DH Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 Show me a quote that she didn't? (see how that works - NOT)Kevin, are you not even reading what I'm saying? I'm asking you to show me where she says she DID consent! That's a positive, not a negative!
why me Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 Is this a joke? I don't see how you can ask that with a straight face. Marriage is the business of BOTH spouses. It involves two people entering into a covenant and obligation to be faithful to each other. So when one spouse secretly marries another person, and lies to his first spouse about it, there's a problem. It's nothing at all like the situation described in the scripture you quoted.And what should Joseph have done? If he were a prophet and he was commanded to practice polygamy after stalling on the principle, what should he have done...obeyed emma or obeyed god?
DH Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 And what should Joseph have done? If he were a prophet and he was commanded to practice polygamy after stalling on the principle, what should he have done...obeyed emma or obeyed god?When he married Emma, he made a solemn promise before God to be faithful to her. Are you saying that promise is irrelevant? And do you really believe God would condone lying to your wife so you could marry another woman?
why me Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 Do you have evidence that she did know about it? Or are you just assuming that she did?Emma was aware of plural marriage; it is not clear at exactly what point she was made aware, partly due to there being relatively few early sources on the matter. Emma was generally opposed to the practice of plural marriage, and did much to try and thwart it. There were times, however, when Emma gave permission for Joseph's plural marriages, though she soon changed her mind.[1] Emma was troubled by plural marriage, but her difficulties arose partly from her conviction that Joseph was a prophet:Zina Huntington remembered a conversation between Elizabeth [Davis] and Emma [smith] in which Elizabeth asked the prophet’s wife if she felt that Joseph was a prophet. Yes, Emma answered, but I wish to God I did not know it.[http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Emma_Smith
Mark Beesley Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 From another thread a poster said:"I think that for many members the lying and dishonesty surrounding the polygamy issue is more of a problem that the polygamy itself"Well said and thank you.Big UP!LamaniteI don't follow these discussion much because historical records are notoriously incomplete and often misleading. Historians can offer their best judgment about what the record means, but in the end it still is a judgment call.Now, with regard to the the allegation that Joseph lied to Emma, can you provide a reference to an unambiguous primary source that supports the allegation, preferably a letter from the Prophet to Emma apologizing for lying?One of the problems we have in the 21st Century is trying to apply our terminology to 19th Century understanding. For example, we see the term "sealed" and jump to equate that to "married." That would be a mistake. A 19th Century sealing was probably not always a marriage as we understand that term, and it would likely be incorrect to consider every woman to whom the Prophet was sealed to by his "wife."We should probably give Joseph Smith the same latitude and benefit of the doubt that we would like Jesus to give us on Judgment Day. 4
DH Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 BTW, I did change one of my posts above. That was because I felt I had thought of a better way of expressing myself. This thread is moving fast enough that what I originally said was quoted by someone else while I was in the process of changing it. I apologize for any confusion.
Lamanite Posted September 13, 2012 Author Posted September 13, 2012 I hope everyone hear purchases and then reads Brian Hale's new books from Kofford.I'm begging you PLEASE!!!Big UP!Lamanite
DH Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 Emma was aware of plural marriage; it is not clear at exactly what point she was made aware, partly due to there being relatively few early sources on the matter. Emma was generally opposed to the practice of plural marriage, and did much to try and thwart it. There were times, however, when Emma gave permission for Joseph's plural marriages, though she soon changed her mind.[1] Emma was troubled by plural marriage, but her difficulties arose partly from her conviction that Joseph was a prophet:Zina Huntington remembered a conversation between Elizabeth [Davis] and Emma [smith] in which Elizabeth asked the prophet’s wife if she felt that Joseph was a prophet. Yes, Emma answered, but I wish to God I did not know it.[http://en.fairmormon...gamy/Emma_SmithThank you.
Lamanite Posted September 13, 2012 Author Posted September 13, 2012 I constantly wonder why some members refuse to allow Joseph his humanity?
why me Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 When he married Emma, he made a solemn promise before God to be faithful to her. Are you saying that promise is irrelevant? And do you really believe God would condone lying to your wife so you could marry another woman?If god commanded it, I guess he would. However, emma did know about polygamy. But she was not onboard about it. I think that joseph was between a rock and a hard place with polygamy. He not only had to practice it but he had to teach it too to other priesthood holders. And the reaction of the apostles were not positive. I cannot judge joseph but I do not see polygamy as a lustful endeavor. I see it as a commandment with a wife that was against it. He had to marry these women and many of he women received testimonies of the practice. I don't think that he wanted to hurt emma and so, he lied. But emma did find out because the practice was not secret.
