Polygamy Denials In Times & Seasons

[liz3564]

This may be a question for another thread, but I'm curious if we really know for a fact that Joseph did lie to Emma.  I would be curious if any Church history buffs are aware of the actual timeline.  Did Joseph actually secretly take another wife without Emma knowing about it, or did he tell Emma about polygamy and Emma (justifiably) wasn't happy about it, but begrudgingly agreed to it, and the second marriage followed?

Liz - sounds like you need to read the anti-mormon bible - RSR . Bushman makes it quite clear that he decieved Emma. At the very least, he had entered into other marriages prior to Emma's knowledge.

Sorry...I've only read the regular Bible.

Seriously, I would like to read "Rough Stone Rolling". I've heard it's fairly accurate as far as timelines.

Are there any other references? This is something that has always intrigued me.

If some astute scholar who has some answers on this wants to start another thread, be my guest. I suppose I shouldn't inadvertantly derail two polygamy threads in one week!

[The Dude]

Once you have decided for yourself the level of deception Joseph Smith used to keep Emma from knowing about his polygamous relationships, it needs to be put into perspective. We should quickly cut through the rationalizations. The question to ask yourself is: If you were in Emma's shoes, would you have wanted to be treated like that (lied to, information withheld, direct questions dodged, basically kept in the dark)? This will tell you, assuredly, if Joseph Smith was "right" or "wrong" in what he did.

[Confidential Informant]

Illegality and deception are the two key words here.

Good. Then you'll be happy to know that Smith practice of plural marriage in Illinois was not a violation of the illinois law at the time.

C.I.

[stn9]

Technically, all denials of a plural marriage system (under whatever name) being practiced in and espoused by the Church are correct. The Chruch, as an institution, never preached or practiced any plural marriage system in Joseph Smith's lifetime. Joseph Smith taught the principle privately and practiced it as privately as possible.

Again, just to be technical.

[mocnarf]

Maybe Emma knew all about Joseph's other wives, but lied about it to save face. Now, that would keep Joseph's integrety intact.

[The Dude]

Maybe Emma knew all about Joseph's other wives, but lied about it to save face. Now, that would keep Joseph's integrety intact.

There's a long history of making her into a scapegoat over this. It's quite sad.

[T-Shirt]

The only acceptable rationalization for lying is when telling the truth would endanger lives.

[Cowpie]

The lying and deceit and self-protection that went on by the church leaders in this instance would seem to indicate a lack of faith on the part of those leaders that God would take care of them. It also raises questions about the nature of a God who would put his people into a situtation like that, or the nature of a God who requires lying and deceit on his behalf.

[T-Shirt]

The lying and deceit and self-protection that went on by the church leaders in this instance would seem to indicate a lack of faith on the part of those leaders that God would take care of them. It also raises questions about the nature of a God who would put his people into a situtation like that, or the nature of a God who requires lying and deceit on his behalf.

So, are you saying that since a few dishonourable men broke their promise and revealed secrets to the world, and in so doing, they distorted the real facts of the matter, this obligated the faithful saints to then reveal the real facts to the world, even though they had covenanted not to?

T-Shirt

[Deborah]

What I find really troubling is the deception of Emma right from the beginning of Joseph's polygamous relationships.  If he had to hide it from his own wife, then he knew he was doing something wrong, IMO.

Doing something wrong? No, I think he just knew Emma well enough to know how she would react and he didn't want to face her.

[Deborah]

What about other things? Is there a pattern? How about Joseph

[Cowpie]

The lying and deceit and self-protection that went on by the church leaders in this instance would seem to indicate a lack of faith on the part of those leaders that God would take care of them. It also raises questions about the nature of a God who would put his people into a situtation like that, or the nature of a God who requires lying and deceit on his behalf.

So, are you saying that since a few dishonourable men broke their promise and revealed secrets to the world, and in so doing, they distorted the real facts of the matter, this obligated the faithful saints to then reveal the real facts to the world, even though they had covenanted not to?

T-Shirt

Hardly. Back up a step.

[T-Shirt]

The lying and deceit and self-protection that went on by the church leaders in this instance would seem to indicate a lack of faith on the part of those leaders that God would take care of them. It also raises questions about the nature of a God who would put his people into a situtation like that, or the nature of a God who requires lying and deceit on his behalf.

So, are you saying that since a few dishonourable men broke their promise and revealed secrets to the world, and in so doing, they distorted the real facts of the matter, this obligated the faithful saints to then reveal the real facts to the world, even though they had covenanted not to?

T-Shirt

Hardly. Back up a step.

Care to explain what you mean by "back up a step"?

