Quotes condemning polygamy

[onandagus]

I fail to see why the original section 101 is important beyond historical information. It was statement of policy and belief authored by Oliver Cowdrey. It is not nor claims to be revelation, as such the church would have the right to remove it. Dnc 132 at least claims to be revelation. I get that some do not accept 132 but the removal of 101 is hardy duplicitous if the church changes its policy. 101 is relevant to the topic but it like 134 also authored by Cowdrey were adopted to quell rumors of adultery spiritual wivery polygamy and disloyalty to the country. Both are problematic doctrinaly.

[Zathura]

I fail to see why the original section 101 is important beyond historical information. It was statement of policy and belief authored by Oliver Cowdrey. It is not nor claims to be revelation, as such the church would have the right to remove it. Dnc 132 at least claims to be revelation. I get that some do not accept 132 but the removal of 101 is hardy duplicitous if the church changes its policy. 101 is relevant to the topic but it like 134 also authored by Cowdrey were adopted to quell rumors of adultery spiritual wivery polygamy and disloyalty to the country. Both are problematic doctrinaly.

Ah did a quick google search to read Fairmormon did ya?

What’s interesting is that Oliver Cowdery was Co-President of the church(most members I’ve talked to have no idea this was a thing).

Now days even the most obscure policies set in place by the President of the church/Q12 are considered “revelation” and “inspiration” and “oh I know they are led by God!!” Even though nobody ever claims they are inspired. This includes policies that literally never would have been announced if it wasn’t LEAKED.

But 200 years ago the Co-President of the church writes something so important that it’s inserted into D&C and because it’s inconvenient and doesn’t fit the narrative it’s suddenly “not revelation “, “not inspired” etc.

It’s extremely relevant. It goes hand in hand with every.single.statement ever made on the topic by the first 3 Men to act as President of the Church. ( Joseph, Hyrum, Oliver). They left no room, no sliver of doubt as to what the church doctrine in the topic was. Even within a month of his death Joseph again railed against this abomination of a doctrine .

[Zathura]

I fail to see why the original section 101 is important beyond historical information. It was statement of policy and belief authored by Oliver Cowdrey. It is not nor claims to be revelation, as such the church would have the right to remove it. Dnc 132 at least claims to be revelation. I get that some do not accept 132 but the removal of 101 is hardy duplicitous if the church changes its policy. 101 is relevant to the topic but it like 134 also authored by Cowdrey were adopted to quell rumors of adultery spiritual wivery polygamy and disloyalty to the country. Both are problematic doctrinaly.

The removal of 101 is duplicitous because of everything else involved. Verifiable evidence that Brigham Young instructed them to adjust Joseph’s words, the disappearance of the supposed “original” of section 132, the fact that the copy just sat in a drawer for 8 years before announcing it( making it a solid 8 years of them practicing this abomination while every single scripture in their canonized set that spoke of polygamy condemned it during that time, meaning they were actively breaking the existing church policies ) and then they still didn’t even canonize it until everyone had been living this abomination for 30 years, then conveniently and quietly removed the inconvenience that contradicted this new section they are adding.

That’s also when they started getting “proof” that Joseph taught it. 30-40 years after the man died and everyone who can defend him is on the other side of the country and anyone you ask to testify has been living this abomination during those 40 Years

[onandagus]

Unfortunately 101 doesn't shed much light on Joseph Smiths views on polygamy. At best it can be said he let it stand as the voice of the people after he got back into town.

"every single scripture in their canonized set that spoke of polygamy condemned it during that time"
only this non revelation condemns polygamy. certainly not the old testament. the new testament does not deal with it much a few polygamous parables from Christ and paul's instructions to local priesthood leadership which is even less clear in the greek from which it was translated.
Maybe jacob 2 but that is hardly a universal condemnation especially to people who believe the lord has commanded it.

I still fail to see how removing what was essentially a pr release from 1835 after church policy changed was wrong.

[Robin Hood]

Oliver Cowdery didn't leave the church because of the Fanny Alger accusation. He left because he was accused of adultery.
I have done some background reading about the Fanny Alger "affair". Turns out there is no evidence to substantiate it. There is some evidence to suggest that she had a sexual relationship with a young man in the neighbourhood at the time she was living with Joseph and Emma, and it is also claimed the reason for her being sent away was that she had fallen pregnant to him.

How anyone can claim that Fanny Alger was Joseph's plural wife is beyond me, because at that time (1831) no sealing keys had been restored.

