Killing Joseph Smith To Save Mormonism

[mormonnewb]

I don't understand how people don't know that. It's in the D&C. I learned it in Primary and Seminary too when we were studing the D&C. *sigh*

The D&C talks about JOSEPH'S multiple marriages?

[mormonnewb]

Often times when I read some of the comments on the Board and just look at society in general I remember George Orwell's old statement, "War is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength." We as a people seem much more willing to buy the snake oil or stick our head in the sand and then demand why we don't know there is light in the world.

I admit that I was a reader, but I was not a bookworm by any stretch of the imagination. Prior to serving my mission I had read the Standard Works several times; they were important to me and had become good friends. I certainly was not unique, but I recognize that I had put forth efforts in areas that many had not. What I refuse to accept is that knowledge was mysteriously hidden from the public. The fact that Joseph had instituted polygamy was a known fact; it is impossible to say it otherwise IF one had read the Doctrine & Covenants.

Who is to blame for ignorance? Go to a mirror, look honestly at it, and take responsibility for the only individual in the entire world that is to blame. There is no one else; it is not your parents; not your seminary teacher, not your Sunday School teacher, not the prophet, not the Church, not the Holy Spirit, and not God.

Those who are the most ignorant want to demand the most strength. I do not need to be in a picket line or to protest anything, but I know when these midgets of self-appointed czars have no clothes.

I have a sister who is over 60 and she just recently read the Book of Mormon for the first time. When she shared that with me I was happy for her, but I was also very dismayed. Why does anyone expect to know God in any depth without spending time with him in study, contemplation, and prayer?

Peace is not war, freedom is not allowing ourselves to be enslaved by mass media or any other spin meisters, and ignorance should be forced to acknowledge its utter weakness.

I wouldn't have wanted to be around when your kids found out there was no Santa Claus. "How could you not know there was no Santa, child? You could have gone to ANY library and found out the truth. Heck, the whole thing makes no sense. Sure, I was the one who told you about Santa but your ignorance is your fault. Look in the mirror, dummy!"

If someone of normal intelligence can go through HUNDREDS of hours of instruction and never know about JS' polygamy, then it simply isn't being taught well. No one ever grows up in this Church and says, "Who is this Hyrum fellow? And by the way, I thought JS had a PhD in physics." Neither JS' close relationship with his brother nor his meager education are pertinent to our salvation, yet these facts support a narrative that we drill into our kids. However, the polygamy narrative is a little more complicated so we " choose not to emphasize it."

That's fine. All faith traditions have stories that they like better than others. However, they don't blame the "ignorant" souls who are so trusting that they BELIEVE the Church's teachings.

[Danzo]

PRIMARY? Where and how was it taught? If you don't mind me asking. I'm in my early 50's, never heard about it until I read it on the web in my late 40's.

You never read the doctrine and covenants?

[mormonnewb]

Mormonnewb said he hasn't read the D&C yet, I believe him.

 

Please give me the reference in the D&C where it states that JOSEPH SMITH had multiple wives.  Yes, D&C 132 talks about polygamy but that isn't a confirmation that JS had engaged in the practice; particularly considering that he was publicly denying it.

 

In the same way, the D&C talks about the Word of Wisdom but that is no guarantee that JS followed it strictly.  In fact, we know that on the night of the martyrdom, he drank wine and had tobacco.  Given his situation, I think he was well within his rights to do so.  I'm just pointing out that just because something is in the D&C doesn't mean that JS necessarily did it or that we couldn't use more clarification.

 

For example, my ignorance notwithstanding, I'm going to guess that marriage is talked about in more than one section of the D&C.  Yet, despite its mention, the Church has taken pains to let us all know that JS was indeed married.  We know the name of his wife, and his children.  Given that they all chose Door #2 in the Succession Crisis, it wasn't necessary for us to know any of this, but the Church chose to include it anyway.

 

Hopefully, you can see how some of us woefully uninformed (and simple-minded) folk might think that we should be told the WHOLE story.  As Dr. King once said, "A fact is the absence of the contradiction, but the truth is the presence of coherence."  I should haven't to read through every issue of the Ensign ever published to parse through enough facts to get to the truth.  After all, I've heard a thousand times that this is one TRUE church.  Or does it say somewhere in the D&C that this is the one FACTUAL church and I've just missed it again?

