Another historical revision – Hyrum Smith’s missing anti-polygamy discourse from April 1844

[Reluctant Watchman]

I approach it this way. If Joseph said what he did to condemn polygamy, in public/open periodicals, and then lived it secretly, he is a fallen prophet, a true charlatan. Or he taught the doctrine of sealing people together and someone changed the history afterward. Looking at how awful polygamy was used over the years I tend to side with Joseph.

[Luke]

I approach it this way. If Joseph said what he did to condemn polygamy, in public/open periodicals, and then lived it secretly, he is a fallen prophet, a true charlatan. Or he taught the doctrine of sealing people together and someone changed the history afterward. Looking at how awful polygamy was used over the years I tend to side with Joseph.

What is the need to exclude the other reasonable option?

Cognitive dissonance.

[Reluctant Watchman]

I approach it this way. If Joseph said what he did to condemn polygamy, in public/open periodicals, and then lived it secretly, he is a fallen prophet, a true charlatan. Or he taught the doctrine of sealing people together and someone changed the history afterward. Looking at how awful polygamy was used over the years I tend to side with Joseph.

What is the need to exclude the other reasonable option?

Cognitive dissonance.

It makes no sense for him to live this practice. The whole intent is explained by Jacob, to raise up seed. The Utah census for the time shows more men than women. What in the hell were they doing? Consolidating the women to a select group of men is counterintuitive to the purpose of raising up seed.

[cab]

I absolutely reject “the evidence” and it’s not because I don’t like it. I used to believe the “evidence”.

But now I believe Joseph and Hyrum.

They denied it. Every time.

And I don’t believe they crafted carefully worded lies.

You're speaking out of both sides of your mouth here. On the one hand you say you don't reject the mounds and mounds of very credible and well corroborated evidence because you don't like it, but then on the other hand you say you don't believe that Joseph and Hyrum crafted carefully worded denials, even though this is exactly what the available evidence shows is what happened.

To continue to accuse them means you are lining up with the accusers.

Nice try. I'm not accusing them of adultery, spiritual wivery, or being fallen/false prophets.

But I will concede that a much stronger case can be made for this, then the one you're trying to make.

It simply not true that "They denied it. Every time."

You know that many eyewitnesses all across the board testified that they "admitted" they had more than one wife.

Your reasoning hurts my brain.

My take is simple.

Joseph and Hyrum rejected the doctrine dozens of times and denied being having anything to do with it. I don’t believe they lied.

Any accusations made towards them during their lives about having multiple wives the denied. I don’t believe they lied.

There is no contemporaneous source they had any control over that showed they had anything to do with it.

I do believe that the “mounds of evidence” saying otherwise was created by those with an agenda, liars, accusers, and believers of liars and accusers.

I believe that you, Matthias, are sided with the accusers and the believers of the accusers.

I side with their accusers even though I don't accuse them of any wrong doing? That doesn't make any sense.

You on the other hand are an actual accuser. You accuse the faithful Saints of God of being liars, adulterers, and murderers, all because you just don't want to believe that Joseph and Hyrum practiced plural marriage secretly.

Stay tuned. I'm going to put together some evidence that you and the other deniers/accusers will not be able to refute. I'm sure you'll find a way to reject it, but you won't be able to make any reasonable counterarguments against it.

It makes perfect sense. I accuse people that accuse Joseph of polygamy of lying. You accuse Joseph of denying polygamy of lying.

But please bring on what you call irrefutable evidence. I’m always willing to accept new truth.

[LDS Watchman]

I'm not twisting their words at all. I simply view these carefully worded public denials of spiritual wivery and adultery...

Look, if you believe that Joseph and Hyrum were justified in saying one thing in public, while saying (and doing) another thing in private, because God had commanded them to do so, I get that. It is not something that can be argued with.

Though you could at least drop the Newspeak about "carefully worded denials" and instead use a phrase that's more honest and straightforward, like "Lying for the Lord," as in:

I'm not twisting their words at all. I simply view lying for the Lord about spiritual wifery and adultery in light of all the available evidence...

I'll stick to using the phrase "carefully worded denials," because that's the correct terminology.

"Lying for the Lord" is a charge leveled against the Saints of God by their enemies.

[LDS Watchman]

You're speaking out of both sides of your mouth here. On the one hand you say you don't reject the mounds and mounds of very credible and well corroborated evidence because you don't like it, but then on the other hand you say you don't believe that Joseph and Hyrum crafted carefully worded denials, even though this is exactly what the available evidence shows is what happened.



Nice try. I'm not accusing them of adultery, spiritual wivery, or being fallen/false prophets.

But I will concede that a much stronger case can be made for this, then the one you're trying to make.

It simply not true that "They denied it. Every time."

You know that many eyewitnesses all across the board testified that they "admitted" they had more than one wife.

Your reasoning hurts my brain.

My take is simple.

Joseph and Hyrum rejected the doctrine dozens of times and denied being having anything to do with it. I don’t believe they lied.

Any accusations made towards them during their lives about having multiple wives the denied. I don’t believe they lied.

