Distinct polygamy concerns

[CA Steve]

7 hours ago, Ginger Snaps said:

Mainly lurking, but popping in with a resource I don’t think I’ve seen mentioned. Elder Cook did a face to face in September 2018 with historians Kate Holbrook and Matt Grow. Polygamy was one of the topics addressed and Elder Cook said:

“In the senior councils of the Church, there is a feeling that polygamy, as it was practiced, served its purpose and we should honor those Saints, but that purpose has been accomplished.”

 

The statement makes no sense as long as men are still being allowed to be sealed to multiple wives.

We are still practicing polygamy.

[YJacket]

9 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

You realize that some of the "fruits" you're taking about are real people, right?  Real, live, flesh-and-blood human beings who might feel differently about their existence than you do?  (Gawrsh, but we're so sorry our very existence makes you make you feel uncomfortable! ) 

Yes, it would "ruffle some members' feathers," especially those of the "birds" who wouldn't be here without it!  But, hell, since it would make you feel more comfortable for the Church of Jesus Christ to denounce it!  

Brigham Young was a force.  I tremendously respect him for his strength of will. It is debatable whether the Church as an institution would have survived after JS's death without him. 

He absolutely did things that were and are wrong in the eyes of God. Stealing another man's wife (Augusta Cobb) was absolutely wrong and evil.  Joseph and Hyrum both preached and forcefully that if a woman joined the Church she was NOT to leave her husband (which is exactly what the NT states). 

[YJacket]

8 hours ago, juliann said:

The problem is the harshness of 132...it would be important to inform the RS that JS did not put this in the D&C, BY did much later. 

DC 132 was not even produced as a document until 1854ish.  The story goes that Emma burned the original, but that a copy was made and that super secret copy was then put in a lockbox on BY desk that he held until he produced it in 1854ish.  Of course there are no witnesses to the story, Emma firmly claimed the burning never happened and that the first time she had ever seen 132 was when BY produced it.

The history of 132 is VERY, VERY sketchy.  In fact, when one reads 132, it does not read like the other revelations Joseph received.  It has a different word structure. 

[Kenngo1969]

5 minutes ago, YJacket said:

Brigham Young was a force.  I tremendously respect him for his strength of will. It is debatable whether the Church as an institution would have survived after JS's death without him. 

He absolutely did things that were and are wrong in the eyes of God. Stealing another man's wife (Augusta Cobb) was absolutely wrong and evil.  Joseph and Hyrum both preached and forcefully that if a woman joined the Church she was NOT to leave her husband (which is exactly what the NT states). 

Think what you like of Brigham Young.  None of that is responsive to anything I wrote.  Anything else?   

[Teancum]

On 7/6/2022 at 9:33 PM, JLHPROF said:

Joseph made it even simpler:

I mean really, all this debate should always end here.  It doesn't matter what we think of polygamy, tithing, word of wisdom, temple work, or any other revealed principle.  If God commands it we'd better figure out how to do it with a smile on our faces.  😁

A lot of big IFs there.

[Teancum]

On 7/6/2022 at 9:45 PM, Hamba Tuhan said:

Agreed. And the real risk then is almost always the assumption that God would never command something we don't immediately like. William Law and his wife jumped straight to that conclusion.

Did they jump straight to it?  How do you know this?  Maybe they prayed about it?  Maybe they talked about it.  Maybe  they agonized over it.  And maybe God told them it was not from him.  

[Hamba Tuhan]

23 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Did they jump straight to it?  How do you know this?  Maybe they prayed about it? ... And maybe God told them it was not from him.  

Not according to his own account:

Quote

Hyrum gave it to me in his office, told me to take it home and read it and then be careful with it and bring it back again. I took it home, and read it and showed it to my wife. She and I were just turned upside down by it; we did not know what to do.

As Saints, they should have understood from previous experience exactly what to do.

Quote

I took the revelation back to my wife and told her that Joseph had acknowledged it. ”That is what I fully expected.” said she. ”What shall we do?” said I. She advised me to keep still try to sell my property quietly for what I could get. But I did not follow her advice. My heart was burning. I wanted to tread upon the viper.

But clearly they didn't ...

