Polygamy Is Not The Issue. The Devil Is In The Details

[Teancum]

How can one learn any spiritual claim is true or not except through spiritual means??? Can you speak for God and say that Joseph was not a prophet? Can you speak for God and say that He did not send an angel with a flaming sword to threaten to literally cut Joseph off if he did not obey? Can you speak for God and tell us that He was not the source of D&C section 132? Can you speak for God on anything?

Joseph's first vision and his call as a prophet, the angel and a sword thing, Section 132, were all spiritual events with no other witnesses around. In order to ascertain whether they actually happened would require something or someone with a direct knowledge of the events. We have Joseph's word. And for a confirmation or rejection, we have to get it from another witness. We do not have enough information on our own to make that determination.

You may speak for yourself, only. And what you think or speak may not be in line with what God thinks and has spoken.

Glenn

I don't think claiming that an angel with a sword came to tell JS to do polygamy is a spiritual claim. I think it is nonesenical.

All I know is JS claimed he was a prophet. Before I will pray about that anymore I will use rational thought to see if it makes sense to pray about it or something ge claimed.

Honestly your post is so full of a priori claims and assumptions it is silly. Do you give equal credence to anyone who claims revelation from God? Do you pray about Muhammend, Islam and the Korqn to know if it is true? I could claim tomorrow God is speaking to me thqt the LDS church from polygamy forward is false and I had an angel with q sword tell me to go out and teach it. Would you pray about it? Do you know who Denver Snuffer is? Did you pray about his claims to a visitation of Jesus being true?

Of course as you so bluntly point out I could be wrong. But then again you could be as well. You don't speak for God either though it is clear you believe JS did. That is fine. But it does not make you right.

Edited November 12, 2014 by Teancum

[Teancum]

Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. He restored plural marriage to the earth by direct revelation and commandment. Plural Marriage is an eternal principle and law.

All other questions, history, and doctrinal issues are our own and our own hangups to deal with. The issues are with us, not with the restoration of this law. It's just like Consecration.

A simple assertion of your own faith and nothing more. One can easily reject it.

[Teancum]

If you throw out Joseph's claims, you also have to throw out Brigham's, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, Lorenzo Snow, Joseph F. Smith and Heber J. Grant, as being in on the conspiracy or duped. Not to mention most of the Apostles and Elders for the first two thirds of the history of the church.

I just don't see how a faithful Latter-day Saint can discount the principle and reconcile that with having living prophets and apostles guided by God.

We are told our leaders make mistakes. I believe polygamy along with the priesthood ban were both horrific mistakes. Edited November 12, 2014 by Teancum

[Calm]

I must have asked you before, my apologies for needing to do it again. What do you think of the quite vivid and detailed spiritual experiences of the women, such as Vilate Kimball who iicr had a vision about PM without having been taught it, she only knew something was troubling her husband?

Other women who just don't talk about being taught by father, husband, brother or Joseph, but about spiritual eexperiences they had...so that it seems to me it just isn't Joseph who is privy to them.

[cinepro]

I also have to ask myself whether the the person claiming fantastic supernatural intervention that they are the only person privy to can be trusted. To make that decision I have to look at other things they do. I don't give any other religious leader who claims God told them to take more wives or do some other odd sexual practice when they claim God told them to because their claims seem far to self serving and because of other odd strange things they do. Based on how joseph rolled out plural marriage I don't give him a pass either. Thus I determine it was a false teaching and a large mistake. Why Joseph did it, whether he believed it really from God I have no way to determine it.

 

Honestly, one of my biggest worries is how easy it is to find leaders of other religious groups (especially the founders of such groups) who feel inspired to implement polygamy in secret.  It's very common.  Obviously, with Joseph Smith it was different because God commanded him to, and everyone else it was just them coming up with it.  But sometimes I wish Joseph were a little more unique in that regard.

[Teancum]

In other words, why seek out God on matters of godliness when men are presumably smart enough to figure it all out on their own? What need have we of God?

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

You got it. Nonesense does not deserve to prayed about.

So I assume you pray about other individuals fantastic claims? Are prayers about truth claims reserved solely ifor things from the LDS church.

[Teancum]

In relation to the restored gospel, the title of this thread is correct, polygamy isn't the issue. Instead, it is coming unto Christ and becoming like him. 

