Learning About Polygamy: "it's Like Learning You Have Cancer."

[Tacenda]

UD, it looked like I was saying all of polygamy started with JS, hopefully you didn't read my post that way, though I can be pretty naive sometimes. Edited: Oh dear, you probably didn't think that since everyone knows men in Bible times had wives and concubines. Which btw, I've seen/heard JS had concubines, do you have any info on that, is it true?

Edited January 29, 2015 by Tacenda

[Uncle Dale]

UD, it looked like I was saying all of polygamy started with JS, hopefully you didn't read my post that way, though I can be pretty naive sometimes. Edited: Oh dear, you probably didn't think that since everyone knows men in Bible times had wives and concubines. Which btw, I've seen/heard JS had concubines, do you have any info on that, is it true?

I'd rather not say.

On this particular message board, it's a good idea to have one's

sources and citations in proper order, before attempting to relate

what did and did not transpire at Far West and Nauvoo. Let's

just say that I remain highly interested in Mrs. Cleveland and

her hospitality to the Smith family in Quincy, after the nightmare

of Liberty Jail. --- But, even more than that, I continue to sort

through piles of notes and clippings regarding Mrs. Harris,

widow of the notorious William Morgan of Batavia.

We shall see...

UD

[ERayR]

After stumbling onto the website of JS' s wives I was shocked to learn the truth and soon after that I was reading stories about the FLDS escapee's and it made me angry and that anger turned toward the root of it. And therefore added to the problem of seeing that it started with JS.

 

The "truth" you seem to want to accept has some flaws. 1) Your version comes from an anti presentation and 2) is filtered through your 20th century sensibilities. and 3) bears no resemblance to FLDS which is feeding your faulty visualization.

Before, I was under the impression polygamy was to take care of the widows and children after their ordeals in the east and travels to Utah and losing husbands along the way. Didn't know it was commanded to live it, for everyone at some points.

 

Your faulty understanding and lack of knowledge is fueling your faulty perceptions.

I remember going on a trip to Hawaii with my sister and brother in law for a real estate convention before I was married. The three of us would be out and about and someone asked where we were from and when we said Utah they thought we might be polygamists. We got a laugh out of it and it was when I didn't know the half of it.

 

You stil don't.

The closest I've really ever gotten to reading about early polygamy is on anti sites and some of "In Sacred Loneliness". I don't know if I have the stomach for reading more or not, but believe there had to have been some good too.

 

No wonder you you have such an attitude you are ill informed.

Completely forgot, I did listen to every one of Lindsay's podcast on FMH's, called "A Year of Polygamy", she speaks of many early women's lives in polygamy, all the way through to her current podcast on the Kingston's, the first one started with Fanny Alger, I believe. So that's an option if Juliann would like to listen to those.

 

 

[Damien the Leper]

After stumbling onto the website of JS' s wives I was shocked to learn the truth and soon after that I was reading stories about the FLDS escapee's and it made me angry and that anger turned toward the root of it. And therefore added to the problem of seeing that it started with JS.

 

The "truth" you seem to want to accept has some flaws. 1) Your version comes from an anti presentation and 2) is filtered through your 20th century sensibilities. and 3) bears no resemblance to FLDS which is feeding your faulty visualization.

Before, I was under the impression polygamy was to take care of the widows and children after their ordeals in the east and travels to Utah and losing husbands along the way. Didn't know it was commanded to live it, for everyone at some points.

 

Your faulty understanding and lack of knowledge is fueling your faulty perceptions.

I remember going on a trip to Hawaii with my sister and brother in law for a real estate convention before I was married. The three of us would be out and about and someone asked where we were from and when we said Utah they thought we might be polygamists. We got a laugh out of it and it was when I didn't know the half of it.

 

You stil don't.

The closest I've really ever gotten to reading about early polygamy is on anti sites and some of "In Sacred Loneliness". I don't know if I have the stomach for reading more or not, but believe there had to have been some good too.

 

No wonder you you have such an attitude you are ill informed.

Completely forgot, I did listen to every one of Lindsay's podcast on FMH's, called "A Year of Polygamy", she speaks of many early women's lives in polygamy, all the way through to her current podcast on the Kingston's, the first one started with Fanny Alger, I believe. So that's an option if Juliann would like to listen to those.

And you have yet, as many "apologists", to adequately respond to the history presented by Uncle Dale.

