Why did Emma Smith fight polygamy so strongly?

[USU78]

1 hour ago, Glenn101 said:

The strength of the evidence would seem to rest upon the credibility of the witnesses who testified against him.

 

Glenn

Yup, and Hyrum's is necessarily hearsay 

[JulieM]

3 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 So the specific commandment of God dealing with levirate marriage (polygyny required when a brother dies childless and an already married living brother must also marry the widow to provide a child for the dead brother) is a false commandment, not given by God, and invented by man?

From what I've read (on here from discussions on this, and elsewhere), the only place in the Bible where God gave a comand that MAY SOMETIMES include a man having more than one wife is when he is to take care of his dead brother's wife IF she has no children.

But, it's not a specific commandment to live polygamy (in all other examples you gave, there was no commandment from God to practice polygamy). It's more of a commandment for a man to take care of his dead brother's wife (Levirate marriage).

Here are the stipulations for Levirate Marriage:

 

"5 “If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the widow of the dead man shall not be married to a stranger outside the family; her husband’s brother shall go in to her, take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband’s brother to her. 6 And it shall be that the firstborn son which she bears will succeed to the name of his dead brother, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel. 7 But if the man does not want to take his brother’s wife, then let his brother’s wife go up to the gate to the elders, and say, ‘My husband’s brother refuses to raise up a name to his brother in Israel; he will not perform the duty of my husband’s brother.’ 8 Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him. But if he stands firm and says, ‘I do not want to take her,’ 9 then his brother’s wife shall come to him in the presence of the elders, remove his sandal from his foot, spit in his face, and answer and say, ‘So shall it be done to the man who will not build up his brother’s house.’ 10 And his name shall be called in Israel, ‘The house of him who had his sandal removed.’"

 

Edited March 7, 2016 by JulieM

[VideoGameJunkie]

If Emma and Joseph fought polygamy so much I wonder if they are going to be living it in the Celestial Kingdom. I mean after Josephs death women who never met Joseph were being sealed to him as a wife without his consent. These women chose to be polygamous wives of a dead prophet they didn't know over finding a good living man to love for themself.

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

If Emma and Joseph fought polygamy so much I wonder if they are going to be living it in the Celestial Kingdom. I mean after Josephs death women who never met Joseph were being sealed to him as a wife without his consent. These women chose to be polygamous wives of a dead prophet they didn't know over finding a good living man to love for themself.

If marriage is eternal, Joseph is a polygamist today.
Just as Abraham, Jacob, Solomon, Moses, and others.

[VideoGameJunkie]

9 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

If marriage is eternal, Joseph is a polygamist today.
Just as Abraham, Jacob, Solomon, Moses, and others.

Yes, but why were women who never even knew him getting sealed to him for eternity without his permission? Can I seal myself to Marilyn Monroe then?

Edited March 7, 2016 by VideoGameJunkie

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, JulieM said:

From what I've read (on here from discussions on this, and elsewhere), the only place in the Bible where God gave a comand that MAY SOMETIMES include a man having more than one wife is when he is to take care of his dead brother's wife IF she has no children.

But, it's not a specific commandment to live polygamy (in all other examples you gave, there was no commandment from God to practice polygamy). It's more of a commandment for a man to take care of his dead brother's wife (Levirate marriage).

.................................................................    

So you do understand that polygynous marriage would be called for in such instances.  Because of this, as well as in cases of childlessness of the first wife, the Pope (who once possessed vast secular powers) had authority to grant a request from a Jew to allow him to marry a second wife -- back at the time when Jews still practiced polygyny within the Holy Roman Empire (naturally they needed no such permission within Islamic nations).

However, apart from that, you apparently see the widespread practice of polygyny in biblical times as simply cultural, rather than divine.  So that God explicitly giving multiple wives to King David is merely catering to (enabling) his already despicable nature.  You also see the polygyny of the Patriarchs as being tolerated by God, rather than approved or commanded by him -- even though God interacts directly with Jacob-Israel in the polygynous birth of the Twelve Tribal founders..  You also reject the explicit rule stated by God that he can order a dispensation of polygyny when and if he wishes (Jacob 2:30).

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, JulieM said:

I remember reading that there is no mention of John C. Bennett's name in any church records.  None at all.  That seems odd and lends credibility to his name being completely removed.  He was a prominent force in Nauvoo for the years he was there.  

There is:

No Baptism record for John Bennett.

No record of him receiving the priesthood. 

Nothing.

I think that's evidence his name was taken off of any church records.

Wouldn't he have had to have been a member of the church and hold the priesthood to be called to serve in the calling of counselor in the 1st presidency?

And, let me add that I wouldn't blame Joseph for erasing any records involving John Bennett.  He betrayed Joseph and the great trust he gave him.  

CFR that no such records exist.  Are you referring to a specific book or article?