As I recently mentioned in another thread, I find it instructive to contrast Law's words with those of Elizabeth Ann Whitney, who, along with her husband, took a different approach and therefore had a very different experience:

Quote

My husband revealed these things to me; we had always been united, and had the utmost faith and confidence in each other. We pondered upon them continually, and our prayers were unceasing that the Lord would grant us some special manifestation concerning this new and strange doctrine. The Lord was very merciful to us; He revealed unto us His power and glory. We were seemingly wrapt in a heavenly vision, a halo of light encircled us, and we were convinced in our own minds that God had heard and answered our prayers and intercedings before Him.

 

Edited July 8, 2022 by Hamba Tuhan

[Teancum]

On 7/6/2022 at 9:47 PM, JLHPROF said:

True, that should be the issue.  But can we honestly say it's really the issue.

Do you think if I could prove 100% that polygamy came from God and is an eternal law that it would make people like the idea one iota more?

How about it @Tacenda?  If you absolutely knew it came from God would you like it even a tiny bit more?

I would argue it wouldn't for the vast majority.  They want their idea of God. 

 

You want your idea of God as well. You think everything from the  early LDS prophets is from God. Just take polygamy for example.  You approach it with a predetermined conclusion this it is from God because you are convince JS was a prophet.  So you make it all fit regardless of whether or not it is rational or good. So your approach is the same.  You want your idea of God as much as anyone else does.

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Not according to his own account:

As Saints, they should have understood from previous experience exactly what to do.

But clearly they didn't ...

As I recently mentioned in another thread, I find it instructive to contrast Law's words with those of Elizabeth Ann Whitney, who, along with her husband, took a different approach and therefore had a very different experience:

 

Perhaps then they were simply bright enough to see it for what it was right out of the box.  Utter nonsense.

[Teancum]

On 7/6/2022 at 9:52 PM, Hamba Tuhan said:

That's precisely what he believed, and he had zero desire to ask God if that belief was correct or not. He didn't need to. He already knew that God would agree with him.

In spite of your summary you do not know what went through the man's mind.  But I know there is a need to demonize him.  Still sometimes it is clear when something is simply wrong and Law clearly saw that.  Sometimes one does not need to pray. I think Law was a hero.

[juliann]

2 hours ago, CA Steve said:

The statement makes no sense as long as men are still being allowed to be sealed to multiple wives.

We are still practicing polygamy.

And women are sealed to live multiple husbands by special permission, or in work for the dead. The process doesn't treat the sexes equitably but the results are the same in the end. (There is no longer an official statement that only women have to choose one spouse.)

[Tacenda]

21 minutes ago, Teancum said:

In spite of your summary you do not know what went through the man's mind.  But I know there is a need to demonize him.  Still sometimes it is clear when something is simply wrong and Law clearly saw that.  Sometimes one does not need to pray. I think Law was a hero.

He was just like we would be if our 14 yr. old daughter (pretend you have one if not) was told she needed to marry Joseph for the family's exaltation in the CK. So Law was ahead of his time on the morality scale, or paying attention to his compass. Not believe something that in your gut is wrong. Too bad the Law's were painted so differently to me while growing up. I wish I had known the full story, not a brush stroke of a story in order to make Joseph persecuted for his faith, and not for committing some crimes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_and_the_criminal_justice_system

[Amulek]

7 hours ago, Raingirl said:

Gotta send a man in to teach in RS, because we couldn’t possibly trust one of those darn women to teach. 

Sounds like the kind of complaint that you ought to be taking up with the woman who presides over the Relief Society in that ward - you know, the one who extended the (unsolicited) invitation to rongo in the first place. 

 

[Teancum]

On 7/6/2022 at 10:20 PM, Hamba Tuhan said:

When Kenneth Godfrey was my Institute instructor in America, he shared what he'd learnt from his PhD research about men's experiences in plural marriage. He said that chronic loneliness and social isolation were common, with sister wives often relying on each other for emotional/intellectual intimacy, leaving the husband as an outsider to his own 'family life'.

I also remember a handout he gave us on which were quoted the words a man in Logan, Utah, had spoken in stake conference about the 'blessings of plural marriage' and then his journal entry that same night in which he wrote out a prayer pleading with the Lord to sustain him in his abject misery.

Sure.  Polygamy was apparently an awful way to live for many men and women. No surprise.  

