The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

For discussing the Church, Gospel of Jesus Christ, Mormonism, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
topcat
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1645

The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by topcat »

I was just reading this quote from Jesef from 3 or 4 days ago...
Jesef wrote: January 29th, 2019, 9:27 am I agree, if Joseph is taken at his word (was honest), then he opposed polygamy. If he practiced it secretly, as all the sources in BY's camp report (including Clayton & Twelve), then he was a (public) liar/deceiver. I would prefer to believe the first option, that Joseph was honest, but that indicts all the successive Brethren as conspirators & liars & whoremongers/adulterers. But it could also mean that 1890-1904 was a course correction by the Lord, via external forces (which overturned many public prophecies as well, i.e. false prophecies). It would also probably mean that D&C 132 is invalid/false revelation.

I haven't been able to find firsthand evidence that seems incontrovertible that Joseph consummated marriages with other women - & there are no offspring to point to, which is the only physical evidence we would have today. It is pretty solid that he "sealed" other women to himself as "spiritual" or eternal wives - even Denver Snuffer acknowledges that - but I still think that is a wonky explanation or practice because those who hold to this say Joseph did that to use the "sealing" keys, "cleverly", to save those women & their families by extension (by sealing them to him & his promises/blessings of exaltation, C&E, etc.). It makes no sense why Joseph couldn't just seal men & women to him as sons & daughters or something obviously platonic & innocent.

I think the whole polygamy thing is a total mess - I don't think the Lord could have authored such a disaster. If it was some kind of test, the humans totally flubbed it, probably for even trying it. Just my opinion.
Impeccable logic. Thank you, Jesef.

You articulated well perhaps the dilemma of the day for LDS, which may be cut and dried, like no other issue, and be a line in the sand eventually for many Saints who declare the line has been crossed. For those who think it's unimportant and unworthy of consideration, I can only conclude the koolaid they've drunk is too delicious to stop drinking it, even though it may be poison and killing them by degrees.

The question is: Did Joseph practice polygamy secretly?

His public statements and his public actions (as in excommunicating people who DID practice it) demonstrate his irrevocable opposition to the practice and even its teaching.

His successors have their public statements and actions as well. They openly taught and practiced it as a sacrament of their religion.

But Joseph didn't. He condemned it.

So I ask...assuming that polygamy is an abomination, and founded by and encouraged by Satan, what would Satan do to persuade good men and women to practice it? It's a great question. How would Satan sell something that is an abomination?

#1: he would make it sound righteous and good and "of God". That would be his #1 objective. Otherwise, good Christian people would see it for what it appears to be, which is a sanctioned way for me to have a lot of sex, and be not held accountable to the society they live, but actually praised and lifted up as righteous!

#2: Satan would have the leaders and institution attack those in their society who would oppose it. Censorship would be institutionalized, as a culture of speaking evil of "the Lord's anointed" would be branded as apostate.

#3: a close corollary to #1 would be a complete redefining of what is good and what is bad. Basic definitions would be turned upside down.


Just an hour ago I saw an interview of the out-of-the-closet communist OCASIO-CORTEZ (see https://news.grabien.com/story-ocasio-c ... n-cisgende). She is a tool of Satan. With a straight face (and I can see Brigham Young teaching with a straight face the celestial virtues of polygamy as he sports an erection in his pants), she teaches in this radio interview that all of us cisgenders (new word for me today!), including her, have to acknowledge how blessed we are, and that we have enjoyed cisgender privilege!!!

And therefore, if we do NOT acknowledge our cisgender privilege but instead call gender confused people mentally ill, which is what it is, then WE are the bad guys, WE are morally wrong, WE are intolerant, WE are not loving, WE are not Christian, WE are blinded by cisgender privilege. She attempts to establish an ILLEGITIMATE question which should never be entertained by society and certainly not with school-age children in the state-run classrooms of the gov't re-education camps (public schools)!

Satan must first get the question to be asked, and then he must justify it, and keep fanning the flames of the evil until the abomination is widespread in practice. Satan attacks the moral foundation of our society with transgenderism, as he did with polygamy.

