Why Do Many Restorationist Sects Of The Lds Church Disbelieve Js Ever Practiced Polygamy?

[Kenngo1969]

But the fact that it happened [plural marriage was instituted], and was initiated by Joseph Smith, seems like a pretty well established and known fact to me. It just so happens to be an ‘inconvenient truth.’

Oh, man! Just as the thread gets interesting, somebody has to completely ruin it by quoting Al Gore!

[bluebell]

The official position of the RLDS Church was that Joseph Smith did not practice plural marriage. However, there was a footnote of sorts which said that if he did he was wrong to do it.

Thanks Allan (and Sandy!) for the info. The above statement is what i'm really wondering about, especially as it fits in with the BOM scripture that specifically states that polygamy is acceptable to the Lord under certain circumstances.

How did the RLDS square their position, which seems to be that polygamy is never acceptable, with their own scriptures which seems to contradict it?

[cinepro]

My position is that Joseph did not practice plural marriage as we think of it, or as it was later practiced in Utah. He was sealed to a number of women but that was it. No physical relations took place in my opinion. DNA research has proved that none of the children attributed to the Prophet through plural wives, and who were told by their mothers that Joseph was their father, were his. I think that evidence is persuasive as he had no trouble at all fathering children with Emma.

Two things.

First, there are still three possible children that haven't been confirmed or denied with DNA testing:

http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/DNA.htm

Second, DNA testing isn't the only way to show that Joseph consummated a plural marriage. Another evidence would be if Joseph or one of the women themselves actually said that they had consummated the marriage. I'm not clear what the state of reproductive science was in the 1800's, but I'm pretty sure people had figured out the birds and the bees by then, and thus a woman telling her child that Joseph Smith was their father seems like a pretty strong claim for consummation having taken place, regardless of whether the event resulted in children.

[dougtheavenger]

I know that the RLDS and Community of Christ, and maybe other groups as well, deny that JS ever practiced polygamy. I'm curious to understand why?

Thanks.

Genetic research by Ugo Perego has failed to confirm a single descendant of Joseph Smith through any woman other than Emma Smith. Five likely candidates have been ruled out including Fanny Alger’s first son and his male descendants. In a couple cases, genetic research also confirmed the paternity of boys as that of their mother’s legal husband and refuted gossip that surrounded their paternity for 170 years.

http://www.josephsmithjr.org/the-news/60-smith-descendants-other-wives

[bluebell]

Genetic research by Ugo Perego has failed to confirm a single descendant of Joseph Smith through any woman other than Emma Smith. Five likely candidates have been ruled out including Fanny Alger’s first son and his male descendants. In a couple cases, genetic research also confirmed the paternity of boys as that of their mother’s legal husband and refuted gossip that surrounded their paternity for 170 years.

http://www.josephsmithjr.org/the-news/60-smith-descendants-other-wives

I've read that. It is very interesting. I'm not really looking to argue whether or not he actually ever had more than one wife, but i'm trying to understand why these groups claim that no true prophet COULD or SHOULD have more than one wife, given the scriptural support of the practice.

[webbles]

I've read that. It is very interesting. I'm not really looking to argue whether or not he actually ever had more than one wife, but i'm trying to understand why these groups claim that no true prophet COULD or SHOULD have more than one wife, given the scriptural support of the practice.

I'd say that they claim that there is no scriptural support of the practice. This page (http://restorationbookstore.org/articles/nopoligamy/jsfp-vol1/chp18.htm) has an explanation on why Jacob 2:30 is actually a condemnation of polygamy instead of a possible loophole. The D&C section is explained away by saying that it was entirely made up Brigham Young and attributed to Joseph. And the Bible scriptures are explained way in the same manner that other Christians use.

[dougtheavenger]

I've read that. It is very interesting. I'm not really looking to argue whether or not he actually ever had more than one wife, but i'm trying to understand why these groups claim that no true prophet COULD or SHOULD have more than one wife, given the scriptural support of the practice.