 

As such, those who lose faith in the gospel because of polygamy don't correctly or adequate;y grasp what the gospel is really all about.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Or they conclude that because of that and other things that the LDS church may not be all it claims. There are other simplistic answers.

[Robert F. Smith]

What is the "gospel" in the church anyway?

"Gospel" means "good tidings, glad tidings, good news" of the Atonement of Jesus the Messiah, and of His grace.  It does not mean doctrine, dogma, theology, or the like.  The Gospel is independent of the Church (of any church), though a church organization may be created to preach it and teach it, and although a book may be written to contain it (among other things).

[Robert F. Smith]

"Brian Hales whom I respect and share many views with has found ways to reconcile all of this. My issue is his theories only work if there will indeed be more women who make the Celestial Kingdom then men. He has stated so himself that this is his premise. I struggle with that as I just don't buy that God gave women a salvific advantage over men."

 

So what are the odds that there will be exactly the same number of men as women who are considered worthy to be exalted in the Celestial Kingdom?

No chance of that in my opinion.

Straw man.

[Teancum]

I must have asked you before, my apologies for needing to do it again. What do you think of the quite vivid and detailed spiritual experiences of the women, such as Vilate Kimball who iicr had a vision about PM without having been taught it, she only knew something was troubling her husband?

Other women who just don't talk about being taught by father, husband, brother or Joseph, but about spiritual eexperiences they had...so that it seems to me it just isn't Joseph who is privy to them.

I give them the shame credit I do other woman whose religious leader convinced them that God was telling them to do something lie marry them or sleep with them. I don't accept the testimony of an FLDS woman that God was directing her to marry Jeffs. Do you?

So it is the same with thsee woman. They all views Jospeh and Gods mouthpiece on earth. Given where they lived and what so many had already given up....well the mind can confirm all sorts of things in all sorts of ways,

And what about the women who rejected Joseph who had believed him but no longer could when approached woth plural marriage? Do you hold Nancy Rigdon, the recipient of the happiness letter, in as hihg esteem for rejecting Joseph's proposal as you do Vialte Kimball?

[Teancum]

Honestly, one of my biggest worries is how easy it is to find leaders of other religious groups (especially the founders of such groups) who feel inspired to implement polygamy in secret. It's very common. Obviously, with Joseph Smith it was different because God commanded him to, and everyone else it was just them coming up with it. But sometimes I wish Joseph were a little more unique in that regard.

To me it is not so obviously that God commanded Jospeh. Just the opposite actually.

Edited November 12, 2014 by Teancum

[cdowis]

What is the "gospel" in the church anyway?

 

3 Nephi 27

[16] And it shall come to pass, that whoso repenteth and is baptized in my name shall be filled; and if he endureth to the end, behold, him will I hold guiltless before my Father at that day when I shall stand to judge the world.

[17] And he that endureth not unto the end, the same is he that is also hewn down and cast into the fire, from whence they can no more return, because of the justice of the Father.

[18] And this is the word which he hath given unto the children of men. And for this cause he fulfilleth the words which he hath given, and he lieth not, but fulfilleth all his words.

[19] And no unclean thing can enter into his kingdom; therefore nothing entereth into his rest save it be those who have washed their garments in my blood, because of their faith, and the repentance of all their sins, and their faithfulness unto the end.

[20] Now this is the commandment: Repent, all ye ends of the earth, and come unto me and be baptized in my name, that ye may be sanctified by the reception of the Holy Ghost, that ye may stand spotless before me at the last day.

[21] Verily, verily, I say unto you, this is my gospel;

[rodheadlee]

I don't think claiming that an angel with a sword came to tell JS to do polygamy is a spiritual claim. I think it is nonesenical.

All I know is JS claimed he was a prophet. Before I iwll pray about that anymore I will use rational thought to see if it makes sense today about it.

Honestly your post is so full of a priori claims and assumptions it is silly. Do you give equal credence to anyone who claims revelation from God? Do you pray about Muhammend, Islam and the Korqn to know if it is true? I could claim tomorrow God is speaking to me thqt the LDS church from polygamy forward is false and I had an angel with q sword tell me to go out and teach it. Would you pray about it? Do you know who Denver Snuffer is? Did you pray about his claims to a visitation of Jesus being true?

Of course as you so bluntly point out I could be wrong. But then again you could be as well. You don't speak for God either though it is clear you believe JS did. That is fine. But it does not make you right.