With polygamy, at least procreation was able to occur, and families, however warped by the practice, were allowed to live and survive the best they could bolstered by Christian principles they valued. But with the meteoric and sudden rise of transgenderism, the family is directly assaulted and the very plain nature of gender identity is mindblowingly questioned, and the question is now being carefully considered by perhaps tens of thousands of people. Polygamy abused women in the name of Jesus Christ. Stockholm syndrome was ingeniously brought about, to the delight of the men, as the women played along and loved and supported their righteous abusers. The abuse resulting from the transgender movement takes the sinister nature of abuse to a whole other level. It's stunning. Mental disorder is encouraged and promoted by the schools and the state, so that lifestyle changes and even genitalia is replaced, which results in catastrophic rates of depression and suicide. Both polygamy and transgenderism are abuse.

In both cases, Satan has to redefine evil so that it's somehow acceptable to people. And then he has to make the opposition look bad for opposing his redefinition. It's a system that's tried and true for ANY issue! Redefine and then brand the opposition unfavorably.

A perfect illustration is how one of the most non-racist men of all time -Donald Trump (whose elite golf courses were opened up to blacks and Jews when that was controversial; and who has hired THOUSANDS of black and Hispanics to build his hotels) - is now viewed by millions as racist. The mere wearing of a MAGA hat causes millions of people to view that person as racist. Logic is suspended. Makes no sense. But once that propaganda has been gaslighted to the masses (or a religious society) over and over, it takes root, and bears fruit, EVIL fruit, so that good is viewed as evil, and evil as good.

That's the day we live in, where Satan triumphantly declares, "Now is the great day of my power. I reign from the rivers to the ends of the earth. There is none who dares to molest or make afraid."

Because the people who stand up for basic and obvious truths (like a person with a penis is a male) are the ones who "molest" the transgenders by stating the obvious fact. Sharing the opinion that transgenderism is a mental disorder is a HATE CRIME! Such "hate", they say, is a mental disorder!

Joseph Smith taught the basic principle of morality that you should sleep with your own SINGULAR wife, and not justify your sexual escapades by saying God commanded you to do it. That's pretty basic, but in BY's brand of Mormonism, such monogamous behavior was not celestial and could not earn you a seat at the right hand of God.

Either Joseph Smith was lying about his private life of polygamy, or his successors were. There is no valid 3rd option. God does not keep changing his mind, and suggesting He did, TO EXCUSE the libidos of deceiving men, is surely offensive to God, and really a pathetic excuse to offer to defend an institution. Why not just acknowledge the obvious, that there were/ are liars or deceived among us, and embrace the glorious truths of the Restoration!?
Last edited by topcat on February 2nd, 2019, 11:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sirius
captain of 100
Posts: 552

Re: Transgenderism is the new polygamy

Post by Sirius »

Utter nonsense. Such a poor comparison.

User avatar
topcat
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1645

Re: Transgenderism is the new polygamy

Post by topcat »

Sirius wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 11:30 am Utter nonsense. Such a poor comparison.
Agreed. And thank you. I didn't like the title either. I'll change it. It was just a comparison I made as I went along. It wasn't the main thrust of my post. I am trying to grab attention. I just changed the title to "The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars". That's more in line with the body of the post.

MMbelieve
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5072

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by MMbelieve »

It was also the good christian thing to stone an adulterer and to crucify an apostate. Lots of things have been carried out in the name of God. Polygamy has some pretty good arguments that are in the name of god too.

Regardless of whatever happened in the early church I have a testimony that Joseph was a good man. And the testimony that gods standard of desired marriage is 1 man and 1 woman sealed together for all of eternity.
Polygamy by nature then falls by the wayside as an alternative never to be the standard. It will never be the standard so we dont really need to worry much about it at all. Its not the standard of heaven either, so the arguments that its required to even be a god and carry out the plan that has been carried out many times before, is false.

User avatar
Jesef
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2603
Location: Unauthorized Opinion-Land

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by Jesef »

MMbelieve wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 12:30 pm It was also the good christian thing to stone an adulterer and to crucify an apostate. Lots of things have been carried out in the name of God. Polygamy has some pretty good arguments that are in the name of god too.

