Joseph Smith's Promise Made To Helen Mar Kimball

[JLHPROF]

Hate to break it to you, but polygamy at any level, let alone 30+ wives, didn't exactly fly in mainstream 19th century frontier America, either.  Invoking *presentism* doesn't work in this situation.

 

Who cares what society thinks?  They've never had the best morals or ethics.

[ttribe]

Who cares what society thinks?  They've never had the best morals or ethics.

 

That's a separate issue from the argument ERayR was trying to posit.

[ERayR]

Hate to break it to you, but polygamy at any level, let alone 30+ wives, didn't exactly fly in mainstream 19th century frontier America, either.  Invoking *presentism* doesn't work in this situation.

 

Was this from those who had an eastern wife and a western frontier wife?

[ttribe]

Was this from those who had an eastern wife and a western frontier wife?

 

Why does that matter?  The fact is it wasn't a commonly accepted practice.  You are talking Victorian-era sensibilities exerting a heavy influence on American culture.  Again, the presentism argument is faulty in this case.  If you wanted to argue that viewing Abraham's practice of polygamy through a 21st century lens is, at best, problematic then your argument would have some legs.  But the 21st v. 19th century doesn't fly on this issue.

Edited June 11, 2015 by ttribe

[SeekingUnderstanding]

That is the problem with only being able to see things through pampered 21st century perspective.

I'd love to hear you explain how a partnership can exist between a man and his 30+ wives from any perspective.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

You are kidding yourself if you think Abraham only had 2 wives.  Assuming eternal marriages he was sealed to at least 3, I wouldn't be surprised if some didn't make the record.  After all, D&C 132 names Isaac as a polygamist but the Bible only names Rebekah.  The Bible also tells us Peter was married but never names a wife/wives.  Realistically, if the same laws apply all the apostles were married and we have no record of any wives or children.

 

The family proclamation is as much a product of its day as the Old Testament.  Every principle in there is perfectly written to apply only to monogamous nuclear families.  You can bet if Joseph or Brigham wrote a proclamation on family it would read much differently.

That's what I like so much about you as a poster. You pull no punches. Don't try and hide the past, and don't try and pretend like the church now is the same as it always been. Even though my world view is very different than yours, you are definitely one of my favorite posters on this board.

 

I'm curious for you and ErayR to explain how that works exactly. So Joseph having 30+ wives, Brigham having 50+ wives is perfectly a-okay with God. Are wives like a reward for righteousness or priesthood postition? Is that why the people at the top of the church had the most wives?

[tonie]

Last night my Bishop called and asked for some help regarding Helen Mar Kimball (in relation to her being the youngest of Joseph's wives that is mentioned in the church essay).  I can tell he's struggling with how to present this to the ward when he teaches the 5th Sunday discussion on this topic.  

 

He asked about the promise that Joseph made to Helen (and then told me that members have asked him this question too, so he's fairly certain it will come up during the discussion if we open it up to a Q & A session):  

 

Helen wrote

 

- How could Joseph promise Helen this regarding all of her "father's household" and also all of her kindred without knowing what kind of lives they would each live?  

 

- What do we know about who was included in her "father's household" and in her "kindred"?  

 

- Did they all stay in the church and remain faithful members?

As to the 3 questions you pose, they are questions that would arise, but the danger in those questions is the honest answer is "We do not know." We create more problems, in my opinion, when we attempt ro answer questions for which there are not answer. Specifically Jospeh Smith is the only one who can answer why he did or said something.

[JLHPROF]

I'm curious for you and ErayR to explain how that works exactly. So Joseph having 30+ wives, Brigham having 50+ wives is perfectly a-okay with God. Are wives like a reward for righteousness or priesthood postition? Is that why the people at the top of the church had the most wives?

 

It works on the principle of kingdoms of glory and eternal increase.

Just as God's kingdom continues to grow and grow eternally, so will ours if we have eternal lives and eternal increase and attain Godhood.

What blessing did Abraham receive for entering plural marriage? 

"as touching Abraham and his seed, out of the world they should continue; both in the world and out of the world should they continue as innumerable as the stars; or, if ye were to count the sand upon the seashore ye could not number them.  This promise is yours also, because ye are of Abraham,"

 

I know people like to come up with alternate explanations (I call them Celestial turkey basters) for how God and Mary conceived Christ's physical body.  But I don't believe it was done in any other way than any other mortal body is conceived.  God took his spirit daughter Mary as a wife and they conceived a child.  God is absolutely a polygamist, with innumerable worlds populated by spirit children conceived with his resurrected wives and his family continues to grow.  His kingdoms, and his wives kingdoms grow exponentially forever, and as he is a part of someones kingdom their kingdom continues to grow eternally.

 

There is no end to glory, matter, space, kingdoms, priesthood, knowledge, and family.

