let us reason together

[Tacenda]

4 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

Yes, but not in a funny Ha Ha way. More like in the "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"  way. 

SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion

Now where's the "funny, but wrong" back up for the book "Mormon Enigma", since that is the book in question, not "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion".

[cdowis]

32 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

 Just the thought that some kind of grooming may have been happening at that young of an age, really creeped me out!  

.  I have four daughters and five gdaughters, and I see nothing here.  I think you should take a careful look at your fantasy life == it sounds very creepy to me.  That "grooming" is nowhere stated nor implied, but is found only in the mind of a deeply disturbed individual.

Edited September 23, 2016 by cdowis

[hope_for_things]

1 minute ago, cdowis said:

.  I have four daughters and five gdaughters, and I see nothing here.  I think you should take a careful look at your fantasy life == it sounds very creepy to me.

Nice, you're employing one of the same tactics Joseph's used against those women that refused him. 

[ALarson]

5 minutes ago, cdowis said:

.  I have four daughters and five gdaughters, and I see nothing here.  I think you should take a careful look at your fantasy life == it sounds very creepy to me.  That "grooming" is nowhere stated nor implied, but is found only in the mind of a deeply disturbed individual.

Ok.  Now we know that you'd have no problem with a 20 some year old man living in your home and being around your 4 year old daughter or grand daughter and then years later, wanting to marry her when she's a teenager and he already has a dozen or more wives.  Good to know.

[cdowis]

del

 

Edited September 23, 2016 by cdowis

[JLHPROF]

40 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

 I was disturbed by a story where Joseph and Emma stayed with a family for a few months in Kirtland, I can't remember the name of the family off the top of my head, and one of their children was very young I want to say 9 or 10 yrs old.  When this child was older they became one of Joseph's polygamous wives.

Mary Rollins Lightner.
 

[Tacenda]

8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Mary Rollins Lightner.
 

 

Mary Rollins first met Joseph Smith in early 1831.  She and her family were new converts and Joseph Smith had just arrived in Kirtland from New York state.  Twelve-year-old Mary remembers,“when he saw me, he looked at me so earnestly, I felt almost afraid [and I thought, ‘He can read my every thought,’ and I thought how blue his eyes were.] after a moment, or too he came and put his hands on my head and gave me a great Blessing, (the first I ever received)”.  Joseph also prepared Mary for their eventually marriage: “[He] told me about his great vision concerning me. He said I was the first woman God commanded him to take as a plural wife.”  In the fall of that year, Mary and her family left Kirtland for “Zion”, which was being established in Missouri.

Three years later, Mary and Joseph would be reunited when Joseph led the Zion’s Camp expedition from Ohio to Missouri.  Mary remembers, “In 1834 he was commanded to take me for a Wife, I was a thousand miles from him, he got afraid”.  At the close of Zion’s Camp, Joseph returned to Kirtland.  Mary stayed in Missouri, living in Liberty and Far West.  Perhaps thinking her marriage to Joseph was off, she married Adam Lightner in 1835.  By 1840 they had settled in Nauvoo, and were raising two children. 

Early in 1842, Joseph approached Mary about becoming his wife.  According to Mary, Joseph said, “The angel came to me three times between the year of ’34 and ’42 and said I was to obey that principle or he would slay me.”  Furthermore, Joseph told her, “I was his before I came here and he said all the Devils in hell should never get me from him...” and “I know that I shall be saved in the Kingdom of God. I have the oath of God upon it and God cannot lie. All that he gives me I shall take with me for I have that authority and that power conferred upon me.”

Initially, Mary did not accept Joseph’s proposal.  She wanted a witness from God.  Mary recalls, “If ever a poor mortal prayed I did”.  By February 1842 Joseph had convinced her it was a correct principle and she, “went forward and was sealed to him. Brigham Young performed the sealing...for time, and all Eternity.”  Mary said her husband Adam was “far away” out of town at the time of her marriage to Joseph.

Mary continued to live with her first husband, Adam.  Of this arrangement, she later wrote, “I could tell you why I stayed with Mr. Lightner. Things the [current] leaders of the Church does not know anything about.  I did just as Joseph told me to do...”

