Glenn Beck's Shockingly Absurd Retelling Of Polygamy History...

[frank_jessop]

Ironically, this was what a wonderful young missionary told me during my first session as an investigator. I love this young woman like my very own daughter and so I KNOW that she wasn't trying to deceive me. Folk lore dies hard.

Harder still when it is taught as fact for many many years.

And the Reorganites insisted for generations that Joseph had nothing to do with polygamy.When I read that, I laughed until I cried it was so bad..."Brigham made it all up."Really, Luvr?At least Glenn Beck is not speaking on behalf of any Church.Nobody has offered him as an authority on any subject.Glass houses. Stones.Regards,Pahoran

I heard the "lack of men" false justification many times growing up in the Church and heard it said by fellow missionaries on my mission. Just because it isn't in a manual doesn't mean members of the Church do not teach it to each other as fact.

[california boy]

Lack of men as the reason for polygamy was also routinely taught in Northern California when I was growing up as well. "God's divine plan to make sure all widows had a husband to support them."

[Calm]

That he himself might believe it no big deal. That is not the issue for me. If he went to the effort to collect visual aids including a picture of Jeffs, a first edition BoM and a framed copy (I hope) of the Extermination Order, he can put at least as much effort into doing some basic research. No one told him he had to do this, it was a personal choice. There was probably significant money put in it to produce it. It will reach a much wider audience than the local early morning seminary teacher. As such, I think a higher standard should met. I am not suggesting a nuanced discussion we might expect from a trained historian, just something that he might have found with a half an hour googling.

At the very least he should have read the Church's own page on it (if this was produced after it was posted, if not he should have read the Institute manual):

https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-and-families-in-early-utah?lang=eng

Edited April 20, 2014 by calmoriah

[The Nehor]

I'm pretty amazed, this forum has managed to be lower than the mormondiscussions boards.  No discussion of what he got right vs. wrong.  Just a lot of sniping on a popular figure who's a convert to the LDS church.

 

I'd rather listen to a talk show host than pollute my mind with the garbage thrown around on this board.  There is far more anti-Mormon or just plain "embarassed to be Mormon" content in these forums than useful discussion I hoped to find here.  What a waste of time.  I long for the alt.religion.mormon days.  That unmoderated Usenet forum was a treasure of knowledge by comparison.

 

Pardon my distraction.  Go back to your content-free gossiping.  I won't interrupt again.

 

I am not embarrassed to be a Mormon. I am just embarrassed that he is also a Mormon.

 

Still, not all bad. His craziness did lead to the best Donald Duck cartoon of all time.

 

 

Of course he then went nuts about how the liberal conspiracy funded this thing to get him....not realizing it could be done by anyone with video editing software for nothing. Then he implies that it was funded by federal funding. What an egotist.

 

This is what I hear now when I hear him talk:

 

[Thinking]

The LDS critics' best ammunition are broadcasts like this one. Even though Glenn Beck doesn't officially represent the LDS Church, he is a high profile member so some people listen.

[thesometimesaint]

[BookofMormonLuvr]

And the Reorganites insisted for generations that Joseph had nothing to do with polygamy.

When I read that, I laughed until I cried it was so bad...

"Brigham made it all up."

Really, Luvr?

At least Glenn Beck is not speaking on behalf of any Church.

Nobody has offered him as an authority on any subject.

Glass houses. Stones.

Regards,

Pahoran

Me thinks thou doth protest too much...

 

I wasn't here arguing over the historical veracity of whether or not Joseph taught or practiced polygamy. I haven't argued about the subject in about two years. It holds absolutely no interest for me anymore and don't believe it holds sufficient weight that I should withhold Christian fellowship from my LDS brothers and sisters.

I was merely pointing out how absurd Mr. Becks retelling of history was by anyone's standard.

The ironic thing is that I- the "Reorganite"- likely have more Mormon Fundamentalist friends and acquaintances then 99% of the participants here who hold it as a Gospel principle that can be practiced at certain times.

[Stargazer]

Lack of men as the reason for polygamy was also routinely taught in Northern California when I was growing up as well. "God's divine plan to make sure all widows had a husband to support them."

 

I definitely remember hearing that being taught in classes, or outside them.  Heck, I remember believing it.  It had the attraction of at least sounding logical.

 

I think that this was a widely taught Mormon rumor that many LDS at the time used as a justification. I've since gotten waaaay past the need to justify it except as a commandment from God, who never said WHY He commanded it.  I'd be interested in His explanation, but I don't think I'm going to get one in this life.