[Zathura]

Oliver Cowdery didn't leave the church because of the Fanny Alger accusation. He left because he was accused of adultery.
I have done some background reading about the Fanny Alger "affair". Turns out there is no evidence to substantiate it. There is some evidence to suggest that she had a sexual relationship with a young man in the neighbourhood at the time she was living with Joseph and Emma, and it is also claimed the reason for her being sent away was that she had fallen pregnant to him.

How anyone can claim that Fanny Alger was Joseph's plural wife is beyond me, because at that time (1831) no sealing keys had been restored.

This. I’m surprised when people tell me there isn’t a basis for the claim that she might not have been a plural wife of his.

[nvr]

Here's non-LDS author's take after stopping and interviewing people living in Utah in the 1860's:

Polygamy is a recent feature in the Mormon religion, and was added by Brigham Young after Joseph Smith’s death. Before that, it was regarded as an “abomination.” This verse from the Mormon Bible occurs in Chapter II. of the book of Jacob:

For behold, thus saith the Lord, this people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the Scriptures; for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son. Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord; wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph. Wherefore, I the Lord God, will no suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.

However, the project failed—or at least the modern Mormon end of it—for Brigham “suffers” it. This verse is from the same chapter:

Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate, because of their filthiness and the cursings which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our fathers, that they should have, save it were one wife; and concubines they should have none.

This was by Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain), - hence the tone - but he had no stake in defense of Joseph's reputation.

Samuel Clemens didn't know Joseph nor was he involved at all with the church at that time. Later when he read the Book of Mormon he had this to say about it-
The Mormon Bible is rather stupid and tiresome to read

So yeah, quote Mark Twain regarding church history. The guy wasn't even born until the end of 1835 . Might as well quote Stahura. Both only have their opinions to share.

I think you missed the logic of the post. He had no stake in the matter and his judgements on the Book Of Mormon are irrelevant. He simply commented on the general viewpoint of polygamy he got from talking to people In Utah from his travels.

[Zathura]

Unfortunately 101 doesn't shed much light on Joseph Smiths views on polygamy. At best it can be said he let it stand as the voice of the people after he got back into town.

"every single scripture in their canonized set that spoke of polygamy condemned it during that time"
only this non revelation condemns polygamy. certainly not the old testament. the new testament does not deal with it much a few polygamous parables from Christ and paul's instructions to local priesthood leadership which is even less clear in the greek from which it was translated.
Maybe jacob 2 but that is hardly a universal condemnation especially to people who believe the lord has commanded it.

I still fail to see how removing what was essentially a pr release from 1835 after church policy changed was wrong.

Here are some more (You didn't respond to my other response to you by the way).

Joseph Smith: Times and Seasons, vol. 3, p. 909 (1842)

Inasmuch as the public mind has been unjustly abused through the fallacy of Dr. Bennett's letters(in response to accusations from Bennett that Joseph taught and practiced polygamy), we make an extract on the subject of marriage, showing the rule of the church on this important matter(Joseph thinks it's an important topic). The extract is from the Book of Doctrine and Covenants, and is the only rule allowed in the church. "All legal contracts of marriage made before a person is baptized into this church, should be held sacred an fulfilled. Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife;...."

In other words, as Dr Bennett has accused ME(and the church) of POLYGAMY, let me defend myself of these false accusations by quoting a section in our Book of Doctrine and Covenants, one that says a man should have ONE Wife.

Joseph Smith Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 423 (1844)
As we have lately been credibly informed that an Elder of the Church of Jesus Christ, of Latter-day Saints, by the name of Hiram Brown , has been preaching Polygamy, and other false and corrupt doctrines, in the county of Lapeer, state of Michigan.

This is to notify him and the church in general, that he has been cut off from the church, for his inquity; and he is further notified to appear at Special Conference on the 6th of April to make answer for these charges.

In other words, an Elder of our church has been preaching corrupt and false doctrines, polygamy being one of them, we have excommunicated him for teaching those things.

Hyrum Smith Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 474 (1844)
Richard Hewitt has called on me to-day to know my views concerning some doctrines that are preached in your place, and states to me that some of your elders say, that a man having a certain priesthood, may have as many wives as he pleases, and that doctrine is taught here: I Say unto you that man teaches false doctrine, for there is no such doctrine here, neither is there any such thing practised here. And any man that is found teaching privately or publicly any such doctrine, is culpable , and will stand a chance to be brought before the High Council and lose his license and membership also:


In other words, some of your elders say that if you have a certain high priesthood you can have more than one wife and that this church teaches this as a doctrine. I'm telling you right now, this is false doctrine. It is not taught, privately or publically and it is not practiced and anyone teaching such a thing will be excommunicated.