Juliann makes an important point. I do not think it sufficient to look at polygamy through a man's eyes. Subscribing to such, as I am sure you'll fairly agree, would be inadequate also.

[why me]

After stumbling onto the website of JS' s wives I was shocked to learn the truth and soon after that I was reading stories about the FLDS escapee's and it made me angry and that anger turned toward the root of it. And therefore added to the problem of seeing that it started with JS.

Before, I was under the impression polygamy was to take care of the widows and children after their ordeals in the east and travels to Utah and losing husbands along the way. Didn't know it was commanded to live it, for everyone at some points.

I remember going on a trip to Hawaii with my sister and brother in law for a real estate convention before I was married. The three of us would be out and about and someone asked where we were from and when we said Utah they thought we might be polygamists. We got a laugh out of it and it was when I didn't know the half of it.

The closest I've really ever gotten to reading about early polygamy is on anti sites and some of "In Sacred Loneliness". I don't know if I have the stomach for reading more or not, but believe there had to have been some good too.

Completely forgot, I did listen to every one of Lindsay's podcast on FMH's, called "A Year of Polygamy", she speaks of many early women's lives in polygamy, all the way through to her current podcast on the Kingston's, the first one started with Fanny Alger, I believe. So that's an option if Juliann would like to listen to those.

Quite a few of these women said no at first. But after praying about the principle and experiencing a spiritual witness, they said yes. Was it hard? I would think so. To live in such a relationship is a sacrifice. But what to do with that spiritual experience that confirmed the principle of polygamy when prayed about it? Thus, the problem. Why do we seem to forget the spiritual experiences of these women when considering to accept a polygamous marriage?

 

https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo?lang=eng

Trial and Spiritual Witness

Years later in Utah, participants in Nauvoo plural marriage discussed their motives for entering into the practice. God declared in the Book of Mormon that monogamy was the standard; at times, however, He commanded plural marriage so His people could “raise up seed unto [Him].”⁴⁴ Plural marriage did result in an increased number of children born to believing parents.⁴⁵

Some Saints also saw plural marriage as a redemptive process of sacrifice and spiritual refinement. According to Helen Mar Kimball, Joseph Smith stated that “the practice of this principle would be the hardest trial the Saints would ever have to test their faith.” Though it was one of the “severest” trials of her life, she testified that it had also been “one of the greatest blessings.”⁴⁶ Her father, Heber C. Kimball, agreed. “I never felt more sorrowful,” he said of the moment he learned of plural marriage in 1841. “I wept days. … I had a good wife. I was satisfied.”⁴⁷

The decision to accept such a wrenching trial usually came only after earnest prayer and intense soul-searching. Brigham Young said that, upon learning of plural marriage, “it was the first time in my life that I had desired the grave.”⁴⁸ “I had to pray unceasingly,” he said, “and I had to exercise faith and the Lord revealed to me the truth of it and that satisfied me.”⁴⁹ Heber C. Kimball found comfort only after his wife Vilate had a visionary experience attesting to the rightness of plural marriage. “She told me,” Vilate’s daughter later recalled, “she never saw so happy a man as father was when she described the vision and told him she was satisfied and knew it was from God.”⁵⁰

Lucy Walker recalled her inner turmoil when Joseph Smith invited her to become his wife. “Every feeling of my soul revolted against it,” she wrote. Yet, after several restless nights on her knees in prayer, she found relief as her room “filled with a holy influence” akin to “brilliant sunshine.” She said, “My soul was filled with a calm sweet peace that I never knew,” and “supreme happiness took possession of my whole being.”⁵¹

Not all had such experiences. Some Latter-day Saints rejected the principle of plural marriage and left the Church, while others declined to enter the practice but remained faithful.⁵² Nevertheless, for many women and men, initial revulsion and anguish was followed by struggle, resolution, and ultimately, light and peace. Sacred experiences enabled the Saints to move forward in faith.⁵³

 

What to do with such spiritual experiences?

Edited January 29, 2015 by why me

[Uncle Dale]

And you have yet, as many "apologists", to adequately respond to the history presented by Uncle Dale.

...

 

It may help explain things a little, in my case, if folks recall that for

a significant portion of my adult life I truly believed that Joseph Smith,

Hyrum Smith, William Smith, George A. Smith, John Smith, etc. were

all monogamists (until the latter two moved to Utah -- where, I was

taught, polygamy first began).