[Pahoran]

I heard the "lack of men" false justification many times growing up in the Church and heard it said by fellow missionaries on my mission. Just because it isn't in a manual doesn't mean members of the Church do not teach it to each other as fact.

So what you're saying is, "absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence." Is that it?

My only point re the manual is that if it's officially taught by the Church, then it's in a manual somewhere. If it's just a case of "people repeating folklore" then I suppose all bets are off.

I guess the people who were "teaching" something not in the manuals were "uncorrelated Mormons" of some sort or other.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Pahoran]

Me thinks thou doth protest too much...

 

I wasn't here arguing over the historical veracity of whether or not Joseph taught or practiced polygamy. I haven't argued about the subject in about two years. It holds absolutely no interest for me anymore and don't believe it holds sufficient weight that I should withhold Christian fellowship from my LDS brothers and sisters.

I was merely pointing out how absurd Mr. Becks retelling of history was by anyone's standard.

Every faith tradition has members with "absurd" ideas.

We have one who is publicly prominent as a talk show host.

You had a large number of them: your entire leadership cohort throughout the formative generations of your church.

It takes no talent at all to poke fun at someone else's foibles, as we have daily proof. But it takes a special kind of hubris to poke fun at the foibles of a member who is not an authority of any sort, when your church is built upon the similar foibles of several generations of leaders.

This is a subject you would have done better not to raise, Luvr.

The ironic thing is that I- the "Reorganite"- likely have more Mormon Fundamentalist friends and acquaintances then 99% of the participants here who hold it as a Gospel principle that can be practiced at certain times.

Actually that's not surprising.

I've pointed out a number of times that anti-Mormons habitually back both your succession claims and those of the "fundamentalist" groups, despite those claims being mutually exclusive. But apart from that, as has been pointed out elsewhere, the notion of a "spectrum" of Mormon belief, though useful for some purposes, is really a distortion. The reality is that "Mormonism" consists of (1) The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and (2) a set of small splinter groups, the total membership of which is easily <1% of ours.

It's not surprising, then, that you'd tend to gravitate towards each other.

Regards,

Pahoran

[JAHS]

So what you're saying is, "absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence." Is that it?

My only point re the manual is that if it's officially taught by the Church, then it's in a manual somewhere. If it's just a case of "people repeating folklore" then I suppose all bets are off.

I guess the people who were "teaching" something not in the manuals were "uncorrelated Mormons" of some sort or other.

Regards,

Pahoran

I think someone made it up based on some assumptions regarding persecution back in the early days of the church. I remember an episode of the TV show Bonanza where the Cartwrights  took interest in a polygamous Mormon family and Ben Cartwright himself said the reason they practiced polygamy was because of all the men that were being killed from the persecution. If you can't trust Ben Cartwright who can you trust?

Watch it here (at about 2:35 minutes):

Edited April 21, 2014 by JAHS

[Pahoran]

I think someone made it up based on some assumptions regarding persecution back in the early days of the church. I remember an episode of the TV show Bonanza where the Cartwrights  took interest in a polygamous Mormon family and Ben Cartwright himself said the reason they practiced polygamy was because of all the men that were being killed from the persecution. If you can't trust Ben Cartwright who can you trust?

There's a point!

(Incidentally, Dan Blocker, who played Hoss Cartwright, was a Mormon.)

I don't have a problem with people holding (and even repeating) inaccurate historical notions. When we stand before the Great White Throne to be judged, we're not going to have to sit a two-hour test on Mormon history.

I have a problem when people try to hold the Church responsible for Mormon folklore.

Especially when those same people mercilessly ridicule the Church about "correlation," a major purpose of which is to stamp out Mormon folklore.

If the Church's "critics" actually had any positive program to put forward, this would be a problem for them. But since they can snipe all they like at whatever target looks attractive, they show themselves to be utter hypocrites with this behaviour.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Scott Lloyd]

_{I understand Glen Beck is a convert to the Church.}

_{From time to time, we hear from people who are mad at the Church and claim victimhood because they didn't know for a long time that Joseph Smith practiced plural marriage.}

_{If somebody can spend years in the Church of Jesus Christ and be oblivious to a fact that is "hidden in plain sight," as it were, in history books and in the Doctrine and Covenants. I think I can excuse a relatively recent convert like Glen Beck for not being acquainted with all the ins and outs about a rather complex subject in Church history like plural marriage.}

Edited April 21, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

There's a point!

(Incidentally, Dan Blocker, who played Hoss Cartwright, was a Mormon.)

