Joseph Smith's Polygamy

[Guest]

I am not bothered by polygamy. I'm bothered by dishonesty and coercion.

As also in ancient times?

[jkwilliams]

As also in ancient times?

 

Yep.

[ALarson]

Even teachings that don't apply to us today?

How do the teachings of plural marriage not apply to us today?  We have apostles who are sealed to more than one woman as well as other church members today.

[Zakuska]

The king of hyperbole strikes again. 

There's a reason my tag was "Captian Zinger" for so long.

[KevinG]

...what do your questions have to do with why the subject of polygamy was absent from the manual for the year we taught about Brigham Young and his teachings?

 

...about as much as your comments did.

[jkwilliams]

There's a reason my tag was "Captian Zinger" for so long.

 

How have the zingers worked out for you?

[why me]

Well, I'd call that a major fail on your part.

 

You stated this (emphasis added):

Really, a major fail? Reading that book, I learned that hyrum and joseph were polygamists and that many members in nauvoo were practicing polygamy. I also leaned about the revelation in section 132 and how hyrum requested a revelation. I also learned that hyrum was against polygamy until he received his own spiritual confirmation and that he married a plural wife. And how he called others to plural marriage. How is that a fail? Did you know that hyrum was also a polygamist? And who was his first plural wife?

 

My point: Members today need to sit down and read books published by members and not just skim the web for anti mormon information.

Edited August 17, 2015 by why me

[Zakuska]

How have the zingers worked out for you?

Pretty good Dr. Phil.

[KevinG]

I wish this was included in the BY Manual.  It would have led to some fantastic discussions about obedience, faith, and peer pressure.

 

 

 

Now, we as Christians desire to be saved in the kingdom of God. We desire to attain to the possession of all the blessings there are for the most faithful man or people that ever lived upon the face of the earth, even him who is said to be the father of the faithful, Abraham of old. We wish to obtain all that father Abraham obtained. I wish here to say to the Elders of Israel, and to all the members of this Church and kingdom, that it is in the hearts of many of them to wish that the doctrine of polygamy was not taught and practiced by us. It may be hard for many, and especially for the ladies, yet it is no harder for them than it is for the gentlemen. It is the word of the Lord, and I wish to say to you, and all the world, that if you desire with all your hearts to obtain the blessings which Abraham obtained, you will be polygamists at least in your faith, or you will come short of enjoying the salvation and the glory which Abraham has obtained. This is as true as that God lives. You who wish that there were no such thing in existence, if you have in your hearts to say: "We will pass along in the Church without obeying or submitting to it in our faith or believing this order, because, for aught that we know, this community may be broken up yet, and we may have lucrative offices offered to us; we will not, therefore, be polygamists lest we should fail in obtaining some earthly honor, character, and office, etc." The man that has that in his heart, and will continue to persist in pursuing that policy, will come short of dwelling in the presence of the Father and the Son, in celestial glory. The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy. Others attain unto a glory and may even be permitted to come into the presence of the Father and the Son; but they cannot reign as kings in glory, because they had blessings offered unto them, and they refused to accept them.

[Guest]

Yep.

As do I not having the full story then or now in our day. This does not mean I do not believe in God...just lousy recond keeping long ago and a short time ago. But since God only calls flawed men, I must follow the common thread of YEWH, JEHOVAH, Christ and his word. I am not going to throw the badly out with muddy water.

[jkwilliams]

Pretty good Dr. Phil.

 

Low blow.

[jkwilliams]

As do I not having the full story then or now in our day. This does not mean I do not believe in God...just lousy recond keeping long ago and a short time ago. But since God only calls flawed men, I must follow the common thread of YEWH, JEHOVAH, Christ and his word. I am not going to throw the badly out with muddy water.

 

You've worked it out, and that's fine. It's kind of weird that people act as if it's some kind of moral or spiritual failing to not be able to reconcile a man's sleeping with other women without his wife's knowledge or consent.

[ALarson]

Really, a major fail? Reading that book, I learned that hyrum and joseph were polygamists and that many members in nauvoo were practicing polygamy. I also leaned about the revelation in section 132 and how hyrum requested a revelation. I also learned that hyrum was against polygamy until he received his own spiritual confirmation and that he married a plural wife. And how he called others to plural marriage. How is that a fail? Did you know that hyrum was also a polygamist? And who was his first plural wife?

 

My point: Members today need to sit down and read books published by members and not just skim the web for anti mormon information.

You stated books published by the "church's publishing arm".

 

And yes, your answer to my CFR regarding the book on Hyrum Smith is a failure.  That book does not give "much" information about how Joseph lived polygamy and that was your claim.

Edited August 17, 2015 by ALarson

[jkwilliams]

You stated books published by the church.

 

And yes, your answer to my CFR regarding the book on Hyrum Smith is a failure.  That book does not give "much" information about how Joseph lived polygamy and that was your claim.

 

I would imagine most members aren't bothered that Joseph was a polygamist. It's the lying to his wife, the coercion, and the polyandry that are a bit shocking. 

[ALarson]

I would imagine most members aren't bothered that Joseph was a polygamist. It's the lying to his wife, the coercion, and the polyandry that are a bit shocking. 

None of which are covered in any of why me's source claims.

[jkwilliams]

None of which are covered in any of why me's source claims.

 

Hence, the problem.

[KevinG]

None of which are covered in any of why me's source claims.

 

Nor are they as well documented by unassailable sources as you seem to present.

 

I recommend people check out Bushman's treatment of the subject.  Fairly well researched and balanced without jumping to conclusions either way.