T-Shirt

[Cowpie]

The lying and deceit and self-protection that went on by the church leaders in this instance would seem to indicate a lack of faith on the part of those leaders that God would take care of them. It also raises questions about the nature of a God who would put his people into a situtation like that, or the nature of a God who requires lying and deceit on his behalf.

So, are you saying that since a few dishonourable men broke their promise and revealed secrets to the world, and in so doing, they distorted the real facts of the matter, this obligated the faithful saints to then reveal the real facts to the world, even though they had covenanted not to?

T-Shirt

Hardly. Back up a step.

Care to explain what you mean by "back up a step"?

T-Shirt

I mean you've taken it to a whole new level, and I really don't understand your logic in doing so, but it's okay, what you speak of is more of the sort of clandestine drama that demonstrates the lack of faith in God to lead and care for his people, if you accept that kind of God, or ultimately question the nature of a God who requires lying and deceipt on his behalf.

[Teancum]

Is this out of context?

I said context of time and place which the critics of either our American history or Church history seem to ignore.

In fact in thinking about these statements, for the majority of the church at the time they were absolutely true. Not everyone was authorized to practice polygamy in the beginning, and even later it had certain regulations that had to be met.

In fact in thinking about these statements, for the majority of the church at the time they were absolutely true. Not everyone was authorized to practice polygamy in the beginning, and even later it had certain regulations that had to be met.

Sure. THe majority did not even know about it then. So the truth was withheld from them as well.

But do you really think that justifies hiding it? The main leaders were certianly doing it and lying about it.

Teancum.

[Deborah]

But do you really think that justifies hiding it? The main leaders were certianly doing it and lying about it.

Not if they were under oath not to reveal anything at that time.

[Teancum]

If you were to press me about information that was none of your business on an issue that would cause harm to people if I revealed it you are darn straight I'd lie to you.

[Teancum]

But do you really think that justifies hiding it?  The main leaders were certianly doing it and lying about it.

Not if they were under oath not to reveal anything at that time.

Wow. An oath to whom? Each other? I highly doubt you would apply these situational ethics so easily to any other group doing such things.

Teancum

[Tarski]

What about other things? Is there a pattern? How about Joseph

[Teancum]

But do you really think that justifies hiding it?  The main leaders were certianly doing it and lying about it.

Not if they were under oath not to reveal anything at that time.

I conspire with Jimmy to commit a crime. Rob a bank let's say. I let two other people that work at the bank know I am going to rob the bank and tell them if they keep my secret and leave the door unlocker and swear an oath to me to do so I will share the take.

I rob the bank.

The police figure out someone left the door unlocked.

So they question all the employees. Whenthey get to the two I know they deny they left the door unlocked. They have an oath with me after all.

They are also asked if they know any suspects. They so, nope.

I guess they were not lying.

Teancum

[NoSmiles]

What about other things? Is there a pattern? How about Joseph

[Deborah]

Wow.  An oath to whom?  Each other?  I highly doubt you would apply these situational ethics so easily to any other group doing such things.

I have made covenants not to reveal certain things in the temple. I've taken an oath not to do so. Is it situational ethics to decline to respond in the affirmative if someone blurts out what they shouldn't and I'm asked to confirm?

I don't even know if an oath was made but it sounds like some kind of covenant was made to God and to the prophet that certain things would not be revealed publically at that time.

[Deborah]

You do realize that he used the very seer stone used in translating the BoM for looking for treasure for a group of treasure hunters don't you? (not "mining"  ).

Oh, my, what gleeful gloating!

Of course I first have to believe those stories, which I don't. Hearsay and second hand information.

[Deborah]

Why has he tried to mislead people from the truth of his actual history?

And who are you to say what his actual history is. There have been so many stories, so much speculation, that much of what has been said cannot be believed. I believe the "actual" history is in the doctrines Joseph taught and in the fruits of his church.

[T-Shirt]

I mean you've taken it to a whole new level, and I really don't understand your logic in doing so, but it's okay, what you speak of is more of the sort of clandestine drama that demonstrates the lack of faith in God to lead and care for his people, if you accept that kind of God, or ultimately question the nature of a God who requires lying and deceipt on his behalf.

What on earth are you talking about? Let's pretend for a minute that you are Joseph Smith and that the Lord has revealed the principle of plural marriage to you. He instructs you that it is not for the entire Church at this time, but only for a select few. You covenant not to reveal it to the world and put those who are instructed about it under the same covenant.

One of these persons, later, gets angry and breaks his covenant and begins telling people about the practice. In the process, he also embellishes and distorts the truth of the matter, thus creating all manner of rumors. The accusations fly.

You and those who have been instructed are still under covenant. What actions do you take when confronted with these accusations?

T-Shirt