 

Think of it! As a college graduate, getting ready for University studies,

and fairly well versed in "Mormon History" (as I thought) I still took all

of the latter-day polygamy denials issued by the Smiths (not the least

of whom was Emma Smith) seriously -- at face value. I read and re-read

Mother Lucy Smith's history of her son, and could find no admission for

plural wives there. Certainly that sainted lady, a pillar of the Nauvoo

community, would have known (and told us) if she had many daughters-in-law!

 

But, slowly -- very slowly -- I began to drop my old trust and belief, that

the leaders of the "Restoration of all Things" would not -- could not -- lie

to us. Emma had lied. Brigham was justified in calling her that, and in saying

he had witnesses right there in the present audience who knew her to have

said and done evil things. That was MY BREAKING POINT. Even when I had

begun to try and find justifications for those mysterious "multiple sealings,"

I still trusted Emma -- I still trusted Katherine Smith Salisbury. Then that floor,

too, dropped out from under me.

 

Richard and Pamela Price wrote and published a book entitled "Joseph Smith

Fought Polygamy" -- and back in 2000 they were the leading advocates of the

traditional Reorganized LDS denials of Nauvoo polygamy. But even they had

evolved to the point of admitting that "some secret polygamy" had crept into

the Quorum of Twelve by 1843 or 1844 -- and that Joseph Smith fought it

tooth and nail. That he died trying to remove this abomination from the Church.

 

 

It was in 2000 that Todd Compton accompanied me to the Prices' bookstore in

Independence. He was calm, collected, remarkably well informed. He was very

polite -- purchased the Prices' book and their other published arguments for

Joseph Smith's professed championship of monogamy. He did not attempt any

arguments. In fact, he stated his case in a single, soft-spoken sentence. The

rhetoric of the Price fundamentalists seemed (in my mind) destroyed by that

simple admission -- that years of meticulous research had confirmed in Todd's

mind, and heart, that the Smith brothers were not only secret polygamists --

but were the chief promoters of the practice, and the chief white-washers of

it in public -- in false denials directed at the Gentiles, and in false denials

directed at the uninformed membership -- directed at the "Prices" of 1844.

 

 

So -- it is not the "history presented by Uncle Dale." It is the exposure of actual

events, so long denied, or whitewashed, or skipped over, by Church leaders

and educators who did not wish to "rile up" the membership -- who worked to

portray latter-day polygamy as something it was not (or who tried to avoid

having to teach anything concerning that part of our shared past).

 

I apologize for my earliest postings on this board, made years ago, when I

was still trying to defend Sister Emma, her son, and the entire notion of a need

for an 1860s "reorganization."

 

I was wrong. Those LDS voices who informed me of my errors... were right.

 

UD

Edited January 29, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[cinepro]

I was wrong. Those LDS voices who informed me of my errors... were right.

 

UD

Wow. Fascinating story. I can only imagine your shock in finding out was similar to someone being told they have...diphtheria.

[JLHPROF]

Richard and Pamela Price wrote and published a book entitled "Joseph Smith

Fought Polygamy" -- and back in 2000 they were the leading advocates of the

traditional Reorganized LDS denials of Nauvoo polygamy. But even they had

evolved to the point of admitting that "some secret polygamy" had crept into

the Quorum of Twelve by 1843 or 1844 -- and that Joseph Smith fought it

tooth and nail. That he died trying to remove this abomination from the Church.

 

 

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

 

Fairmormon addresses the Prices claims, theories, especially as relates to the Cochranites.  The Prices work doesn't hold much water with scholars or historians.  It's considered skewed to their CoC viewpoint and not very historically accurate.

[Uncle Dale]

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

Fairmormon addresses the Prices claims, theories, especially as relates to the Cochranites. The Prices work doesn't hold much water with scholars or historians. It's considered skewed to their CoC viewpoint and not very historically accurate.

Actually, the Prices disagree with CoC on practically every important

RLDS issue, from 1879 right on down to 2015 -- so they are rather

poor examples to point to in this case.

The early Mormon leaders were well aware of the "Prophet" Jacob Cochran

and his spiritual wifery teachings. When Samuel H. Smith and Orson Hyde

undertook the first major Mormon missionary excursion out of Kirtland, they

ended up in Cochranite territory at its termination, and made converts

there. One or two of Joseph Smith's brothers married former Cochranites

and Joseph himself "inherited" one of those wives when Don Carlos died.