 

Silly me!

[Danzo]

Please give me the reference in the D&C where it states that JOSEPH SMITH had multiple wives.  Yes, D&C 132 talks about polygamy but that isn't a confirmation that JS had engaged in the practice; particularly considering that he was publicly denying it.

 

In the same way, the D&C talks about the Word of Wisdom but that is no guarantee that JS followed it strictly.  In fact, we know that on the night of the martyrdom, he drank wine and had tobacco.  Given his situation, I think he was well within his rights to do so.  I'm just pointing out that just because something is in the D&C doesn't mean that JS necessarily did it or that we couldn't use more clarification.

 

For example, my ignorance notwithstanding, I'm going to guess that marriage is talked about in more than one section of the D&C.  Yet, despite its mention, the Church has taken pains to let us all know that JS was indeed married.  We know the name of his wife, and his children.  Given that they all chose Door #2 in the Succession Crisis, it wasn't necessary for us to know any of this, but the Church chose to include it anyway.

 

Hopefully, you can see how some of us woefully uninformed (and simple-minded) folk might think that we should be told the WHOLE story.  As Dr. King once said, "A fact is the absence of the contradiction, but the truth is the presence of coherence."  I should haven't to read through every issue of the Ensign ever published to parse through enough facts to get to the truth.  After all, I've heard a thousand times that this is one TRUE church.  Or does it say somewhere in the D&C that this is the one FACTUAL church and I've just missed it again?

 

Silly me!

 

If you are telling me that you have read doctrine and covenents 132 and the possibility that JS had more than one wife never entered your mind, then I guess you just read things different than I do.

[mormonnewb]

Another thing Mormonweb, I don't think polygamy or anti-mormons are destroying the church all that much. Yes, they take away some people, but most (and I wouldn't say all, because there are exceptions. I almost decided to leave, because of their attacks on Spiritual Witness)  Apostates aren't necessarily entirely driven by the facts. 60% of Young Men leave the church primarily because of the thoroughness of pornography in drawing people's hearts away [emphasis added]. Now like I said, there are exceptions and some very honest truth seekers among the ex-Mormons and anti-Mormons. But I think it has more to do with our current culture than the facts.

 

This appears to be a uniquely Mormon narrative of faith transitions.  It also seems to be fundamental misunderstanding of human reasoning.

 

As a Baptist, I had a list of rules that very closely resembled the Mormon "No No" list.  At various times, I would willfully break one or several of such rules.  In doing so, I never thought, "I must leave this religion right now because I keep breaking the rules."  In fact, as I understood it, that is precisely WHY I needed a relationship with Christ -- because without Him, I would never be able to keep His commandments.

 

Therefore, on Saturday night, I didn't think, "I've just sinned.  I guess I won't go to church in the morning."  It was just the opposite.  I would think, "Boy, I REALLY missed up tonight.  I better get to church EARLY tomorrow so I don't miss a SINGLE word of the sermon."

 

Yet, we somehow believe that someone's desire for sin will cause their brain to malfunction and they will lose the ability to tell truth from lies.  This might happen in extreme cases, but in my experience, it's entirely possible for human beings to choose to do things that they KNOW are wrong.

 

Let's take a silly example.  I really like ice cream.  Yet, I've had experiences that are too embarrassing to share that cause me to KNOW that it is fattening.  Yet, sometimes (who am I kidding? often) I eat it anyway.  Before buying a pint of Ben & Jerry's Chunky Monkey, I don't have to try to talk myself out of my belief in ice cream's fat-inducingness by listening to an episode of the Ice Cream Stories podcast.  I can simply choose to do something that I know is wrong.

 

In the same way, no one has to leave this Church in order to embark on a life of porn.  They certainly don't have to deconstruct the very fundamentals of their world view in order to watch porn, in just the same way that I don't have to deconstruct the last century of nutritional science to eat ice cream.  They can simply do it and then feel bad about it later.

