Was Joseph Smith A Polygamist?

[Teancum]

What confuses me is the typically unchallenged assumption that polygyny is evil, per se.

What confuses me is that someone cannot see that it is inherintly evil because of the potential abuse that can come from it, particularly when used as God commands and men that are in power put forth the idea that they are provide better eternal prospects for the woman.

• It is a successful mating strategy that has worked for millennia.

I am not so sure this is correct. Sure from a biological standpoint I guess that this is true. But certainly not from an intimacy stand point. But yea it does work great in some species in the animal kingdom.

• It helps women and hurts men (the latter alone ought to mean that feminists should support it).

I think it hurts men and women. It makes having an intimatly emotional relationship between one man and one woman impossible. Women can often be neglected. So can the children. How can a man with 50 children really succesfully parent them all as a good father? It also hurts men be leaving fewer women to choose from for a mate.

• It ensures that children will have a father and a mother married to each other and an ongoing family for their support and rearing.
  

If father is spreading himself between 50 kids he is not able to be a father that is close and spending much time with his children. If dad is rarely around it is almost like there is no father.

• It increases women's independence.

This one is the one that I may give you.

• It makes girl children more "valuable" (hence, it makes abortion and infanticide for sexual selection of boys less likely, thus giving girls a better chance of survival).
  

I hardly think it makes children any more valuable then a monogamous relationship.

• 
  

• It impels men to make themselves more desirable to women so as to attract mate(s).
  

And it pits men against men in an awful way. Think The Lost Boys here.

• 
  

• It is a major improvement over serial polygyny and "mistressing" for both women and their children.
  

Neither are optimal.

I am failing to see the cause for so much rancor against the principle.

See above then. And below:

Jacob 2:

9 Wherefore, it burdeneth my soul that I should be constrained, because of the strict commandment which I have received from God, to ^aadmonish you according to your crimes, to enlarge the wounds of those who are already wounded, instead of consoling and healing their wounds; and those who have not been wounded, instead of feasting upon the pleasing word of God have daggers placed to pierce their souls and wound their delicate minds.

10 But, notwithstanding the greatness of the task, I must do according to the strict ^acommands of God, and tell you concerning your wickedness and abominations, in the presence of the pure in heart, and the broken heart, and under the glance of the ^bpiercing eye of the Almighty God.

31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and ^a of their ^b.

[Mark Beesley]

Buzzard,

You wrote:

I don't know the source for the numbers you cited. I certainly don't think there were 51. The usual number is around 33.

Frankly, it isn't much of a defense to argue . . .

It's not much of a defense because it needs no defense. Joseph Smith is the Prophet of the Restoration and he needs no defending for doing that which the Lord commanded.

[Log]

Joseph Smith is the Prophet of the Restoration and he needs no defending for doing that which the Lord commanded.

This deserves repeating.

[Damien the Leper]

This deserves repeating.

But what was Joseph actually commanded to do by God? How can we know? The answers to these questions do not come down to petitioning God as to whether or not JS was a prophet or if the BoM is actual scripture. That's pointless. To deduce truth from the phrase "If Joseph was a true prophet then" is logically fallacious. It shows poor thought processes, etc. Such notions should be rejected outright.

[LDSGuy]

"Other." When I was on my mission we had Q&A with Elder Vinas (with and enya). A question was asked about what we should tell people about polygamy. He said the church never practiced polygamy, but that it practiced plural marriage and that there is a difference.

[Damien the Leper]

"Other." When I was on my mission we had Q&A with Elder Vinas (with and enya). A question was asked about what we should tell people about polygamy. He said the church never practiced polygamy, but that it practiced plural marriage and that there is a difference.

That would be okay if there was no proof that JS had posterity with any of the other wives. The same would go for BY and other polygamists.

[Log]

But what was Joseph actually commanded to do by God? How can we know? The answers to these questions do not come down to petitioning God as to whether or not JS was a prophet or if the BoM is actual scripture. That's pointless. To deduce truth from the phrase "If Joseph was a true prophet then" is logically fallacious. It shows poor thought processes, etc. Such notions should be rejected outright.

That is your choice. You know where the door is, apparently.

[Damien the Leper]

That is your choice. You know where the door is, apparently.

Show otherwise that without real proof such IF/THEN statements hold any substantial ground. Perhaps you can go further and show in honor of Geometry a series of proof statements that substantiate a GIVEN. If you are unable to do so then your argument and kind drive by comment fail.

And isn't there a board rule about acting like a 'nanny' or 'playground monitor' unless you're a mod?

[Log]

Show otherwise that without real proof such IF/THEN statements hold any substantial ground. Perhaps you can go further and show in honor of Geometry a series of proof statements that substantiate a GIVEN. If you are unable to do so then your argument and kind drive by comment fail.

And isn't there a board rule about acting like a 'nanny' or 'playground monitor' unless you're a mod?