[Zathura]

Unfortunately 101 doesn't shed much light on Joseph Smiths views on polygamy. At best it can be said he let it stand as the voice of the people after he got back into town.

"every single scripture in their canonized set that spoke of polygamy condemned it during that time"
only this non revelation condemns polygamy. certainly not the old testament. the new testament does not deal with it much a few polygamous parables from Christ and paul's instructions to local priesthood leadership which is even less clear in the greek from which it was translated.
Maybe jacob 2 but that is hardly a universal condemnation especially to people who believe the lord has commanded it.

I still fail to see how removing what was essentially a pr release from 1835 after church policy changed was wrong.

Here's this:

In Joseph's diary it said the following:

Joseph ‘gave instructions to try those who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives...Joseph forbids it and the practice thereof. No man shall have but one wife.’”

When this was copied over into official church history and published, miraculously church history says the following:

"Joseph Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives; for, according to the law, I hold the keys of this power in the last days; for there is never but one on earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred and I have constantly said no man shall have but one wife at a time, unless the Lord directs otherwise." (Emphasis mine)

THE BLUE WAS REMOVED, THE RED WAS ADDED. Convenient yeah?

[shadow]

Here's non-LDS author's take after stopping and interviewing people living in Utah in the 1860's:

Polygamy is a recent feature in the Mormon religion, and was added by Brigham Young after Joseph Smith’s death. Before that, it was regarded as an “abomination.” This verse from the Mormon Bible occurs in Chapter II. of the book of Jacob:

For behold, thus saith the Lord, this people begin to wax in iniquity; they understand not the Scriptures; for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son. Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord; wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph. Wherefore, I the Lord God, will no suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.

However, the project failed—or at least the modern Mormon end of it—for Brigham “suffers” it. This verse is from the same chapter:

Behold, the Lamanites your brethren, whom ye hate, because of their filthiness and the cursings which hath come upon their skins, are more righteous than you; for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our fathers, that they should have, save it were one wife; and concubines they should have none.

This was by Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain), - hence the tone - but he had no stake in defense of Joseph's reputation.

Samuel Clemens didn't know Joseph nor was he involved at all with the church at that time. Later when he read the Book of Mormon he had this to say about it-
The Mormon Bible is rather stupid and tiresome to read

So yeah, quote Mark Twain regarding church history. The guy wasn't even born until the end of 1835 . Might as well quote Stahura. Both only have their opinions to share.

I think you missed the logic of the post. He had no stake in the matter and his judgements on the Book Of Mormon are irrelevant. He simply commented on the general viewpoint of polygamy he got from talking to people In Utah from his travels.

My point was that it's strictly his opinion. He wasn't around during Joseph's time. The early Mormons in Salt Lake also believed Joseph was a polygamist so his views aren't from them. He probably spoke to some who didn't follow the church out west and who had more of a vested interest in keeping Joseph a monogamist, like Joseph's son.

[nvr]

Just to be complete, the last part should also be in red as it was also added later.


from this site:
https://faenrandir.github.io/a_careful_ ... nal-entry/

edit: adding link for where I got the image

[shadow]

Oliver Cowdery didn't leave the church because of the Fanny Alger accusation.

He left for a few reasons and one of them was clear that he didn't like Joseph's relationship with Fanny. He wrote about it in a letter to his brother prior to his leaving the church. Contemporary stuff.
That sealings didn't take place yet has no bearing on Joseph marrying Fanny for time, which can be biblically legal. OT Prophets did the same.

[Zathura]

Just to be complete, the last part should also be in red as it was also added later.

good catch.

[Zathura]

Just to be complete, the last part should also be in red as it was also added later.

If it was just a simple policy change , it wouldn't be a big deal. Problem is, there is an obvious cover up. There is an obvious, coordinated(directed) effort to make it appear that Joseph taught polygamy, and also to make it appear that he did not fight or condemn polygamy. This very clear effort alone puts to rest the claim that it was just a mere policy change.

