Scott Lloyd Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 What did I say that was misleading?I'm only pointing out that stating "pure fact" can leave a false impression.
Anteojito Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 I'm only pointing out that stating "pure fact" can leave a false impression.OK
strappinglad Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 May I suggest a good outline for making statements about someone is given in the Rotary Club 4 way Test: The 4-Way Test considers the following questions in respect to thinking, saying or doing: Is it the truth? Is it fair to all concerned? Will it build goodwill and better friendships? Will it be beneficial to all concerned? If all we do is focus on the First way, we miss out on some Christian principles. 2
Tacenda Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 May I suggest a good outline for making statements about someone is given in the Rotary Club 4 way Test:The 4-Way Test considers the following questions in respect to thinking, saying or doing:Is it the truth?Is it fair to all concerned?Will it build goodwill and better friendships?Will it be beneficial to all concerned?If all we do is focus on the First way, we miss out on some Christian principles.Begging your pardon, but now replace with Santa Claus or...
Darren10 Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 Wow, you sure read a lot into my statement. What I said is pure fact. Joseph Smith sent Orson Hyde on a mission. Joseph Smith married Miranda Hyde. I did not say that he sent Hyde on the mission so that he could marry her and I did not say that he had sex with her. But what if he did have sex with her, would that change things?Even when you cited Orson Hyde you said, Joseph Smith sent "men" on missions, "Based of the fact that Joseph Smith sent men on missions (Orson Hyde) and then married his wife Marinda Hyde." This statement and the original statement by you and two others left the distinct *connotation* (that was the word I used) that Joseph Smith wanted sex, sex, and more sex; even from other men's wives. There is no way to conclude any such thing from "pure facts" from history. And, yes, if Joseph Smith had sexual relations with a woman or women currently married to other men, that would be a weightful subject for me.
JLHPROF Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 And, yes, if Joseph Smith had sexual relations with a woman or women currently married to other men, that would be a weightful subject for me. I think Hales conclusions that Joseph never had sexual relations with any of his polyandrous wives is naive (and probably wrong). At the very least I would wager there was a sexual relationship with: Zina Huntington Jacobs and her sister Prescendia Huntington Buell, Sylvia Sessions Lyon (who claimed to have a child by Joseph - kind of hard to do if there was no sex even if she was mistaken about the child's parentage), Mary Rollins Lightner. 1
rockpond Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 True. That, in fact, is in line with scriptural prophecy.Nephi beheld in vision that the church of the Lamb of God in the last days would have a global presence but that its numbers would be few because of the influence of the great and abominable church or church of the devil.This handwringing over the Church's growth supposedly slowing because it has not been forthcoming about every little thing may in fact be missing the mark. Good point, Scott. Why do we spend all this time in Bishopric/Ward Council/PEC trying to figure out how to retain and reactivate our members? We should just realize that it's part of the plan for them to fall away. When one of our youth decides that it isn't true, we should just hold the door open for them as they leave. Part of Nephi's vision, right?