The scriptures used to argue against polygamy are certainly weak. I think the strongest is that a Bishop "should be husband to one wife". This may be a translation issue or a temporal commandment like Jacob's commandment to the Nephites to discontinue plural marriage. The categoric condemnation of plural marriage obviously flies in the face of the Old Testiment.

[bluebell]

I'd say that they claim that there is no scriptural support of the practice. This page (http://restorationbookstore.org/articles/nopoligamy/jsfp-vol1/chp18.htm) has an explanation on why Jacob 2:30 is actually a condemnation of polygamy instead of a possible loophole.

I looked over the writing, and maybe i missed it, but i did not see anything that addressed this scripture:

Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes. For if I will, saith the Lord of hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people: otherwise, they shall hearken unto these things.

They address the 'otherwise' part, which obvious speaks to the fact that polygamy is an abomination unless it is a commandment. They don't address the 'for if I will, I will command my people' part though, not that i could find anyway. And it's that specific part that i'm wondering about.

[Deborah]

I think she also knew that if she went west with the saints, Brigham would have tried to take her as a "spiritual wife" (as he did others of Joseph's wives) and that would have been more than she could stand. She truly disliked the man.

I've always found that interesting because Joseph and Brigham were very close and Joseph trusted Brigham completely. It is also interesting that in the last great council Joseph held with leaders of the church before his death, Emma was not included though other women were. I wonder if Emma was jealous of the time spent with Brigham and the fact she was left out at the end.

[Deborah]

It would be nice to have a complete record of everything that took place at that time but we don't and so everything is speculation. The direction one speculates based on what scattered evidence we have depends on where they are in relation to their standing in the church. Faithful members firmly grounded seem to give the benefit of the doubt while others love to form the worst picture they can of the man and the times.

[dougtheavenger]

I know that the RLDS and Community of Christ, and maybe other groups as well, deny that JS ever practiced polygamy. I'm curious to understand why?

Thanks.

If I were tasked with inventing an argument against polygamy this is what I would say.

In times past sexual practices were countinenced by GOD that he later condemed and commanded His children to refrain from. For example, in the first generation of Adam and Eve's children, brothers and sisters married and produced offspring. At the time there was no other way to propagate the human race. For generations incest was permissable. Even Abraham was married to his half-sister, Sarah. However, during Moses' time as prophet, GOD instituted a number of new restrictions on sexual behavior. Chief among these was the prohibition on incest. In the New Testiment, GOD instituted further restrictions, among them, a prohibition on plural marriage.

The only problem, I would have selling this phoney baloney argument is the near total lack of scripture to support it, and of course, history. Official monogamy is a Roman and Geek cultural tradition Europeans inherited from the Roman Empire. It was originally about keeping the inheritance of property clear and unambiguous not sexual fidelity. Nevertheless, this Roman law combined with Christian condemnation of adultery has produced the "moral monogamous" mentality we see today.

[bluebell]

If I were tasked with inventing an argument against polygamy this is what I would say.

In times past sexual practices were countinenced by GOD that he later condemed and commanded His children to refrain from. For example, in the first generation of Adam and Eve's children, brothers and sisters married and produced offspring. At the time ther was no other way to propagate the human race. For generations incest was permissable. Even Abraham was married to his half-sister, Sarah. However, during Moses' time as prophet, GOD instituted a number of new restrictions on sexual behavior. Chief among these was the prohibition on incest. In the New Testiment, GOD instituted further restrictions, among them, a prohibition on plural marriage.

The only problem, I would have selling this phoney baloney argument is the near total lack of scripture to support it and, of course history. Official monogamy is a Roman and Geek cultural inheritance. It was about keeping inheritance of property clear and unambiguous not sexual fidelity. Neverthe less, this Roman law combined with Christian condemnation of adultery has produced the moral monogamous mentality we see today.

Your argument isn't too bad, but i think it kind of falls apart (for those who legitimately use it) when it's realized that God produced the 12 tribes of Israel, His chosen people, through polygamy and that without the plural marriage, the 12 tribes would not have existed.

