Helen47 Posted July 6, 2014 Posted July 6, 2014 http://www.withoutend.org/emmas-awareness-response-brian-hales-jmh-letter-editor/ I always wondered how Emma dealt with the issue of polygamy. Afterall it was she who eloped with Joseph against her father's wishes. Was their relationship a romantic one?Was romance a feature of other women he asked to marry?.
Garden Girl Posted July 6, 2014 Posted July 6, 2014 http://www.withoutend.org/emmas-awareness-response-brian-hales-jmh-letter-editor/ I always wondered how Emma dealt with the issue of polygamy. Afterall it was she who eloped with Joseph against her father's wishes. Was their relationship a romantic one?Was romance a feature of other women he asked to marry?. Hello Helen...I find these questions to be calling for nothing more than pure speculation... there are some sources from which research will glean information... many have been discussed here time and again. Now you want people to speculate on the "romance" angle... this topic hasn't been discussed enough that now we are asked to opine on whether romance was involved?? GG 1
JLHPROF Posted July 6, 2014 Posted July 6, 2014 1. We know from historical letters and accounts that Joseph and Emma had a romantic relationship. We also know she had a very hard time with plural marriage.2. We know from historical letters and accounts that a very few (but not nearly all) of Josephs other wives had romantic relationships with him.Any more than this is speculation and these things we already knew. 1
Garden Girl Posted July 6, 2014 Posted July 6, 2014 1. We know from historical letters and accounts that Joseph and Emma had a romantic relationship. We also know she had a very hard time with plural marriage.2. We know from historical letters and accounts that a very few (but not nearly all) of Josephs other wives had romantic relationships with him.Any more than this is speculation and these things we already knew. GG
Helen47 Posted July 6, 2014 Author Posted July 6, 2014 So if Smith would not have to have worried about valentine cards!
Helen47 Posted July 6, 2014 Author Posted July 6, 2014 How would that have gone on in the Zina Hungtington, Lyn Jacobs ala Joseph Smith & Brigham Young partnership? If Zina had children to BY who do they go with in the CK? Smith or Young? What happens to the children Lyn Jacobs and Zina had between them?
webbles Posted July 6, 2014 Posted July 6, 2014 How would that have gone on in the Zina Hungtington, Lyn Jacobs ala Joseph Smith & Brigham Young partnership? If Zina had children to BY who do they go with in the CK? Smith or Young? What happens to the children Lyn Jacobs and Zina had between them? I went over to FamilySearch Tree to see her current sealings and interestingly (to me at least), she is still only sealed to Joseph Smith. I would have expected her to be sealed to all three by now. The other two sealings are in the requested state, though I don't see how to determine how long it has been in that state.
JLHPROF Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 How would that have gone on in the Zina Hungtington, Lyn Jacobs ala Joseph Smith & Brigham Young partnership? If Zina had children to BY who do they go with in the CK? Smith or Young? What happens to the children Lyn Jacobs and Zina had between them? Doctrinally at the time any children Henry Jacobs and Zina had and any children Brigham Young and Zina had would have been seen by all parties as belonging to Joseph in the next life. Today it is seen more as a "we'll sort it out in the next life" kind of deal. 1
strappinglad Posted July 7, 2014 Posted July 7, 2014 Do people really think that the sealing ordinances are anything like getting " custody " of the kids in the next life? These are autonomous spirits , and their 'age' and subservience to some other spirit is not an issue. 2
thesometimesaint Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 Whom they will be Sealed to in the Eternities is best left up to God. BTW We will all be Sealed to each other in the Eternities as the family of Adam. 1
cinepro Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 (edited) Whom they will be Sealed to in the Eternities is best left up to God. BTW We will all be Sealed to each other in the Eternities as the family of Adam. But since the sealing power gives humans the power to "bind" people together in such a way that God will honor that binding, it's not totally left up to Him. The idea that God might break a sealing and "re-assign" people is the exact opposite of what the sealing power is. If God could do that, then there's no need for anyone to be sealed in this life to begin with. He could just snap His fingers after the millennium and instantly perform all the necessary "sealings" in the perfect order. Which would mean we're all wasting our time worrying about it now. Edited July 9, 2014 by cinepro 1
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 How would that have gone on in the Zina Hungtington, Lyn Jacobs ala Joseph Smith & Brigham Young partnership? If Zina had children to BY who do they go with in the CK? Smith or Young? What happens to the children Lyn Jacobs and Zina had between them?After some of these topics, I am not sure any of us really know. I have often wondered what the end game of all these sealings really mean.