Regardless of whatever happened in the early church I have a testimony that Joseph was a good man. And the testimony that gods standard of desired marriage is 1 man and 1 woman sealed together for all of eternity.
Polygamy by nature then falls by the wayside as an alternative never to be the standard. It will never be the standard so we dont really need to worry much about it at all. Its not the standard of heaven either, so the arguments that its required to even be a god and carry out the plan that has been carried out many times before, is false.
Agreed, but it does have implications, too. The fact that BY & those early Apostles were seduced by it says something.

User avatar
Jesef
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2603
Location: Unauthorized Opinion-Land

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by Jesef »

It's not just a question of whether polygamy was a lie or whether Joseph was honest or not - it's a question of whether Joseph was a doofus a good part of the time, too. I think it's clear he messed up A LOT. The fundamentalist "hero worship" of Joseph is no better than any other hero worship. Joseph's martyrdom wasn't a martyrdom - it was a shootout. Joseph created the situation that got him & Hyrum killed - by having himself anointed King of the "Kingdom of God" in the Council of Fifty, coupled with not really squelching polygamy & "spiritual wifery" run amok, plus sealing other men's wives to him & confusing everybody with his "clever" sealing scheme. Joseph tied his own noose, so to speak, and he went down fighting/shooting. Maybe Joseph was paying for his own sins at that point. No need to deify that character either. The fundamentalists seem to want to believe Joseph was pristine & innocent & nary had a thing to do with all the troubles crashing down around him. It's naive. Just my opinion.

MMbelieve
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5072

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by MMbelieve »

Jesef wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 1:22 pm It's not just a question of whether polygamy was a lie or whether Joseph was honest or not - it's a question of whether Joseph was a doofus a good part of the time, too. I think it's clear he messed up A LOT. The fundamentalist "hero worship" of Joseph is no better than any other hero worship. Joseph's martyrdom wasn't a martyrdom - it was a shootout. Joseph created the situation that got him & Hyrum killed - by having himself anointed King of the "Kingdom of God" in the Council of Fifty, coupled with not really squelching polygamy & "spiritual wifery" run amok, plus sealing other men's wives to him & confusing everybody with his "clever" sealing scheme. Joseph tied his own noose, so to speak, and he went down fighting/shooting. Maybe Joseph was paying for his own sins at that point. No need to deify that character either. The fundamentalists seem to want to believe Joseph was pristine & innocent & nary had a thing to do with all the troubles crashing down around him. It's naive. Just my opinion.
Perhaps this is why he was taken from the earth quite young.
He may have been just the right person to receive the very beginning of the restoration and that was his purpose.
No, he wasnt perfect.

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13159
Location: England

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by Robin Hood »

Jesef wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 1:22 pm It's not just a question of whether polygamy was a lie or whether Joseph was honest or not - it's a question of whether Joseph was a doofus a good part of the time, too. I think it's clear he messed up A LOT. The fundamentalist "hero worship" of Joseph is no better than any other hero worship. Joseph's martyrdom wasn't a martyrdom - it was a shootout. Joseph created the situation that got him & Hyrum killed - by having himself anointed King of the "Kingdom of God" in the Council of Fifty, coupled with not really squelching polygamy & "spiritual wifery" run amok, plus sealing other men's wives to him & confusing everybody with his "clever" sealing scheme. Joseph tied his own noose, so to speak, and he went down fighting/shooting. Maybe Joseph was paying for his own sins at that point. No need to deify that character either. The fundamentalists seem to want to believe Joseph was pristine & innocent & nary had a thing to do with all the troubles crashing down around him. It's naive. Just my opinion.
Don't agree with this.
Joseph was killed while in custody. He had surrendered himself to the authority of the state and should not have been put in a position where a shootout was necessary.
He was martyred.

But he wasn't perfect, and I'm not sure anyone is claiming that he was.

As for the question of whether he was a truthful man... I believe he was. For me, that means that when he publicly denied he was involved in polygamy he was telling the truth; just as he was when he said he saw God, angels, or the plates.