That's certainly not proof either but it does seem to imply that sometimes God uses polygamy for His purposes and if then, why not with JS?

[webbles]

I looked over the writing, and maybe i missed it, but i did not see anything that addressed this scripture:

Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes. For if I will, saith the Lord of hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people: otherwise, they shall hearken unto these things.

They address the 'otherwise' part, which obvious speaks to the fact that polygamy is an abomination unless it is a commandment. They don't address the 'for if I will, I will command my people' part though, not that i could find anyway. And it's that specific part that i'm wondering about.

It does address that (though it took a few re-readings for me to find it the first time since it is so different from how I read the scripture). Here's the scripture with the "correct" interpretation in brackets:

For if I will, saith the Lord of hosts, raise up [righteous] seed unto me, I will command my people [the Lord will be their commander—He will give them commandments to obey]: otherwise [if the Lord is not their commander; or they do not obey His commandments], they shall hearken unto these things [they shall practice the sins of polygamy].

So, what they say the scripture says is that God will raise up righteous seed by giving commandments to his people ("for if I will raise up seed unto me, I will command my people"). And if the people do not accept God ("otherwise"), they will practice polygamy ("they shall hearken unto these things"). The biggest change is that the phrase "these things" does not mean monogamy (as LDS read it) but polygamy.

[ERMD]

and many other doctrines that are now increasingly becoming an embarrasment to the church.

I'd be interested in seeing a list of these "many other doctrines."

Would you start a thread and elaborate?

[bluebell]

It does address that (though it took a few re-readings for me to find it the first time since it is so different from how I read the scripture). Here's the scripture with the "correct" interpretation in brackets:

For if I will, saith the Lord of hosts, raise up [righteous] seed unto me, I will command my people [the Lord will be their commander—He will give them commandments to obey]: otherwise [if the Lord is not their commander; or they do not obey His commandments], they shall hearken unto these things [they shall practice the sins of polygamy].

So, what they say the scripture says is that God will raise up righteous seed by giving commandments to his people ("for if I will raise up seed unto me, I will command my people"). And if the people do not accept God ("otherwise"), they will practice polygamy ("they shall hearken unto these things"). The biggest change is that the phrase "these things" does not mean monogamy (as LDS read it) but polygamy.

That is interesting. Looks like they added the word 'righteous' and then moved some commas around. I guess that would be a way to get around that verse.

Kind of ignores precident though-that God had already used polygamy to raise seed unto Himself with Jacob/Israel and the 12 tribes of Israel. Their different reading of Jacob in the BOM makes me wonder how they handle that part of the Old Testament. Their interpretation solves one problem but seems to create a new contradiction with a different set of scriptures.

[inquiringmind]

Ditto! If JS were a prophet and if the BOM is true how do you deny that he had more than one wife. And why is it ok for BY but not JS. That's the one I never understood.

I'm confused here.

If you define polygamy as having intimate relations with more than one wife during one's mortal life, doesn't the LDS Church deny that Joseph was a polygamist?

Also, I believe there are records indicating that Joseph was sealed (in some cases "for time and eternity") to the wives of other active LDS members?

Does the expression "for time and eternity" necessarily imply an intimate marital relationship here in this life (or is it possible that these plural marriages were something other than polygamous)?

Did Joseph lie (a few months before his death) when he said he had only one wife?

[dougtheavenger]

I'm confused here.

If you define polygamy as having intimate relations with more than one wife during one's mortal life, doesn't the LDS Church deny that Joseph was a polygamist?

Also, I believe there are records indicating that Joseph was sealed (in some cases "for time and eternity") to the wives of other active LDS members?

Does the expression "for time and eternity" necessarily imply an intimate marital relationship here in this life (or is it possible that these plural marriages were something other than polygamous)?

Did Joseph lie (a few months before his death) when he said he had only one wife?

The only records I have seen of sealings involving Joseph Smith were dated 1846; two years after his death. The Navou temple was not completed until 1846.

