Come Follow Me (April 1-7) - Talk about chastity, no mention of polygamy

[PortalToParis]

12 minutes ago, webbles said:

Joseph Fielding is actually condemning those women.

Yes, he and his sister Mercy Fielding (Mary's brother & sister) both adopted the polygamy doctrine post-martyrdom.

1 hour ago, webbles said:

It is also interesting that Joseph Fielding appears to be quoting from D&C 132.  Compare D&C 132:22 - "For strait is the gate, and narrow the way that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the lives, and few there be that find it". 

I actually think that our current D&C Section 132 (an earlier draft of it) existed at this time. Jane Law's pre-martyrdom testimony also gives D&C 132 language. But I don't think 132 came from Joseph, or from Hyrum. Joseph Smith said, more than once, that people were teaching false doctrine under his name. I don't believe the claim that Hyrum Smith was the one to have delivered 132 to William Law. I also don't believe that Hyrum Smith would have been the one to teach Joseph Fielding about polygamy being doctrinal, as less than three months before his death he stated this:

8 April 1844 - Hyrum speaking in a general conference address. History, 1838–1856, volume E-1 [1 July 1843–30 April 1844], p. 1984, The Joseph Smith Papers

President Hyrum Smith called the Conference to order at 25 min. to 4 <P. M.> and said:—

... One reason I speak to the Elders is, in consequence of the Ten thousand reports which come to me from abroad— almost every foolish man runs to me, to enquire if such and such things are true, and how many spiritual wives a man may have. I know nothing about it; what he might call a spiritual wife, I should not know anything about. In about half an hour after he has gone, another person begins to say: “the Elders tell such and such things all over the country.” I am authorized to tell you from henceforth, that any man who comes in and tells any such damn fool doctrine, to tell him to give up his [priesthood] license. None but a fool teaches such stuff; the devil himself is not such a fool, and every Elder who teaches such stuff ought to have his nose wrung; any one [p. 1984] found guilty of such teaching will be published and his license will be taken from him... I wish the Elders of Israel to understand it is lawful for a man to marry a wife, but it is unlawful to have more, and God has not commanded any of you to have more; and if any of you dare to presume to do any such things, it will spoil your fun, for you will never have the spirit to preach the Gospel. I despise a man who teaches a pack of stuff that will disgrace himself so; for a man to go into the world, and talk of this spiritual wife system he is as empty as an open sepulchre... I would call the Devil my brother before such a man. The idea of marrying for eternity is the seal of the Covenant, and is easily understood; and as to speaking of it I could make all the world believe it, for it is noble and grand; it is necessary in consequence of the broken Covenants in the world. I never saw any scripture but what was written by Prophets to instruct and prepare mankind for eternity. I read that what God joins together let no man put asunder. I see magistrates and Priests in the world, but not one who is empowered to join [p. 1985] together by the authority of God. nor yet have I seen any priest that dare say that he has the authority of God; there is not a sectarian Priest in Christendom that dare say he has the authority by direct revelation from God. When I look at the seal of the new Covenant and reflect that all the covenants made by the authority of man are only made to be in force during the natural life, and end there I rejoice that what is done by the Lord has an endless duration. No marriage is valid in the morn of the resurrection unless the marriage Covenant be sealed on earth by one having the keys and power from the Almighty God to seal on earth, and it shall be bound in heaven. Such a sealing will have full effect in the morn of the resurrection... No spiritual wife doctrine ever originated with me... If there is any man that has no more sense, and will make a base story of such a fact, his name shall be published ... I believe every good man should have one wife in this life, and I know if I had two I should not know what to do with them; they might quarrel about me, and I might get a whipping. One is enough, and I warn all of you not to attempt it; if a man should begin to find you out, you would get into some cell in Alton... Get the wife sealed to you that God and your country let you have, and if any brother hears any person preach such stuff wring his nose but look out or he may be stouter than you. No man would have more than one wife or they will join together and beat him. If I was a woman, and got so fooled I would hide my head. I give the sisters leave to wring his nose to teach such stuff; I’ll bear you out in it; give him justice. If I can’t get you clear W[illiam] W. Phelps and the Constitutional Congress can... Brother Hyrum will live twenty years hence, and you will then find that [p. 1989] I have spoken the truth...We want the honest in heart— the virtuous— the noble; we want the good seed gathered here. Let all men repent, and the Elders gather out the good seed, and bring it to Nauvoo. We want you to understand that if you preach any thing wrong, you will be published. We don’t want bogus makers, counterfeiters, or preachers of the spiritual wife system... [p. 1990] 

[PortalToParis]

[Wrong formatting]

Edited April 6, 2024 by PortalToParis

[PortalToParis]

1 hour ago, webbles said:

In addition to Joseph Fielding, there are others in Nauvoo who were taught by Hyrum and Joseph about the "true" practice of sealing but then quickly changed to the "incorrect" practice of polygamy.  I find it difficult to believe that they were so easily deceived to change their mind.  All the people who did fight back seem to fight back against both practices (eternal sealings to multiple people or polygamy).  This separation of the two practices feels like a modern invention and not one that actually occurred in Nauvoo.