There is no contemporaneous source they had any control over that showed they had anything to do with it.

I do believe that the “mounds of evidence” saying otherwise was created by those with an agenda, liars, accusers, and believers of liars and accusers.

I believe that you, Matthias, are sided with the accusers and the believers of the accusers.

I side with their accusers even though I don't accuse them of any wrong doing? That doesn't make any sense.

You on the other hand are an actual accuser. You accuse the faithful Saints of God of being liars, adulterers, and murderers, all because you just don't want to believe that Joseph and Hyrum practiced plural marriage secretly.

Stay tuned. I'm going to put together some evidence that you and the other deniers/accusers will not be able to refute. I'm sure you'll find a way to reject it, but you won't be able to make any reasonable counterarguments against it.

It makes perfect sense. I accuse people that accuse Joseph of polygamy of lying. You accuse Joseph of denying polygamy of lying.

But please bring on what you call irrefutable evidence. I’m always willing to accept new truth.

When have I accused Joseph of lying?

I said he carefully denied practicing and teaching plural marriage because he was commanded by God to keep it a secret.

You on the other hand accuse the Saints of God of lies, adultery, whoredoms, and murder.

Totally different.

[cab]

Your reasoning hurts my brain.

My take is simple.

Joseph and Hyrum rejected the doctrine dozens of times and denied being having anything to do with it. I don’t believe they lied.

Any accusations made towards them during their lives about having multiple wives the denied. I don’t believe they lied.

There is no contemporaneous source they had any control over that showed they had anything to do with it.

I do believe that the “mounds of evidence” saying otherwise was created by those with an agenda, liars, accusers, and believers of liars and accusers.

I believe that you, Matthias, are sided with the accusers and the believers of the accusers.

I side with their accusers even though I don't accuse them of any wrong doing? That doesn't make any sense.

You on the other hand are an actual accuser. You accuse the faithful Saints of God of being liars, adulterers, and murderers, all because you just don't want to believe that Joseph and Hyrum practiced plural marriage secretly.

Stay tuned. I'm going to put together some evidence that you and the other deniers/accusers will not be able to refute. I'm sure you'll find a way to reject it, but you won't be able to make any reasonable counterarguments against it.

It makes perfect sense. I accuse people that accuse Joseph of polygamy of lying. You accuse Joseph of denying polygamy of lying.

But please bring on what you call irrefutable evidence. I’m always willing to accept new truth.

When have I accused Joseph of lying?

I said he carefully denied practicing and teaching plural marriage because he was commanded by God to keep it a secret.

You on the other hand accuse the Saints of God of lies, adultery, whoredoms, and murder.

Totally different.

A carefully worded denial of something he was actually doing is a lie.

Those I’m accusing weren’t saints. You need to be sanctified to be a saint. They’re probably better classified as those who call themselves the people of the Lord (D&C 63:1-17).

Most weren’t liars. They just believed liars.

[LDS Watchman]

I approach it this way. If Joseph said what he did to condemn polygamy, in public/open periodicals, and then lived it secretly, he is a fallen prophet, a true charlatan. Or he taught the doctrine of sealing people together and someone changed the history afterward. Looking at how awful polygamy was used over the years I tend to side with Joseph.

What is the need to exclude the other reasonable option?

Cognitive dissonance.

It makes no sense for him to live this practice. The whole intent is explained by Jacob, to raise up seed. The Utah census for the time shows more men than women. What in the hell were they doing? Consolidating the women to a select group of men is counterintuitive to the purpose of raising up seed.

It's obvious that you have an incorrect understanding of what the term "raising up seed" means. It's not about increasing the amount of offspring in the entire population of church members. It's about increasing the posterity of a righteous man in this life and the next.

[Reluctant Watchman]

I approach it this way. If Joseph said what he did to condemn polygamy, in public/open periodicals, and then lived it secretly, he is a fallen prophet, a true charlatan. Or he taught the doctrine of sealing people together and someone changed the history afterward. Looking at how awful polygamy was used over the years I tend to side with Joseph.

What is the need to exclude the other reasonable option?

Cognitive dissonance.

It makes no sense for him to live this practice. The whole intent is explained by Jacob, to raise up seed. The Utah census for the time shows more men than women. What in the hell were they doing? Consolidating the women to a select group of men is counterintuitive to the purpose of raising up seed.

It's obvious that you have an incorrect understanding of what the term "raising up seed" means. It's not about increasing the amount of offspring in the entire population of church members. It's about increasing the posterity of a righteous man in this life and the next.

Oh my, yes, we have a very different perspective on this issue. And yes, I disagree with you on your interpretation. Given how blatant Jacob condemned the practice I tend to believe he never had an "eternal posterity" in mind when he said those grievous words to his brethren the Nephites.

[LDS Watchman]

What is the need to exclude the other reasonable option?

Cognitive dissonance.

It makes no sense for him to live this practice. The whole intent is explained by Jacob, to raise up seed. The Utah census for the time shows more men than women. What in the hell were they doing? Consolidating the women to a select group of men is counterintuitive to the purpose of raising up seed.