After Joseph Smith was killed in 1844, Mary and her first husband Adam continued to live in Nauvoo and the Midwest.  In 1863 they moved to Utah.  In her elderly years, Mary wrote to an acquaintance, “...I Love to talk about the Prophet and the Early days of the Church  will always remember how Joseph looked...at that first sealing...he was tall and of a commanding figure, full of Life...Yes; I could tell you many things that I cannot write – I remember every word he...ever said to me of importance...” 
 

[References]

[ALarson]

56 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Yes, reading Mormon Enigma recently I was disturbed by a story where Joseph and Emma stayed with a family for a few months in Kirtland, I can't remember the name of the family off the top of my head, and one of their children was very young I want to say 9 or 10 yrs old.  When this child was older they became one of Joseph's polygamous wives.  Just the thought that some kind of grooming may have been happening at that young of an age, really creeped me out!  

Also, Sarah Ann Whitney was only 5 years old when Joseph lived with her family in Kirtland and she later became one of Joseph's wives when she was 17 years old.  

Edited September 23, 2016 by ALarson

[hope_for_things]

15 minutes ago, cdowis said:

You need see a professional.  I cannot help you.

Be sure to show him this conversation.

My pointing out that I find grooming behavior disturbing must have really gotten under your skin.  Are you a denier that some sexual predators groom their victims?  Its very creepy to me, and I find it offensive that you would imply that I'm somehow guilty of this.  Do you regularly accuse people of the things they find disturbing? 

[cdowis]

6 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

 

Mary Rollins first met Joseph Smith in early 1831.  She and her family were new converts and Joseph Smith had just arrived in Kirtland from New York state.  Twelve-year-old Mary remembers,“when he saw me, he looked at me so earnestly, I felt almost afraid [and I thought, ‘He can read my every thought,’ and I thought how blue his eyes were.] after a moment, or too he came and put his hands on my head and gave me a great Blessing, (the first I ever received)”.  Joseph also prepared Mary for their eventually marriage: “[He] told me about his great vision concerning me. He said I was the first woman God commanded him to take as a plural wife.”  In the fall of that year, Mary and her family left Kirtland for “Zion”, which was being established in Missouri.

Three years later, Mary and Joseph would be reunited when Joseph led the Zion’s Camp expedition from Ohio to Missouri.  Mary remembers, “In 1834 he was commanded to take me for a Wife, I was a thousand miles from him, he got afraid”.  At the close of Zion’s Camp, Joseph returned to Kirtland.  Mary stayed in Missouri, living in Liberty and Far West.  Perhaps thinking her marriage to Joseph was off, she married Adam Lightner in 1835.  By 1840 they had settled in Nauvoo, and were raising two children. 

Early in 1842, Joseph approached Mary about becoming his wife.  According to Mary, Joseph said, “The angel came to me three times between the year of ’34 and ’42 and said I was to obey that principle or he would slay me.”  Furthermore, Joseph told her, “I was his before I came here and he said all the Devils in hell should never get me from him...” and “I know that I shall be saved in the Kingdom of God. I have the oath of God upon it and God cannot lie. All that he gives me I shall take with me for I have that authority and that power conferred upon me.”

Initially, Mary did not accept Joseph’s proposal.  She wanted a witness from God.  Mary recalls, “If ever a poor mortal prayed I did”.  By February 1842 Joseph had convinced her it was a correct principle and she, “went forward and was sealed to him. Brigham Young performed the sealing...for time, and all Eternity.”  Mary said her husband Adam was “far away” out of town at the time of her marriage to Joseph.

Mary continued to live with her first husband, Adam.  Of this arrangement, she later wrote, “I could tell you why I stayed with Mr. Lightner. Things the [current] leaders of the Church does not know anything about.  I did just as Joseph told me to do...”

After Joseph Smith was killed in 1844, Mary and her first husband Adam continued to live in Nauvoo and the Midwest.  In 1863 they moved to Utah.  In her elderly years, Mary wrote to an acquaintance, “...I Love to talk about the Prophet and the Early days of the Church  will always remember how Joseph looked...at that first sealing...he was tall and of a commanding figure, full of Life...Yes; I could tell you many things that I cannot write – I remember every word he...ever said to me of importance...” 
 

[References]

She was a real character.  You left out the detail of how she became convinced.  An interesting encounter with an angel that answers the question: what happens if you insult an angel.  Unbelieveable!

