What if Joseph was killed by his Jailhouse friends because of Nephi 4

[John Tavner]

And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me again: Slay him, for the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands ... It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief. 1 Nephi 4:12-13.

I'm not pro polygamy, but, if Joseph really was against polygamy and those who practiced it really believed it to be of God, wouldn't it be ironic if them killing Joseph was to prevent the entire mormon religion from "dwindling" in unbelief as teh scripture says. Kill the one who they consider fallen because he rejected their polygamous ways. They truly believed it was of God- so, it is better that one man perish than an whole nation dwindle and perish in unbelief...

[Gadianton Slayer]

Or just so that they could use the name of God to practice it… if Joseph was going to excommunicate them, naturally he had to go. The seat of church president holds a lot of power and influence over the members, as we are obviously seeing today. It’s no surprise to me that this would be a motivating factor, especially considering how arrogant BY was.

[Shawn Henry]

It's no coincidence that Stake President William Marks claims that Joseph told him just before the martyrdom that the church had been deceived regarding polygamy and that he was going to help President Marks excommunicate the offenders. The believers in the practice had to do something at that point. Either abandon the principle or get rid of Joseph.

[Robin Hood]

It's no coincidence that Stake President William Marks claims that Joseph told him just before the martyrdom that the church had been deceived regarding polygamy and that he was going to help President Marks excommunicate the offenders. The believers in the practice had to do something at that point. Either abandon the principle or get rid of Joseph.

According to Marks he claimed that he (Joseph) had been deceived, not the church. Very important distinction.

What isn't clear is whether Joseph was claiming he had been deceived by an evil spirit in introducing plural marriage, or whether he meant he had been deceived by the denials of men who were already practicing it (Brigham etc).

[cab]

And it came to pass that the Spirit said unto me again: Slay him, for the Lord hath delivered him into thy hands ... It is better that one man should perish than that a nation should dwindle and perish in unbelief. 1 Nephi 4:12-13.

I'm not pro polygamy, but, if Joseph really was against polygamy and those who practiced it really believed it to be of God, wouldn't it be ironic if them killing Joseph was to prevent the entire mormon religion from "dwindling" in unbelief as teh scripture says. Kill the one who they consider fallen because he rejected their polygamous ways. They truly believed it was of God- so, it is better that one man perish than an whole nation dwindle and perish in unbelief...

Perhaps their understanding of blood atonement. If Joseph and Hyrum had fallen from their stations by not accepting the “celestial order”, then maybe it was rationalized as a merciful act to shed their blood and allow them to pay for their transgression.

Again, if this were the case - which I don’t necessarily believe it was - then I would reject it wholeheartedly as a wicked plan hatched by Satan within the secret chambers.

[Luke]

It's no coincidence that Stake President William Marks claims that Joseph told him just before the martyrdom that the church had been deceived regarding polygamy and that he was going to help President Marks excommunicate the offenders. The believers in the practice had to do something at that point. Either abandon the principle or get rid of Joseph.

According to Marks he claimed that he (Joseph) had been deceived, not the church. Very important distinction.

What isn't clear is whether Joseph was claiming he had been deceived by an evil spirit in introducing plural marriage, or whether he meant he had been deceived by the denials of men who were already practicing it (Brigham etc).

William Marks said elsewhere that JS was a polygamist.

[Luke]

Joseph and Hyrum gained exaltation in the Celestial Glory, wives and all.

[cab]

It's no coincidence that Stake President William Marks claims that Joseph told him just before the martyrdom that the church had been deceived regarding polygamy and that he was going to help President Marks excommunicate the offenders. The believers in the practice had to do something at that point. Either abandon the principle or get rid of Joseph.

According to Marks he claimed that he (Joseph) had been deceived, not the church. Very important distinction.

What isn't clear is whether Joseph was claiming he had been deceived by an evil spirit in introducing plural marriage, or whether he meant he had been deceived by the denials of men who were already practicing it (Brigham etc).

William Marks said elsewhere that JS was a polygamist.

I’d like to see this.

[Luke]

It's no coincidence that Stake President William Marks claims that Joseph told him just before the martyrdom that the church had been deceived regarding polygamy and that he was going to help President Marks excommunicate the offenders. The believers in the practice had to do something at that point. Either abandon the principle or get rid of Joseph.

According to Marks he claimed that he (Joseph) had been deceived, not the church. Very important distinction.

What isn't clear is whether Joseph was claiming he had been deceived by an evil spirit in introducing plural marriage, or whether he meant he had been deceived by the denials of men who were already practicing it (Brigham etc).

William Marks said elsewhere that JS was a polygamist.

I’d like to see this.