It's obvious that you have an incorrect understanding of what the term "raising up seed" means. It's not about increasing the amount of offspring in the entire population of church members. It's about increasing the posterity of a righteous man in this life and the next.

Oh my, yes, we have a very different perspective on this issue. And yes, I disagree with you on your interpretation. Given how blatant Jacob condemned the practice I tend to believe he never had an "eternal posterity" in mind when he said those grievous words to his brethren the Nephites.

You can think what you like, but the fact remains that you are using an incorrect definition of "raising up seed" to reject the vast body of evidence which shows that Joseph Smith secretly taught and practiced plural marriage. Are you interested in the truth or are you only looking for validation in what you want to believe?

[Reluctant Watchman]

It makes no sense for him to live this practice. The whole intent is explained by Jacob, to raise up seed. The Utah census for the time shows more men than women. What in the hell were they doing? Consolidating the women to a select group of men is counterintuitive to the purpose of raising up seed.

It's obvious that you have an incorrect understanding of what the term "raising up seed" means. It's not about increasing the amount of offspring in the entire population of church members. It's about increasing the posterity of a righteous man in this life and the next.

Oh my, yes, we have a very different perspective on this issue. And yes, I disagree with you on your interpretation. Given how blatant Jacob condemned the practice I tend to believe he never had an "eternal posterity" in mind when he said those grievous words to his brethren the Nephites.

You can think what you like, but the fact remains that you are using an incorrect definition of "raising up seed" to reject the vast body of evidence which shows that Joseph Smith secretly taught and practiced plural marriage. Are you interested in the truth or are you only looking for validation in what you want to believe?

I believe in what Jacob taught in the BoM, which in my mind contradicts what you believe. Disagree all you like.

[LDS Watchman]

It's obvious that you have an incorrect understanding of what the term "raising up seed" means. It's not about increasing the amount of offspring in the entire population of church members. It's about increasing the posterity of a righteous man in this life and the next.

Oh my, yes, we have a very different perspective on this issue. And yes, I disagree with you on your interpretation. Given how blatant Jacob condemned the practice I tend to believe he never had an "eternal posterity" in mind when he said those grievous words to his brethren the Nephites.

You can think what you like, but the fact remains that you are using an incorrect definition of "raising up seed" to reject the vast body of evidence which shows that Joseph Smith secretly taught and practiced plural marriage. Are you interested in the truth or are you only looking for validation in what you want to believe?

I believe in what Jacob taught in the BoM, which in my mind contradicts what you believe. Disagree all you like.

I believe what Jacob taught in the Book of Mormon, too.

It's not about disagreeing. It's about what the truth of the matter is. If you read what it says in D&C 132 and other places in the scriptures, the raising up of seed doesn't mean increasing the general population of children. It means precisely what I explained to you.

If you don't believe me, please show me from the scriptures that raising up seed means increasing the general population of children.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Oh my, yes, we have a very different perspective on this issue. And yes, I disagree with you on your interpretation. Given how blatant Jacob condemned the practice I tend to believe he never had an "eternal posterity" in mind when he said those grievous words to his brethren the Nephites.

You can think what you like, but the fact remains that you are using an incorrect definition of "raising up seed" to reject the vast body of evidence which shows that Joseph Smith secretly taught and practiced plural marriage. Are you interested in the truth or are you only looking for validation in what you want to believe?

I believe in what Jacob taught in the BoM, which in my mind contradicts what you believe. Disagree all you like.

I believe what Jacob taught in the Book of Mormon, too.

It's not about disagreeing. It's about what the truth of the matter is. If you read what it says in D&C 132 and other places in the scriptures, the raising up of seed doesn't mean increasing the general population of children. It means precisely what I explained to you.

If you don't believe me, please show me from the scriptures that raising up seed means increasing the general population of children.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/defendin ... 261259694/

Doctrinal Fallacies in D&C 132

From Enid DeBarthe’s “Bibliography of Joseph Smith II the Mormon Prophet-Leader .”

1. “. . . I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching this principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines. . . ."
a. Rebekah was Isaac’s only wife.
b. It cannot be proved that Zipporah had not died before Moses married his second wife, the Cushite woman. The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible says, “Zipporah may have died during the preceding year, although her death is not recorded."
2. If polygamy was an ancient order commanded of God, it could not be a "new and an everlasting covenant.”
3. The marriage law "instituted before the foundation of the world” was not polygamy, but monogamy.
a. Jesus said, "Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning, made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” (Matthew 19:4-6)
While this applied to divorce, it seems to say that another wife shall not separate what "God hath joined." Other scriptures on monogamy are Genesis 1:27-28; 2:18-2; I Corinthians 6:16.
b. Jacob in the Book of Mormon, speaking for God, said, "Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord, . , , Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save It be one wife and concubines he shall have none? For I, the Lord God, delighteth in the chastity of women." (Jacob 2:33-36)
4. “Mine anointed" referring to Joseph Smith is not consistent with any other use of the term, "Mine anointed" in all Scripture refers to Christ.
5. Marriage "for time and for all eternity" is in contradiction to Jesus* own teaching concerning the man who had had seven wives. When asked whose husband the man would be in heaven, Jesus said “But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor or given in marriage. Neither can they die any more for they are equal unto the angels and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. (Luke 20:35-36)
6. ". . . Pass by the angels, and the gods"
None of the scriptures teach a plurality of gods, but rather:
“And there is no God else beside me, a just God, and a Savior, there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth for I am God, and there is none else." (Isaiah 45:21-22)
“I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. (Isaiah 44:6)
7. "David’s wives and concubines were given unto him by the hand of Nathan.”
In II Samuel 12:1-15 is found the story of Nathan’s answer when David was ready to kill the man who had taken the ewe lamb belonging to another. "Thou art the man." And David confessed, "I have sinned against the Lord."
The Pulpit Commentary writes:

“These words probably mean that, as the whole possessions of his predecessor belonged, by Oriental custom, to the next occupant of the throne, David might have claimed the entire household and the wives both of Saul and Ishbosbeth as his own, though apparently he had not done so. As far as we know, Saul had but one wife (1 Samuel 14:50) and one concubine, Rizpah (2 Samuel 3:7). Of Ishbosheth's family arrangements we know little, but his harem, if he had one, would become the property of David...”
Also important to remember is that the Deuteronomistic Historians edited and redacted Samuel over a period of 2-3 centuries.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Here is a video that explains revisions made to Joseph's original intentions on polygamy. Start at 6:12
https://youtu.be/F5heXE5xS5w?t=372

[LDS Watchman]

Do you have any of your own thoughts or do you just copy and paste what the anti-Mormons say?

This laundry list of anti-Mormon grievances does nothing to bolster your case that Joseph Smith didn't teach and practice plural marriage. But I will address these bogus, lest you think I don't have an answer to them.

See my responses in blue.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/defendin ... 261259694/

Doctrinal Fallacies in D&C 132

From Enid DeBarthe’s “Bibliography of Joseph Smith II the Mormon Prophet-Leader .”

1. “. . . I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching this principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines. . . ."
a. Rebekah was Isaac’s only wife. This proves nothing. The bible only provides us with a very short summary of Isaac's life and there are plenty of things in the D&C which add information about the past, which isn't contained in the Bible at present.
b. It cannot be proved that Zipporah had not died before Moses married his second wife, the Cushite woman. The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible says, “Zipporah may have died during the preceding year, although her death is not recorded." This again proves nothing. It's much more likely that Moses enterered into a polygamous marriage here. There's a reason why Aaron and Miriam were against this marriage.
2. If polygamy was an ancient order commanded of God, it could not be a "new and an everlasting covenant.” It was a new and everlasting covenant to the Saints in the last days. Just like the restoration of other aspects of the gospel were referred to as a new and everlasting covenant in other parts of the D&C, even though they weren't actually new.
3. The marriage law "instituted before the foundation of the world” was not polygamy, but monogamy.
a. Jesus said, "Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning, made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” (Matthew 19:4-6)
While this applied to divorce, it seems to say that another wife shall not separate what "God hath joined." Other scriptures on monogamy are Genesis 1:27-28; 2:18-2; I Corinthians 6:16. There are also passages in the Bible governing polygamy and stating that God gave David many wives and then gave them to someone else.
b. Jacob in the Book of Mormon, speaking for God, said, "Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord, . , , Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save It be one wife and concubines he shall have none? For I, the Lord God, delighteth in the chastity of women." (Jacob 2:33-36) There's also 2 Samuel 12 where it says that God gave David his wives and then once he fell from his high station he gave them another. There's also Jacob 2:30.
4. “Mine anointed" referring to Joseph Smith is not consistent with any other use of the term, "Mine anointed" in all Scripture refers to Christ. This is simply not true. David refers to Saul as the Lord's anointed for example. And there was a whole anointed quorum in Nauvoo of those who had been anointed Kings and Priests under the direction of Joseph Smith.
5. Marriage "for time and for all eternity" is in contradiction to Jesus* own teaching concerning the man who had had seven wives. When asked whose husband the man would be in heaven, Jesus said “But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor or given in marriage. Neither can they die any more for they are equal unto the angels and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. (Luke 20:35-36) Well it's an undeniable fact that Joseph and Hyrum taught eternal marriage. Even the most ardent polygamy deniers on this forum acknowledge that.
6. ". . . Pass by the angels, and the gods"
None of the scriptures teach a plurality of gods, but rather:
“And there is no God else beside me, a just God, and a Savior, there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth for I am God, and there is none else." (Isaiah 45:21-22)
“I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. (Isaiah 44:6) It's again an undeniable fact that Joseph Smith taught plurality of Gods. It's all over the scriptures, too.
7. "David’s wives and concubines were given unto him by the hand of Nathan.”
In II Samuel 12:1-15 is found the story of Nathan’s answer when David was ready to kill the man who had taken the ewe lamb belonging to another. "Thou art the man." And David confessed, "I have sinned against the Lord."
The Pulpit Commentary writes:

“These words probably mean that, as the whole possessions of his predecessor belonged, by Oriental custom, to the next occupant of the throne, David might have claimed the entire household and the wives both of Saul and Ishbosbeth as his own, though apparently he had not done so. As far as we know, Saul had but one wife (1 Samuel 14:50) and one concubine, Rizpah (2 Samuel 3:7). Of Ishbosheth's family arrangements we know little, but his harem, if he had one, would become the property of David...”
Also important to remember is that the Deuteronomistic Historians edited and redacted Samuel over a period of 2-3 centuries. This is a completely false interpretation. In that same chapter, when God says he is taking away David's wives and giving them to his neighbor, he says his neighbor will "lie" with them. These were legitimate wives God gave David.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Do you have any of your own thoughts or do you just copy and paste what the anti-Mormons say?