Hyrum Smith exaggeratingly said that 'Ten thousand' men were being deceived by it:

One reason I speak to the Elders is, in consequence of the Ten thousand reports which come to me from abroad— almost every foolish man runs to me, to enquire if such and such things are true, and how many spiritual wives a man may have. I know nothing about it; what he might call a spiritual wife, I should not know anything about. In about half an hour after he has gone, another person begins to say: “the Elders tell such and such things all over the country.” I am authorized to tell you from henceforth, that any man who comes in and tells any such damn fool doctrine, to tell him to give up his [priesthood] license. 

Hyrum Smith's address explicitly states that the marriage sealing is for being eternally bound to your one, legally-married wife, and is not for getting or having more than one wife:

The idea of marrying for eternity is the seal of the Covenant, and is easily understood; and as to speaking of it I could make all the world believe it, for it is noble and grand; it is necessary in consequence of the broken Covenants in the world. I never saw any scripture but what was written by Prophets to instruct and prepare mankind for eternity. I read that what God joins together let no man put asunder. I see magistrates and Priests in the world, but not one who is empowered to join [p. 1985] together by the authority of God. nor yet have I seen any priest that dare say that he has the authority of God; there is not a sectarian Priest in Christendom that dare say he has the authority by direct revelation from God. When I look at the seal of the new Covenant and reflect that all the covenants made by the authority of man are only made to be in force during the natural life, and end there I rejoice that what is done by the Lord has an endless duration. No marriage is valid in the morn of the resurrection unless the marriage Covenant be sealed on earth by one having the keys and power from the Almighty God to seal on earth, and it shall be bound in heaven. Such a sealing will have full effect in the morn of the resurrection... No spiritual wife doctrine ever originated with me...Get the wife sealed to you that God and your country let you have, and if any brother hears any person preach such stuff wring his nose but look out or he may be stouter than you.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, MustardSeed said:

No sex slaves here.  Except when we agree to be. 🤪

I have no idea what you are talking about and have certainly never been and/or had a sex slave. NEVER!!!!!!

😈

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, carbon dioxide said:

Some are doing the passport thing.  Most men just can't afford that option.   So they just stay home and are just not dating at all.  That is why there are lots of videos on youtube of women complaining about where have all the men gone.   They are still around.  They are not dead.  They just are not apparently going to deal with the mindset of many younger women today.  They don't see the benefits being greater than the risks and they have their porn which is good enough for them.   We will see the day when half of all 50 year old women in the country will be childless and single.   It is coming.

And I am pretty sure it hurts the men more. The women complaining about how there are no good men to date would probably say they are happier being single than lowering their standards.

[webbles]

3 hours ago, PortalToParis said:

Yes, he and his sister Mercy Fielding (Mary's brother & sister) both adopted the polygamy doctrine post-martyrdom.

3 hours ago, PortalToParis said:

I actually think that our current D&C Section 132 (an earlier draft of it) existed at this time. Jane Law's pre-martyrdom testimony also gives D&C 132 language. But I don't think 132 came from Joseph, or from Hyrum. Joseph Smith said, more than once, that people were teaching false doctrine under his name. I don't believe the claim that Hyrum Smith was the one to have delivered 132 to William Law. I also don't believe that Hyrum Smith would have been the one to teach Joseph Fielding about polygamy being doctrinal, as less than three months before his death he stated this:

Why would Joseph Fielding adopt the polygamy doctrine so quickly?  Also Mary adopted it pretty quickly as well as she was sealed to Heber C. Kimball in the Nauvoo temple.  That's what confuses me.  Are you saying that Joseph Fielding didn't learn about what ever Joseph Smith was teaching?  If so, who did Joseph Smith teach?  In the page you like to link to, in section 57, it says that sealings were to create "family bonds".  Some of the first few sealings that Joseph enacted were to:

• Zina Huntington - She was later sealed for time in the Nauvoo temple to Brigham Young (even though she was still civilly married and living with Henry Jacobs) and sealed for eternity to Joseph Smith.  She has a child with Brigham which shows that she did later accept the polygamy doctrine.  So, if she was personally taught by Joseph Smith about the true sealing doctrine, then why did she quickly change?
• Presendia Huntington - She was later sealed for time in the Nauvoo temple to Heber C. Kimball (even though she was still civilly married and living with Norman Buell) and sealed for eternity to Joseph Smith.  She has children with Heber which shows that she did later accept the polygamy doctrine.  Same question as her sister.  Why did she quickly change?  Also, if Joseph was sealing to create family bonds, why two sisters?
• Agnes Coolbrith - She is sealed to for eternity in the Nauvoo temple to Don Carlos Smith (her deceased husband) and sealed to George Albert Smith for time.  Why would she need to be sealed to Joseph Smith if she was sealed for eternity to his brother?  And if Joseph was sealing to create family bonds, why his sister-in-law?
• Sylvia Porter Lyon - She is later sealed for time in the Nauvoo temple to Heber (even though she was still civilly married and living with Windsor Lyon) and sealed for eternity to Joseph Smith.  She supposedly told her daughter Josephine that she (Josephine) was Joseph's daughter.  Why would Sylvia think that Josephine could be a daughter of Joseph if the sealing was just a "family bond"?  Why did she change belief so quickly after the martydom as well?

Why would these women, who appear to have been personally taught by Joseph Smith, change their beliefs so quickly and easily?  Also, if Brigham convinced them that polygamy was the correct meaning of the sealing, why didn't they get sealed to their actual husbands instead of repeat a non-marriage sealing to Joseph?

3 hours ago, PortalToParis said:

I also don't believe that Hyrum Smith would have been the one to teach Joseph Fielding about polygamy being doctrinal, as less than three months before his death he stated this:

In that same talk, he announced that he was sealed to two women - https://catalog.churchofjesuschrist.org/assets/daa151c4-7bae-49d0-8cef-d281a70f1d32/0/33

Quote

I married me a wife & was the only one who had any write to her— till we had 5 Chi’d [children] the covt. was made for our lives— she fell in the grave bef[ore] God shewed us his authy God has shewed me that the Covt. is dead & had no more force neither could I have her in the resn. but we shod. be as the angels— it troubled me— Bro J sd. you can be sealed to her upon the same prin[ciple] as you can be bap for the dead what can I do for more 2nd. wife— you can make a covt. with her for etern[ity] & sealed to her— & she sd. I will act as proxy for the one that is dead — and I will be sealed to you for eternity

So, Hyrum both denounced polygamy and at the same time announced he was sealed to two women.  And it does sound like he sees these sealings as actual marriage covenants.  This sounds very much like what Joseph Fielding wrote about.

[Teancum]

18 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

Not really that gross in the 19th century. 

Yes really. Especially considering he was was already married.  How common was that in the 19th century?  But yea 14 was young for marriage in the 1840s.

 

Quote

 

Age of Marriage in 1800s USA

Between 1800 and 1900, women generally married for the first time between the ages of 20 and 22 years old, making the median age 21 years old for average brides. Less is known about the average age of first marriages for men during the 19th century. In 1890, when the U.S. Census Bureau started collecting marriage data, it was recorded that the average age of a first marriage for men was 26 years, and the average age of marriage for women was 22 years.

https://www.theclassroom.com/age-marriage-us-1800s-23174.html#google_vignette

 

 

18 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

 

I have not seen a lot of evidence that it was a big deal in those days.

You have not looked very hard.

18 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

 

  

Your view is based on 20th and 21st century thinking.  If you lived in 1800, you might even had considered marrying a teen.   Why not?  What would be a legit argument against it in say 1810?

It is a legit argument for the 18th century. See above. I found about ten resources in 30 seconds. Once again Joseph was already married. 

[Teancum]

18 hours ago, ZealouslyStriving said:

You can't bring me down...

It's General Conference Weekend!!!!

🥳

I Wasn't trying to bring you down.

[Teancum]

On 4/5/2024 at 4:45 PM, sunstoned said:

Without their parent's permission? To polygamist men?  Good luck trying to justify JS's actions.  I know Emma couldn't.

I love watching believers jump through hoops for JS to justify his extramarital activity in ways they never ever would for anyone else. But I have empathy. I used to do the same thing, till I coudn't.

[Teancum]

On 4/5/2024 at 5:02 PM, bluebell said:

She must have somehow since she stayed married to him and continued to believe that he was a prophet.