[JLHPROF]

3 minutes ago, VideoGameJunkie said:

Yes, but why were women who never even knew him getting sealed to him for eternity without his permission? Can I seal myself to Marilyn Monroe then?

No, but a living woman could ask to be sealed to you after you die.

At least, they used to be able to.

[rockpond]

On 3/6/2016 at 7:01 PM, VideoGameJunkie said:

No one knows why Emma Smith fought polygamy? Oh well.

I haven't read the whole thread, but my answer would be that she fought polygamy because she felt it was wrong based on her own conscience and the teachings of the Church/Prophet (her husband).

Or maybe she knew that it would ultimately lead to her husband's assassination.

[USU78]

14 minutes ago, rockpond said:

 

Or maybe she knew that it would ultimately lead to her husband's assassination.

How in the world would she have known that? 

[JulieM]

28 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

So you do understand that polygynous marriage would be called for in such instances.  

Not necessarily.  Only if the living brother was already married when his brother dies.  So not all Levirate marriages are polygamous.

And, all other examples you listed are where God may have allowed polygamy to be lived, but He did not command it.

[Calm]

That doesn't make sense though.  If the brother marries the widow,all the children are the dead ma's and he himself would have no children to carry his name.  So he would, even if unmarried likely marry a wife who would bear child for his line.

Unless I understand the Law incorrectly.

[Calm]

Man's, not ma's; can't edit.

[Robert F. Smith]

55 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Not necessarily.  Only if the living brother was already married when his brother dies.  So not all Levirate marriages are polygamous.

I did not say they were, but that is a specific instance in which you admit that God commands polygyny.

And, all other examples you listed are where God may have allowed polygamy to be lived, but He did not command it.

Likewise, you fail to come to grips with instances in which God regulates polygyny, as at Ex 21:10 (which I cited for you)

Abraham has three wives, Jacob-Israel has four, and God regulates some of these marriages.  Of course, he may merely be going along with failed human nature (since some now consider polygyny to be evil in retrospect), even though he intercedes in Jacob's polygynous marriages and blesses his progeny (Gen 29:31, 30:17,2231:42, 35:9-12, etc.), and allowing for extraordinary blessings upon those children of Jacob -- the chosen people (Gen 49, Deut 33).  It is obvious that God has no problem with polygyny among his chosen people, except in very specific instances (the harems of David & Solomon).  After all, God does give multiple wives to David in II Sam 12:7.  If God didn't approve of polygyny, why would he do that?

You insist that polygyny is not valid unless God commands it, but why would he have to command it when it is normal?  He does regulate it under the Mosiac Code, but he does not prohibit it until Jacob 2:27, 3:5, and under D&C Official Declaration 1.

Edited March 7, 2016 by Robert F. Smith

[VideoGameJunkie]

My female cousin told me of a rhyme that was joked about during Young Women about polygamy coming back during the Millennium. It went like this:

"Someday my Prince will come,
In the Millennium,
And then he will say to me –
'You can be my Number Three.'"
 

[VideoGameJunkie]

In D&C 132 Emma got the shorthand of the stick by these verses:

51 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.
52 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.
53 For I am the Lord thy God and ye shall obey my voice; and I give unto my servant Joseph that he shall be made ruler over many things; for he hath been faithful over a few things, and from henceforth I will strengthen him.
54 And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.
55 But if she will not abide this commandment, then shall my servant Joseph do all things for her, even as he hath said; and I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an hundredfold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children, and crowns of eternal lives in the eternal worlds.
56 And again, verily I say, let mine handmaid forgive my servant Joseph his trespasses; and then shall she be forgiven her trespasses, wherein she has trespassed against me; and I, the Lord thy God, will bless her, and multiply her, and make her heart to rejoice.
57 And again, I say, let not my servant Joseph put his property out of his hands, lest an enemy come and destroy him; for Satan seeketh to destroy; for I am the Lord thy God, and he is my servant; and behold, and lo, I am with him, as I was with Abraham, thy father, even unto his exaltation and glory.

[JulieM]

28 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Abraham has three wives, Jacob-Israel has four, and God regulates some of these marriages.  Of course, he may merely be going along with failed human nature (since some now consider polygyny to be evil in retrospect), even though he intercedes in Jacob's polygynous marriages and blesses his progeny (Gen 29:31, 30:17,2231:42, 35:9-12, etc.), and allowing for extraordinary blessings upon those children of Jacob -- the chosen people (Gen 49, Deut 33).  It is obvious that God has no problem with polygyny among his chosen people, except in very specific instances (the harems of David & Solomon).  After all, God does give multiple wives to David in II Sam 12:7.  If God didn't approve of polygyny, why would he do that?

You insist that polygyny is not valid unless God commands it, but why would he have to command it when it is normal?  He does regulate it under the Mosiac Code, but he does not prohibit it until Jacob 2:27, 3:5, and under D&C Official Declaration 1.