This laundry list of anti-Mormon grievances does nothing to bolster your case that Joseph Smith didn't teach and practice plural marriage. But I will address these bogus, lest you think I don't have an answer to them.

See my responses in blue.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/defendin ... 261259694/

Doctrinal Fallacies in D&C 132

From Enid DeBarthe’s “Bibliography of Joseph Smith II the Mormon Prophet-Leader .”

1. “. . . I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching this principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines. . . ."
a. Rebekah was Isaac’s only wife. This proves nothing. The bible only provides us with a very short summary of Isaac's life and there are plenty of things in the D&C which add information about the past, which isn't contained in the Bible at present.
b. It cannot be proved that Zipporah had not died before Moses married his second wife, the Cushite woman. The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible says, “Zipporah may have died during the preceding year, although her death is not recorded." This again proves nothing. It's much more likely that Moses enterered into a polygamous marriage here. There's a reason why Aaron and Miriam were against this marriage.
2. If polygamy was an ancient order commanded of God, it could not be a "new and an everlasting covenant.” It was a new and everlasting covenant to the Saints in the last days. Just like the restoration of other aspects of the gospel were referred to as a new and everlasting covenant in other parts of the D&C, even though they weren't actually new.
3. The marriage law "instituted before the foundation of the world” was not polygamy, but monogamy.
a. Jesus said, "Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning, made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” (Matthew 19:4-6)
While this applied to divorce, it seems to say that another wife shall not separate what "God hath joined." Other scriptures on monogamy are Genesis 1:27-28; 2:18-2; I Corinthians 6:16. There are also passages in the Bible governing polygamy and stating that God gave David many wives and then gave them to someone else.
b. Jacob in the Book of Mormon, speaking for God, said, "Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord, . , , Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save It be one wife and concubines he shall have none? For I, the Lord God, delighteth in the chastity of women." (Jacob 2:33-36) There's also 2 Samuel 12 where it says that God gave David his wives and then once he fell from his high station he gave them another. There's also Jacob 2:30.
4. “Mine anointed" referring to Joseph Smith is not consistent with any other use of the term, "Mine anointed" in all Scripture refers to Christ. This is simply not true. David refers to Saul as the Lord's anointed for example. And there was a whole anointed quorum in Nauvoo of those who had been anointed Kings and Priests under the direction of Joseph Smith.
5. Marriage "for time and for all eternity" is in contradiction to Jesus* own teaching concerning the man who had had seven wives. When asked whose husband the man would be in heaven, Jesus said “But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor or given in marriage. Neither can they die any more for they are equal unto the angels and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. (Luke 20:35-36) Well it's an undeniable fact that Joseph and Hyrum taught eternal marriage. Even the most ardent polygamy deniers on this forum acknowledge that.
6. ". . . Pass by the angels, and the gods"
None of the scriptures teach a plurality of gods, but rather:
“And there is no God else beside me, a just God, and a Savior, there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth for I am God, and there is none else." (Isaiah 45:21-22)
“I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. (Isaiah 44:6) It's again an undeniable fact that Joseph Smith taught plurality of Gods. It's all over the scriptures, too.
7. "David’s wives and concubines were given unto him by the hand of Nathan.”
In II Samuel 12:1-15 is found the story of Nathan’s answer when David was ready to kill the man who had taken the ewe lamb belonging to another. "Thou art the man." And David confessed, "I have sinned against the Lord."
The Pulpit Commentary writes:

“These words probably mean that, as the whole possessions of his predecessor belonged, by Oriental custom, to the next occupant of the throne, David might have claimed the entire household and the wives both of Saul and Ishbosbeth as his own, though apparently he had not done so. As far as we know, Saul had but one wife (1 Samuel 14:50) and one concubine, Rizpah (2 Samuel 3:7). Of Ishbosheth's family arrangements we know little, but his harem, if he had one, would become the property of David...”
Also important to remember is that the Deuteronomistic Historians edited and redacted Samuel over a period of 2-3 centuries. This is a completely false interpretation. In that same chapter, when God says he is taking away David's wives and giving them to his neighbor, he says his neighbor will "lie" with them. These were legitimate wives God gave David.

I love how people throw around the term "anti-mormon." Please, by all means, believe what you will about polygamy. I'm not a fan of D&C 132.