I don't have a problem with people holding (and even repeating) inaccurate historical notions. When we stand before the Great White Throne to be judged, we're not going to have to sit a two-hour test on Mormon history.

I have a problem when people try to hold the Church responsible for Mormon folklore.

Especially when those same people mercilessly ridicule the Church about "correlation," a major purpose of which is to stamp out Mormon folklore.

If the Church's "critics" actually had any positive program to put forward, this would be a problem for them. But since they can snipe all they like at whatever target looks attractive, they show themselves to be utter hypocrites with this behaviour.

Regards,

Pahoran

Excellent post -- except that Dan Blocker was not Mormon. That is an instance of Mormon folklore.

 

Incidently, I very clearly recall being a youth growing up in the Church, watching that "Bonanza" episode one Sunday night, and thinking how cool it was that Hollywood was treating us so well. Too bad the trend didn't last into the current age.

[Stargazer]

Excellent post -- except that Dan Blocker was not Mormon. That is an instance of Mormon folklore.

 

Incidently, I very clearly recall being a youth growing up in the Church, watching that "Bonanza" episode one Sunday night, and thinking how cool it was that Hollywood was treating us so well. Too bad the trend didn't last into the current age.

 

Whoa!  ...he wasn't LDS?  What?  I just Wikipedia'd that.  He was a Methodist.  Where on earth did the Mormon thing come from, then?

 

And he died at such a young age!  43!  Wow.  I guess the good really do die young.

Edited April 21, 2014 by Stargazer

[mormonnewb]

_{I understand Glen Beck is a convert to the Church.}

 

_{From time to time, we hear from people who are mad at the Church and claim victimhood because they didn't find out for a long time that Joseph Smith practiced plural marriage.}

 

_{If somebody can spend years in the Church of Jesus Christ and be oblivious to a fact that is "hidden in plain sight," as it were, in history books and in the Doctrine and Covenants. I think I can excuse a relatively recent convert like Glen Beck for not being acquainted with all the ins and outs about a rather complex subject in Church history like plural marriage.}

 

I really do appreciate the charitable nature of the saints, but Beck isn't a typical convert who was roped into giving this week's Sunday School lesson.  He took it upon himself to teach this bit of "history" to his viewers.  He could have just as easily ignored the letter that "prompted" this lesson (I find it extremely coincidental that Beck received a letter about Mormons and polygamy just when he had brought all of his props into the studio for Employee Show and Tell Day).

 

In short, he put himself forward as someone who was knowledgeable on the subject.  He didn't waiver or give qualifications when putting forth his fallacies.  He didn't say, "As it's been told to me ..."  Nor did he say, "I have a theory about this.  It's just conjecture, but here it is ..."

 

Now, I'm not saying that the man should be tarred and feathered ... or worse, made to teach Sunday School.  He is a child of God and I'm sure that Heavenly Father loves him at least HALF as much as he loves me.  However, if a person sets himself up as an authority on a topic and then proceeds to recklessly (or perhaps, purposefully) mislead thousands of others, then I think he should suffer the sting of rebuke by the 20 people following this thread.  That's why they pay him the big bucks.

[Scott Lloyd]

Whoa! ...he wasn't LDS? What? I just Wikipedia'd that. He was a Methodist. Where on earth did the Mormon thing come from, then?

And he died at such a young age! 43! Wow. I guess the good really do die young.

I can only guess.

Both Dan Blocker and Merlin Olson were associated with Michael Landon, Blocker on "Bonanza" and Olson on "Little House on the Prairie." Both were rather large in stature. And Olson <was> Mormon -- although not very active.

[canard78]

I was taught it in young men's.

Not sure if it was in a manual.

My dad was taught it as well.

May have just been a New Zealand thing.

 

No, a UK thing too. I remember explaining it this way to a teacher (having been taught as much at seminary/sunday school).

 

Just the other day a member of the branch presidency gave this explanation in a packed 5th Sunday lesson. I should probably take the time to correct him but I didn't want to embarrass him in front of the class at the time.

[Scott Lloyd]

I really do appreciate the charitable nature of the saints, but Beck isn't a typical convert who was roped into giving this week's Sunday School lesson. He took it upon himself to teach this bit of "history" to his viewers. He could have just as easily ignored the letter that "prompted" this lesson (I find it extremely coincidental that Beck received a letter about Mormons and polygamy just when he had brought all of his props into the studio for Employee Show and Tell Day).

In short, he put himself forward as someone who was knowledgeable on the subject. He didn't waiver or give qualifications when putting forth his fallacies. He didn't say, "As it's been told to me ..." Nor did he say, "I have a theory about this. It's just conjecture, but here it is ..."

