In Latter Times Some Shall Forbid Marriage

[JulieM]

12 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

With polygamy, his mother-in-law had plenty to feel rebellious about without there being a question of the three-way sexual trist that ALarson is "hinting at."

I think he said it was "hinted at" in the journal.  I agree (from the quote).  It appears that may have been what his mother-in-law thought he wanted too 

But, I'll read more when I get the actual writings by William Clayton.

Just curious about what you think.  Why do you think Clayton asked his mother-in-law if he could invite her one daughter to sleep with him and her other daughter?

Edited August 22, 2017 by JulieM

[Scott Lloyd]

58 minutes ago, JulieM said:

I think he said it was "hinted at" in the journal.  I agree (from the quote).  It appears that may have been what his mother-in-law thought he wanted too 

But, I'll read more when I get the actual writings by William Clayton.

Just curious about what you think.  Why do you think Clayton asked his mother-in-law if he could invite her one daughter to sleep with him and her other daughter?

I think you both are irresponsible gossips.

 

[JulieM]

7 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think you both are irresponsible gossips.

 

Ok.  You're funny Scott (and I note you avoided answering the question which is fine).  I'll read the journal.  No one here has stated a conclusion about this.  All we have is what William wrote about the question he asked and the reaction he got.  No one is gossiping about it, but we can discuss it.  You're free not to, of course.

Edited August 22, 2017 by JulieM

[ALarson]

31 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Ok.  You're funny Scott (and I note you avoided answering the question which is fine).  I'll read the journal.  No one here has stated a conclusion about this.  All we have is what William wrote about the question he asked and the reaction he got.  No one is gossiping about it, but we can discuss it.  You're free not to, of course.

I think the problem may be that with the publishing of these excerpts from Clayton's diaries, many felt that unflattering things came to light regarding the way polygamy was lived in Nauvoo.   It was an insider's view and written by one who actually lived polygamy himself (and was close to Joseph).  

I'll be interested in hearing what you think (just PM me if you'd like).

We should probably move on though as it's off topic really for this thread.  I won't be responding to any more comments about it.

Edited August 22, 2017 by ALarson

[Calm]

1 hour ago, JulieM said:

 No one is gossiping about it, but we can discuss it.

I think the mods might have a problem with that since under "banned topics" there is this:

"discussions of sexual behavior of LDS leaders, past or present"

Reporting a journal entry is one thing (and I personally interpreted the use of 'hint' like a hint for a puzzle...giving partial information, not implying anything), discussing what it implies when that involves possible sexual behaviour is likely going to get the thread locked.

Edited August 22, 2017 by Calm

[JulieM]

2 minutes ago, Calm said:

I think the mods might have a problem with that since under "banned topics" there is this:

"discussions of sexual behavior of LDS leaders, past or present"

Reporting a journal entry is one thing (and I personally interpreted the use of 'hint' like a hint for a puzzle...giving partial information, not implying anything), discussing what it implies when that involves possible sexual behaviour is likely going to get the thread locked.

Yes, I agree with you (although I saw no gossiping going on here, but I think it best to avoid even speculating).  Definitely time to get back on topic.  Thanks for the reminder!

[JulieM]

1 hour ago, ALarson said:

I think the problem may be that with the publishing of these excerpts from Clayton's diaries, many felt that unflattering things came to light regarding the way polygamy was lived in Nauvoo.   It was an insider's view and written by one who actually lived polygamy himself (and was close to Joseph).  

I'll be interested in hearing what you think (just PM me if you'd like).

We should probably move on though as it's off topic really for this thread.  I won't be responding to any more comments about it.

I agree (about getting back on topic!)

Thanks for explaining more about the diaries too.  And, I will definitely PM you after I read them or if I have any questions while reading them 

[carbon dioxide]

On 8/17/2017 at 1:04 AM, california boy said:

 

Just how easily is it to dismiss this prophecy of Paul "latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;....Forbidding to marry".

 

 

There is about as much evidence that Paul would entertain the idea of SSM being a valid form of marriage as he would accept the idea of a man marrying his microwave oven.  I don't think its reasonable to suggest that Paul had the opposition to SSM in mind when he wrote these words.

[california boy]

8 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

There is about as much evidence that Paul would entertain the idea of SSM being a valid form of marriage as he would accept the idea of a man marrying his microwave oven.  I don't think its reasonable to suggest that Paul had the opposition to SSM in mind when he wrote these words.

Well obviously you have not read much of the comments on this thread because this was discussed in depth.  No one has even hinted that Paul would entertain, understand or have an opinion on gay marriage.