Let's also just realize, a judge, an unbiased judge ruled that the evidence presented by the LDS Church was not sufficient to prove that Joseph Smith was the originator of the polygamy in the Church. Mark Twain also had the same impression by merely interacting and observing Mormons.

[braingrunt]

If Brigham was bad then Joseph was no prophet and the D&C is not true. The prophecies about the church failed utterly.

There is no reasonable way to condemn polygamy and rescue Joseph.

Simple.

[ori]

If Brigham was bad then Joseph was no prophet and the D&C is not true. The prophecies about the church failed utterly.

There is no reasonable way to condemn polygamy and rescue Joseph.

Simple.

I’ve never thought of it that way. Interesting!

[Zathura]

If Brigham was bad then Joseph was no prophet and the D&C is not true. The prophecies about the church failed utterly.

There is no reasonable way to condemn polygamy and rescue Joseph.

Simple.

Nah. There’s no logic to this whatsoever.

D&C forbid polygamy, Joseph forbid polygamy , Jacob forbids polygamy, God forbids it. Simple as that.

[braingrunt]

If Brigham was bad then Joseph was no prophet and the D&C is not true. The prophecies about the church failed utterly.

There is no reasonable way to condemn polygamy and rescue Joseph.

Simple.

Nah. There’s no logic to this whatsoever.

D&C forbid polygamy, Joseph forbid polygamy , Jacob forbids polygamy, God forbids it. Simple as that.

Sure there's logic to it. For example, this piece of the D&C is obviously false if the church failed:

2 The keys of the kingdom of God are committed unto man on the earth, and from thence shall the gospel roll forth unto the ends of the earth, as the stone which is cut out of the mountain without hands shall roll forth, until it has filled the whole earth.

This is just one of many which would obviously be false and thereby falsify Joseph as a prophet. If there is a reasonable way out of what seems obvious to me, I hope you'll tell me, cuz I like to be right.

If you have an explanation, try not to wrest the scripture too hard while doing so, or I'm likely to give up on the explanation you have.

[Zathura]

If Brigham was bad then Joseph was no prophet and the D&C is not true. The prophecies about the church failed utterly.

There is no reasonable way to condemn polygamy and rescue Joseph.

Simple.

Nah. There’s no logic to this whatsoever.

D&C forbid polygamy, Joseph forbid polygamy , Jacob forbids polygamy, God forbids it. Simple as that.

Sure there's logic to it. For example, this piece of the D&C is obviously false if the church failed:

2 The keys of the kingdom of God are committed unto man on the earth, and from thence shall the gospel roll forth unto the ends of the earth, as the stone which is cut out of the mountain without hands shall roll forth, until it has filled the whole earth.

This is just one of many which would obviously be false and thereby falsify Joseph as a prophet. If there is a reasonable way out of what seems obvious to me, I hope you'll tell me, cuz I like to be right.

If you have an explanation, try not to wrest the scripture too hard while doing so, or I'm likely to give up on the explanation you have.

I never said the keys were lost, you're the one that introduced this idea into this thread.

Polygamy is an abomination, it was never okay, never will be okay. If Joseph practiced or taught to any degree, it was an abomination. It's not okay. I make no conclusions, I never have.

[braingrunt]

If Brigham was bad then Joseph was no prophet and the D&C is not true. The prophecies about the church failed utterly.

There is no reasonable way to condemn polygamy and rescue Joseph.

Simple.

Nah. There’s no logic to this whatsoever.

D&C forbid polygamy, Joseph forbid polygamy , Jacob forbids polygamy, God forbids it. Simple as that.

Sure there's logic to it. For example, this piece of the D&C is obviously false if the church failed:

2 The keys of the kingdom of God are committed unto man on the earth, and from thence shall the gospel roll forth unto the ends of the earth, as the stone which is cut out of the mountain without hands shall roll forth, until it has filled the whole earth.

This is just one of many which would obviously be false and thereby falsify Joseph as a prophet. If there is a reasonable way out of what seems obvious to me, I hope you'll tell me, cuz I like to be right.

If you have an explanation, try not to wrest the scripture too hard while doing so, or I'm likely to give up on the explanation you have.

I never said the keys were lost, you're the one that introduced this idea into this thread.

Polygamy is an abomination, it was never okay, never will be okay. If Joseph practiced or taught to any degree, it was an abomination. It's not okay. I make no conclusions, I never have.

Interesting. Keys passed on to bad men. Will have to see how that settles with me overnight. I've already followed the references to "keys" and it doesn't sit well with me right now.