 

In fact, from a strategic standpoint, it is easier to engage in sin while a member of the Church.  If a typical Mormon man were to ask for my advice on how to get away with watching porn, my FIRST piece of advice would be, "Don't leave the Church!"  Because the moment that he expresses any indication of doing so, his wife is going to go STRAIGHT to his browser history.  His parents are going to start looking closely around his home for empty beer bottles or cigarette boxes.  Because of this narrative, he has brought upon himself intense scrutiny.

 

So to assume that most people leave the Church because they want to sin assumes that most people have no ability to CTW (choose the wrong).  Whatever happened to that whole agency thing?  Also, it assumes that these people are not very bright because they are simultaneously increasing their odds of getting caught.

 

So we should probably stop this misconception right now and be clear: The vast majority of Mormon sinners are IN the Church.  In fact, to borrow from the Baptists, "A saint is just a sinner who falls down, but keeps getting up."

[mormonnewb]

If you are telling me that you have read doctrine and covenents 132 and the possibility that JS had more than one wife never entered your mind, then I guess you just read things different than I do.

 

Yes, the POSSIBILITY exists from reading the text, but I'm supposed to divine from D&C 132 that he had over 30 wives?  Or whatever the number was.  And since the Church didn't make me play "Guess the Bride" with Emma, why here?

Edited July 16, 2014 by mormonnewb

[Storm Rider]

Please give me the reference in the D&C where it states that JOSEPH SMITH had multiple wives.  Yes, D&C 132 talks about polygamy but that isn't a confirmation that JS had engaged in the practice; particularly considering that he was publicly denying it.

 

In the same way, the D&C talks about the Word of Wisdom but that is no guarantee that JS followed it strictly.  In fact, we know that on the night of the martyrdom, he drank wine and had tobacco.  Given his situation, I think he was well within his rights to do so.  I'm just pointing out that just because something is in the D&C doesn't mean that JS necessarily did it or that we couldn't use more clarification.

 

For example, my ignorance notwithstanding, I'm going to guess that marriage is talked about in more than one section of the D&C.  Yet, despite its mention, the Church has taken pains to let us all know that JS was indeed married.  We know the name of his wife, and his children.  Given that they all chose Door #2 in the Succession Crisis, it wasn't necessary for us to know any of this, but the Church chose to include it anyway.

 

Hopefully, you can see how some of us woefully uninformed (and simple-minded) folk might think that we should be told the WHOLE story.  As Dr. King once said, "A fact is the absence of the contradiction, but the truth is the presence of coherence."  I should haven't to read through every issue of the Ensign ever published to parse through enough facts to get to the truth.  After all, I've heard a thousand times that this is one TRUE church.  Or does it say somewhere in the D&C that this is the one FACTUAL church and I've just missed it again?

 

Silly me!

 

Newby, this is just so full of errors.  Let's review a little bit:

 

• Joseph received the revelation and you then assume that it was for someone else and not him?  This sounds unusually gullible and naive.  You may be many things, but naive is not one of them.
• He was publicly denying it - says who?  Oh, so the fount of LDS historical fact is anti-Mormon "literature" (I term I use lightly here).  So you spend so much time studying this caliber of writing and can't be bothered to actually study the scriptures or a multitude of Church published authors?  Please, no need to pull my leg any harder, I think I understand you better.
• Go back and read the D&C 89 again. Joseph obeyed the Word of Wisdom during his day.  The Section clearly states that it is not absolute and not be being compelled.  Who is actually accusing him of breaking the Word of Wisdom?  Oh, I forgot that wonderful literature you have wasted your time reading.  I keep forgetting.
• Yes, there you go again with, "I did read it in Church", but you are unfortunately incorrect again.  Get yourself to an LDS bookstore and buy one of many books that discusses the succession crisis.  How old was Joseph's oldest son?  What was said to him by Joseph if he remained true?  What about Brigham?  There are a lot of moving parts, but if studied you will grasp it.  Leave off on the darkening, I mean enlightening, influence of the critics (another term I use lightly).