Tacenda Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 Even when you cited Orson Hyde you said, Joseph Smith sent "men" on missions, "Based of the fact that Joseph Smith sent men on missions (Orson Hyde) and then married his wife Marinda Hyde." This statement and the original statement by you and two others left the distinct *connotation* (that was the word I used) that Joseph Smith wanted sex, sex, and more sex; even from other men's wives. There is no way to conclude any such thing from "pure facts" from history.And, yes, if Joseph Smith had sexual relations with a woman or women currently married to other men, that would be a weightful subject for me.The only time the chapter in Jacob of the BoM, doesn't call polygamy abominable, is when it is used to raise up righteous seed. Why is JS picking women who are already married, and according to some here, not having sexual relations. But it has been verified that these were marriages, not just sealings, in every deed. 1
Darren10 Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 (edited) I think Hales conclusions that Joseph never had sexual relations with any of his polyandrous wives is naive (and probably wrong). At the very least I would wager there was a sexual relationship with: Zina Huntington Jacobs and her sister Prescendia Huntington Buell, Sylvia Sessions Lyon (who claimed to have a child by Joseph - kind of hard to do if there was no sex even if she was mistaken about the child's parentage), Mary Rollins Lightner. Not at all naïve: http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/special-roundtable-discussion-polygamy/ (Hales shines brilliantly) Joseph Smith never lived with Zina and had little to no contact with her in am manner to have sexual relations with her. Zina did not move n with Brigham Young (whom she also married after Joseph Smith's death) until after her husband left her and remarried himself. Don't know much about Prescendia but here's this: ( http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages/Presendia_Buell ). As for Lyons, it is not clear if she *considered* Joseph Smith to be her daughter's father or if he was the biological father. This is another area which DNA is inconclusive. Same for Lightner. http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages Edited March 22, 2014 by Darren10
Darren10 Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 The only time the chapter in Jacob of the BoM, doesn't call polygamy abominable, is when it is used to raise up righteous seed. Why is JS picking women who are already married, and according to some here, not having sexual relations. But it has been verified that these were marriages, not just sealings, in every deed. "Verified that these were marriages in every deed,"? How do you conclude that? As to getting sealed to women already married, I cannot say for sure why Joseph Smith did that other than he viewed all of humanity as being sealed together, not just one man one woman. 1
Coreyb Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 Begging your pardon, but now replace with Santa Claus or...Doesn't work with Santa Claus, he doesn't visit the poor kids houses, even if they believe, so it isn't fair to all involved.
Sanpitch Posted March 22, 2014 Author Posted March 22, 2014 Not at all naïve: http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/special-roundtable-discussion-polygamy/ (Hales shines brilliantly)Joseph Smith never lived with Zina and had little to no contact with her in am manner to have sexual relations with her. Zina did not move n with Brigham Young (whom she also married after Joseph Smith's death) until after her husband left her and remarried himself.Don't know much about Prescendia but here's this: ( http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages/Presendia_Buell ). As for Lyons, it is not clear if she *considered* Joseph Smith to be her daughter's father or if he was the biological father. This is another area which DNA is inconclusive. Same for Lightner.http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriagesQuote: "Zina did not move n with Brigham Young (whom she also married after Joseph Smith's death) until after her husband left her and remarried himself." Is there a little more to this story? As I remember the history, Henry and Zina were headed West when Brigham sent Henry on another mission. Did I miss something? Her husband left her to go on a mission.
omni Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 Not at all naïve: http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/special-roundtable-discussion-polygamy/ (Hales shines brilliantly)Joseph Smith never lived with Zina and had little to no contact with her in am manner to have sexual relations with her. Zina did not move n with Brigham Young (whom she also married after Joseph Smith's death) until after her husband left her and remarried himself.Don't know much about Prescendia but here's this: ( http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages/Presendia_Buell ). As for Lyons, it is not clear if she *considered* Joseph Smith to be her daughter's father or if he was the biological father. This is another area which DNA is inconclusive. Same for Lightner.http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages Whether you believe Joseph had relations with these women or not, you are completely missing the elephant in the room - Joseph was sealing himself to these women for eternity. He was essentially telling their original husbands we can share them now, but they will be sealed to me for eternity. How does this sound like something God would command? 3
Darren10 Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 Quote: "Zina did not move n with Brigham Young (whom she also married after Joseph Smith's death) until after her husband left her and remarried himself." Is there a little more to this story? As I remember the history, Henry and Zina were headed West when Brigham sent Henry on another mission. Did I miss something? Her husband left her to go on a mission.Yes, you missed a lot.Critics of the early Saints have, often with glee, latched onto William Hall’s story and used it as a prime example of ecclesiastical abuse, pitting a powerful Brigham Young against a penniless and ill Henry Jacobs, with Zina as some kind of prize for the winner of their imagined contest. It is easy to understand how one might see things that way; it is certainly the way that William Hall portrayed the episode:At a place called, by the Mormons, Pisgah, in Iowa, as they were passing through to Council Bluffs, Brigham Young spoke in this wise, in the hearing of hundreds: He said it was time for men who were walking in other men’s shoes to step out of them. “Brother Jacobs,” he says, “the woman you claim for a wife does not belong to you. She is the spiritual wife of brother Joseph, sealed up to him. I am his proxy, and she, in this behalf, with her children, are my property. You can go where you please, and get another, but be sure to get one of your own kindred spirit.”37The immediate problem with such a statement is that there is no contemporary corroboration for it. Hall states that Brigham’s statement was made in the hearing of hundreds of people, yet there are no other diaries that indicate such a statement or, indeed, any statement from Brigham to Henry. The statement itself would need to have been made sometime between Henry’s arrival at Mt. Pisgah (May 18) and his departure on his mission (approximately June 1).http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2006-fair-conference/2006-zina-and-her-men-an-examination-of-the-changing-marital-state-of-zina-diantha-huntington-jacobs-smith-youngThe linked article gives a very thorough description of the events behind Zina, Joseph smith, Brigham Young, and Henry Jacobs.