[Gray]

1 hour ago, thesometimesaint said:

Racism has been with us for a very long time. Cain, and his offspring, skin color was turned black so the white skinned colored ones wouldn't intermarry with them.

There is no historical basis for this story. It was invented in as an excuse to justify our enslavement of African people. 

[Gray]

1 hour ago, thesometimesaint said:

Our definitions of morality have well known tendency to change over time.

Of course. Morality evolves just as scientific understanding evolves. 

[JLHPROF]

13 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Initially, Mary did not accept Joseph’s proposal.  She wanted a witness from God.  Mary recalls, “If ever a poor mortal prayed I did”. 

She must have received her answer since she agreed.  And she wasn't a child when they married but a 22 year old adult who had prayed earnestly.
Who are we to question the witness she received from God?

I say the same thing about Vilate Kimball - she had her challenges with polygamy.  But her vision of the eternal nature of plural marriage should be read by all questioning members.

• "My mother often told me that she could not doubt the plural order of marriage was of God, for the Lord had revealed it to her in answer to prayer...
  "The anguish of their hearts was indescribable, and when she found it was useless to beseech him longer, she retired to her room and bowed before the Lord and poured out her soul in prayer to Him who hath said: 'If any lack wisdom let him ask of God, who giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not.' My father's heart was raised at the same time in supplication. While pleading as one would plead for life, the vision of her mind was opened, and, as darkness flees before the morning sun, so did her sorrow and the groveling things of earth vanish away.
  "Before her was illustrated the order of celestial marriage, in all its beauty and glory, together with the great exaltation and honor it would confer upon her in that immortal and celestial sphere, if she would accept it and stand in her place by her husband's side. She also saw the woman he had taken to wife, and contemplated with joy the vast and boundless love and union which this order would bring about as well as the increase of her husband's kingdoms, and the power and glory extending throughout the eternities, worlds without end.
  "With a countenance beaming with joy, for she was filled with the Spirit of God, she returned to my father, saying: 'Heber, what you kept from me the Lord has shown me.' She told me 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.
  "She covenanted to stand by him and honor the principle, which covenant she faithfully kept, and though her trials were often heavy and grevious to bear, she knew that father was also being tried, and her integrity was unflinching to the end. She gave my father many wives, and they always found in my mother a faithful friend."
  - Life of Heber C. Kimball by Orson F. Whitney

So again, who are we to question such testimonies and revelations, we who have never had to even ask?

[thesometimesaint]

53 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Now where's the "funny, but wrong" back up for the book "Mormon Enigma", since that is the book in question, not "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_Enigma

[thesometimesaint]

22 minutes ago, Gray said:

There is no historical basis for this story. It was invented in as an excuse to justify our enslavement of African people. 

Slavery based on race is a very old thing.

SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery

The definition of race has changed over time. The ancient Romans considered the Germanic Tribes a different race.

Edited September 23, 2016 by thesometimesaint

[Glenn101]

18 hours ago, Calm said:

If it matters, I think Helen's case was one of the many mistakes associated with the practice of plural marriage in the LDS faith.  I don't believe plural marriage itself was a mistake, but like many, many commandments we humans screw up even with the best of attentions.  Her father should have been satisfied with himself being adopted into Joseph's family and females should have been allowed, imo, to have the option to be sealed as daughters if it was appropriate for men to be sealed as sons at the time.

Calm, isn't that something that we are not qualified to judge? I do understand that you are expressing your opinion here, and always do so respectfully. Helen Mar originally agreed because she trusted her father implicitly, knowing him to be a good father and a righteous man. She did have some problems with it for a while because her parents constrained her from attending some youth dances, etc. at an age where she was eager to engage in such social activities. Yet, she prayed continuously about the matter until she received peace in her heart about it.

I am expressing my opinion here, but I feel that this matter is something that the principles involved worked out between themselves and God. It was not something that they did lightly but spent a lot of time praying about and agonizing over. Here we are, over one hundred seventy years later, trying to emotionally and intellectually second guess decisions etc. that these people came to spiritually. 

Glenn

[Tacenda]

43 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_Enigma

Looks pretty un-laughable to me.

[Jeanne]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

Looks pretty un-laughable to me.

I am still not laughing..ha..ha..??