I'm not acting like a nanny or a playground monitor. I'm telling you that you know where the exit from the Church is.

Because you don't know a thing, it does not follow that nobody knows that thing. Some of us know things that you do not know. Things relevant to the topics discussed, even.

Edited April 5, 2012 by Log

[theplains]

"Other." When I was on my mission we had Q&A with Elder Vinas (with and enya). A question was asked about what we should tell people about polygamy. He said the church never practiced polygamy, but that it practiced plural marriage and that there is a difference.

According to the topic section of the church's web site, it seems polygamy is the same as plural marriage.

But in my opinion using the term "polygamy" has a more negative connotation.

Regards,

Jim

[Teancum]

Joseph Smith is the Prophet of the Restoration and he needs no defending for doing that which the Lord commanded.

This deserves repeating.

I do not believe God commands evil things and I believe polygamy was ultimatly evil. Based on my studies its early practice in the LDS Church did not seem godly. I could be wrong of course but that is where I am at with it these days.

[Log]

I do not believe God commands evil things and I believe polygamy was ultimatly evil.

That is your choice, too. I'm glad you recognize this is a value judgement on your part. FWIW, it's not something I would ever like to do.

[Evergrow]

From the evidence, it only seems Joseph practiced the "Sealing Ordinance", not Polygamy.

Emma specifically forbid Joseph from practicing Polygamy, and it appears that when Joseph said the Church wasn't practicing Polygamy, he was being honest, they were only practicing the Sealing Ordinance.

Actual Polygamy only seems to have started in Utah, and maybe slightly unofficially right before Joseph's death by some other Saints.

LDS need to get more accurate about this.

[theplains]

From the evidence, it only seems Joseph practiced the "Sealing Ordinance", not Polygamy.

Emma specifically forbid Joseph from practicing Polygamy, and it appears that when Joseph said the Church wasn't practicing Polygamy, he was being honest, they were only practicing the Sealing Ordinance.

Can you send me a link to how the church defines polygamy?

Thanks,

Jim

[Teancum]

That is your choice, too. I'm glad you recognize this is a value judgement on your part. FWIW, it's not something I would ever like to do.

Well don't we all have to make some judgement on such matters? I do hold open to be in error. This is not something I take lightly. But I am sure there are religious leaders that have introduced polygamy or other sexual devience into their flock that you do not accept, no?

[Teancum]

From the evidence, it only seems Joseph practiced the "Sealing Ordinance", not Polygamy.

Emma specifically forbid Joseph from practicing Polygamy, and it appears that when Joseph said the Church wasn't practicing Polygamy, he was being honest, they were only practicing the Sealing Ordinance.

Actual Polygamy only seems to have started in Utah, and maybe slightly unofficially right before Joseph's death by some other Saints.

LDS need to get more accurate about this.

I think the evidence is pretty clear the JS practice polygamy and consumated a number of his marraiges. If not he was violating D&C 132. But it is not worth arguing about to me really. One can read the historical evidence and decide for themselves.

[Log]

Well don't we all have to make some judgement on such matters? I do hold open to be in error. This is not something I take lightly.

I know, and in contrast to the guy who was posting a bit ahead of you, the admission is refreshing.

But I am sure there are religious leaders that have introduced polygamy or other sexual devience into their flock that you do not accept, no?

Yes, there are religious leaders that I do not accept that have introduced all manner of interesting things into their flock.

With respect to Joseph, however, I am satisfied he did as he was told by God. Did you read my article?

[Mansquatch]

It comes down to the simple fact that the issue of polygamy does not bring me closer to Christ.

In the same sense, I've always been amused by the mental gymnastics LDS have performed in justifying the practice in your history and how there is nothing wrong with it. I was amused by Stargazer's inference that Luther had no issues on the subject. I obviously agree to disagree in what the practice should be since the time that Jesus was among us. The inferences that Jesus could have been a polygamist is hysterical.

It doesn't bring me closer to Christ either. It is currently an abomination with all the condemnation that comes from it.

Did Luther not ever recommend polygamy to anyone?

I enjoy the mental gymnastics of other Bible believers who accept the polygamy of Abraham et al but will not allow it for early LDS.

[Evangeline]

From the evidence, it only seems Joseph practiced the "Sealing Ordinance", not Polygamy.

Emma specifically forbid Joseph from practicing Polygamy, and it appears that when Joseph said the Church wasn't practicing Polygamy, he was being honest, they were only practicing the Sealing Ordinance.

Actual Polygamy only seems to have started in Utah, and maybe slightly unofficially right before Joseph's death by some other Saints.

LDS need to get more accurate about this.

Unfortunately, it's hard to know exactly what happened in all the cases, since the individuals involved are no longer around to set the record straight.

However, here's an easily accessible article by Gregory L. Smith that might help clear up some of the confusion:

"George D. Smith's Nauvoo Polygamy"

^[185] This is only nine marriages out of Todd Compton's list of thirty-three—or G. D. Smith's list of thirty-eight—plural marriages."