You like to push buttons, but one thing I won't accept from you is to act stupid.  You are not nor have you ever been stupid.  Leave off on the play-acting and begin seeking after the best books.  You won't have to look far; it will be right in front of your nose if you actually put forth the effort to learn.  Spend all of five minutes doing a search on LDS.org in any Ensign and you will find a complete coverage for laying a foundation.  Then buy a few halfway decent books that address the topics in depth.  Guess what, the Bible answer man, Ms. Bordie, et. al. are not the ideal sources when there are so many others to choose from. 

[mormonnewb]

Newby, this is just so full of errors.  Let's review a little bit:

 

• Joseph received the revelation and you then assume that it was for someone else and not him?  This sounds unusually gullible and naive.  You may be many things, but naive is not one of them.

And knowing that the revelation applies to him tells us how many wives he had and the circumstances in which he procured them?

• He was publicly denying it - says who?  Oh, so the fount of LDS historical fact is anti-Mormon "literature" (I term I use lightly here).  So you spend so much time studying this caliber of writing and can't be bothered to actually study the scriptures or a multitude of Church published authors?  Please, no need to pull my leg any harder, I think I understand you better.

​I certainly could be mistaken here, except I find it hard to believe that so many people could have missed this core doctrine had he been preaching it publicly.  How did the Reorganized Church totally miss this teaching from the prophet?  Possibly because D&C 132 wasn't publicly acknowledged by Brigham Young until 1852?  Here's an article from FAIR that explains why JS did NOT publicly teach polygamy.

 

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Hiding_the_truth

 

• Go back and read the D&C 89 again. Joseph obeyed the Word of Wisdom during his day.  The Section clearly states that it is not absolute and not be being compelled.  Who is actually accusing him of breaking the Word of Wisdom?  Oh, I forgot that wonderful literature you have wasted your time reading.  I keep forgetting.

So it's self-evident that JS followed the commandment on plural marriage, but it's illogical to assume that he would have complied with the WoW?  As I understand it, the WoW was not meant to be mandatory for all of the saints, but I would THINK that the prophet himself might have followed it strictly.  It certainly isn't an unreasonable inference, which is supposedly how we are to obtain knowledge about these things (unless we keep reading to the very last page of the Ensign).

• Yes, there you go again with, "I did read it in Church", but you are unfortunately incorrect again.  Get yourself to an LDS bookstore and buy one of many books that discusses the succession crisis.  How old was Joseph's oldest son?  What was said to him by Joseph if he remained true?  What about Brigham?  There are a lot of moving parts, but if studied you will grasp it.  Leave off on the darkening, I mean enlightening, influence of the critics (another term I use lightly).

 

You like to push buttons, but one thing I won't accept from you is to act stupid.  You are not nor have you ever been stupid.  Leave off on the play-acting and begin seeking after the best books.  You won't have to look far; it will be right in front of your nose if you actually put forth the effort to learn.  Spend all of five minutes doing a search on LDS.org in any Ensign and you will find a complete coverage for laying a foundation.  Then buy a few halfway decent books that address the topics in depth.  Guess what, the Bible answer man, Ms. Bordie, et. al. are not the ideal sources when there are so many others to choose from. 

 

Don't you see that it is our reticence to discuss these issues openly that drives people to Brodie, Tanner, et al?  If I've been reading church manuals all of my life and find out on the Internet about JS' polygamy, where would I logically look to know find out more?  Would I go back to the same church that conveniently left out any mention of the topic in DOZENS of manuals and other tracts they placed in my hands during the years?  Or am I going to just clicking through the links provided?

 

And your mention of Brodie is apropos because I recently heard Richard Bushman talk about her work and how Rough Stone Rolling was his attempt at a faithful response.  Interestingly, he did not trash Brodie for her anti-Mormon "tome full of lies."  Instead, he actually acknowledged her as an "excellent journalist" and "okay historian."  In his research, he unearthed many of the SAME facts.  Of course, where they differ is that he doesn't draw the same conclusions that Brodie drew.  As a result, a Bushman reader will come away with a much more positive view of JS (and more importantly, the restored gospel) than a Brodie reader, even when they tell fairly similar stories.