[Teancum]

On 7/6/2022 at 10:36 PM, carbon dioxide said:

If all commandments were easy and likeable, we would have no problems keeping all of the commandments and our faith would never get tested.  People say they love God but God has ways of seeing if that is really true or not.  

Why does faith have to be tested often in such brutal and cruel ways?  Maybe this is just what we tell ourselves to satisfy the cognitive dissonance such things cause.

Edited July 8, 2022 by Teancum

[Teancum]

On 7/6/2022 at 10:41 PM, carbon dioxide said:

When it comes to polygamy, I would start with the baseline of polygamy in the scriptures, particularly the Bible.  If people view polygamy as always wrong, something that God simply allowed and not commanded, they will see any issue regarding polygamy in LDS history or elsewhere in a negative light.   They will never approach the issue with an open mind that perhaps this issue or circumstance was fine.   Any issue regarding it will be graded on degrees of how wrong it is.  If people can see that there are times when it is appropriate, good, or acceptable, it is easier to move on to specifics in regards to the list you have. 

But there is no evidence God ever did command it. Not in the Bible. Nor is there that God commanded it the way JS did it, as some new and everlasting covenant needed for the highest level of heaven.

[webbles]

9 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

He was just like we would be if our 14 yr. old daughter (pretend you have one if not) was told she needed to marry Joseph for the family's exaltation in the CK. So Law was ahead of his time on the morality scale, or paying attention to his compass. Not believe something that in your gut is wrong. Too bad the Law's were painted so differently to me while growing up. I wish I had known the full story, not a brush stroke of a story in order to make Joseph persecuted for his faith, and not for committing some crimes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_and_the_criminal_justice_system

You appear to be confusing Law's story with Kimball's story.  And Helen Mar Kimball (the 14 year old) appears to have misremembered what was said to her since we have written evidence from her parents shortly after the sealing about how they all still need to work towards their exaltation.  They didn't see the sealing as a guarantee of exaltation.

Law's story is really odd because it involves his wife potentially being sealed to/seduced by Joseph Smith.  We have a few possible situations that happened: 1) Jane Law asked to be sealed to Joseph Smith, 2) Jane Law was seduced by Joseph Smith, 3) Joseph Smith asked William Law to marry his wife, 4) Joseph Smith and William Law proposed swapping/sharing wives.  All of those are kind of contradictory with each other but all have similar types of sources.  I would love to somehow go back in time and figure out what actually happened.  Because what ever it was, it caused William to no longer like/believe Joseph.

[YJacket]

1 minute ago, webbles said:

You appear to be confusing Law's story with Kimball's story.  And Helen Mar Kimball (the 14 year old) appears to have misremembered what was said to her since we have written evidence from her parents shortly after the sealing about how they all still need to work towards their exaltation.  They didn't see the sealing as a guarantee of exaltation.

Law's story is really odd because it involves his wife potentially being sealed to/seduced by Joseph Smith.  We have a few possible situations that happened: 1) Jane Law asked to be sealed to Joseph Smith, 2) Jane Law was seduced by Joseph Smith, 3) Joseph Smith asked William Law to marry his wife, 4) Joseph Smith and William Law proposed swapping/sharing wives.  All of those are kind of contradictory with each other but all have similar types of sources.  I would love to somehow go back in time and figure out what actually happened.  Because what ever it was, it caused William to no longer like/believe Joseph.

Right this is an extremely strange account.  What is even stranger is the supposed "William Law's Diary". Many of the quotes from William Law about JS come from a "diary" that was "found" by a Law relative in the mid 1900s (I think 1950s-70s).  Anyways, this "diary" has never been submitted for analysis if it is authentic, the Law descendants simply claim it is authentic, had a journalist come in look at the manuscript type it up and sell it.  That text (not the handwritten) is held by BYU, but they won't allow anyone into the reading rooms to see it except under very strict rules.  The "diary" is extremely convenient in that it starts ~Jan '43 and end June '43.  It is in that diary where the account of the wife swapping comes in where Emma supposedly told Joseph if he could have other women, she wanted another man and that man was WL, and then when WL was propositioned by JS of course he was offended and as well as his wife.  A long sordid tale when it WL later admitted being unfaithful to his wife.