One of Joseph's sisters married a guy from Cochranite lineage and various

early Saints (Brannan, Boynton, etc.) came from that community.

An early resident of Batavia, NY recalled Joseph Smith having met Cochran

in that area, prior to the beginnings of Mormonism. Although his account

is somewhat jumbled, it may be partly true -- since there was indeed a

colony of Cochranites living just south of Batavia at the time.

Did Mormon polygamy evolve out of Cochranite teachings? I think not.

UD

Edited January 29, 2015 by Uncle Dale

[VideoGameJunkie]

Can you imagine if the church practiced polygamy today? There would be so much jealousy from single men and the multiple wives. I only think polygamy can work in the afterlife where there is no jealousy and better understanding and abilities to pull everything off. That's why I think Brigham Young could be correct when he said the only way to exaltation is polygamy, because it can be completed in the afterlife, and I can't accept Brigham Young being wrong about yet another subject and still consider him a prophet of God.

[juliann]

So -- it is not the "history presented by Uncle Dale." It is the exposure of actual

events, so long denied, or whitewashed, or skipped over, by Church leaders

and educators who did not wish to "rile up" the membership -- who worked to

portray latter-day polygamy as something it was not (or who tried to avoid

having to teach anything concerning that part of our shared past).

 

I apologize for my earliest postings on this board, made years ago, when I

was still trying to defend Sister Emma, her son, and the entire notion of a need

for an 1860s "reorganization."

 

I was wrong. Those LDS voices who informed me of my errors... were right.

 

UD

We have somewhat of the same situation going on now with some who have a great need to make sure there was never any "real" polyandry. Since D&C 132 makes allowances for it, I think it is a very dangerous path. Because of the continued whitewashing of the most uncomfortable nooks and crannies of polygamy, that house of cards will fall and many will react as if they found out they discovered they had....malaria.

[JLHPROF]

Can you imagine if the church practiced polygamy today? There would be so much jealousy from single men and the multiple wives. I only think polygamy can work in the afterlife where there is no jealousy and better understanding and abilities to pull everything off. That's why I think Brigham Young could be correct when he said the only way to exaltation is polygamy, because it can be completed in the afterlife, and I can't accept Brigham Young being wrong about yet another subject and still consider him a prophet of God.

 

Alma 34:32 -  For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the day for men to perform their labors.

 

No, with or without polygamy, God expects us to overcome our weaknesses as much as we possibly can in this life (and rely on the Savior for those we simply can't overcome).

This includes jealousy.  In fact many proponents of polygamy claim it was ALL those negative feelings to be overcome that helped polygamy exalt you more quickly, in a way monogamy simply can't.

[bcuzbcuz]

Alma 34:32 -  For behold, this life is the time for men to prepare to meet God; yea, behold the day of this life is the day for men to perform their labors.

 

No, with or without polygamy, God expects us to overcome our weaknesses as much as we possibly can in this life (and rely on the Savior for those we simply can't overcome).

This includes jealousy.  In fact many proponents of polygamy claim it was ALL those negative feelings to be overcome that helped polygamy exalt you more quickly, in a way monogamy simply can't.

Polygamy will help overcome jealousy?? Are you basing that claim on experience? Proponents seem to claim such, but is that while polygamy was hidden and lied about or when it was somewhat openly practised?

The whole idea of polygamy being something to strive for and look forward to in the somewhat distant future is an abomination.

[Tacenda]

Polygamy will help overcome jealousy?? Are you basing that claim on experience? Proponents seem to claim such, but is that while polygamy was hidden and lied about or when it was somewhat openly practised?

The whole idea of polygamy being something to strive for and look forward to in the somewhat distant future is an abomination.

Just like Jacob 2:24 says...

 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/jacob/2.24?lang=eng

 

Chapter 2

Jacob denounces the love of riches, pride, and unchastity—Men may seek riches to help their fellowmen—The Lord commands that no man among the Nephites may have more than one wife—The Lord delights in the chastity of women. About 544–421 B.C.

 1 The words which Jacob, the brother of Nephi, spake unto the people of Nephi, after the death of Nephi:

 2 Now, my beloved brethren, I, Jacob, according to theresponsibility which I am under to God, to magnify mine office with soberness, and that I might rid my garments of your sins, I come up into the temple this day that I might declare unto you the word of God.