[LDS Watchman]

Do you have any of your own thoughts or do you just copy and paste what the anti-Mormons say?

This laundry list of anti-Mormon grievances does nothing to bolster your case that Joseph Smith didn't teach and practice plural marriage. But I will address these bogus, lest you think I don't have an answer to them.

See my responses in blue.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/defendin ... 261259694/

Doctrinal Fallacies in D&C 132

From Enid DeBarthe’s “Bibliography of Joseph Smith II the Mormon Prophet-Leader .”

1. “. . . I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching this principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines. . . ."
a. Rebekah was Isaac’s only wife. This proves nothing. The bible only provides us with a very short summary of Isaac's life and there are plenty of things in the D&C which add information about the past, which isn't contained in the Bible at present.
b. It cannot be proved that Zipporah had not died before Moses married his second wife, the Cushite woman. The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible says, “Zipporah may have died during the preceding year, although her death is not recorded." This again proves nothing. It's much more likely that Moses enterered into a polygamous marriage here. There's a reason why Aaron and Miriam were against this marriage.
2. If polygamy was an ancient order commanded of God, it could not be a "new and an everlasting covenant.” It was a new and everlasting covenant to the Saints in the last days. Just like the restoration of other aspects of the gospel were referred to as a new and everlasting covenant in other parts of the D&C, even though they weren't actually new.
3. The marriage law "instituted before the foundation of the world” was not polygamy, but monogamy.
a. Jesus said, "Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning, made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” (Matthew 19:4-6)
While this applied to divorce, it seems to say that another wife shall not separate what "God hath joined." Other scriptures on monogamy are Genesis 1:27-28; 2:18-2; I Corinthians 6:16. There are also passages in the Bible governing polygamy and stating that God gave David many wives and then gave them to someone else.
b. Jacob in the Book of Mormon, speaking for God, said, "Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord, . , , Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save It be one wife and concubines he shall have none? For I, the Lord God, delighteth in the chastity of women." (Jacob 2:33-36) There's also 2 Samuel 12 where it says that God gave David his wives and then once he fell from his high station he gave them another. There's also Jacob 2:30.
4. “Mine anointed" referring to Joseph Smith is not consistent with any other use of the term, "Mine anointed" in all Scripture refers to Christ. This is simply not true. David refers to Saul as the Lord's anointed for example. And there was a whole anointed quorum in Nauvoo of those who had been anointed Kings and Priests under the direction of Joseph Smith.
5. Marriage "for time and for all eternity" is in contradiction to Jesus* own teaching concerning the man who had had seven wives. When asked whose husband the man would be in heaven, Jesus said “But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor or given in marriage. Neither can they die any more for they are equal unto the angels and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. (Luke 20:35-36) Well it's an undeniable fact that Joseph and Hyrum taught eternal marriage. Even the most ardent polygamy deniers on this forum acknowledge that.
6. ". . . Pass by the angels, and the gods"
None of the scriptures teach a plurality of gods, but rather:
“And there is no God else beside me, a just God, and a Savior, there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth for I am God, and there is none else." (Isaiah 45:21-22)
“I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. (Isaiah 44:6) It's again an undeniable fact that Joseph Smith taught plurality of Gods. It's all over the scriptures, too.
7. "David’s wives and concubines were given unto him by the hand of Nathan.”
In II Samuel 12:1-15 is found the story of Nathan’s answer when David was ready to kill the man who had taken the ewe lamb belonging to another. "Thou art the man." And David confessed, "I have sinned against the Lord."
The Pulpit Commentary writes:

“These words probably mean that, as the whole possessions of his predecessor belonged, by Oriental custom, to the next occupant of the throne, David might have claimed the entire household and the wives both of Saul and Ishbosbeth as his own, though apparently he had not done so. As far as we know, Saul had but one wife (1 Samuel 14:50) and one concubine, Rizpah (2 Samuel 3:7). Of Ishbosheth's family arrangements we know little, but his harem, if he had one, would become the property of David...”
Also important to remember is that the Deuteronomistic Historians edited and redacted Samuel over a period of 2-3 centuries. This is a completely false interpretation. In that same chapter, when God says he is taking away David's wives and giving them to his neighbor, he says his neighbor will "lie" with them. These were legitimate wives God gave David.

I love how people throw around the term "anti-mormon." Please, by all means, believe what you will about polygamy. I'm not a fan of D&C 132.

When I use the term anti-mormon, I'm simply calling a spade a spade.

And it really doesn't matter that you aren't a fan of D&C 132. What matters is whether or not it came from God.

It's clear from the historical record that it came from Joseph Smith, who said it was a revelation from God. The contents of the revelation are also corroborated by the testimonies of Joseph and Hyrum, eye witnesses who were intimately acquainted with them, and the rest of the scriptures.

[Reluctant Watchman]

Do you have any of your own thoughts or do you just copy and paste what the anti-Mormons say?

This laundry list of anti-Mormon grievances does nothing to bolster your case that Joseph Smith didn't teach and practice plural marriage. But I will address these bogus, lest you think I don't have an answer to them.