Where have I "insisted" that polygamy is not "valid unless God commands it"?  I'm not even sure what you mean by "valid" (legal?).

I don't care what consenting adults choose to do, I just don't believe polygamy was commanded by God (not in the Bible other than in some Levirate marriages amd not in the early days of the church).   I believe polygamy comes from men (or women if they choose to live it).

Edited March 7, 2016 by JulieM

[Tacenda]

2 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Where have I "insisted" that polygamy is not "valid unless God commands it"?  I'm not even sure what you mean by "valid".

I don't care what consenting adults choose to do, I just don't believe polygamy was commanded by God (not in the Bible other than in some Levirate marriages amd not in the early days of the church).   I believe polygamy comes from men (or women if they choose to live it).

And because men had concubines and many wives in the bible doesn't mean that it's correct.

[JulieM]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

And because men had concubines and many wives in the bible doesn't mean that it's correct.

Exactly or that they were commanded to be with these women. Even where it states God gave David additional wives, he was not commanded to accept them or live with them.  He could have refused them.

[Glenn101]

6 hours ago, JulieM said:

Where have I "insisted" that polygamy is not "valid unless God commands it"?  I'm not even sure what you mean by "valid" (legal?).

I don't care what consenting adults choose to do, I just don't believe polygamy was commanded by God (not in the Bible other than in some Levirate marriages amd not in the early days of the church).   I believe polygamy comes from men (or women if they choose to live it).

So, you reject Section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants, specifically verses 34 and 65?

6 hours ago, Tacenda said:

And because men had concubines and many wives in the bible doesn't mean that it's correct.

 

6 hours ago, JulieM said:

Exactly or that they were commanded to be with these women. Even where it states God gave David additional wives, he was not commanded to accept them or live with them.  He could have refused them.

So, even though God specifically commands polygamy in certain instances, and even though God is on record as giving Saul's wives to David, it was still wrong of David to have taken them? Of course David could have refused them, but why should he have done so, since it was god who was doing the offering?

 

Glenn

[JLHPROF]

8 hours ago, JulieM said:

Exactly or that they were commanded to be with these women. Even where it states God gave David additional wives, he was not commanded to accept them or live with them.  He could have refused them.

Blessings refused become cursings.

[Gray]

I suppose we must think that God also approves of slavery, since it's commanded explicitly in the Old Testament? 

Fundamentalism leads down dark paths. 

Edited March 7, 2016 by Gray

[ALarson]

17 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

You keep stating this.
CFR that there is any historical source for this claim of expunged marriages.  The only source I can find provides none.

I stated:

22 hours ago, ALarson said:

I believe that he was authorized to enter into polygamy (but I read that all of his plural marriages and references were expunged by Joseph from church records after he left Nauvoo...is that correct?).

And:

21 hours ago, ALarson said:

But, the records are reported to have been expunged of anything to do with John Bennett, so we simply do not know if he actually was authorized to practice plural marriage.

 

So, I first asked you if that was correct and then "the records are reported to have been".  I've most likely read what you've read about that in the same sources.

I do remember reading on a thread (another forum) a few years ago where a researcher posted that he had read everything he could find (records) during the time John Bennett was in Nauvoo and his name is absent from records that with his positions, it should be there.  We also have no baptism date, etc,. for him, but I think that we don't have many dates for people during that time (and many we do).  I'll see if I can search up that old thread.

Bennett should have been included and present in meetings and so forth, considering the amount of time he was in Nauvoo and the callings and positions of authority he held.  I'll search and see if his name is anywhere in documents or records too.

JLHPROF, (edited to add), I found these records where John C. Bennett is referrenced as mayor up until March 10, 1842 and then his resigning as mayor after that (these are civil records, not church records which I believe the claim has been made of the expunging, but this link is still interesting):

https://eadview.lds.org/resource/public/collection/pdf/4875/

Edited March 7, 2016 by ALarson

[JulieM]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

Blessings refused become cursings.

Well, being given many women to marry, may not be considered a blessing by a lot of men, I'd imagine  

But seriously, you believe God would have cursed David if he hadn't accepted all of those other wives that he offered him?

 

[USU78]

32 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Well, being given many women to marry, may not be considered a blessing by a lot of men, I'd imagine  

But seriously, you believe God would have cursed David if he hadn't accepted all of those other wives that he offered him?

Maybe acquiring the harem of a defeated king is an incident of kingship.

Maybe to reject the incidents of kingship is to reject the kingship.

Maybe David had been anointed king in Saul's stead, during Saul's life, by G-d's prophet.

Maybe G-d knew what He was doing in having David anointed king.

Maybe things would not have gone particularly well for David if he'd rejected the crown.  A cursing maybe even.