 

However, when the Church refuses to tell ANY story (or worse, tells a watered-down version of it), then it has ceded the field to the anti-Mormons because they are the only game in town.  In fact, the only reason there is a game at all is because the Church often refuses to play.  If every member of the Church knew that JS had 27+ wives, then they would never click on a link that said, "I bet you didn't know Joseph Smith had multiple wives."  They'd say, "Duh!" and move right along to trying to figure out what Game of Thrones character they most closely resemble.

Edited July 16, 2014 by mormonnewb

[Storm Rider]

Geez, this is tedious.  Tell me what can you find only in anti-Mormon writing that the Church or members of the church have never written about?  Just one.  

[Tacenda]

You never read the doctrine and covenants?

My bad, probably not enough scripture study on my part, but as someone mentioned before, section 132 doesn't get specific that JS actually did live polygamy, or name wives.

[Storm Rider]

My bad, probably not enough scripture study on my part, but as someone mentioned before, section 132 doesn't get specific that JS actually did live polygamy, or name wives.

 

I think what you are looking for is a more depth analysis such as, Joseph Smith married Emma on xyz, and then proceed with every other woman, plus their ages, who gave consent, was it a marriage or a sealing, was it conjugal, if so, why not; if so, how often, and if there were any children.  

 

I can understand the curiosity for such things. It was never condensed into a complete list in church publications; you had to go looking for some of the names if you had an interest.  However, I am not really understanding the real value of such knowledge when it was known that Brigham and so many others were polygamists?  Does being a polygamist somehow makes Joseph less of a prophet?  

 

So much of these factoids just escape me as to why there is such value places on them. If Brigham had 27 wives and a whole passel of children what is the issue with Joseph having wives and children only from Emma?  It just seems like mountains out of mile hills.  If you want to have a problem, you will find it.  If you don't want to have a problem, you won't; you have to choose. 

[why me]

Yes, the POSSIBILITY exists from reading the text, but I'm supposed to divine from D&C 132 that he had over 30 wives?  Or whatever the number was.  And since the Church didn't make me play "Guess the Bride" with Emma, why here?

The idea of plurality of marriage is in the introduction.

 

Section 132

Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded July 12, 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant and the principle of plural marriage. Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, evidence indicates that some of the principles involved in this revelation were known by the Prophet as early as 1831. See Official Declaration 1.

 

Now of course, it wouldn't state that he had thirty wives in the section itself. Of course the church could publish a 2000 page history but I know of no church that has published its own history. But scholars have done so. Scholars are more than welcome to do so about the lds church and members can read such books. I guess the point is that even if the church did write its history, the critics would write their own interpretation. The best history would be written by objective historians who do not have a dog in the fight.

Edited July 16, 2014 by why me

[rodheadlee]

http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_9_16?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=history+of+the+church+of+jesus+christ+of+latter-day+saints+complete+8+volume+set&sprefix=history+of+the+C%2Cstripbooks%2C455

 

 

Mormonnewb D&C 131:

 

6 It is impossible for a man to be ^asaved in ^bignorance.

 

I read these BEFORE I joined the Church.

Edited July 16, 2014 by rodheadlee

[Senator]

Geez, this is tedious.  Tell me what can you find only in anti-Mormon writing that the Church or members of the church have never written about?  Just one.  

 

What would be more informative is a chronology of who wrote about something first.

[JLHPROF]

The D&C talks about JOSEPH'S multiple marriages?

 

Please give me the reference in the D&C where it states that JOSEPH SMITH had multiple wives.  Yes, D&C 132 talks about polygamy but that isn't a confirmation that JS had engaged in the practice; particularly considering that he was publicly denying it.

 

My bad, probably not enough scripture study on my part, but as someone mentioned before, section 132 doesn't get specific that JS actually did live polygamy, or name wives.

 

D&C 132

 

vs 32-34 Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved.

But if ye enter not into my law ye cannot receive the promise of my Father, which he made unto Abraham.

God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises.