 3 And ye yourselves know that I have hitherto been diligent in the office of my calling; but I this day am weighed down with much more desire and anxiety for the welfare of your souls than I have hitherto been.

 4 For behold, as yet, ye have been obedient unto the word of the Lord, which I have given unto you.

 5 But behold, hearken ye unto me, and know that by the help of the all-powerful Creator of heaven and earth I can tell you concerning your thoughts, how that ye are beginning to labor in sin, which sin appeareth very abominable unto me, yea, and abominable unto God.

 6 Yea, it grieveth my soul and causeth me to shrink with shame before the presence of my Maker, that I must testify unto you concerning the wickedness of your hearts.

 7 And also it grieveth me that I must use so much boldness of speech concerning you, before your wives and your children, many of whose feelings are exceedingly tender and chaste and delicate before God, which thing is pleasing unto God;

 8 And it supposeth me that they have come up hither to hear the pleasing word of God, yea, the word which healeth the wounded soul.

 9 Wherefore, it burdeneth my soul that I should be constrained, because of the strict commandment which I have received from God, to admonish you according to your crimes, to enlarge the wounds of those who are already wounded, instead of consoling and healing their wounds; and those who have not been wounded, instead of feasting upon the pleasing word of God have daggers placed to pierce their souls and wound their delicate minds.

 10 But, notwithstanding the greatness of the task, I must do according to the strict commands of God, and tell you concerning your wickedness and abominations, in the presence of the pure in heart, and the broken heart, and under the glance of the piercingeye of the Almighty God.

 11 Wherefore, I must tell you the truth according to the plainnessof the word of God. For behold, as I inquired of the Lord, thus came the word unto me, saying: Jacob, get thou up into the temple on the morrow, and declare the word which I shall give thee unto this people.

 12 And now behold, my brethren, this is the word which I declare unto you, that many of you have begun to search for gold, and for silver, and for all manner of precious ores, in the which this land, which is a land of promise unto you and to your seed, doth abound most plentifully.

 13 And the hand of providence hath smiled upon you most pleasingly, that you have obtained many riches; and because some of you have obtained more abundantly than that of your brethren ye are lifted up in the pride of your hearts, and wear stiff necks and high heads because of the costliness of your apparel, and persecute your brethren because ye suppose that ye are better than they.

 14 And now, my brethren, do ye suppose that God justifieth you in this thing? Behold, I say unto you, Nay. But he condemneth you, and if ye persist in these things his judgments must speedily come unto you.

 15 O that he would show you that he can pierce you, and with one glance of his eye he can smite you to the dust!

 16 O that he would rid you from this iniquity and abomination. And, O that ye would listen unto the word of his commands, and let not this pride of your hearts destroy your souls!

 17 Think of your brethren like unto yourselves, and be familiar with all and free with your substance, that they may be rich like unto you.

 18 But before ye seek for riches, seek ye for the kingdom of God.

 19 And after ye have obtained a hope in Christ ye shall obtain riches, if ye seek them; and ye will seek them for the intent to dogood—to clothe the naked, and to feed the hungry, and to liberate the captive, and administer relief to the sick and the afflicted.

 20 And now, my brethren, I have spoken unto you concerning pride; and those of you which have afflicted your neighbor, and persecuted him because ye were proud in your hearts, of the things which God hath given you, what say ye of it?

 21 Do ye not suppose that such things are abominable unto him who created all flesh? And the one being is as precious in his sight as the other. And all flesh is of the dust; and for the selfsame end hath he created them, that they should keep his commandmentsand glorify him forever.

 22 And now I make an end of speaking unto you concerning this pride. And were it not that I must speak unto you concerning a grosser crime, my heart would rejoice exceedingly because of you.

 23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. For behold, thus saith the Lord: This people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son.

 24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.

 25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.

 26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.

 27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it beone wife; and concubines he shall have none;

 28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. Andwhoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.

 29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.

 30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.

 31 For behold, I, the Lord, have seen the sorrow, and heard the mourning of the daughters of my people in the land of Jerusalem, yea, and in all the lands of my people, because of the wickedness and abominations of their husbands.

 32 And I will not suffer, saith the Lord of Hosts, that the cries of the fair daughters of this people, which I have led out of the land of Jerusalem, shall come up unto me against the men of my people, saith the Lord of Hosts.