[MelvinCJohnson]

I don’t know exactly why, but it might have something to do with the fact that polygamy is a distasteful doctrine to a lot of people. It is hard to understand and come to terms with. But the fact that it happened, and was initiated by Joseph Smith, seems like a pretty well established and known fact to me. It just so happens to be an ‘inconvenient truth.’

In the case of the Community of Christ, they seem to be moving further and further away from their Mormon roots, and trying to move more in the direction of mainstream Protestantism. If this is indeed the case, it would only make sense for them to disavow themselves with JS and polygamy as much as possible.

I know next to nothing about other Restorationist sects. Perhaps our own bookofmormonlvr could enlighten us - or anybody more knowledgeable about the subject.

Isaac Sheen, in the first issue of the True Latter Day Saint's Herald, the RLDS newspaper out of Lamoni, IA, clearly identified JS as the fount of LDS polygamy and, more importantly, for the RLDS, had supposedly repented of his error. Joseph Smith III and others in the RLDS leadership quickly suppressed both heresies. Part of JSIII's motivation, I believe, was his mother's insistence that her husband never did any such thing, although the evidence has become quite clear over the last few decades that she was either self-delusional or deliberately false about the issue. The work by RLDS historians like Alma Blair and other CoC historians have answered the question. Many of the Restorationists simply won't believe the facts. Nothing new with that; all denominations and belief systems have followers that refuse to face facts.

[Deborah]

If you define polygamy as having intimate relations with more than one wife during one's mortal life, doesn't the LDS Church deny that Joseph was a polygamist?

Who defines it as that. Polygamy is marriage to more than one spouse. And whether he had intimate relations with all of them is questionable. In any case the "Church" doesn't deny this, it's the break-off groups that do. This is all the church has to say on it from their website:

After God revealed the doctrine of plural marriage to Joseph Smith in 1831 and commanded him to live it, the Prophet, over a period of years, cautiously taught the doctrine to some close associates. Eventually, he and a small number of Church leaders entered into plural marriages in the early years of the Church. Those who practiced plural marriage at that time, both male and female, experienced a significant trial of their faith. The practice was so foreign to them that they needed and received personal inspiration from God to help them obey the commandment.

Also, I believe there are records indicating that Joseph was sealed (in some cases "for time and eternity") to the wives of other active LDS members?

Does the expression "for time and eternity" necessarily imply an intimate marital relationship here in this life (or is it possible that these plural marriages were something other than polygamous)?

Yes to the first. When Joseph was given the sealing power this wasn't fully understood. Had he lived longer he might have understood it better. In any case men were sealed to men, etc. It was an act of uniting people in eternity and not necessarily according to family relationships.

In answer to the second part, No. Once again you are assuming that polygamous means intimate though where you get that definition I don't know. Many of those sealings were only and for eternity. He may have been intimate with some of his wives, but not all those who were sealed to him.

Did Joseph lie (a few months before his death) when he said he had only one wife?

Not knowing to what you refer and the exact circumstances I can't answer that. However, I will ask this. Did the people who hid the Jews from the Nazi's lie to the authorities? I don't know how many times I have to point out that liar scripturally speaking doesn't apply to such circumstances. As 1 John 2:22 defines it "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son." The condemnation of lying in other circumstances is for those who bear false witness and thereby harm others. Lying to protect others is not condemned in the Bible or other scriptures.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

For the reasons spelled out in "Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy" by Richard and Pamela Price. If you really want to know why, that is the first place to start. And look! I will will it easy for you...

http://restorationbookstore.org/jsfp-index.htm

*Now you need never ask the question again

[Alla]

For the reasons spelled out in "Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy" by Richard and Pamela Price. If you really want to know why, that is the first place to start. And look! I will will it easy for you...

http://restorationbo.../jsfp-index.htm

*Now you need never ask the question again

The LDS Church' date=' which has its headquarters in Utah, has taught for over a century that Joseph Smith was the author of Mormon polygamy—and the religious public has been eager to believe the story. But the truth is that Brigham Young and his family and friends were the ones who brought polygamy into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and made it a cardinal doctrine. All of the writings of Joseph Smith (published during his lifetime) condemn polygamy, but after his death Brigham and the other polygamous apostles published polygamist documents which they ascribed to Joseph. As evidence of Joseph's innocence, he had no children by polygamous wives (even though the purpose of practicing polygamy—according to LDS authorities—was to have many children born of polygamy). Brigham had a total of fifty-six children (John J. Stewart, Brigham Young and His Wives: And the True Story of Plural Marriage, 82).[/quote']

So many opinions. Some say J.S. didn't have sexual relationship with his wives, some say he did.