See my responses in blue.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/defendin ... 261259694/

Doctrinal Fallacies in D&C 132

From Enid DeBarthe’s “Bibliography of Joseph Smith II the Mormon Prophet-Leader .”

1. “. . . I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching this principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines. . . ."
a. Rebekah was Isaac’s only wife. This proves nothing. The bible only provides us with a very short summary of Isaac's life and there are plenty of things in the D&C which add information about the past, which isn't contained in the Bible at present.
b. It cannot be proved that Zipporah had not died before Moses married his second wife, the Cushite woman. The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible says, “Zipporah may have died during the preceding year, although her death is not recorded." This again proves nothing. It's much more likely that Moses enterered into a polygamous marriage here. There's a reason why Aaron and Miriam were against this marriage.
2. If polygamy was an ancient order commanded of God, it could not be a "new and an everlasting covenant.” It was a new and everlasting covenant to the Saints in the last days. Just like the restoration of other aspects of the gospel were referred to as a new and everlasting covenant in other parts of the D&C, even though they weren't actually new.
3. The marriage law "instituted before the foundation of the world” was not polygamy, but monogamy.
a. Jesus said, "Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning, made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” (Matthew 19:4-6)
While this applied to divorce, it seems to say that another wife shall not separate what "God hath joined." Other scriptures on monogamy are Genesis 1:27-28; 2:18-2; I Corinthians 6:16. There are also passages in the Bible governing polygamy and stating that God gave David many wives and then gave them to someone else.
b. Jacob in the Book of Mormon, speaking for God, said, "Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord, . , , Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save It be one wife and concubines he shall have none? For I, the Lord God, delighteth in the chastity of women." (Jacob 2:33-36) There's also 2 Samuel 12 where it says that God gave David his wives and then once he fell from his high station he gave them another. There's also Jacob 2:30.
4. “Mine anointed" referring to Joseph Smith is not consistent with any other use of the term, "Mine anointed" in all Scripture refers to Christ. This is simply not true. David refers to Saul as the Lord's anointed for example. And there was a whole anointed quorum in Nauvoo of those who had been anointed Kings and Priests under the direction of Joseph Smith.
5. Marriage "for time and for all eternity" is in contradiction to Jesus* own teaching concerning the man who had had seven wives. When asked whose husband the man would be in heaven, Jesus said “But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor or given in marriage. Neither can they die any more for they are equal unto the angels and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. (Luke 20:35-36) Well it's an undeniable fact that Joseph and Hyrum taught eternal marriage. Even the most ardent polygamy deniers on this forum acknowledge that.
6. ". . . Pass by the angels, and the gods"
None of the scriptures teach a plurality of gods, but rather:
“And there is no God else beside me, a just God, and a Savior, there is none beside me. Look unto me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth for I am God, and there is none else." (Isaiah 45:21-22)
“I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. (Isaiah 44:6) It's again an undeniable fact that Joseph Smith taught plurality of Gods. It's all over the scriptures, too.
7. "David’s wives and concubines were given unto him by the hand of Nathan.”
In II Samuel 12:1-15 is found the story of Nathan’s answer when David was ready to kill the man who had taken the ewe lamb belonging to another. "Thou art the man." And David confessed, "I have sinned against the Lord."
The Pulpit Commentary writes:

“These words probably mean that, as the whole possessions of his predecessor belonged, by Oriental custom, to the next occupant of the throne, David might have claimed the entire household and the wives both of Saul and Ishbosbeth as his own, though apparently he had not done so. As far as we know, Saul had but one wife (1 Samuel 14:50) and one concubine, Rizpah (2 Samuel 3:7). Of Ishbosheth's family arrangements we know little, but his harem, if he had one, would become the property of David...”
Also important to remember is that the Deuteronomistic Historians edited and redacted Samuel over a period of 2-3 centuries. This is a completely false interpretation. In that same chapter, when God says he is taking away David's wives and giving them to his neighbor, he says his neighbor will "lie" with them. These were legitimate wives God gave David.

I love how people throw around the term "anti-mormon." Please, by all means, believe what you will about polygamy. I'm not a fan of D&C 132.

When I use the term anti-mormon, I'm simply calling a spade a spade.

And it really doesn't matter that you aren't a fan of D&C 132. What matters is whether or not it came from God.

It's clear from the historical record that it came from Joseph Smith, who said it was a revelation from God. The contents of the revelation are also corroborated by the testimonies of Joseph and Hyrum, eye witnesses who were intimately acquainted with them, and the rest of the scriptures.

D&C 132 was messed with. There is no way to justify this record with what Joseph and Hyrum said earlier.

[LDS Watchman]

Do you have any of your own thoughts or do you just copy and paste what the anti-Mormons say?

This laundry list of anti-Mormon grievances does nothing to bolster your case that Joseph Smith didn't teach and practice plural marriage. But I will address these bogus, lest you think I don't have an answer to them.

See my responses in blue.

I love how people throw around the term "anti-mormon." Please, by all means, believe what you will about polygamy. I'm not a fan of D&C 132.

When I use the term anti-mormon, I'm simply calling a spade a spade.