[rockpond]

Really, a major fail? Reading that book, I learned that hyrum and joseph were polygamists and that many members in nauvoo were practicing polygamy. I also leaned about the revelation in section 132 and how hyrum requested a revelation. I also learned that hyrum was against polygamy until he received his own spiritual confirmation and that he married a plural wife. And how he called others to plural marriage. How is that a fail? Did you know that hyrum was also a polygamist? And who was his first plural wife?

 

My point: Members today need to sit down and read books published by members and not just skim the web for anti mormon information.

 

Books published by members... like Quinn and Brodie?

 

But yeah, it's my fault for not seeking out this information that I was told was "anti".  I shouldn't have believed my parents, teachers, and leaders.  And, unfortunately, during my first 40 years in the church I was too busy getting an education, graduating from early morning seminary, serving a mission, attending BYU, starting a career, dating my wife, having children, attending church 3 hours per week, serving in numerous callings like EQ presidencies, seminary teacher, YM pres, and a number of Bishoprics.

 

How was it that I didn't have time to go out and find books to teach me about stuff that I was taught didn't exist?!

 

Clearly it was all my fault that I didn't learn these things until my 40's.

[rockpond]

I recommend people check out Bushman's treatment of the subject.  Fairly well researched and balanced without jumping to conclusions either way.

 

The same could be said of Quinn's work.

[JulieM]

From what I've read, Joseph's polyandry is well documented from many sources. Same with his lying to Emma (and church members at the time). As far as coercion, I guess that's up to the readers when they study how Joseph convinced girls and women to become one of his plural wives and keep it a secret.

[jkwilliams]

From what I've read, Joseph's polyandry is well documented from many sources. Same with his lying to Emma (and church members at the time). As far as coercion, I guess that's up to the readers when they study how Joseph convinced girls and women to become one of his plural wives and keep it a secret.

 

I've read Bushman's book and many of his published articles about Joseph Smith and polygamy. Acknowledging that he practiced polyandry and concealed his marriages from Emma does not require jumping to any conclusions. I find his actions coercive and manipulative, but apparently, one would only think that if one were biased against Joseph Smith, or something.

[Guest]

You've worked it out, and that's fine. It's kind of weird that people act as if it's some kind of moral or spiritual failing to not be able to reconcile a man's sleeping with other women without his wife's knowledge or consent.

As all must work it out...and I can see your view is much more popular and this is becoming circular. Papa out for the night.

[jkwilliams]

As all must work it out...and I can see your view is much more popular and this is becoming circular. Papa out for the night.

 

I hope you're not suggesting my view is a result of going with what's popular. 

[Walden]

From what she presented her "understanding" of the complex issue of polygamy in the early church is a mile wide and an inch deep.

 

I do not pretend to understand the complexities of polygamy, why it might be commanded by God, nor do I have authoritative evidence of any unscrupulous or devious activities (whether they be coercion, sexual improprieties, etc.) committed by Joseph Smith in his involvement with polygamy. My "crisis of faith," if you want to label it as such, is independent of the actions of Joseph Smith and his practice of polygamy. Rather, it has everything to do with the way in which the church manipulated the actual history of Smith's polygamy that started me down the "slippery slope" leading me out of the church.

 

When I was a youth in the church in the 80s and 90s, polygamy was taught to us youth as a practice that was implemented after the revelation received by Smith in 1843. We heard lessons of polygamy as practiced by Brigham Young and other members of the church during the pioneer era (heck, my own great-great-great grandfather Parley P Pratt was a polygamist, so my existence itself is very much tied to polygamy). Never in any Sunday School lesson, nor through 4 years of seminary (taught by some of the most esteemed and educated members of our ward via church education-published manuals) was it taught that Joseph Smith was a practitioner of polygamy. If it had been taught, it would not have made a lick of difference regarding our opinions of Joseph Smith, as we had already digested any number of odd things about a man who, one must admit, was at least peculiar, if not outright odd.

 

The divisiveness of Smith's polygamy, for me, was not that he practiced it, but that the church went to such lengths to hide it. Compound that with the lessons we received regarding the translation method, in which the only method taught to us was the exclusive use of the Urim and Thummin (no mention of peep stones or head-in-a-hat methods) and it begins to foment in one's mind a curiosity as to the other things that the church failed to be honest about in it's teachings.

 

If the church was less than honest in it's teachings of something as evident as historical fact, could it be trusted in it's teachings of supernatural or spiritual fact?

[Guest]

I hope you're not suggesting my view is a result of going with what's popular.

Well just as I was powering down you wrote this...popular on my website is to question Church policy. This is what I mean...when I express any doubt of differing opinions about many thinks, I am ignored, and you get rep points. Such is the norm on websites. Once I become an unbeliever, I sure I will make new friends. Then I am often called out for spelling and sentence structure, and none ever answer PM's almost ever. One friend suggested that pain Medication for my back may be affecting my writing. The reality is that due to my back injury almost everything I read or write with my dyslexia fingers and eyes is done on an IPad held by my thumb on my raised legs to remove the difficultity in my lower back. When I can get to Church...when the pain is bearable people don't take to me because they think I am semi-active and loosing my testimony. True is I am a believer in all that matters, hold a recommend, love all here and at Church...even though this is the case have not had a calling in three years; since the accident. So, I don't PM anyone anymore, and say little at Church. So yes John you are popular here. I embarrass myself by coming here...but I like the company. Hope I spelled everything right...I typed as slowly as I could, it took three attempts.