There's another website that gives us a brief overview of the wives' stories. I don't know if everything on there is totally accurate, but it might be helpful to read this short biography of Emily and Eliza Partridge:

http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/2021-EmilyandElizaPartridge.htm

Daniel Peterson also addresses the issue of early polygamy quite eloquently in this little blog entry (LOOOOOVE your blog Dan!):

http://dcpsicetnon.blogspot.ca/2012/02/joseph-smith-and-early-mormon-polygamy.html

He also gives some references to reading material that he has found helpful in coming to terms with the information.

As a final note, I'll second this quote from his blog, since I firmly believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God:

"Taken as a whole, in my judgment, Joseph Smith still emerges from the historical record as a good, sincere, and honest man."

[Evangeline]

Oops, the link to Greg Smith's article didn't show up.

Here's the link:

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/review/?vol=20&num=2&id=721

This is the quote:

"There is no reason to doubt," G. D. Smith tells us, "that [Joseph's] marriages involved sexual relations in most instances" (p. 227). There is, in fact, relatively little evidence with which to judge, which means that some doubt is prudent. There is good evidence of a conjugal relationship with Almira Johnson, Melissa Lott, Emily Partridge, and Eliza R. Snow. It is also reasonable to include Eliza Partridge, Maria Lawrence, and Sarah Lawrence. The evidence for their inclusion is persuasive, though they are not named specifically. There is late, hostile evidence of intimacy with Fanny Alger, and most intriguingly there is some evidence of both a physical relationship and a child with Sylvia Sessions Lyon.^[185] This is only nine marriages out of Todd Compton's list of thirty-three—or G. D. Smith's list of thirty-eight—plural marriages."

I hope it works this time...

[Stargazer]

I lived in St. George, UT back in the 70's, and knew a man who had two moms quite well. When we asked him once if his mothers ever fought about sharing the same husband, he replied that he never once saw his moms fight, but they ganged up on his dad every day. So for those of you who joke about polygamy coming back, be careful what you wish for....

Oh, yes. I jokingly like to say that Jesus implicitly taught against polygamy when he said, "No man can serve two masters..."

[Damien the Leper]

Because you don't know a thing, it does not follow that nobody knows that thing. Some of us know things that you do not know. Things relevant to the topics discussed, even.

Prove it then. Show me that you have a transcending knowledge of things beyond this known reality that I don't. If you KNOW that what Joseph was commanded was of God then prove it. Also, do not try testimony bearing for it is unsubstantial evidence. Rationalized arguments also provide no further evidence.

I recognize Joseph as a prophet of God. However, I don't excuse him from human fallacy or flaw. Do I think he institued things based on his own understanding and agenda? To an extent, YES. Do I believe that he was divinely inspired on other matters? Yes. Do I have evidence or proof of my opinions or testimony? No. Until this life is finished, the jury is out and I can only do the best I logically can.

Edited April 6, 2012 by Valentinus

[Stargazer]

I am LDS and what I am talking about spans several verses. Polygamy is an abomination unless the Lord commands otherwise; just as in the Bible.

I am curious now as to why you believe or feel that you were given a negative answer about the religious teaching of polygamy, if it is not because the practice is an abomination and wrong.

I think that it's perfectly legitimate that God would give blueadept an answer to his prayer that said polygamy isn't for him. If I asked about it, I would get the same answer, and for the same reason -- that reason is, until God commands it to be reinstated, it is not doctrinal even if it once was, and if ever it becomes doctrinal again, it will most likely be strictly controlled by the Brethren, and its return will give no LDS man carte blanche to go out 2nd-wife hunting. And no Catholic will be given the nod to do so either, if he happens to ask about it in faith.

As to me? Wow. If the "Principle" was ever brought back, I would be making sure to hide in plain sight on the issue. But I don't fear it, though, really, because no 60+, fat, lower-middle-class guy is going to be asked to take on a second wife. There's plenty of faithful, younger and richer men in our stake who'd be way ahead of me in line.

[Damien the Leper]

I'm not acting like a nanny or a playground monitor. I'm telling you that you know where the exit from the Church is.

Why even suggest something like this? When is it reason to leave if someone disagrees? Keep in mind that my testimony of the Gospel is separate from a testimony of the Church. They are exclusive in their own rights. To say that they cannot be disconnected is in poor taste.

[Calm]

I don't know if everything on there is totally accurate, but it might be helpful to read this short biography of Emily and Eliza Partridge:

http://www.wivesofjo...zaPartridge.htm

In the wife that I researched, Helen Mar Kimball, he was very inaccurate in the way he structured the quotes to say something Helen never actually said and in a quite dramatically wrong way. I would only use the site to collect a quote to google on to find a site that presents the entire quote in its actual context and hopefully with other writings of the individual.