[JLHPROF]

I'd love to hear you explain how a partnership can exist between a man and his 30+ wives from any perspective.

 

Eternity vs time

Endless matter vs finite space

Past, Present and Future continually before you

I don't think God and his wives feel "apart" at all.  Do we really think they worry about "which house he is sleeping at tonight?"

I don't understand the physics, but I am certain they all have as much time with each other as needed and never feel ignored.

[ALarson]

As to the 3 questions you pose, they are questions that would arise, but the danger in those questions is the honest answer is "We do not know." We create more problems, in my opinion, when we attempt ro answer questions for which there are not answer. Specifically Jospeh Smith is the only one who can answer why he did or said something.

I like this.  And I do feel that this is the best answer to give.  I know that many on here have given some pretty good theories or expressed what they believe is a good answer (I really like JLHPROF's perspective and input), but you're right.  We just really do not know what Joseph was thinking when issued these promises to Helen in return for her agreeing to marry him.

 

Keep it simple is what I'm going to advise.  Especially with the limited time we have.

 

Again, we will give references and the Bishop will offer to meet privately with anyone with further questions too.  I really appreciate any references given from others here and I pass all of them on.

Edited June 11, 2015 by ALarson

[TheSkepticChristian]

 So Joseph having 30+ wives, Brigham having 50+ wives is perfectly a-okay with God. Are wives like a reward for righteousness or priesthood postition? Is that why the people at the top of the church had the most wives?

 

What is so wrong with polygamy? Just live and let live

 

There are other issues about the church that trouble me, but not this one, you are wasting your time. 

[hope_for_things]

It works on the principle of kingdoms of glory and eternal increase.

Just as God's kingdom continues to grow and grow eternally, so will ours if we have eternal lives and eternal increase and attain Godhood.

What blessing did Abraham receive for entering plural marriage? 

"as touching Abraham and his seed, out of the world they should continue; both in the world and out of the world should they continue as innumerable as the stars; or, if ye were to count the sand upon the seashore ye could not number them.  This promise is yours also, because ye are of Abraham,"

 

I know people like to come up with alternate explanations (I call them Celestial turkey basters) for how God and Mary conceived Christ's physical body.  But I don't believe it was done in any other way than any other mortal body is conceived.  God took his spirit daughter Mary as a wife and they conceived a child.  God is absolutely a polygamist, with innumerable worlds populated by spirit children conceived with his resurrected wives and his family continues to grow.  His kingdoms, and his wives kingdoms grow exponentially forever, and as he is a part of someones kingdom their kingdom continues to grow eternally.

 

There is no end to glory, matter, space, kingdoms, priesthood, knowledge, and family.

Thanks for the honesty and candor. This is a perfect explanation based on my conservative Mormon upbringing in Utah County. This is how I was taught.

One question, if you believe these teachings still, are you frustrated with the church's attempts to water down these teachings and even distance itself from these teachings?

I personally don't believe any of this anymore, but I'm curious how someone who was taught these things and still believes feels about the more recent statements and distancing from these concepts.

[bluebell]

I don't think so - how many children did Joseph have with the 11 (?) or so women with whom there is strong evidence that the marriage was sexual? How many of them lived with him?

 

The children (or reported children since none have been proven, and some can't be, are strong evidence that the marriage was sexual.  Wives who also reported that the union was sexual would be evidence in my opinion.  

 

And the reason that I cite Helen remaining with her parents after her marriage as supportive of a nonsexual (or more accurately, non-typical) marriage is because she seemed to remain under the authority of her father and mother.  

[bluebell]

People often get married but abstain from marital relations. Wait, no they don't. Either Joseph had relations with Helen, like he verifiably did with many of his other wives, or he picked out a really young girl just to call  "dibbs" for later. Either way, it's a morally bankrupt practice.

 

People don't often get married to someone who's already married, either.  We can't pretend that this marriage was a typical marriage and therefore must have be typical in every way.  

[theplains]

God took his spirit daughter Mary as a wife and they conceived a child.

 

A few questions come to mind.  How did Mary accept God as her husband?  Did God have to

divorce Mary so she could marry Joseph?  Or is she the only woman that was permitted two

husbands?

 

Thanks,

Jim

[JLHPROF]

A few questions come to mind.  How did Mary accept God as her husband?  Did God have to

divorce Mary so she could marry Joseph?  Or is she the only woman that was permitted two

husbands?

 

Thanks,

Jim

 

Joseph was her husband for time, just as Hyrum Smith married Robert Thompson's wife for time.

Many scholars believe Joseph had had another wife or was widowed, not to mention significantly older than Mary.

Edited June 12, 2015 by JLHPROF

[JLHPROF]

Thanks for the honesty and candor. This is a perfect explanation based on my conservative Mormon upbringing in Utah County. This is how I was taught.