MMbelieve
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5072

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by MMbelieve »

Jesef wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 12:43 pm
MMbelieve wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 12:30 pm It was also the good christian thing to stone an adulterer and to crucify an apostate. Lots of things have been carried out in the name of God. Polygamy has some pretty good arguments that are in the name of god too.

Regardless of whatever happened in the early church I have a testimony that Joseph was a good man. And the testimony that gods standard of desired marriage is 1 man and 1 woman sealed together for all of eternity.
Polygamy by nature then falls by the wayside as an alternative never to be the standard. It will never be the standard so we dont really need to worry much about it at all. Its not the standard of heaven either, so the arguments that its required to even be a god and carry out the plan that has been carried out many times before, is false.
Agreed, but it does have implications, too. The fact that BY & those early Apostles were seduced by it says something.
Since the time Joseph was being prepared to receive from heaven, the adversary was against him. Since the church began, the adversary was trying to thwart then pollute it. I have full reason to believe that part of the confusion and nonsense of the early church is directly due to the adversary doing everything possible to confuse and deceive and incite each man in charge or in positions of leadership. The other pretty clear reason for the confusion and nonsense was not as much the imperfection of the people but the imperfection of the gospel message in understanding it fully and the people able to comprehend something new and foreign. Like children understanding adult things, the message is not understood or able to be fully stated. Minds take time to understand.

If an angel came to a person today and taught them the operation of the celestial kingdom and then that person tried to teach others and implement its practices and mindsets, it would be a catastrophic failure resulting in mass confusion and everyone “hearing it from the grape vine” misrepresentation of it.
The people here on the forum that are members of the church should all believe and understand and process basically the same but we dont, its actually quite baffling to me how different people interpret and understand the same principles. Im sure this was the case in the beginning of the church too.

Sometimes i wonder if i would have accepted or stayed with the church at all if i was at that time.

User avatar
Jesef
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2603
Location: Unauthorized Opinion-Land

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by Jesef »

Robin Hood wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 2:33 pm
Jesef wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 1:22 pm It's not just a question of whether polygamy was a lie or whether Joseph was honest or not - it's a question of whether Joseph was a doofus a good part of the time, too. I think it's clear he messed up A LOT. The fundamentalist "hero worship" of Joseph is no better than any other hero worship. Joseph's martyrdom wasn't a martyrdom - it was a shootout. Joseph created the situation that got him & Hyrum killed - by having himself anointed King of the "Kingdom of God" in the Council of Fifty, coupled with not really squelching polygamy & "spiritual wifery" run amok, plus sealing other men's wives to him & confusing everybody with his "clever" sealing scheme. Joseph tied his own noose, so to speak, and he went down fighting/shooting. Maybe Joseph was paying for his own sins at that point. No need to deify that character either. The fundamentalists seem to want to believe Joseph was pristine & innocent & nary had a thing to do with all the troubles crashing down around him. It's naive. Just my opinion.
Don't agree with this.
Joseph was killed while in custody. He had surrendered himself to the authority of the state and should not have been put in a position where a shootout was necessary.
He was martyred.

But he wasn't perfect, and I'm not sure anyone is claiming that he was.

As for the question of whether he was a truthful man... I believe he was. For me, that means that when he publicly denied he was involved in polygamy he was telling the truth; just as he was when he said he saw God, angels, or the plates.
I respect your opinion, truly.

But I’m open to other possibilities, including that Joseph basically went astray. I hope he was honest, but many of the things I stated are undisputed facts (not my conclusions, but the actual happenings). He did seal all manner of women, including married & too young, to himself - whether he consummated is debatable. Having himself anointed king by the anointed quorum & council of fifty is also a fact - this was a huge flub to commit in early America - it would be a huge mistake today & an afront to freedom - & if an anointed king & arguable theocratic-cult leader tried to run for president? It wouldn’t go well. His shooting back at Carthage can very well be categorized as self-defense but it’s not really martyrdom if you’re shooting back. That’s my opinion - but that is not like a lamb to the slaughter or Jesus going to the cross without resistance.