 33 For they shall not lead away captive the daughters of my people because of their tenderness, save I shall visit them with a sore curse, even unto destruction; for they shall not commitwhoredoms, like unto them of old, saith the Lord of Hosts.

 34 And now behold, my brethren, ye know that these commandments were given to our father, Lehi; wherefore, ye have known them before; and ye have come unto great condemnation; for ye have done these things which ye ought not to have done.

 35 Behold, ye have done greater iniquities than the Lamanites, our brethren. Ye have broken the hearts of your tender wives, and lost the confidence of your children, because of your bad examples before them; and the sobbings of their hearts ascend up to God against you. And because of the strictness of the word of God, which cometh down against you, many hearts died, pierced with deep wounds.

 

ETA:  Notice I did include verse 30.  That one always gets me.  Has this always been there from the very first edition?  Also, is there a scripture in the Bible that says polygamy is to rise up seed?  I believe there may have been a time that it was unavoidable such as in the beginning of time.  But it sounds like it's not a given that all should look forward to it or that it is a given at all.     

Edited January 30, 2015 by Tacenda

[JLHPROF]

Polygamy will help overcome jealousy?? Are you basing that claim on experience? Proponents seem to claim such, but is that while polygamy was hidden and lied about or when it was somewhat openly practised?

The whole idea of polygamy being something to strive for and look forward to in the somewhat distant future is an abomination.

 

Yes, well we all know your negative viewpoint on this practice as lived by men of God.  Personally, I'll go with the teachings of those who actually lived the law and its attendant blessings rather than our modern day worldly sensibilities.

Joseph, Brigham, John, Wilford, Lorenzo, Joseph F., Heber, and all the apostles from their times were good and righteous polygamists.  As were more of the scriptural prophets than I could name, including the super righteous Brother of Jared in the Book of Mormon.

You want to believe polygamy is an abomination, go for it.  But you aren't even close to right.

Edited January 30, 2015 by JLHPROF

[Uncle Dale]

...

You want to believe polygamy is an abomination, go for it.  But you aren't even close to right.

In order to be "close to right," the reader of the Book of Mormon

might wish to look at the reign of King Noah, and what is said of

the treatment of women. Though little is recorded, what clues

can be gleaned from the narrative, to explain why Israel's God

and that god's covenant with the Nephites would have condemned.

as abomination the polygamy and concubinage of those accounts?

UD

[stemelbow]

Yes, well we all know your negative viewpoint on this practice as lived by men of God.  Personally, I'll go with the teachings of those who actually lived the law and its attendant blessings rather than our modern day worldly sensibilities.

Joseph, Brigham, John, Wilford, Lorenzo, Joseph F., Heber, and all the apostles from their times were good and righteous polygamists.  As were more of the scriptural prophets than I could name.

You want to believe polygamy is an abomination, go for it.  But you aren't even close to right.

But you seem to ignore the difficulty it caused, particularly the difficult on women who lived it. It wasn't all rosey, surely.

[Calm]

Polygamy will help overcome jealousy?? Are you basing that claim on experience? Proponents seem to claim such, but is that while polygamy was hidden and lied about or when it was somewhat openly practised?.

My great great grandmother who would have lived through both the time it was considered legal in Utah as well as during the federal persecutions considered it the best opportunity to live celestial love in mortality.

Not having the experience, I cannot agree or disagree with her; perhaps it was for her.

[JLHPROF]

But you seem to ignore the difficulty it caused, particularly the difficult on women who lived it. It wasn't all rosey, surely.

 

I don't ignore the difficulty at all.  I'd be a fool to do so.

What I DON'T think is that because it was so difficult it was bad/a mistake.  Somewhere we got the notion that if it makes us unhappy it must be wrong.  That I will disagree with all day long.

[juliann]

Yes, well we all know your negative viewpoint on this practice as lived by men of God.  Personally, I'll go with the teachings of those who actually lived the law and its attendant blessings rather than our modern day worldly sensibilities.

Joseph, Brigham, John, Wilford, Lorenzo, Joseph F., Heber, and all the apostles from their times were good and righteous polygamists.  As were more of the scriptural prophets than I could name, including the super righteous Brother of Jared in the Book of Mormon.