I am sure were lots of dynamics for Emma and how she stayed married. Since none of us can know her mind or motives who knows. But people stay in unhappy and abusive relationships all the time.  So what Emma did or did not do, and whether we know she continued to believe or not believe that he was a prophet, we can not know.

[Teancum]

On 4/5/2024 at 6:47 PM, ZealouslyStriving said:

Read what Doctrine and Covenants actually says. The keyholder doesn't need the permission of his wife:

"64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law.

65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law, for him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I commanded Abraham to take Hagar to wife." 

Hahahahh!  You think this is a good defence of polygamy? Really? Let your hubby "marry" and sleep with many women or get destroyed.  Good lord.

[Teancum]

On 4/5/2024 at 7:15 PM, Pyreaux said:

That isn't what you said, are you moving the goal post? What does Emma's permission have to with the legality of marrying the someone underage, when it's still legal to this day? You seem to be randomly lashing out.

Let's see:

Man is 38.

Man is married already.

Man has been sneaking around behind his wife's back marrying other women.

Man has been using is position and power and making arguments to lure women to marry him such as they were appointed his before they were born, placing time limits and implying a no from a woman would risk her exaltation. 

Man want to marry 14 year old and promises family exaltation if 14 year old does marry him.

Average age of women marrying in 1840 was 20-22.

Sure, all good here. Nother to see so lets move on. 🙄😏

 

[ZealouslyStriving]

43 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Hahahahh!  You think this is a good defence of polygamy? Really? Let your hubby "marry" and sleep with many women or get destroyed.  Good lord.

🤷‍♂️

[Teancum]

On 4/5/2024 at 8:57 PM, ZealouslyStriving said:

Since I believe God is good, fair, and no respecter of person- and that this is a revelation from that same God- who am I to say they aren't?

Doesn't this type of thinking make you brain hurt?

[Teancum]

On 4/5/2024 at 10:12 PM, PortalToParis said:

The Historical Monogamy Doctrine website (https://historicalmonogamy.wixsite.com/evidenceofdoctrine) addresses this idea, and says this about it:

The idea was that by having the more righteous men have a greater number of wives and children, the following generations of people would be healthier and stronger - essentially by having such a high proportion of them be from the most holy and good men. In fact, the opposite of this is now known to be genetically true - the more limited the male gene pool, the more genetic diseases and shortened lifespans you will have occur. Due to polygamy, as reported by the BBC, "more human disease genes have been discovered in Utah - with its Mormon history - than any other place in the world." [a]

Certain families are still facing fatal illness and early deaths to this day as a result of early Mormon polygamy - see "Fatal Inheritance: Mormon Eugenics" for Linda Walker's introductory exposition on the topic.

This sounds a lot like what the Utopian Oneida Community thought and practice.  Another religious group where the top men controlled the sexual activity of the group and had preference over who they got to make babies with. 

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

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

I am sure were lots of dynamics for Emma and how she stayed married. Since none of us can know her mind or motives who knows. But people stay in unhappy and abusive relationships all the time.  So what Emma did or did not do, and whether we know she continued to believe or not believe that he was a prophet, we can not know.

How come you didn't tell Sunstone there's no way to know her mind or motives when he definitively stated that Emma couldn't justify JS's polygamy but you did to me when I said she could?    

[Teancum]

On 4/5/2024 at 10:59 PM, Calm said:

Do you believe this was written by Joseph or it was written by Oliver and published by Joseph?

Does it matter who wrote the D&C Section that was in the 1835 D&C?  The book was voted on and accepted by the church.  Seems like the marriage section was a valid as the rest of the book.

[Teancum]

19 minutes ago, bluebell said:

How come you didn't tell Sunstone there's no way to know her mind or motives when he definitively stated that Emma couldn't justify JS's polygamy but you did to me when I said she could?    

Sorry I am not sure which post that was.

[bluebell]

4 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Sorry I am not sure which post that was.

Sunstone stated: “Good luck trying to justify JS's actions.  I know Emma couldn't.”

 

[TheTanakas]

On 4/5/2024 at 9:41 PM, PortalToParis said:

These are really great questions you came up with, I'm impressed. You've managed to find a few things inconsistent about polygamy and concubinage being commanded by God. On the Historical Monogamy Doctrine website (https://historicalmonogamy.wixsite.com/evidenceofdoctrine) there are a lot more inconsistencies that are explored, as well as an alternate narrative put forward of early Mormon polygamy. It touches on each of the points that you've brought up, so I recommend you read through it. If you do, I hope you reply about what you think of it.