Darren10 Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 Whether you believe Joseph had relations with these women or not, you are completely missing the elephant in the room - Joseph was sealing himself to these women for eternity. He was essentially telling their original husbands we can share them now, but they will be sealed to me for eternity. How does this sound like something God would command?Even today we do not know how the eternities work regarding sealings. How do divorced couples remain sealed eternally, particularly if both remarrry and are sealed to other spouses? What of widows and widowers who remarry? Who are children sealed to in such cases? Getting sealed to other men's wives, though quite unorthopractic today is not a big deal to me.
Damien the Leper Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 the church just provided an essay stating the litteralness of the worldwide flood of noah. do you think the leaders of the church actually believe in a world wide flood?https://www.lds.org/topics/noah?lang=eng Oh for the love of God! Next the LDS church will become fundamentalist and start teaching young earth creationism. Let's hope it doesn't come down to such nonsense. 1
Damien the Leper Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 It's all about how you say it: You either say "Joseph Smith sent men on missions so he could marry their wives" - this is historically incorrect.ORYou could say "While a few brethren were on missions their wives agreed to be sealed to Joseph Smith" - this is historically correct. It's a troublesome thing for many either way, but tone and phrasing do matter to the correctness of the claim. Were the rules of plural marriage always set in stone or did they change with the times?
Sanpitch Posted March 22, 2014 Author Posted March 22, 2014 Yes, you missed a lot.http://www.fairmormon.org/perspectives/fair-conferences/2006-fair-conference/2006-zina-and-her-men-an-examination-of-the-changing-marital-state-of-zina-diantha-huntington-jacobs-smith-youngThe linked article gives a very thorough description of the events behind Zina, Joseph smith, Brigham Young, and Henry Jacobs.I read half way through the article, it is good and detailed. But no matter how it's explained, I will never understand it. At the age of seventeen, growing up in a bishops family, I had polygamy explained to me by mom and I thought "that's it for me, it's all ridiculous". There was polygamy in the distance family. At that age I felt you fall in love with one girl and marriage to several other ladies is out of the question. My opinion is still the same.
Coreyb Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 I read half way through the article, it is good and detailed. But no matter how it's explained, I will never understand it. At the age of seventeen, growing up in a bishops family, I had polygamy explained to me by mom and I thought "that's it for me, it's all ridiculous". There was polygamy in the distance family. At that age I felt you fall in love with one girl and marriage to several other ladies is out of the question. My opinion is still the same.wow! at that age I though you tried to sleep with every girl and never fell in love 1
Sanpitch Posted March 22, 2014 Author Posted March 22, 2014 wow! at that age I though you tried to sleep with every girl and never fell in loveWell, I wasn't known as a completely righteous young guy. But then for marriage that's another story.