 

Joseph Smith commanded to enter the same law as Abraham did with Hagar, ie plural marriage

 

vs 51-52 Verily, I say unto you: A commandment I give unto mine handmaid, Emma Smith, your wife, whom I have given unto you, that she stay herself and partake not of that which I commanded you to offer unto her; for I did it, saith the Lord, to prove you all, as I did Abraham, and that I might require an offering at your hand, by covenant and sacrifice.

And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, receive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.

 

All those who are given to Joseph, ie wives, just as she is described as given to him

 

So, while it's true the D&C doesn't list his wives and marriages, there can be no doubt from reading 132 that he lived polygamy/plural marriage.

[Bowtiemenace]

Mormonweb: You're wrong on this one. Pornography is destroying the church. 

 

1st difference between that and a normal sin: A Bishop's visit is required to overcome it.

2nd difference: Its extremely bad (next to adultery, which is next to murder.) This keeps people from feeling the spirit, etc. So they don't get a testimony and wonder why they were ever in the church.

3rd difference: People like it, so they sometimes look for justification to do it. (Anti-mormon genre can do that.) This can then get them to disbelieve and then eventually leave.

 

You have to disbelieve the church and hate the church to leave the church.

 

Like I said, this isn't a law of nature and there are lots of exceptions, but pornography is doing a killer blow against the Church.

[ERayR]

Don't you see that it is our reticence to discuss these issues openly that drives people to Brodie, Tanner, et al?  If I've been reading church manuals all of my life and find out on the Internet about JS' polygamy, where would I logically look to know find out more?  Would I go back to the same church that conveniently left out any mention of the topic in DOZENS of manuals and other tracts they placed in my hands during the years?  Or am I going to just clicking through the links provided?

 

And your mention of Brodie is apropos because I recently heard Richard Bushman talk about her work and how Rough Stone Rolling was his attempt at a faithful response.  Interestingly, he did not trash Brodie for her anti-Mormon "tome full of lies."  Instead, he actually acknowledged her as an "excellent journalist" and "okay historian."  In his research, he unearthed many of the SAME facts.  Of course, where they differ is that he doesn't draw the same conclusions that Brodie drew.  As a result, a Bushman reader will come away with a much more positive view of JS (and more importantly, the restored gospel) than a Brodie reader, even when they tell fairly similar stories.

 

However, when the Church refuses to tell ANY story (or worse, tells a watered-down version of it), then it has ceded the field to the anti-Mormons because they are the only game in town.  In fact, the only reason there is a game at all is because the Church often refuses to play.  If every member of the Church knew that JS had 27+ wives, then they would never click on a link that said, "I bet you didn't know Joseph Smith had multiple wives."  They'd say, "Duh!" and move right along to trying to figure out what Game of Thrones character they most closely resemble.

 

IN the immortal words of Hilary Clinton "What difference does it make now."

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

IN the immortal words of Hilary Clinton "What difference does it make now."

"What difference, at this point, does it make".

[name]

Hi JLHPROF!

Joseph was never fallen and still stands at the head of this dispensation (and will judge us at some point).

Please forgive my ignorance (I am a never-Mo)

Joseph Smith is the one who will judge us?

Can you elaborate on this?

Thanks and peace,

Name

[ERayR]

"What difference, at this point, does it make".

 

Sorry I should have looked it up.

[CV75]

I was just reading

You will notice that the Church does not condemn individuals as modern revelation changes what they received or practiced, no matter how we view such teachings and practices today. The leaders have far more integrity than to do that. It is inconsistent with the principle of righteous judgment to label Joseph Smith a fallen prophet and reframe his martyrdom as an action taken by the Lord to remove him. Even in judgments on apostasy and error, the worth of the soul is great.

 

The same principle of righteous judgment is required of those who would condition their membership (it’s not faith!) on the punishment of a dead prophet.

[Tacenda]

IN the immortal words of Hilary Clinton "What difference does it make now."

Not everyone is as resilient as you and many others on the board I guess. 

