Jump to content

JS DID practice polygamy


Scottie

Recommended Posts

I finally came out to my Mom last weekend about my decision to leave the church. I told her that polygamy was one of the big reasons that I left and that I have yet to hear a valid explaination of why JS practiced it.

Her response: "JS didn't practice polygamy. That didn't start until BY, and it was mainly because of all the men that died crossing the plains. There were more women than men at that time."

I told her that was completely untrue and that if you go to familysearch.org and look up JS, it says right there that he was married to MANY wives. She still didn't believe me and said I was being misled by anti-mormon material.

I told my (TBM) co-worker about this. He said that a while ago the topic of polygamy came up. He mentioned to his Mom how JS had multiple wives and she said the exact same thing my Mom said. He tried to convince her, but she wouldn't hear it.

Now, mind you, these are strong Mormon women that have attended church from birth. They listen and participate in SS and RS. Yet neither knew this fact.

I didn't know this until I started researching the anti-mormon claims. I had been mostly active throughout my life. Graduated seminary, went to SS and preisthood. I didn't read much church history though.

I drove to Montana a couple of weeks ago with my buddy and he had never heard this.

More and more I am seeing this trend.

In your opinion, where does the blame for this lie? Is this on the members for not researching the history of the church, or is this on the church for not including such a critical historical aspect in the lesson manuals?

Link to comment

Scottie:

I a way you and your mom are both right.

Polygamy was not PUBLICALLY proclaimed or practiced until the Saints were in the SL valley, And It was practiced by JS.

I personally feel a responsibility to teach what I know when someone teaches something not true. But I don't feel the Church is responsible for people not knowing when the information is commonly avaible. And put out by the Church.

Link to comment
{snip}

In your opinion, where does the blame for this lie?

{snip to end}

Two requests:

List your reasons for calling the abherent ignorance of those very few you interviewed typical.

List your reasons for calling the failure to mention XIXth Century LDS polygyny on every page of every publication a lie.

Link to comment
I finally came out to my Mom last weekend about my decision to leave the church.  I told her that polygamy was one of the big reasons that I left and that I have yet to hear a valid explaination of why JS practiced it.<snip>

In your opinion, where does the blame for this lie?  Is this on the members for not researching the history of the church, or is this on the church for not including such a critical historical aspect in the lesson manuals?

Blame? What blame? I understand your frustration, but, "blame"? You learned about it the same way I did, and I knew quite a bit about polygamy generally since I was a kid. *I* don't have a problem with that. Probably because I have had many spiritual witnesses that the Church is true. (Just love that simple phrase that mean so, sooooo much).

Most members don't need to do any research, other than obtaining a testimony via the Spirit. Why the heck should the Church include "critical historical" material in ANYTHING it does? You seem to misunderstand the mission of the Church, like, TOTALLY.

HiJolly

Link to comment

It wasn't common knowledge in my home. I didn't learn of it until I began visiting FairLDS.org but it didn't bother me at all. I'm not sure why so many people have problems with it. I've read what they have written here for example and I just don't feel/see it the same way.

Link to comment
Scottie:

I a way you and your mom are both right.

Polygamy was not PUBLICALLY proclaimed or practiced until the Saints were in the SL valley, And It was practiced by JS.

How does the secrecy of polygamy when JS practiced it back then have ANY aspect on what we know now?

Because the members back then didn't know about it, should that mean that our members now shouldn't know about it?

Are you saying that it is ok for my Mom (and the others) to not know about this because it WAS a secret?

Link to comment
List your reasons for calling the abherent ignorance of those very few you interviewed typical.

Where did I ever say it was typical. I said it was a trend I'm seeing more and more... :P

List your reasons for calling the failure to mention XIXth Century LDS polygyny on every page of every publication a lie.

Ummm...I would be happy if it were mentioned on A SINGLE page.

Link to comment
{snip}

In your opinion, where does the blame for this lie?

{snip to end}

Two requests:

List your reasons for calling the abherent ignorance of those very few you interviewed typical.

List your reasons for calling the failure to mention XIXth Century LDS polygyny on every page of every publication a lie.

:P

Dang you just get to the heart of the matter don't you!

Link to comment

Because of the persecutions and prosecutions of the 1880s-1890s because of polygyny, which the US outlawed in its territories, there grew up a culture of secrecy and distrust of the US Gov't (we can argue whether that last is well deserved or not, but it's hardly original or particularly virulent in the Great Basin), kids got in the habit of saying, "Daddy's out visiting!" in response to questions about Daddy's whereabouts. You never knew who was going to turn Daddy in to the Feds.

I think it became a habit of not discussing such things with outsiders. Given the time since the First Manifesto is now about 120 years, you can understand why it's no longer a big issue for us to be discussing in every Church meeting, critics' demands that we do so notwithstanding.

It isn't a big secret. If somebody's missing the information, it's probably more due to individual laziness than anything else.

(BTW: My own G-Grandfather spent time in the Federal Pen in Sugarhouse during the persecutions and prosecutions.)

Link to comment
I knew it (multiple sealings to JS) from an early age.  How come you didn't?  Seems like pretty common knowledge to me.....

That's my question. Why didn't I know this? Why didn't our Mom's know this?

Blame? What blame? I understand your frustration, but, "blame"? You learned about it the same way I did, and I knew quite a bit about polygamy generally since I was a kid. *I* don't have a problem with that. Probably because I have had many spiritual witnesses that the Church is true. (Just love that simple phrase that mean so, sooooo much).