[Zathura]

Nah. There’s no logic to this whatsoever.

D&C forbid polygamy, Joseph forbid polygamy , Jacob forbids polygamy, God forbids it. Simple as that.

Sure there's logic to it. For example, this piece of the D&C is obviously false if the church failed:

2 The keys of the kingdom of God are committed unto man on the earth, and from thence shall the gospel roll forth unto the ends of the earth, as the stone which is cut out of the mountain without hands shall roll forth, until it has filled the whole earth.

This is just one of many which would obviously be false and thereby falsify Joseph as a prophet. If there is a reasonable way out of what seems obvious to me, I hope you'll tell me, cuz I like to be right.

If you have an explanation, try not to wrest the scripture too hard while doing so, or I'm likely to give up on the explanation you have.

I never said the keys were lost, you're the one that introduced this idea into this thread.

Polygamy is an abomination, it was never okay, never will be okay. If Joseph practiced or taught to any degree, it was an abomination. It's not okay. I make no conclusions, I never have.

Interesting. Key's passed on to bad men. Will have to see how that settles with me overnight.

How many times have I been taught that Alma retained authority through unrighteous lineage?

[braingrunt]

however it stands, if Joseph had no understanding that Brigham was a bad man, that does not bode well for his prophetic talents. I find no logical escape from my conclusions.

The direct references to Brigham in the DC do not seem to fit with him being bad.

[Zathura]

however it stands, if Joseph has no understanding that Brigham is a bad man, that does not bode well for his prophetic talents.

Another example is David and Solomon.

Jacob 2 explicitly states that they were not justified or approved in their concubines, they displeased the lord. The Lord called it Abominable.

And yet he worked with them.

There is precedent for what I’m discussing here.

[braingrunt]

however it stands, if Joseph has no understanding that Brigham is a bad man, that does not bode well for his prophetic talents.

Another example is David and Solomon.

Jacob 2 explicitly states that they were not justified or approved in their concubines, they displeased the lord. The Lord called it Abominable.

And yet he worked with them.

There is precedent for what I’m discussing here.

So, does that mean you are prepared to throw Joseph under the bus, as I believe a person in your position must? (if they logically consider all the facts and implications)

[Zathura]

however it stands, if Joseph has no understanding that Brigham is a bad man, that does not bode well for his prophetic talents.

Another example is David and Solomon.

Jacob 2 explicitly states that they were not justified or approved in their concubines, they displeased the lord. The Lord called it Abominable.

And yet he worked with them.

There is precedent for what I’m discussing here.

So, does that mean you are prepared to throw Joseph under the bus, as I believe a person in your position must? (if they logically consider all the facts and implications)

I already stated as much here:

...If Joseph practiced or taught to any degree, it was an abomination...

What is clear is that a very direct and coordinated effort has been made to make it look like Joseph taught polygamy, because there are nothing but public statements from him condemning it. His personal journal has been changed. People have lied about him, the most "credible" sources used to claim him of teaching/practicing polygamy contradicted themselves on numerous occasions.

The Temple Lot case was a case involving THREE Mormon branches. The Judge takes no sides, it's all the same to him. They couldn't prove to him in a court of law that Joseph initiated the practice of polygamy. He was convinced that Brigham started it, and that he usurped the leadership of the church(I'm not saying that's what happened, that's just the conclusion the judge came to).

All of this just says one thing: The official narrative simply cannot be what really went down. Too much dishonesty, too many lies, too many contradictions. Too many sources are completely unreliable and would never be accepted in any other historical narrative.

My summarized opinion is this:

I believe Joseph, he denied it to the death, Emma denied it, his son searched his whole life seeking the truth, spoke with every possible person that was still alive that would talk to him and ask them about it and every single allegation that he had heard of, and he went to the grave believing his father did not practice polygamy. In addition to that, I believe the Book of Mormon when it calls it an abomination.

I also believe it's possible Joseph still denied it, didn't practice it, but began to preach it consider practicing it, or something like it, and before his death tried to reverse it and was repentant of it, but it was too late. (There is "Evidence" of this, it's not super credible, but it's just as credible as much of the "evidence" used to accuse him of practicing polygamy).

I make no conclusions as to what happened to the keys. It's certainly possible for God to work through Brigham if he worked through David and Solomon. It's certainly possible for God to smite his people for this wickedness, as they were not pulled down and did not abandon this practice like Jacob successfully managed to do with his people.