There are many problems with the end of Joseph’s career. The fundamentalists seem to want to only accept the flattering & the idealistic.

User avatar
nightlight
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8477

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by nightlight »

MMbelieve wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 12:30 pm It was also the good christian thing to stone an adulterer and to crucify an apostate. Lots of things have been carried out in the name of God. Polygamy has some pretty good arguments that are in the name of god too.

Regardless of whatever happened in the early church I have a testimony that Joseph was a good man. And the testimony that gods standard of desired marriage is 1 man and 1 woman sealed together for all of eternity.
Polygamy by nature then falls by the wayside as an alternative never to be the standard. It will never be the standard so we dont really need to worry much about it at all. Its not the standard of heaven either, so the arguments that its required to even be a god and carry out the plan that has been carried out many times before, is false.
don't pretend to know the standard of heaven.

simpleton
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3080

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by simpleton »

So based upon all or most of the comments above, all of the first 7 presidents/prophets of TCOJCOLDS were adulterers period. Nothing but a bunch of sexual prowlers. So what makes all of you think that an adulterous man can have the Spirit of God to lead? As every single one of the first seven practiced that awful adulterous way of marriage. How do we even dare present to the world the Gospel according to Joseph, with him committing those awful atrocities under the guise of falsely portraying himself to be a prophet, and the next 6 continuing in the same sinful way.
How all of you wrap your minds around that is quite a feat...

MMbelieve
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5072

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by MMbelieve »

NIGHTLIGHT wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 3:14 pm
MMbelieve wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 12:30 pm It was also the good christian thing to stone an adulterer and to crucify an apostate. Lots of things have been carried out in the name of God. Polygamy has some pretty good arguments that are in the name of god too.

Regardless of whatever happened in the early church I have a testimony that Joseph was a good man. And the testimony that gods standard of desired marriage is 1 man and 1 woman sealed together for all of eternity.
Polygamy by nature then falls by the wayside as an alternative never to be the standard. It will never be the standard so we dont really need to worry much about it at all. Its not the standard of heaven either, so the arguments that its required to even be a god and carry out the plan that has been carried out many times before, is false.
don't pretend to know the standard of heaven.
Im not. Its what we are taught.
Polygamy is not the standard of heaven, even one of the most active polygamist in the early church said there would be men there with only 1 wife.

simpleton
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3080

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by simpleton »

Basicly what it seems like, is that if we were alive at the time we would have assented to his death also....
Because it is this same spirit that killed him...

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13159
Location: England

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by Robin Hood »

Jesef wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 3:13 pm
Robin Hood wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 2:33 pm
Jesef wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 1:22 pm It's not just a question of whether polygamy was a lie or whether Joseph was honest or not - it's a question of whether Joseph was a doofus a good part of the time, too. I think it's clear he messed up A LOT. The fundamentalist "hero worship" of Joseph is no better than any other hero worship. Joseph's martyrdom wasn't a martyrdom - it was a shootout. Joseph created the situation that got him & Hyrum killed - by having himself anointed King of the "Kingdom of God" in the Council of Fifty, coupled with not really squelching polygamy & "spiritual wifery" run amok, plus sealing other men's wives to him & confusing everybody with his "clever" sealing scheme. Joseph tied his own noose, so to speak, and he went down fighting/shooting. Maybe Joseph was paying for his own sins at that point. No need to deify that character either. The fundamentalists seem to want to believe Joseph was pristine & innocent & nary had a thing to do with all the troubles crashing down around him. It's naive. Just my opinion.
Don't agree with this.
Joseph was killed while in custody. He had surrendered himself to the authority of the state and should not have been put in a position where a shootout was necessary.
He was martyred.

But he wasn't perfect, and I'm not sure anyone is claiming that he was.

As for the question of whether he was a truthful man... I believe he was. For me, that means that when he publicly denied he was involved in polygamy he was telling the truth; just as he was when he said he saw God, angels, or the plates.
I respect your opinion, truly.