And it really doesn't matter that you aren't a fan of D&C 132. What matters is whether or not it came from God.

It's clear from the historical record that it came from Joseph Smith, who said it was a revelation from God. The contents of the revelation are also corroborated by the testimonies of Joseph and Hyrum, eye witnesses who were intimately acquainted with them, and the rest of the scriptures.

D&C 132 was messed with. There is no way to justify this record with what Joseph and Hyrum said earlier.

How was it messed with?

Contemporary evidence supports that it was about the ancient polygamy of Abraham, David, etc., eternal marriage sealing, and a commandment/authorization for a man to have more than one wife.

[Reluctant Watchman]

I love how people throw around the term "anti-mormon." Please, by all means, believe what you will about polygamy. I'm not a fan of D&C 132.

When I use the term anti-mormon, I'm simply calling a spade a spade.

And it really doesn't matter that you aren't a fan of D&C 132. What matters is whether or not it came from God.

It's clear from the historical record that it came from Joseph Smith, who said it was a revelation from God. The contents of the revelation are also corroborated by the testimonies of Joseph and Hyrum, eye witnesses who were intimately acquainted with them, and the rest of the scriptures.

D&C 132 was messed with. There is no way to justify this record with what Joseph and Hyrum said earlier.

How was it messed with?

Contemporary evidence supports that it was about the ancient polygamy of Abraham, David, etc., eternal marriage sealing, and a commandment/authorization for a man to have more than one wife.

Since you appreciate people copy/pasting hyperlinks and not including their original thoughts:
https://www.the-exponent.com/the-irreco ... in-dc-132/

[darknesstolight]

why would anyone need more than one wife in the celestial kingdom?
answer: to populate so many worlds. Really? So when a woman is perfect she will need 9 months to produce a spirit? hmmmmmm

Why else would anyone need more than one wife?
answer: . . . crickets. . . .

silly people. . . .fools

Yes we are just so obviously silly and foolish, silly us...

Completely appropriate thing to say about anyone believing BY polygamy whoredom as wholesom or as good and somehow praiseworthy or worthy of emulating.

BY polygamy and BY himself and the early Church leaders were some of the most diluted individuals who have lived. Amazingly blind and arrogant in their dogmatic declarations and attempts to support the abuse of women, men, and children. Fruits of BY polygamy. Bickering, lying, in fighting, divorce, neglect, sorrow, pain.

I can't think of a more foolish or silly thing for anyone to be committed to and how much energy is foolishly expended in trying to prop up a whoredom as if that's God.

...

[LDS Watchman]

When I use the term anti-mormon, I'm simply calling a spade a spade.

And it really doesn't matter that you aren't a fan of D&C 132. What matters is whether or not it came from God.

It's clear from the historical record that it came from Joseph Smith, who said it was a revelation from God. The contents of the revelation are also corroborated by the testimonies of Joseph and Hyrum, eye witnesses who were intimately acquainted with them, and the rest of the scriptures.

D&C 132 was messed with. There is no way to justify this record with what Joseph and Hyrum said earlier.

How was it messed with?

Contemporary evidence supports that it was about the ancient polygamy of Abraham, David, etc., eternal marriage sealing, and a commandment/authorization for a man to have more than one wife.

Since you appreciate people copy/pasting hyperlinks and not including their original thoughts:
https://www.the-exponent.com/the-irreco ... in-dc-132/

More of the same. Nothing to see here as usual.

And yes it would be nice if you're going to make accusations that you are also willing and able to back them up yourself, rather than pointing to the work of others (which usually doesn't even fit with your claims anyway).

[TheDuke]

Like I have said before and before, anyone here gets a direct revelation on this let me know and we can discuss. But, I am more than confident that Joseph and Hyrum were sealed to multiple females. Call it what you like. they can publicly say what they like. Let's compare to other statements they made about hot topics where publicly they denied (Danites, Orin Porter Rockwell, Masonic statements, on and on and on).

[Reluctant Watchman]

Like I have said before and before, anyone here gets a direct revelation on this let me know and we can discuss. But, I am more than confident that Joseph and Hyrum were sealed to multiple females. Call it what you like. they can publicly say what they like. Let's compare to other statements they made about hot topics where publicly they denied (Danites, Orin Porter Rockwell, Masonic statements, on and on and on).

Are we making the differentiation between sealed vs sex?

[Luke]

Like I have said before and before, anyone here gets a direct revelation on this let me know and we can discuss. But, I am more than confident that Joseph and Hyrum were sealed to multiple females. Call it what you like. they can publicly say what they like. Let's compare to other statements they made about hot topics where publicly they denied (Danites, Orin Porter Rockwell, Masonic statements, on and on and on).

Are we making the differentiation between sealed vs sex?

It was both in this instance

Interesting how pretty much all of you anti-polygamists always have to make it about sex (I can pinpoint the main culprits)... it's almost as if your constant mentioning of it is in fact a reflection of yourselves, your mind, your thoughts...

Maybe us pro-polygamists arent so sordid and dirty as you think. Might want to look closer to home though mate.