JLHPROF Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 But since the sealing power gives humans the power to "bind" people together in such a way that God will honor that binding, it's not totally left up to Him. The idea that God might break a sealing and "re-assign" people is the exact opposite of what the sealing power is. If God could do that, then there's no need for anyone to be sealed in this life to begin with. He could just snap His fingers after the millennium and instantly perform all the necessary "sealings" in the perfect order. Which would mean we're all wasting our time worrying about it now. All sealings require ratification by the Holy Spirit of Promise (aka, God's approval). Not everything man seals will pass muster with God. But all sealings performed by man in accordance with the authority they've been given and correct principle and application will be ratified.God will absolutely declare any incorrect sealing as invalid - now what makes a sealing incorrect is anyone's guess. That doesn't invalidate the power of the sealing, it just reverses an incorrect mortal mistake.
awyatt Posted July 9, 2014 Posted July 9, 2014 How would that have gone on in the Zina Hungtington, Lyn Jacobs ala Joseph Smith & Brigham Young partnership? If Zina had children to BY who do they go with in the CK? Smith or Young? What happens to the children Lyn Jacobs and Zina had between them?Zina and Her Men: An Examination of the Changing Marital State of Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs Smith Young-Allen
bcuzbcuz Posted July 10, 2014 Posted July 10, 2014 Zina and Her Men: An Examination of the Changing Marital State of Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs Smith Young-AllenDoesn't her name say it all?
Stargazer Posted July 10, 2014 Posted July 10, 2014 (edited) But since the sealing power gives humans the power to "bind" people together in such a way that God will honor that binding, it's not totally left up to Him. The idea that God might break a sealing and "re-assign" people is the exact opposite of what the sealing power is. If God could do that, then there's no need for anyone to be sealed in this life to begin with. He could just snap His fingers after the millennium and instantly perform all the necessary "sealings" in the perfect order. Which would mean we're all wasting our time worrying about it now. We aren't wasting our time. If no sealing on earth takes place, then there is no sealing in the resurrection. It's just like baptism, cinepro. If it isn't done, it isn't valid. Note these situations:One of my great grandmothers, Arilee, is sealed to two men: my great grandfather, John; and her first husband, James, who was deceased when she married John. My grandfather is sealed to Arilee and John. But who will be my great grandfather in the eternities, John or James?My wife was sealed to her first husband, but that sealing was cancelled by the FP, after his excommunication, and at my wife's request (so we could be sealed in the temple). Their children were sealed to them, and the letter from President Kimball said that the spousal sealing cancellation did not affect the right of eternal parentage to their children. So who will these children be sealed to ultimately? Me as the sealed spouse of their mother? Or presuming that he repented adequately to regain his place in the patriarchal order, to him and his eventual partner (he married later a couple of times)?So who will be ultimately sealed to whom (assuming that none of these people have disqualified themselves from the patriarchal order)? President Kimball's letter to my wife makes it clear that all this will be finally decided by the Lord. And I trust the Lord that all things will be sorted out justly and appropriately. So should we all. Edited July 10, 2014 by Stargazer 1
thesometimesaint Posted July 11, 2014 Posted July 11, 2014 But since the sealing power gives humans the power to "bind" people together in such a way that God will honor that binding, it's not totally left up to Him. The idea that God might break a sealing and "re-assign" people is the exact opposite of what the sealing power is. If God could do that, then there's no need for anyone to be sealed in this life to begin with. He could just snap His fingers after the millennium and instantly perform all the necessary "sealings" in the perfect order. Which would mean we're all wasting our time worrying about it now. The Holy Ghost is the one who does the actually Sealing in the eternities. I don't know why God requires us to do Sealings, but I feel as though I'm a better man for doing as my God requires of me.
Alan Posted July 12, 2014 Posted July 12, 2014 President Kimball's letter to my wife makes it clear that all this will be finally decided by the Lord. And I trust the Lord that all things will be sorted out justly and appropriately. I think this is a cop out. I think some people think the Lord is going to sit there like the Rev. Moon and decide who goes with who. We're going to have to figure it out for ourselves. We will have to choose and stand by our choice in my view.