[JLHPROF]

18 hours ago, Calm said:

Her father should have been satisfied with himself being adopted into Joseph's family and females should have been allowed, imo, to have the option to be sealed as daughters if it was appropriate for men to be sealed as sons at the time.

Many females were adopted under the Law of Adoption while it was practiced.
100+ females were sealed to new parents under the LOA in the Nauvoo temple.

http://www.scottwoodward.org/Talks/html/z-Scholarly Articles/StapleyJA_AdoptiveSealingRitual.pdf

See page 66.

[Tacenda]

34 minutes ago, Glenn101 said:

Calm, isn't that something that we are not qualified to judge? I do understand that you are expressing your opinion here, and always do so respectfully. Helen Mar originally agreed because she trusted her father implicitly, knowing him to be a good father and a righteous man. She did have some problems with it for a while because her parents constrained her from attending some youth dances, etc. at an age where she was eager to engage in such social activities. Yet, she prayed continuously about the matter until she received peace in her heart about it.

I am expressing my opinion here, but I feel that this matter is something that the principles involved worked out between themselves and God. It was not something that they did lightly but spent a lot of time praying about and agonizing over. Here we are, over one hundred seventy years later, trying to emotionally and intellectually second guess decisions etc. that these people came to spiritually. 

Glenn

I guess I'm going to go by my God-given intuition that it was wrong, before I'm going to go by a mortal man's intuition. ETA: I know this was directed to Calm but feel strongly about this, couldn't help it. 

Edited September 23, 2016 by Tacenda

[Robert F. Smith]

15 hours ago, Shadrak said:

I'm not sure we can give brother Brigham such an easy pass. If his racism was confined to his personal conduct, then one could call it a fallibility. When it runs over into doctrine and denying salvation to everyone contrary to the laws of God, it's more than a fallibility. Peter got a revelation overturning his bias and prejudices to open salvation to all. That Brigham let his prejudices rule him doesn't sit well.

I gave Brother Brigham no "easy pass."  Where did you get that from?  I would have been just as vociferous as Orson had I been present in those days. I would have made the point that it was a betrayal of what Joseph Smith had taught.  However, your conclusion is flawed since it is based on the notion of prophetic infallibility.  It is no accident that Peter and Paul were at loggerheads over taking the Gospel to the Gentiles.  All of God's servants are flawed.  We need to own up to that fact.

[Jeanne]

12 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I guess I'm going to go by my God-given intuition that it was wrong, before I'm going to go by a mortal man's intuition. ETA: I know this was directed to Calm but feel strongly about this, couldn't help it. 

I believe Calm has the greater take on this.

[Gray]

1 hour ago, thesometimesaint said:

Slavery based on race is a very old thing.

SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery

The definition of race has changed over time. The ancient Romans considered the Germanic Tribes a different race.

A quick search of your linked page didn't bring up race until the 1600s and 1700s. 

[Robert F. Smith]

16 hours ago, Teancum said:

Likely modern Jews understand  the polygny was a cultural thing that was practiced thousands of years ago by a their nomadic and tribal ancestors. They understand that then women were viewed more like property.  They don't claim that God came to their founding prophets with a flaming sword and commanded them to institute the practice. Nor is there anything in their canon like D&C 132 nor a command to take on many wives to reach God's highest heavens.

I think your comparison is thus flawed.

The flaw in your reply is based on ignoring all previous discussions on this board:  You speak as though Jews only practiced polygyny in ancient nomadic times, when in fact they practiced it up until modern times, without qualm in Sephardic tradition.  You ignore the specific regulation of polygyny in God's law (Ex 21:10, Deut 21:15-17, 25:5-10), along with God specifically giving multiple wives to King David (II Sam 12:7, Ps 45:9).

Martin Luther: 

Quote

"I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture. If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God. In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter." 

Why is this important?  Because a society in which polygyny is normal (and polygyny has been the most common form of marriage in history), then it does not need to be ordered by an angel with flaming sword.  That would only be necessary in Western society, where polygyny seemed abhorrent to most people (which is why Western Jews outlawed it in modern Israel).  The remainder of the issue turns on whether there is in fact a God, and whether he in fact ordered Joseph to practice polygyny.  That finally is the only real issue.

[thesometimesaint]

6 minutes ago, Gray said:

A quick search of your linked page didn't bring up race until the 1600s and 1700s. 

The definition of race has changed over time.