But I’m open to other possibilities, including that Joseph basically went astray. I hope he was honest, but many of the things I stated are undisputed facts (not my conclusions, but the actual happenings). He did seal all manner of women, including married & too young, to himself - whether he consummated is debatable. Having himself anointed king by the anointed quorum & council of fifty is also a fact - this was a huge flub to commit in early America - it would be a huge mistake today & an afront to freedom - & if an anointed king & arguable theocratic-cult leader tried to run for president? It wouldn’t go well. His shooting back at Carthage can very well be categorized as self-defense but it’s not really martyrdom if you’re shooting back. That’s my opinion - but that is not like a lamb to the slaughter or Jesus going to the cross without resistance.

There are many problems with the end of Joseph’s career. The fundamentalists seem to want to only accept the flattering & the idealistic.
Just be careful with what you regard as "actual happenings". Joseph may very well have been sealed to a number of people, but there is very little in the way of contemporary evidence of such. All church records of such sealings were created many years after the fact, so the only "actual happening" we know for sure is that the church created a retrospective record.

The fact that he defended himself does not, in any way whatsoever, disqualify him as a martyr of religion. It isn't the manner of death we need to consider, but the reason for it. And clearly the mob were not concerned with the destruction of a printing press.

User avatar
Jesef
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2603
Location: Unauthorized Opinion-Land

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by Jesef »

The possibilities have implications, yes. But most of those implications are not “All or Nothing”, as you put it. Polygamy may very well have been an error. The Brethren under/after Brigham Young who promoted it as the central Principle of our religion, seeking 1st Ammendment protection, prophesied it would never cease & that God would destroy the U.S. government instead. These were false prophecies & they were indeed forced to finally quit, not in 1890 under WW which was a publicity stunt & stall tactic, but in 1904 under JSF. This close call of almost having all the Church’s assets seized resulted in the church incorporating into the Corporation-Sole named The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints & he alone owns all Church property & the bylaws of that Corp determine automatic succession to the next senior Apostles upon his death. It’s an interesting chain of historical events.

User avatar
Alaris
Captain of 144,000
Posts: 7354
Location: Present before the general assembly
Contact:

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by Alaris »

If you guys just keep creating these threads and repeat it long enough, maybe it will magically come true. It's not working for CNN so far with Russia, but there's always hope.

User avatar
nightlight
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8477

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by nightlight »

I read most of the quotes of JS claiming not guilty to charges of adultery (imo, we was not guilty)...but I doubt I'm finding all the quotes you guys are talking about.

Someone post them and see if we can reason

User avatar
Chip
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7963
Location: California

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by Chip »

Robin Hood wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 2:33 pm
Jesef wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 1:22 pm It's not just a question of whether polygamy was a lie or whether Joseph was honest or not - it's a question of whether Joseph was a doofus a good part of the time, too. I think it's clear he messed up A LOT. The fundamentalist "hero worship" of Joseph is no better than any other hero worship. Joseph's martyrdom wasn't a martyrdom - it was a shootout. Joseph created the situation that got him & Hyrum killed - by having himself anointed King of the "Kingdom of God" in the Council of Fifty, coupled with not really squelching polygamy & "spiritual wifery" run amok, plus sealing other men's wives to him & confusing everybody with his "clever" sealing scheme. Joseph tied his own noose, so to speak, and he went down fighting/shooting. Maybe Joseph was paying for his own sins at that point. No need to deify that character either. The fundamentalists seem to want to believe Joseph was pristine & innocent & nary had a thing to do with all the troubles crashing down around him. It's naive. Just my opinion.
Don't agree with this.
Joseph was killed while in custody. He had surrendered himself to the authority of the state and should not have been put in a position where a shootout was necessary.
He was martyred.

But he wasn't perfect, and I'm not sure anyone is claiming that he was.

As for the question of whether he was a truthful man... I believe he was. For me, that means that when he publicly denied he was involved in polygamy he was telling the truth; just as he was when he said he saw God, angels, or the plates.
Okay. Let's say he was honest about not being involved in polygamy. That makes all his successors liars or maybe, later on, ignorant perpetuators of lies. The church today thinks Joseph WAS involved in polygamy. Something's wrong.