As far as the newspaper interviews written 40 years later . . .yeah whatever I put very, very little stock in that.  Memories are extremely faulty and people recount, retell their own stories dozens of time and create whatever narrative they want.

It would be a huge problem IF WL's actual handwritten "diary" was ever produced and it was shown to be authentic.  But the Law's descendants will not allow anyone to see the original hand-written text . . .hmmmmm, that's REAL convenient.  I like the put up or shut up principle.  As far as I can see, the Law's diary and his subsequent newpaper interviews is a shut up principle.

[Teancum]

29 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

He was just like we would be if our 14 yr. old daughter (pretend you have one if not) was told she needed to marry Joseph for the family's exaltation in the CK. So Law was ahead of his time on the morality scale, or paying attention to his compass. Not believe something that in your gut is wrong. Too bad the Law's were painted so differently to me while growing up. I wish I had known the full story, not a brush stroke of a story in order to make Joseph persecuted for his faith, and not for committing some crimes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Smith_and_the_criminal_justice_system

Up vote point for you.

[YJacket]

11 minutes ago, webbles said:

I would love to somehow go back in time and figure out what actually happened.  Because what ever it was, it caused William to no longer like/believe Joseph.

The simplest explaination is the best.  Jane and William Law wanted to be sealed together. Joseph Smith denied the sealing b/c he had reason or evidence to suspect WL was committing adultery.  There is record the WL confessed to this adultery; then later because he was spurned by JS, created a bunch of lies to get back at JS.

This is a typical pattern and makes the most human sense; in that when people are denied something that they feel they have a right to, they usually get very nasty, bitter and slanderous.

[CA Steve]

6 minutes ago, YJacket said:

The simplest explaination is the best.  Jane and William Law wanted to be sealed together. Joseph Smith denied the sealing b/c he had reason or evidence to suspect WL was committing adultery.  There is record the WL confessed to this adultery; then later because he was spurned by JS, created a bunch of lies to get back at JS.

This is a typical pattern and makes the most human sense; in that when people are denied something that they feel they have a right to, they usually get very nasty, bitter and slanderous.

Somehow that pattern never applies to Joseph Smith.

[Teancum]

On 7/7/2022 at 12:02 AM, The Nehor said:

I have a hard time putting much credit in the “I don’t think God would do this” argument. From our point of view God often does things that by our morality are downright cruel.

A good reason to question the existence of such a being.

[Teancum]

15 minutes ago, Obehave said:

Evidence for God commanding someone to do something usually comes in the form of someone saying God did that.  It is called testimony evidence, and testimony evidence is accepted in all courts in the United States of America and in many other countries. 

True.  And the question is whether or not the person saying "God told me to tell you do do this or that" can be trusted becomes critical.

[Tacenda]

24 minutes ago, YJacket said:

The simplest explaination is the best.  Jane and William Law wanted to be sealed together. Joseph Smith denied the sealing b/c he had reason or evidence to suspect WL was committing adultery.  There is record the WL confessed to this adultery; then later because he was spurned by JS, created a bunch of lies to get back at JS.

This is a typical pattern and makes the most human sense; in that when people are denied something that they feel they have a right to, they usually get very nasty, bitter and slanderous.

https://william-law.org/disparaged/

[Tacenda]

38 minutes ago, webbles said:

You appear to be confusing Law's story with Kimball's story.  And Helen Mar Kimball (the 14 year old) appears to have misremembered what was said to her since we have written evidence from her parents shortly after the sealing about how they all still need to work towards their exaltation.  They didn't see the sealing as a guarantee of exaltation.

Law's story is really odd because it involves his wife potentially being sealed to/seduced by Joseph Smith.  We have a few possible situations that happened: 1) Jane Law asked to be sealed to Joseph Smith, 2) Jane Law was seduced by Joseph Smith, 3) Joseph Smith asked William Law to marry his wife, 4) Joseph Smith and William Law proposed swapping/sharing wives.  All of those are kind of contradictory with each other but all have similar types of sources.  I would love to somehow go back in time and figure out what actually happened.  Because what ever it was, it caused William to no longer like/believe Joseph.

I wasn't connecting Law with the 14 year old daughter, sorry if I made it sound that way.