 

 

You really, really need to start reading the women's stories. As great a man and prophet as BY was, he picked favorite wives at the other wives' expense. His last youngest wife took over the favorite spot from the one before him who was no longer the one picked to go on trips, etc.  This was cruel and it isn't even the worst story about his treatment.

 

 

I don't ignore the difficulty at all.  I'd be a fool to do so.

What I DON'T think is that because it was so difficult it was bad/a mistake.  Somewhere we got the notion that if it makes us unhappy it must be wrong.  That I will disagree with all day long.

 

Well, there is that man is that he might have joy problem.... unless it only applies to men ;-)  This wasn't just a bad day for these women.

[Uncle Dale]

...covenant with the Nephites...

 

 

Let me put a finer point on the matter. Suppose I had been there

to confront the priests of King Noah (call me Abinadihah) -- and

began to bring formal charges against the royal administration.

 

How might I prioritize the abrogations of the Mosaic Covenant?

Might I not logically begin with the most evident, or most outrageous 

defilements? If the bad treatment of widows and orphans topped my

list, might I not mention that, first of all?

 

Or, if an improper observance of the Day of Atonement was the

primary offense, would I not quickly call King Noah out on that?

 

According to the BoM narrative, which iniquity and transgressions

headed up such a list? What was the logical effect upon the women

of the realm? How would their lives have been different if the terms

of the Covenant had been properly observed?

 

Tell me something about what the word "abomination" meant in

Israelite society -- how it might effect the role of females in that

society, and the safeguards that the Torah provided for them.

 

UD

[JLHPROF]

You really, really need to start reading the women's stories. As great a man and prophet as BY was, he picked favorite wives at the other wives' expense. His last youngest wife took over the favorite spot from the one before him who was no longer the one picked to go on trips, etc.  This was cruel and it isn't even the worst story about his treatment.

 

Well, there is that man is that he might have joy problem.... unless it only applies to men ;-)  This wasn't just a bad day for these women.

 

Oh I'm very familiar with the women's stories.  Pretty much all of them, from Ann Eliza's 19th (27th) wife to Phoebe Woodruff and Vilate Kimball's private exclamations of sorrow, Mary Lightners begging for support from Brigham, or President Jedediah Grant's daughter making jokes and mockery of it.   I don't believe that the husbands were flawless by any stretch, but I believe the restoration of plural marriage was 100% a blessing, not an abomination.

 

I don't discount or dismiss the trials experienced by these noble women, any more than I discount the pain and suffering experienced by our Saviour, the Apostles who were so hated, the early martyrs, Joseph in Liberty Jail, the pioneers crossing the plains, the malaria victims in Nauvoo, and yes, the women living plural marriage.

 

I am a firm believer in the 6th Lecture on Faith (more even than the others - it reads more like revelation) and believe that applies equally to men and women, just replace the word man with woman:

 

 

Let us here observe, that a religion that does not require the sacrifice of all things, never has power sufficient to produce the faith necessary unto life and salvation; for from the first existence of man, the faith necessary unto the enjoyment of life and salvation never could be obtained without the sacrifice of all earthly things: it was through this sacrifice, and this only, that God has ordained that men should enjoy eternal life; and it is through the medium of the sacrifice of all earthly things, that men do actually know that they are doing the things that are well pleasing in the sight of God. When a man has offered in sacrifice all that he has, for the truth's sake, not even withholding his life, and believing before God that he has been called to make this sacrifice, because he seeks to do his will, he does know most assuredly, that God does and will accept his sacrifice & offering, & that he has not nor will not seek his face

 

Yes it's hard.  Yes it's painful.  Yes it hurts and causes suffering.  And it's supposed to be.  Just ask our Savior.

[stemelbow]

I don't ignore the difficulty at all.  I'd be a fool to do so.

What I DON'T think is that because it was so difficult it was bad/a mistake.  Somewhere we got the notion that if it makes us unhappy it must be wrong.  That I will disagree with all day long.

That's fine, but weighing it in the balance I'm not sure the blessings it brought, such like you seem to accept.

[KevinG]

I need more information on this.  Are we talking "dead in two weeks cancer", or "sorry but we have to replace your sphincter with this handy drawstring but you will live" cancer?

[Tacenda]

I need more information on this. Are we talking "dead in two weeks cancer", or "sorry but we have to replace your sphincter with this handy drawstring but you will live" cancer?

Hi KevinG, good to have you back..I think.