Peace.

Thank you.  It was a lot of material.  The end stipulates it was written by a faithful 
sister member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. But if she is right,
then many LDS leaders are apostate based on what they have written about the history of
polygamy.  So she could not possibly sustain even the current leaders.

[TheTanakas]

On 4/4/2024 at 6:59 PM, CV75 said:

It doesn’t say “much seed,” but “seed.” I take this phrasing in connection with the Abrahamic covenant, with the practice serving as an “appendage” and not as the “requisite” for raising this kind of seed.

Maybe "more seed" is the appropriate term to use.  

[CV75]

21 hours ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

Look - I made my position clear right from the get go. This is what I wrote:

On the other hand, what you are doing is creating an argument for relativism. It's an odd sort of position because I get the impression that in any other context, you would be ridiculing that sort of argument. I didn't actually start with the idea of harms that come to children when they are married. The first time I mentioned it at all was here (this morning) - long after our discussion started:

And there isn't anything in my discussion that leads back to Joseph Smith - that's all your interpretation and reading into it. I have very little interest in that discussion right now (it just doesn't go anywhere). It's obvious at this point why you want to introduce this relativism into the discussion because your interest really isn't over the question of whether something is good or bad but engages the assumption that every criticism of polygamy must be an attack aimed at Joseph Smith ...

Not so much “relativism” but “empathetic historicism.” Thought I explained that. Funny that you would continue to ascribe intentions than accept my repeated acknowledgement ("from the get go") that it took me a moment to recontextualize your post.

[CV75]

4 minutes ago, TheTanakas said:

Maybe "more seed" is the appropriate term to use.  

It doesn't say "more seed", either. Just "seed."

[TheTanakas]

19 hours ago, PortalToParis said:

Hyrum Smith's address explicitly states that the marriage sealing is for being eternally bound to your one, legally-married wife, and is not for getting or having more than one wife:

The idea of marrying for eternity is the seal of the Covenant, and is easily understood; and as to speaking of it I could make all the world believe it, for it is noble and grand; it is necessary in consequence of the broken Covenants in the world. I never saw any scripture but what was written by Prophets to instruct and prepare mankind for eternity. I read that what God joins together let no man put asunder. I see magistrates and Priests in the world, but not one who is empowered to join [p. 1985] together by the authority of God. nor yet have I seen any priest that dare say that he has the authority of God; there is not a sectarian Priest in Christendom that dare say he has the authority by direct revelation from God. When I look at the seal of the new Covenant and reflect that all the covenants made by the authority of man are only made to be in force during the natural life, and end there I rejoice that what is done by the Lord has an endless duration. No marriage is valid in the morn of the resurrection unless the marriage Covenant be sealed on earth by one having the keys and power from the Almighty God to seal on earth, and it shall be bound in heaven. Such a sealing will have full effect in the morn of the resurrection... No spiritual wife doctrine ever originated with me...Get the wife sealed to you that God and your country let you have, and if any brother hears any person preach such stuff wring his nose but look out or he may be stouter than you.

He is right.  The spiritual wife doctrine did not originate with him.  Polygamy originated with that
D&C 132 revelation the church believes came from God.

Edited April 7, 2024 by TheTanakas

[Pyreaux]

4 hours ago, Teancum said:

Let's see:

Man is 38.

Man is married already.

Man has been sneaking around behind his wife's back marrying other women.

Man has been using is position and power and making arguments to lure women to marry him such as they were appointed his before they were born, placing time limits and implying a no from a woman would risk her exaltation. 

Man want to marry 14 year old and promises family exaltation if 14 year old does marry him.

Average age of women marrying in 1840 was 20-22.

Sure, all good here. Nother to see so lets move on. 🙄😏

You two enjoy your undocumented fictions. Emma never said she was unaware of the wives of Joseph. It was Heber C. Kimball that requested a sealing be performed, it had nothing to do with Joseph wanting her. There is no evidence that Helen ever cohabited with or had sexual relations with Joseph. In fact, she continued to live with her parents after the sealing. She always had a chaperone when with Joseph. Underage marriages were legal in her time, as girls matured at different rates, 40% of the young women Helen's age would have already matured and thus in their society be considered marriage eligible. A fourteen-year-old bride might be eyebrow-raising, but not a scandal. Helen thought very highly of Joseph, advocated for polygamy, and would never ask for you to be outraged on her behalf using your time traveling, mind reading abilities.

Edited April 7, 2024 by Pyreaux