 

I've often linked this https://www.lds.org/churchhistory/presidents/controllers/potcController.jsp?leader=2&topic=events because it shows a stark contrast.  It shows the Significant Events of each of the presidents of the church.  On Joseph Smith's, it lists his marriage to Emma Smith, as if she is the only wife.  Then it proceeds to show no category of marriages for the next several presidents that lived polygamy and then will pick up on the next presidents from then on and show their one wife.  If it's common knowledge that JS lived polygamy, why only list one wife?  And then on the presidents like BY and others, no wives are listed?  Then it picks back up and lists the wife of the known non-polygamists?  Isn't this misleading in a way, by listing Emma just as the other non-polygamists?  Thereby making it appear he didn't have any other wives?      

 

This semi hidden fact of JS, threw me in a tailspin for the past several years.  This information of JS's polygamy put me in a faith crisis.  Took me out of the temple as far as I now have an expired TR, will soon change my relationship with all my in laws when the truth is out.  This info I ran onto innocently, threw me into an obsession I didn't see coming.  This silent killer took me from my family and changed my personality.  I don't even know who I am, nor do I even know if there is a life after this, maybe it's a blessing and will force me to search I guess.  But I hope that my youngest child and I can have a relationship since I pretty much neglected it.  At my funeral my kids will probably remember me most as being on the computer & drinking my Diet Dr. Pepper, that's it.  I lost the desire for a hobby, this is my hobby.  No wonder ex LDS or disbelieving LDS won't leave the church alone.  I pray for the day Nauvoo Polygamy comes out in a church essay.  I need the church to be more open on this in order to save my hide, when the family think all I've done is look at anti stuff, when what I struggle with is the truth and yes it is anti but it is true anti.  I need the church to be an open church, as much as I need air to breath.

 

I remember reading the book series "The Work and the Glory" by Gerald N. Lund.  In it he comes just short of telling that JS married other wives.  He stops short and just said JS was commanded to live polygamy and that he struggled to do it.  The author even has foot notes at the end of each chapter.  I read each of these because they were facts about that which I was reading, which was fictional, and a great way to learn about church history.  Why did Lund not take the opportunity to let the reader know the fact that Joseph went on to actually living up to the commandments?  This would've been a great opportunity to give respect to the wives that helped JS live the commandment, if it was really from God wouldn't this be something worth noting? 

[JLHPROF]

Hi JLHPROF!

Please forgive my ignorance (I am a never-Mo)

Joseph Smith is the one who will judge us?

Can you elaborate on this?

Thanks and peace,

Name

 

Two things:

 

#1 - I already answered this in post #37 if you want to read a few of the teachings surrounding this.

and

#2 - Joseph Smith isn't the "one" who will judge us.  He is one of many who will judge us ending with the Savior and Heavenly Father.  Mormonism features a strict hierarchy.  Even in the church today you are interviewed by your bishop for some things, by your bishop AND then stake president for others, and in rare cases by your bishop, then stake president, then a general authority.

Also Christ himself said that the 12 Apostles would judge the twelve tribes of Israel. - Matt 19:28.

 

The actual belief is that we will be progressively judged by those in positions over us until we reach the Savior.  And yes, that means for this dispensation of the gospel that Joseph Smith will be one of our judges.  We don't know if it will be a council/panel judgement or a progression of judgements, but that's kind of irrelevant to the issue at hand.

[thesometimesaint]

You'd better duck.  I hardly know where to begin.

 

1. Polygamy was not a mistake as it was given directly from God by recorded revelation that is still canon.  (That young man needed to read his D&C 132 before claiming he was lied to - it's right in the scriptures).  The same revelations continued with Brigham Young and John Taylor, until Wilford Woodruff received a revelation instructing that they stop.  But still, never called a mistake in any divine communication.  So Joseph wasn't fallen as a prophet.

 

2. Moses & Noah had sins.  Joseph had sins.  None of them were recorded as fallen prophets.  They still held their priesthood and calling.

 

3. The scriptures clearly state that IF God had to remove a prophet out of his place as you state in your third point, that he would still have power to name his successor.  So if Joseph fell (which he didn't) he would still have been able to name Brigham his successor.  That way the chain of authority remains unbroken.  If a prophet fell and no successor was named by him another restoration would be needed.

 

Joseph was never fallen and still stands at the head of this dispensation (and will judge us at some point).

 

Agreed.