So are you a member of the Church? I would say with that outlook on Joseph Smith you must not believe The LDS Church is the Church of Jesus Christ therefore there is no reason to belong to the Church.

[Teancum]

Yes I am a member and I stay for an variety of reasons of which I don't think this thread is the place to delve into them. But I will say there is much JS brought forth that I find wonderful and quite like and can accept it is a grand possibility. I also find some of what he did and brought forth horrible and the topic of this thread is clearly one of them.

[rodheadlee]

Thanks for answering. I'm just trying to get to know people better.

[Calm]

Do you hold Nancy Rigdon, the recipient of the happiness letter, in as hihg esteem for rejecting Joseph's proposal as you do Vialte Kimball?

If she didn't get a spiritual witness of the principle, then yes for turning him down.  It would take as much guts to say no as to say yes in that kind of a situation, imo.  If she then turned against him and other LDS, I probably would have an issue on that, I can't remember if she did or not, I am tired and braindead and not going to go look like I usually do when I need a refresher.

 

I don't accept the testimony of an FLDS woman that God was directing her to marry Jeffs. Do you?

 

I haven't heard any such testimony so I couldn't say.

Edited November 12, 2014 by calmoriah

[Tacenda]

"Gospel" means "good tidings, glad tidings, good news" of the Atonement of Jesus the Messiah, and of His grace. It does not mean doctrine, dogma, theology, or the like. The Gospel is independent of the Church (of any church), though a church organization may be created to preach it and teach it, and although a book may be written to contain it (among other things).

Just what I was looking for, thank you. Sadly all my life I didn't really know what exactly it meant.

[The Nehor]

Honestly, one of my biggest worries is how easy it is to find leaders of other religious groups (especially the founders of such groups) who feel inspired to implement polygamy in secret.  It's very common.  Obviously, with Joseph Smith it was different because God commanded him to, and everyone else it was just them coming up with it.  But sometimes I wish Joseph were a little more unique in that regard.

Well, he was unique in being sealed to men too so doesn't that make him more progressive?

[The Nehor]

You got it. Nonesense does not deserve to prayed about.

But if I find something amenable why would I feel a need to pray about it? Aren't you just saying "no need to pray about anything"?

[stemelbow]

We are told our leaders make mistakes. I believe polygamy along with the priesthood ban were both horrific mistakes.

It's certainly possible that it was all a big mistake. Spiritual experience, revelation works to some extent but it's not foolproof. All involved could have been fooled in their "testimonies" of plural marriage. With that said, I wouldn't doubt at all that the priesthood ban is a great example wherein the leaders were wrong and perhaps fooled.

[stemelbow]

I give them the shame credit I do other woman whose religious leader convinced them that God was telling them to do something lie marry them or sleep with them. I don't accept the testimony of an FLDS woman that God was directing her to marry Jeffs. Do you?

So it is the same with thsee woman. They all views Jospeh and Gods mouthpiece on earth. Given where they lived and what so many had already given up....well the mind can confirm all sorts of things in all sorts of ways,

And what about the women who rejected Joseph who had believed him but no longer could when approached woth plural marriage? Do you hold Nancy Rigdon, the recipient of the happiness letter, in as hihg esteem for rejecting Joseph's proposal as you do Vialte Kimball?

it is an interesting thought. We often give such veneration to those who accepted polygamy as they sought spiritual confirmation. It could very well be that they were fooled, and the real valiant listeners of the spirit opposed polygamy. I'd have no problem with it if that were the case, personally.

[thesometimesaint]

I think we need to be very careful here because Jesus during his mortal ministry instituted a Priesthood Ban too. Are you saying that Jesus was wrong and perhaps fooled?

[stemelbow]

I think we need to be very careful here because Jesus during his mortal ministry instituted a Priesthood Ban too. Are you saying that Jesus was wrong and perhaps fooled?

Not at all.

[rockpond]

When someone raises polygamy as a concern, they are often shut down and told something like - "that is a silly thing to be bothered by, polygamy occurred in the Old Testament by prophets... it really shouldn't bother you". Heck, I have used that myself a time or two. May I state to those who say or think such, Polygamy is really not the issue. Polygamy doesn't bother me as a practice. If informed consenting adult women want to share a man... more power to them. My issue and likely the issue of other LDS who are bothered by "polygamy" is rather with the details of how it was practiced, not the practice itself. 