Alan Posted July 12, 2014 Posted July 12, 2014 Emma consistently denied Joseph was involved in polygamy and I believe her.Joseph also denied he was involved and I believe him too.
why me Posted July 12, 2014 Posted July 12, 2014 (edited) I always wondered how Emma dealt with the issue of polygamy. Afterall it was she who eloped with Joseph against her father's wishes. Was their relationship a romantic one?Was romance a feature of other women he asked to marry?.I am afraid that it is quite impossible to know all the facts and so there is much room for speculation. No one knows just what kind of conversations went on in the smith home about it all and what was said between the couple. We only have some facts and much specualtion. However, when it was all said and done, emma loved joseph and carried a lock of his hair in a locket around her neck even after she was married, I believe. And this says much about their relationship. Also, at least one plural wife lived in the mansion house with joseph. One of the Prophet’s plural wives, having lived three years in his home, reflected late in her life, “I have known of his outgoings, and his incomings, his sorrows and joys, his troubles and afflictions in public and in private. He was one of the noblest of men and those who knew him best, loved him most.”14 https://www.lds.org/ensign/1979/09/joseph-smiths-reputation?lang=eng And from the same link we have this from Emma's second husband Bidamon: Lewis Bidamon, the non-Mormon who married Emma Smith after the Prophet’s death, recalled that Joseph Smith’s “manners, movements and whole deportment made a deep and lasting impression upon me, and convinced me that he was not the imposter and wicked man he had been represented by his enemies to be; to me he appeared to be a good, honest and noble-hearted man, and from all I have ever learned about him since, I have not had occasion to change my opinion about him.”11 It is obvious that Emma was not exactly cursing joseph out to her second husband and that he had a wonderful opinion of him. What does all this mean? Nothing much but it does say that maybe what the critics have said may not be on the mark. Edited July 12, 2014 by why me 1
cinepro Posted July 13, 2014 Posted July 13, 2014 One of the Prophet’s plural wives, having lived three years in his home, reflected late in her life, “I have known of his outgoings, and his incomings, his sorrows and joys, his troubles and afflictions in public and in private. He was one of the noblest of men and those who knew him best, loved him most.”14 But to the point of this thread, who was that woman, and did Emma know she was one of Joseph's plural wives at the time? 1
bcuzbcuz Posted July 14, 2014 Posted July 14, 2014 But to the point of this thread, who was that woman, and did Emma know she was one of Joseph's plural wives at the time?If I had a "plural wife" and my first, original wife, by civil or temple marriage, did not know that the "other woman" considered herself my wife, both the law and the church would view both the marriage and the "other woman" by terms other than "plural marriage". How much leeway, or slack, do we cut the "personal definition" of the man involved in the bigamy? Do we look for occasional lapses in speech or definition by the "first wife" that allows a liberal interpretation of her words to permit a "second or third wife", or do we go by the general standard that every one else is judged by, that defines the parameters of marriage?All I know is that if I had a second, hidden marriage (assumably, with privileges), that my wife did not know about, that no amount of "inventive thinking" on my part as to why that second woman was a part of my life would have any purchase with my first wife. Her words would be, "you're a lying cheat, get out of my life".
cinepro Posted July 14, 2014 Posted July 14, 2014 If I had a "plural wife" and my first, original wife, by civil or temple marriage, did not know that the "other woman" considered herself my wife, both the law and the church would view both the marriage and the "other woman" by terms other than "plural marriage". How much leeway, or slack, do we cut the "personal definition" of the man involved in the bigamy? Do we look for occasional lapses in speech or definition by the "first wife" that allows a liberal interpretation of her words to permit a "second or third wife", or do we go by the general standard that every one else is judged by, that defines the parameters of marriage? All I know is that if I had a second, hidden marriage (assumably, with privileges), that my wife did not know about, that no amount of "inventive thinking" on my part as to why that second woman was a part of my life would have any purchase with my first wife. Her words would be, "you're a lying cheat, get out of my life". Sure, that's how it works for you. But there is a specific exemption for Joseph Smith in the scriptures: D&C 132 64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power [i.e. Joseph], and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law. 65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if [Emma] receive not this law, for [Joseph] to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take aHagar to wife. https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/132 1
stemelbow Posted July 15, 2014 Posted July 15, 2014 What does it matter we'll all be sealed to each other anywho? Presuming we all become exalted. Why? Because that's what this is all about. I am sealed to my wife, my kids are sealed to me, my kid one day will be sealed to Cinepro's kid and thus that binding sealing somehow seals my family to his. And we'll all be grownups anyway. I'll be sealed to my kid but he'll be an adult who is sealed to his own kids who will be adults and I'll be sealed to my grandkids who are sealed to their own spouses who up the chain are sealed to say, Joseph Smith, thus linking me to Joseph Smith himself. The binding is such that we all become one as the Son is one with the Father, who'll also both be adults like the rest of us. 3
Recommended Posts