KevinG Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 (edited) Kevin, are you not even reading what I'm saying? I'm asking you to show me where she says she DID consent! That's a positive, not a negative!Sigh, perhaps I should not use the colloquial "proving a negative" and instead use the proper "argument from ignorance" so as not to confuse those who thing the "negative" refers to the tense of their speech? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignoranceBut then I'd probably be accused of calling someone ignorant. Edited September 13, 2012 by KevinG
why me Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 I constantly wonder why some members refuse to allow Joseph his humanity?I do. I see him as he saw himself: not perfect and prone to unrighteousness. He admitted this to the saints:Joseph Smith Quotes... I love that man better who swears a stream as long as my arm, and administering to the poor and dividing his substance, than the long smooth faced hypocrites. I don't want you to think I am very righteous, for I am not very righteous. God judgeth men according to the light he gives them.Words of Joseph Smith, p.204 (18 May 1843)
DH Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 I constantly wonder why some members refuse to allow Joseph his humanity?What do you mean?
KevinG Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 (edited) I constantly wonder why some members refuse to allow Joseph his humanity?I believe he was human and so was Emma. Bushman did a wonderful job of conveying that difficult time and Joseph's struggles to honor his wife and his covenant to God. It seems he didn't always do it smoothly.I'm just not ready to believe the slander that "it was about sex", "he lied repeatedly to his wife" or other nonsense designed to impugn Joseph's character or make Emma look like a fool. Edited September 13, 2012 by KevinG
Lamanite Posted September 13, 2012 Author Posted September 13, 2012 What do you mean?For some it seems to be all or nothing. I'm perfectly comfortable saying, "Sure he was commanded by God to practice plural marriage. And by attempting to implement that practice, he lied to and betrayed his wife. He really screwed a couple things up including his marriage."The end, Still a faithful member.Big UP!Lamanite
Pahoran Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 From another thread a poster said:"I think that for many members the lying and dishonesty surrounding the polygamy issue is more of a problem that the polygamy itself"Well said and thank you.Big UP!LamaniteI agree. Anti-Mormon treatments of polygamy are dishonest from beginning to end.Regards,Pahoran
DH Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 For some it seems to be all or nothing. I couldn't agree more! The black and white thinking can be, in my opinion, a problem. On the one hand you get some people who become disillusioned and claim that the Prophet was totally evil and had no redeeming qualities. On the other hand, you get people who think the Prophet was virtually perfect and could do no wrong at all. But you're right, we're all human, and as such, we are "bundles of contradictions," sometimes doing good stuff, sometimes making mistakes.If we expect someone to never make mistakes and never sin, we are setting ourselves up for disappointment. It seems to me that someone like you--who recognizes that Joseph Smith and Thomas Monson are human and can make mistakes, but can also do lots of good--are less likely to lose their testimony if something goes wrong because there's room for both the good and the bad.
Darren10 Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 So polygamy is an eternal principle?YES!!! Though not all need to enter into it.
Tacenda Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 If it is commanded of Joseph to raise up seed why not have children by these women?
Darren10 Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 It was most certainly lied about. I would have kept it a secret too! Just not from my wife. I'm fairly certain God was not behind some of his actions as they pertain to dishonesty.And there you have it. If God was behind Joseph Smith in practicing and "lying" about polygamy, than it's OK. If God gives an action His OK than we should not condemn it.
Darren10 Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 If it is commanded of Joseph to raise up seed why not have children by these women?When was Joseph commanded to raise seed?
Darren10 Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 He really screwed a couple things up including his marriage."Joseph smith did not "screw up his marriage". Good grief.
Tacenda Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 When was Joseph commanded to raise seed?That would be the only way it would be okay to live polygamy if you're going by the BOM.
Tacenda Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 I need to say that at the time Joseph tried to live polygamy there was talk that second coming was near and many were trying to live the very best way possible to be ready for it. Maybe that's why so many women were able to obey the commandment so readily.
cesc101 Posted September 13, 2012 Posted September 13, 2012 That would be the only way it would be okay to live polygamy if you're going by the BOM.Wow...I didn't realize JS introduction and practice of polygamy had anything to do with the teachings of BoM.
Recommended Posts