Scott Lloyd Posted March 22, 2014 Posted March 22, 2014 (edited) Good point, Scott. Why do we spend all this time in Bishopric/Ward Council/PEC trying to figure out how to retain and reactivate our members?Because we don't know who and how many we can save so long as we continue to do our duty and reach out to others as rescuers. So we do the best we can with whomever we can. But at the same time, we have a record of Nephi's vision to help us keep things in perspective so we don't panic or get overly discouraged or distracted when we see society at large loping off into unrighteous paths such as the wholesale acceptance of gay marriage, Or when it starts to seem like the Latter-day Saints may soon be the only ones holding fast to standards of decency and morality. Or so that we're not overly eager to place blame on the Lord or His servants when we see some of our people falling into the snares of sophistry and falsehood laid by the church of the devil and those who subject themselves to it. Edited March 24, 2014 by Scott Lloyd 1
JLHPROF Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 (edited) Not at all naïve: http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/special-roundtable-discussion-polygamy/ (Hales shines brilliantly)Joseph Smith never lived with Zina and had little to no contact with her in am manner to have sexual relations with her. Zina did not move n with Brigham Young (whom she also married after Joseph Smith's death) until after her husband left her and remarried himself.Don't know much about Prescendia but here's this: ( http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages/Presendia_Buell ). As for Lyons, it is not clear if she *considered* Joseph Smith to be her daughter's father or if he was the biological father. This is another area which DNA is inconclusive. Same for Lightner.http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Children_of_polygamous_marriages I'm going to come right out and say it. I've read Hales work, and he is wrong. He is seeing what he wants to see and forcing the square peg into the round hole to make sure Joseph can be seen to live polyandry AND not offend peoples sensibilities. He bends facts to fit his hypotheses instead of taking them at face value and the logical conclusions. And I say again, regardless of whether Joseph actually fathered any children for these women to even think he MIGHT have fathered their child would required them to have had sex with him at least once. It doesn't take DNA to prove sex. It takes people thinking that he MIGHT be the father because they had sex with him. If they never had sex they would never have claimed anything. Edited March 23, 2014 by JLHPROF 2
Tacenda Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 I'm going to come right out and say it. I've read Hales work, and he is wrong. He is seeing what he wants to see and forcing the square peg into the round hole to make sure Joseph can be seen to live polyandry AND not offend peoples sensibilities. He bends facts to fit his hypotheses instead of taking them at face value and the logical conclusions.And I say again, regardless of whether Joseph actually fathered any children for these women to even think he MIGHT have fathered their child would required them to have had sex with him at least once. It doesn't take DNA to prove sex. It takes people thinking that he MIGHT be the father because they had sex with him. If they never had sex they would never have claimed anything.Good point, and there are natural ways to avoid getting pregnant and Joseph was marrying wives in secret and probably didn't want a pregnancy.
Stone holm Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 I agree with the topic poster. I didn't know the BOM was translated with a hat until I saw the south park episode "all about mormons" and asked my mom if it was true and she confirmed it. Up until then I just always remember seeing the pictures of a tired yet determined and benevolent Joseph Smith translating gold plates next to a candlelight. The church leaders lie by omission to their members. One question I have yet to ask on these forums is this: If the Nephites and Lamanites existed in the Americas, where is all the archaeological evidence? There should be evidence of some sort that they existed, as the BOM tells it the Nephites were quite advanced for their time, so where is the proof? They had access to and knowledge of metallurgy, surely there should be a sword, a shield, a utensil for HECK'S (don't wanna make the mods angry by using the H word) sakes or something to prove they existed. Yet there is none. Also the Book of Abraham, all the papyrus was was run of the mill death scrolls depicting the Egyptian god Osiris. Not only that but the church also makes old Joey Smith look like the most righteous dude on earth since Jesus Christ (note to mods, I'm not taking his name in vain, I mean the actual Jesus Christ), when in fact he was a polygamist and did things like send his best friends on missions and marry their wives while they were gone. Think of it this way, nowadays, if some guy said he had magic stones and some plates that he couldn't really let you get a good look at, threw them all in a hat and said it's the word of god, would you believe him?And you are certain that Christ was not a polygamist? 2
mtomm Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 same here, I honestly can't recall anything from seminary except what this one teacher we had taught us. It seems I spent most of my thus far kinda adult life unlearning what she taught us. I just don't remember what the others teachers said. I remember going to seminary if that helps! Wow, such a shame. My seminary teacher was excellent and I still consider him one of my best teachers of the gospel to this day! 1
Recommended Posts