One question, if you believe these teachings still, are you frustrated with the church's attempts to water down these teachings and even distance itself from these teachings

 

You're still pretty new here so I will just smile and nod.   I think you pretty much summed up my reputation here.

(Wouldn't that be an interesting thread - if we each described our impressions of each other in just a couple of words - then again we'd probably all get banned).

 

 

I personally don't believe any of this anymore, but I'm curious how someone who was taught these things and still believes feels about the more recent statements and distancing from these concepts.

 

I don't believe any "recent statement" that isn't backed up by revelation as being reliable.  And the "distancing" is more about appearing mainstream and increasing conversions and missionary work.  So it has a purpose.

[DBMormon]

Frankly, if the discussion gets into Helen Mar Kimball territory you're unlikely to get anything positive. There's a reason why the church essays break polygamy into four different units - and even then I'd be reluctant to try to squeeze any one of the essays into a 5th Sunday lesson. There's simply too much information. And too much controversy. I'd start with WOW acceptance or frontier violence.

 

That said, if the subject of Helen Mar does come up, you may point your bishop to this resource from the Hales: http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/history-2/plural-wives-overview/helen-mar-kimball/.  As you can see, the leading approach is to deflect the quote by casting doubt on Helen's ability to recall decades later what was said to her as a 14-year-old girl. It could be that Joseph discussed the importance of the practice to helping her family's eternal state, and Helen took it to mean a guarantee. Who knows? But the quote itself is very reliable and has been cited by many historians.

 

Those same scholars also say that an 87 year old Mary Elizabeth Rollings Lightner testimony 62 years after events should not be doubted due simply because of age or time passed.

 

weird how we do that in apologetics

[DBMormon]

I'm not saying nefarious. She could easily have misremembered or embellished.

Possible Buckeye but that seems a pretty significant point and very crucial keystone to her decision to be mis-remembered.....  anything is possible but that seems like a pretty big mental gymnastic doesn't it?

[DBMormon]

Agreed. There are some questions that don't have answers.

or we don't like where the answers lead so we simply say there are not good answers.

[DBMormon]

 

It's confusing.

welcome to faith 101

[hope_for_things]

You're still pretty new here so I will just smile and nod.   I think you pretty much summed up my reputation here.

(Wouldn't that be an interesting thread - if we each described our impressions of each other in just a couple of words - then again we'd probably all get banned).

 

 

I don't believe any "recent statement" that isn't backed up by revelation as being reliable.  And the "distancing" is more about appearing mainstream and increasing conversions and missionary work.  So it has a purpose.

We had a rough start on another thread, but I don't like to hold grudges. I'm not trying to bait you or anything my question is an honest inquiry because I like to better understand the perspectives of others. When I said that is the way I was taught, I'm not bitter about it, it's just reality. No hard feelings on my end.

[DBMormon]

Agreed.  Very confusing.

But as I've shown before, agency increases with righteousness and decreases with wickedness.  I also have posted the Heber C. Kimball quote about God compelling people to keep their covenants eventually.  And of course there is the principle of work for the dead, which while it doesn't remove agency does allow for some postmortal repentance even if actions in this life aren't great.

There is even the oft-maligned Brigham Young quote about Joseph saving Emma from hell.

 

My point is that while everyone has agency the "seal" on the parents guarantees that they have claim on their posterity.  Just as the second anointing guarantees a man and woman exaltation, and guarantees a woman claim on her husband (as in John 12:7).

 

The statement of Joseph to Helen isn't removing agency, it's about birthright, claim, sealing, etc.  Priesthood authority is used to provide salvation, both here and in the world to come.  He was promising that level of authority to her family.

we are going to have to make a decision.... is our salvation tied to our personal faithfulness or not?

[DBMormon]

Amen! And I don't see it as faith-demoting to entertain the possibility that JS may not have completely understood the sealing process at the time. As I read the history, his theology was constantly evolving as he learned and grew as a prophet. So I don't find it disturbing that he MAY have been sincerely mistaken when he made that promise to HMK.

Sadly, I suspect that, for some saints, this might be a bridge too far but it seems completely consistent with the concept of continuing revelation. After all, why do we need modern prophets if the fullness of the Gospel was revealed to Joseph?

ahhhh but to say a fallible prophet erred in this way is hard to have roll of the lips of most members... to me it seems the easy out.  Joseph may have been overzealous and went beyond the mark.,  It changes nothing of my testimony and allows more room for faith personally rather than defend it 

[JLHPROF]

we are going to have to make a decision.... is our salvation tied to our personal faithfulness or not?

 

Our salvation is tied to our acceptance of Christ as our Savior - so it is tied to our faith.

Our condition AFTER being saved/resurrected is tied to our personal faithfulness.