Most members don't need to do any research, other than obtaining a testimony via the Spirit. Why the heck should the Church include "critical historical" material in ANYTHING it does? You seem to misunderstand the mission of the Church, like, TOTALLY.

They sure don't hide the fact that BY had multiple wives. So, why hide the fact that JS did? If they are going to teach the history of the church, then teach the WHOLE history. Doesn't it bother you that they pick and choose?

Hmm.. perhaps the US Government should give full disclosure when it comes to things like watergate.

Yes, this is EXACTLY the same thing, isn't it. A governement coverup is a teensy bit different than a church, with the facts in hand, omitting them to strengthen the faith of the members (or whatever their reasoning is).

After looooong consideration of the matter, I can only conclude some believing Latter-day Saints are very, very dense.

They were never taught something so they are dense??

Link to comment
{snip}
List your reasons for calling the failure to mention XIXth Century LDS polygyny on every page of every publication a lie.

Ummm...I would be happy if it were mentioned on A SINGLE page.

Prove me now therewith that it's not mentioned on a single page.

I wait with breath baited with Tillamook Colby/Jack.

Oh . . . wait . . . you were engaging in hyperbole, weren't you? :P

Link to comment

Scottie:

Not really. As you said yourself the information came from an LDS Website.

Only if they are personally interested. Why would a practice terminated over a hundred years ago really bother most members alive today?

Most members of the Church I have met are more worried about copeing better in their stress filled lives, being faithful to their calliings, raising up good strong families, and getting a litttle more rest on Sunday afternoon. But I suppose if they were really interested in some interesting, but not essential, bit of trivia of events of over a hundred years ago. The information is available.

Link to comment

They sure don't hide the fact that BY had multiple wives.  So, why hide the fact that JS did?  If they are going to teach the history of the church, then teach the WHOLE history.  Doesn't it bother you that they pick and choose?

First, Scottie, congrats on a subject that is really *HOT*. Wow.

Because that's what JS did. You did know that, right? BY didn't. Simple, if you don't get your shorts in a knot.

Not at all. EVERYONE picks and chooses. You haven't seen that in yourself? Guess you're livid about how Jesus taught in parables.

I'm really sorry your are having such an issue on this.

Peace,

HiJolly

Link to comment
I think it became a habit of not discussing such things with outsiders. Given the time since the First Manifesto is now about 120 years, you can understand why it's no longer a big issue for us to be discussing in every Church meeting, critics' demands that we do so notwithstanding.

Yet they have no problem teaching about BY's polygamy. Why is that?

It isn't a big secret.  If somebody's missing the information, it's probably more due to individual laziness than anything else.

So, 1 vote for blame falling on the individual.

How many more pages do you want?

How about something in a Sunday School manual. I freely admit that the information is out there, but why isn't it taught in church?

Prove me now therewith that it's not mentioned on a single page.

The fact that neither my Mom, nor my friends Mom, nor I, nor my friend, nor HiJolly knew the fact until we researched it...kind of leads me to believe that it is not in the lesson manuals.

Link to comment

...in Church?

Does it effect your Salvation if JS practiced Polygamy or not?

Is the earth shacking because David commited Adultury with Bathsheba?

Yet nary a blink of an eye people give to that. :P

Does what David did make the church false? How about Peter lying three times to save his own skin?

Link to comment
{snip}
How many more pages do you want?

How about something in a Sunday School manual. I freely admit that the information is out there, but why isn't it taught in church?

Prove me now therewith that it's not mentioned on a single page.

The fact that neither my Mom, nor my friends Mom, nor I, nor my friend, nor HiJolly knew the fact until we researched it...kind of leads me to believe that it is not in the lesson manuals.

Or . . . somebody didn't bother to read what's actually there?

Come on. 'Fess up. The scene in The RM where nobody knows who's doing the lesson and nobody has a copy of the lesson manual (much less read it) is a more accurate portrayal of your situation than you really want to admit, n'est-ce pas?

Link to comment

There is compelling evidence that Joseph Smith was 'sealed' to other women. But this does not seem to be polygamy as we think of it. For instance, it does not seem to have involved sexual intercourse. This would explain why Joseph (and many others including Emma, when even she was aware of the sealings) denied polygamy in the early days of the church. He did not practice polygamy in the way that his critics alleged.

Joseph compared "plural marriage" to Abraham sacrificing Isaac. Abraham being tested, and God saw that he was prepared to go all the way with a shocking practice... Joseph called for the daughters and wives of the leaders of the church, as an Abrahamic sacrific to test them.

There is ample evidence that shows Emma consented to at least a half-dozen wives, this underminds any discussion on the implications and meaning of this or her overall mixed feelings on the entire issue.

An example of, what at times is, Emma's receptive awareness of Joseph's marriages is found in his marriage to Melissa Lott, which occurred not in secret but in the presence of her parents and with Emma's consent and permission.

Plural marriage was not open command to the general body of the church until Brigham had opened to the church, and indeed changed the nature of plural marriage.

Link to comment
I knew it (multiple sealings to JS) from an early age.  How come you didn't?  Seems like pretty common knowledge to me.....

That's my question. Why didn't I know this? Why didn't our Mom's know this?

Couldn't tell you. I seem to recall discussing it in deacons or teachers quorum though I'm sure it wasn't part of the lesson. I remember being able to respond to it at the age of 16 when some fundies about my age found out I was LDS while working the drive-thru. That's when I first used 2 Samuel 12:7-11 and Jacob 2:30 in a bash. Shut them up pretty good too....

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...