User avatar
Chip
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7963
Location: California

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by Chip »

MMbelieve wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 3:23 pm
NIGHTLIGHT wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 3:14 pm
MMbelieve wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 12:30 pm It was also the good christian thing to stone an adulterer and to crucify an apostate. Lots of things have been carried out in the name of God. Polygamy has some pretty good arguments that are in the name of god too.

Regardless of whatever happened in the early church I have a testimony that Joseph was a good man. And the testimony that gods standard of desired marriage is 1 man and 1 woman sealed together for all of eternity.
Polygamy by nature then falls by the wayside as an alternative never to be the standard. It will never be the standard so we dont really need to worry much about it at all. Its not the standard of heaven either, so the arguments that its required to even be a god and carry out the plan that has been carried out many times before, is false.
don't pretend to know the standard of heaven.
Im not. Its what we are taught.
Polygamy is not the standard of heaven, even one of the most active polygamist in the early church said there would be men there with only 1 wife.
But Brigham Young taught that the entire household of Heaven was polygamous and that Heavenly Father even had sex with Mary.

There's nothing concrete that can be gleaned from any of these men's sayings about what Heaven is like regarding marriage. Looks to me like they made up a bunch stuff to justify their whoredoms.

And I don't suppose that this is some kind of loyalty test by God to believe in something that goes against so much grain of the gospel. The only people served by such belief are the modern-day perpetuators of the ongoing, ever-convolving historical narrative, and they are running their revisionist sausage factory 24/7 now, trying to keep up with all the myths the internet is mercilessly obviating before them. Every week they make some new concession to truth, it seems, that should have never been necessary, to begin with - not for "the one true church on the face of the Earth", anyway.

User avatar
Kingdom of ZION
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1939

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by Kingdom of ZION »

Hey I like the title, it shifts from what the early Brethren were to what people are doing, when they talk about doctrines they have no concept of!

If all the records were available, Adam, Noah, Moses, the Messiah, and Joseph, they all lived the principle of CPM. The world tries to defame it and equate it to polygamy, which in the true definition sense it is not. The Doctrine of Eternal Lives has as much in common as reincarnation as CPM has with polygamy. It is not a lie to disclaim one, that has nothing to do with the other.

You may say it is just word semantics. Okay, so when a women who marry a man to just be supported, and I have seen many who have done this, they are all just prostitutes by that same ignorant judgment of the world. I feel a women who rejects that same kind of characterization is justified! But I DOUBT you see the difference.

User avatar
Jesef
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2603
Location: Unauthorized Opinion-Land

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by Jesef »

The cases of Mary Fielding Smith & her sister, Mercy Fielding Thompson, alleged plural wives of Hyrum Smith, seem to weaken the case that Joseph did not practice polygamy. Both followed Brigham Young & Twelve west. Both were plural wives, concurrently, of Apostle John Taylor. Mercy wrote a letter to Joseph III testifying of the personal interaction she had with JS - a visitation by Mercy’s deceased husband to JS telling him to match Mercy & Hyrum - & her plural marriage to Hyrum for time only (her & any children were to be delivered up to the deceased husband in the resurrection). I don’t think Mary & Mercy, sisters, one an undisputed wife of Hyrum & mother of Joseph Fielding Smith, would have participated in a conspiracy. Going west was voluntary. Why would they follow the guys that they would have known firsthand were secretly going against Joseph & Hyrum and their public denials of plural marriage, which other historians have identified as carefully worded denials.

http://restorationbookstore.org/article ... s/hsfp.htm

simpleton
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3080

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by simpleton »

Jesef wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 3:32 pm The possibilities have implications, yes. But most of those implications are not “All or Nothing”, as you put it. Polygamy may very well have been an error. The Brethren under/after Brigham Young who promoted it as the central Principle of our religion, seeking 1st Ammendment protection, prophesied it would never cease & that God would destroy the U.S. government instead. These were false prophecies & they were indeed forced to finally quit, not in 1890 under WW which was a publicity stunt & stall tactic, but in 1904 under JSF. This close call of almost having all the Church’s assets seized, (all of the assets were seized) resulted in the church incorporating into the Corporation-Sole named The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints & he alone owns all Church property & the bylaws of that Corp determine automatic succession to the next senior Apostles upon his death. It’s an interesting chain of historical events.