Now, I'm not saying that the man should be tarred and feathered ... or worse, made to teach Sunday School. He is a child of God and I'm sure that Heavenly Father loves him at least HALF as much as he loves me. However, if a person sets himself up as an authority on a topic and then proceeds to recklessly (or perhaps, purposefully) mislead thousands of others, then I think he should suffer the sting of rebuke by the 20 people following this thread. That's why they pay him the big bucks.

I rather suspect that much of the pious indignation is driven by an antipathy for Beck's politics.

[Scott Lloyd]

No, a UK thing too. I remember explaining it this way to a teacher (having been taught as much at seminary/sunday school).

Just the other day a member of the branch presidency gave this explanation in a packed 5th Sunday lesson. I should probably take the time to correct him but I didn't want to embarrass him in front of the class at the time.

One of the side benefits of my coming to this board is that it makes me feel very fortunate. You see, none of the outrages I read about here all the time ever happen in my ward.

[Stargazer]

I rather suspect that much of the pious indignation is driven by an antipathy for Beck's politics.

 

Maybe some of it, but I mostly agree with him, politically, and can't stand to listen to him.  I wish he would shut up.  

[Calm]

I dislike his style, the way he throws in unnecessary insults for cleverness like at Chicago (used to live there, it was a good place with good people), media as the Big Bad, can't listen to him long enough to figure out his politics in details.

Otoh, I heard him bear his testimony once in person and was impressed by the sincerity, humility and kindness there so it troubles me that he resorts to negativity so much and makes it an us vs. them approach.

My husband used to like him for a time, some of his stuff...being a teacher he appreciated the attention getting stuff and he is very good at ignoring what he doesn't agree with and finding the good. He is not a fan anymore, has gone too extreme in his view.

Edited April 21, 2014 by calmoriah

[thesometimesaint]

By his own admission his is a rodeo clown. It is his job to distract the attention of the bull to what is really going on.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Every faith tradition has members with "absurd" ideas.

We have one who is publicly prominent as a talk show host.

You had a large number of them: your entire leadership cohort throughout the formative generations of your church.

It takes no talent at all to poke fun at someone else's foibles, as we have daily proof. But it takes a special kind of hubris to poke fun at the foibles of a member who is not an authority of any sort, when your church is built upon the similar foibles of several generations of leaders.

This is a subject you would have done better not to raise, Luvr.

Actually that's not surprising.

I've pointed out a number of times that anti-Mormons habitually back both your succession claims and those of the "fundamentalist" groups, despite those claims being mutually exclusive. But apart from that, as has been pointed out elsewhere, the notion of a "spectrum" of Mormon belief, though useful for some purposes, is really a distortion. The reality is that "Mormonism" consists of (1) The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and (2) a set of small splinter groups, the total membership of which is easily <1% of ours.

It's not surprising, then, that you'd tend to gravitate towards each other.

Regards,

Pahoran

 

Again, I am not here to argue against your church, its teachings, or its leadership. I haven't really argued those things in several years. I have moved on. I recognize LDS members as my brothers and sisters in Christ, I have Fundamentalist friends, because I no longer judge the individual by the teachings of his particular fraction that I don't personally agree with. If you love the Book of Mormon, believe in Zion, and hope for the Second Coming of Christ.... your are my brother or sister!

Perhaps, you need to quit living in the past, where "Brighamites" and "Josephites" are constantly at odds, contending with one another and building fences, instead of bridges. I have, and the added level of peace is amazing! Now I am free to worship where I want.... a LDS Ward, a Restoration Branch, a Temple Lot Local, a Bickertonite Branch, etc... and feel the Spirit. Praise Yah!

Addendum: Many here in the Restoration Branches can testify to the fact that I regularly defend the LDS Church and correct the false information that has floated around for decades.

#2 My Facebook friends list includes:

LDS 

Community of Christ

Restoration Branches (JCRB & CRE)

Fundamentalist (from several groups/independents)

Church of Christ, Temple Lot

Church of Jesus Christ (Rigdon.Bickerton)

Church of Christ, Elijah Message

Lynn Ridenhour (Southern Baptist Preacher and BofMormon Beliver)

"Messianic Mormons"

Church of Jesus Christ, Zion's Branch

Strangite LDS

Remnant LDS

Edited April 21, 2014 by BookofMormonLuvr

[USU78]

I rather suspect that much of the pious indignation is driven by an antipathy for Beck's politics.

of course it is. Hence the extraordinary nastiness