For Example - what bothers me and others are the following details (most can be read about on LDS.ORG's gospel topics articles and further studied in the work of Todd Compton and Brian Hales

*** Some Evidence ( I see this evidence as conflicting and while I give less weight to this, I recognize others see this as deeply problematic) that Joseph used some level of coercion or that God used some level of coercion on Joseph to then coerce others.

was so unwilling to consider the matter favorably that I fear I did not ask in faith for light. Gross darkness instead of light took possession of my mind. I was tempted and tortured beyond endurance until life was not desirable.... The Prophet discerned my sorrow. He saw how unhappy I was, and sought an opportunity of again speaking to me on this subject....

[He said] "I have no flattering words to offer. It is a command of God to you. I will give you until tomorrow to decide this matter. If you reject this message the gate will be closed forever against you."– Lucy Walker

Angel with a drawn Sword:

1881: Zina Huntington—Zina D. Young told of Bro. Joseph's remark in relation to the revelation on celestial marriage. How an angel came to him with a drawn sword, and said if he did not obey this law he would lost his priesthood; and in the keeping of it he, Joseph, did not know but it would cost him his life. [3] 

1894: Zina Huntington—[Joseph] sent word to me by my brother, saying, 'Tell Zina I put it off and put it off till an angel with a drawn sword stood by me and told me if I did not establish that principle upon the earth, I would lost my position and my life.'"

**** Joseph being sealed to 14 year olds bothers me and while there is no evidence of intimacy, if intimacy could ever be shown to have occurred, that would be deeply problematic. As is it is very discomforting and confusing and doesn't sit well. (search Helen Mar Kimball if needed)

*** The taking of some wives from one husband and sealing them to yourself bothers me (Zina Huntington). 

****Besides that Joseph participated in Polyandry (some of the women Joseph was married to were married to other men already.)

**** Brigham married 15/16 year old Clarissa Caroline Decker when he was 42 years old .... that bothers me and seems to run contrary to my senses.... uhhh I really don't want to hear about how young girls at this age married all the time.... still kinda bothers me.

I dislike that people act as if what bothers people about polygamy is polygamy.... when really it is the nitty gritty details that are the issue, not the practice in general. When you tell your friends not to be bothered, you would be better to speak to specifics and not the general practice.

==============

I should add

- Brian Hales whom I respect and share many views with has found ways to reconcile all of this. My issue is his theories only work if there will indeed be more women who make the Celestial Kingdom then men. He has stated so himself that this is his premise. I struggle with that as I just don't buy that God gave women a salvific advantage over men. I don't believe God stacked the odds against me simply because I am a man ( Sorry bill but I designed you to be less spiritual and hence less likely .

- The revelation that allowed polygamy said that it was to raise up seed, but it did just the opposite. The women had far fewer kids than monogamous Mormon women if I have read my data correctly. 

- It also left significant men without a marriage as many of the women were taken.

- Many of the reasons we give for polygamy simply fall short of fact and reality. (more women than men in the Church, it was done to provide for old maids and widows, etc... all simply fall short)

 

I agree, Bill, the devil is in the details on polygamy.  And the "devil" of these essays is in the implications that they have on other doctrines.  The author of this article in Slate sees that and highlights how the essays on polygamy and the priesthood/temple ban lay the groundwork for future doctrinal changes on homosexuality*.

 

Divine Revision by Will Saletan

 

I have a very close friend (faithful, believing church member) for whom these essays have really challenged his beliefs and made him question the role of prophets and the changing of doctrine over time.

 

* I'll just state right now that I am not going to respond on the specific topic of homosexuality as I don't want to derail the thread.  My point in posting the article is to explore the logic put forward by Mr. Saletan.  I am NOT trying to start a debate on whether or not the church will one day accept SSM -- we all know where that topic leads.  So let's please not go there.

[cinepro]

I think we need to be very careful here because Jesus during his mortal ministry instituted a Priesthood Ban too. Are you saying that Jesus was wrong and perhaps fooled?

 

If Jesus implemented his "priesthood ban" in the same way that Brigham Young did, there might be a good argument to say he was "wrong and perhaps fooled" too.  

 

Maybe when it comes to such things Jesus wasn't perfect...?

Edited November 12, 2014 by cinepro