[Palerider]

I've always found that interesting because Joseph and Brigham were very close and Joseph trusted Brigham completely. It is also interesting that in the last great council Joseph held with leaders of the church before his death, Emma was not included though other women were. I wonder if Emma was jealous of the time spent with Brigham and the fact she was left out at the end.

As I recall in the book Emma smith, Mormon Enigma, after Joseph's death she went to his office to gather his papers and personal belongings but was blocked by Brigham who said the personal effects and papers belonged to the church and wouldn't let her have them.

As a child growing up I still remember a certain animosity in the church for Emma because she had chosen to stay in Nauvoo. From what I have read, it seemed to be a constant irritation to Brigham. It was only as a teenager that I saw that stance towards her begin to soften and it has continued as time went on.

[bluebell]

For the reasons spelled out in "Joseph Smith Fought Polygamy" by Richard and Pamela Price. If you really want to know why, that is the first place to start. And look! I will will it easy for you...

http://restorationbookstore.org/jsfp-index.htm

*Now you need never ask the question again

This is actually the same thing that someone else linked to earlier, so share with you my concerns about how this site get's around Jacob's words about polygamy in the BOM, because that's what the OP is actually about-not whether or not JS ever had more than one wife, but why people who accept the BOM as the word of God claim that polygamy is never condoned by Him.

I've read in the link (webbles helped me to find it) how there is an alternate interpretation of Jacob's words on polygamy, which is interesting. It does make a loophole for condemning polygamy straight across the board.

My question with the alternate interpretation though is how it deals with the 12 tribes of Israel. The alternate interpretation kind of ignores OT precident-that God had already used polygamy to raise seed unto Himself with Jacob/Israel and the 12 tribes of Israel.

The different reading of Jacob in the BOM makes me wonder how you handle that part of the Old Testament. Your interpretation solves one problem (plural marriage in the BOM) but it creates a new one because it creates a contradiction between what God said in the BOM (that plural marriage could never righteously be practiced by God's people) and what He actually did in the Old Testament when plural marriage was the means which led to the very existence of God's chosen people.

[bluebell]

As I recall in the book Emma smith, Mormon Enigma, after Joseph's death she went to his office to gather his papers and personal belongings but was blocked by Brigham who said the personal effects and papers belonged to the church and wouldn't let her have them.

As a child growing up I still remember a certain animosity in the church for Emma because she had chosen to stay in Nauvoo. From what I have read, it seemed to be a constant irritation to Brigham. It was only as a teenager that I saw that stance towards her begin to soften and it has continued as time went on.

I think the biggest problem was that both Emma and BY were kind of right, and both were kind of wrong. Neither one seemed to be willing to compromise or let JS belong to the other one but each wanted the whole man for themselves (or in BY's case, for the church) completely.

[Palerider]

I think the biggest problem was that both Emma and BY were kind of right, and both were kind of wrong. Neither one seemed to be willing to compromise or let JS belong to the other one but each wanted the whole man for themselves (or in BY's case, for the church) completely.

I agree. From Brigham's standpoint there was a historical value as well as possibly material that in his mind needed "protection" shall we say, that would have been a great motivator for him to seize everything he could. It wouldn't surprise me if much of it is in "The Vault" at Church headquarters, Joseph's seer stone being a prime example.

From Emma's perspective, Joseph was her beloved husband and the father of her children therefore his personal effects belonged to her and them, not any institution. However she too may have wanted to protect his reputation from his critics.