User avatar
investigator
captain of 100
Posts: 690

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by investigator »

NIGHTLIGHT wrote: February 2nd, 2019, 4:10 pm I read most of the quotes of JS claiming not guilty to charges of adultery (imo, we was not guilty)...but I doubt I'm finding all the quotes you guys are talking about.

Someone post them and see if we can reason
MARRIAGE. v. 4 "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; and one woman, but one husband, except in the case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again." 1835 Doctrine and Covenants, C1, p. 251 (1835)
"...What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one." (Joseph Smith)


Joseph Smith refers people to extract from Doctrine and Covenants on Marriage which disavows polygamy, stating that this is "the only rule allowed by the church." Times and Seasons, vol. 3, p. 909 (1842). See bottom half of left-hand column.
Joseph Smith repeats again statement from Doctrine and Covenants on Marriage to deny all allegations of polygamy being practice. Times and Seasons, vol. 3, p. 939 (1842)

Joseph and Hyrum Smith announce the excommunication of Hiram Brown, a member of the Church, for "preaching Polygamy, and other false and corrupt doctrines, in the county of Lapeer, state of Michigan." Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 423 (1844)
Hyrum Smith, with full knowledge and consent of his brother Joseph, publishes statement categorically denying any teaching of plural wives or polygamy, and that all such teaching is false doctrine.

“… some of your elders say, that a man having a certain priesthood, may has as many wives as he pleases, and that doctrine is taught here: I say unto you that that man teaches false doctrine, for there is no such doctrine taught here; neither is there any such thing practiced here.” Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 474 (March, 1844)

Statement denouncing teaching of plural wives as fiendish. States that the spiritual wife system merely allows a man to be married to another wife for time and eternity if his first wife dies. Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 715 (1844)

"...What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers." (History of the Church, vol 6, p. 411) Joseph Smith made this statement preaching from the stand to the Latter-day Saints in Nauvoo on Sunday May 26, 1844.

User avatar
tmac
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4545
Location: Reality

Re: The question of polygamy sifts the honest from the liars

Post by tmac »

In another recent post in another thread, I saw references to Amonhi -- who I think it was, who suggested a theory about Abraham -- to the effect that in being willing to sacrifice Isaac, Abraham had actually failed his Abrahamic test. Because, according to the theory, rather than just being blindly obedient to a completely immoral commandment -- even from God -- Abraham should have had a serious discussion with God about why he should be commanded to kill an innocent person. Whether the theory is correct or not is certainly debatable, but in any event, Abraham's experience was responsible for coinage of the phrase "Abrahamic Test."

On that score, I have heard others conjecture that although JS was the true prophet of the restoration, etc., as an imperfect mortal, first of all he wasn't perfect, and secondly, plural marriage may have been his own Abrahamic Test, which according to some, he likewise failed. Again a theory that has been conjectured. And I have serious reservations about anyone who genuinely thinks they actually "know" one way or the other, or can arrive at some kind of correct conclusion by simple reason, referring to sketchy history, or even citing scripture(s).

In terms of the question of "who" is or has been lying about this subject, however, that one is easy: Everybody. Every last one has shaded the truth about it. How do I know? Because everyone -- and I mean everyone -- lies. Everyone shades the truth. I don't care who they are -- prophets or not. I concluded long ago that the most honest thing I or anyone else can ever do is lookmyself/ themself squarely in the eye and admit that I/they are not completely honest. There is only one completely honest person who has walked this Earth -- which means that to one extent or another everyone else is dishonest. It's just a matter of degree. So, because we're all liars, perhaps a better way to phrase the question might be "who is, or has been, the least dishonest" about it. And if you think you can legitimately figure that out, congratulations.
Last edited by tmac on February 3rd, 2019, 10:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply