulary I was brought up with, however. Living as a young

fellow in Idaho, I did not comprehend very well what my neighbors meant

in calling my family "apostates," or my cousins "Josephites" and "Reorganites."

Yes, I think those term have no modern use and should be avoided -- just

as they should have been avoided by my neighbors in Idaho years ago.

But, in referring to the 1845-1860 period, I will continue to selectively

use the "ites" terms, when they best express my meaning.

Not long ago I went through this same sort of discussion with a correspondent

in the Disciples of Christ. She was a bit upset at my use of the old term

"Campbellite." But, when I explained that I only make use of the term for

that historical period before the Disciples became an organized denomination,

she consented to my use of the word (which is found all through the literature

of that period and in the writings of historians referring back to that period.

So, charity, I hope you will grant me that 1845-1860 "exemption," and I'll

try not to carry the terminology over into the modern era, where it might be

offensive and unnecessary (except when joking with USU78, of course)..

FAIR enough?

Uncle Dale

[Familyof4]

he wrote in D&C Declaration No. 1 that he was shown by revelation that the temples would be seized and the ordinances would be stopped, both for the living and the dead. The First Presidency would be imprisoned, personal property of the saints would be confiscated.... The saints were to obey the law of the land. Therefore, in 1890 the practice was ceased.

This means that the Goverment forced God to change his commandment...??

[charity]

Uncle Dale, I enjoy the shoot outs between you and USU78. And I will grant you the 1840-1860 exemption. And your Idaho neighbors should have had better manners.

Family of 4. God did not "change His commandments." God allowed the Saints to quit the practice of the principle of plural marriage for the time being. There is a difference. God did not repudiate the principle.

[Garden Girl]

Uncle Dale... I don't know how to use the quote/cut&paste feature... but...

I don't necessarily take all biblical stories to be 100% literal, so I don't think I fall into the category of "those folks." I was simply pointing out the genealogy of Jacob and his wives, and the 12 sons... each of whom eventually received a portion of land or "inheritance" in the land of Canaan... whatever political construct you want to suggest is up to you... I believe in the Abrahamic covenant, and the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob... GG

[juliann]

Doesn't anyone find it just a little ironic that the Chosen people of God -- the House of Israel -- is the product of a polyamous marriage? JACOB, whose name was changed to Israel, had four wives who gave him a total of 12 sons, who became the 12 tribes of Israel:

Leah: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun (and Dinah a daughter)

Rachel: Joseph, Benjamin

Bilhah: Dan, Naphtali

Zilpah: Gad, Asher

Was this terrible? Outrageous?

It gives the critics the vapors. I also find it pretty funny that anyone professing to beleive in the Bible is so willing to believe that God created his covenant people from 12, um...the word for illegitimate children....

[Uncle Dale]

Uncle Dale...  I don't know how to use the quote/cut&paste feature... but...

I don't necessarily take all biblical stories to be 100% literal, so I don't think I fall into the category of "those folks."  I was simply pointing out the genealogy of Jacob and his wives, and the 12 sons... each of whom eventually received a portion of land or "inheritance" in the land of Canaan... whatever political construct you want to suggest is up to you...  I believe in the Abrahamic covenant, and the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob...  GG

We may overlap in our personal realizations more so than I allowed

for in my brief remarks. If there can be such a thing in this modern era,

I would call myself a YHWHist. I certainly acknowledge God's covenant

with the "children of Abraham" to be a real and active force in the world.

Whether or not there ever was a real Abraham, or Isaac, or Jacob is not

something I think of much, I suppose. For me the dawning of biblical history

comes at about the period of Deborah and the other judges.

No doubt there was polygamy among Hebrew-speaking people during the "era of

the patriarchs." I'm drawn to the notion of an early Israelite confederacy of

various clans and tribes, however, not just because some "higher biblical

criticism" points in that direction, but because that explanation seems to provide

for a more inclusive covenant than the more traditional readings of the text.

I have always been much more interested in inclusive covenants than I have

in "chosen peoples;" --- though perhaps I should not voice that opinion too

loudly with my Jewish wife looking over my shoulder.

Uncle Dale

[Observer]

Feel free to ignore this question, if you do not wish to get off-track in your

discussion right now -- but have you (or others, perhaps) ever made an

[Nighthawke]

Oh please. Brigham Young regulary scolded the enlightened polygamous wives from the tabernacle pulpit about everything from bickering to the colors of their dresses. The colors of their dresses! 

That is funny . . . um, how about a reference?

[charity]

He did complain once about the women's skirts being so long they dragged in the mud. So that was doubly bad. The mud aspect, and also the waste of money in extra fabric.