“The question arose as to whether Joseph the Martyr taught the doctrine of polygamy. President Marks said Brother Hyrum came to his place once and told him he did not believe in it and he was going to see Joseph about it and if he had a revelation on the subject he would believe it. And after that Hyrum read a revelation on it in the High Council and he Marks felt that it was not true but he saw the High Council received it.“ (Minutes of a Meeting, 2 May 1865, Council of Twelve Minutes 1865-67, RLDS Archives)

[cab]

According to Marks he claimed that he (Joseph) had been deceived, not the church. Very important distinction.

What isn't clear is whether Joseph was claiming he had been deceived by an evil spirit in introducing plural marriage, or whether he meant he had been deceived by the denials of men who were already practicing it (Brigham etc).

William Marks said elsewhere that JS was a polygamist.

I’d like to see this.

“The question arose as to whether Joseph the Martyr taught the doctrine of polygamy. President Marks said Brother Hyrum came to his place once and told him he did not believe in it and he was going to see Joseph about it and if he had a revelation on the subject he would believe it. And after that Hyrum read a revelation on it in the High Council and he Marks felt that it was not true but he saw the High Council received it.“ (Minutes of a Meeting, 2 May 1865, Council of Twelve Minutes 1865-67, RLDS Archives)

Hmm. Thanks for this. This seems to be a 3rd person accounting of someone’s recollection from a meeting that had occurred over 20 years earlier. This I would consider evidence that William Marks may have believed Joseph had a revelation on the subject….
I would consider something from 1845-1847 to be a bit more compelling…

Still it’s evidence I’ll put on my shelf… Though not iron cast proof of anything…

[Mamabear]

I wonder if that’s why he said this, “if I were to tell you all I know...you would rise up and kill me.” Maybe he knew their intentions.

[cab]

I wonder if that’s why he said this, “if I were to tell you all I know...you would rise up and kill me.” Maybe he knew their intentions.

If Joseph actually did teach them polygamy, I still contend that it was never from God, but rather that God was answering them according to their erring hearts as he’s done in the past…

Ezekiel 14
1 Then came certain of the elders of Israel unto me, and sat before me.
2 And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,
3 Son of man, these men have set up their idols in their heart, and put the stumblingblock of their iniquity before their face: should I be inquired of at all by them?
4 Therefore speak unto them, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Every man of the house of Israel that setteth up his idols in his heart, and putteth the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to the prophet; I the Lord will answer him that cometh according to the multitude of his idols;
5 That I may take the house of Israel in their own heart, because they are all estranged from me through their idols.

Hosea 6
5 Therefore have I hewed them by the prophets; I have slain them by the words of my mouth: and thy judgments are as the light that goeth forth.
6 For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
7 But they like men have transgressed the covenant: there have they dealt treacherously against me.
8 Gilead is a city of them that work iniquity, and is polluted with blood.
9 And as troops of robbers wait for a man, so the company of priests murder in the way by consent: for they commit lewdness.
10 I have seen an horrible thing in the house of Israel: there is the whoredom of Ephraim, Israel is defiled.
11 Also, O Judah, he hath set an harvest for thee, when I returned the captivity of my people.

[Luke]

If Joseph actually did teach them polygamy, I still contend that it was never from God

The hatred of polygamy on this forum makes me sad.

[Luke]

William Marks said elsewhere that JS was a polygamist.

I’d like to see this.

“The question arose as to whether Joseph the Martyr taught the doctrine of polygamy. President Marks said Brother Hyrum came to his place once and told him he did not believe in it and he was going to see Joseph about it and if he had a revelation on the subject he would believe it. And after that Hyrum read a revelation on it in the High Council and he Marks felt that it was not true but he saw the High Council received it.“ (Minutes of a Meeting, 2 May 1865, Council of Twelve Minutes 1865-67, RLDS Archives)

Hmm. Thanks for this. This seems to be a 3rd person accounting of someone’s recollection from a meeting that had occurred over 20 years earlier. This I would consider evidence that William Marks may have believed Joseph had a revelation on the subject….
I would consider something from 1845-1847 to be a bit more compelling…

Still it’s evidence I’ll put on my shelf… Though not iron cast proof of anything…

Marks was at the meeting. It’s someone making a minute of what Marks himself said at this meeting.

Clearly first hand information, and not third hand.

[cab]

If Joseph actually did teach them polygamy, I still contend that it was never from God

The hatred of polygamy on this forum makes me sad.

Well brother, I feel that way about those who aspire to it.

[Luke]

If Joseph actually did teach them polygamy, I still contend that it was never from God

The hatred of polygamy on this forum makes me sad.

Well brother, I feel that way about those who aspire to it.

Why?

[cab]

I’d like to see this.

“The question arose as to whether Joseph the Martyr taught the doctrine of polygamy. President Marks said Brother Hyrum came to his place once and told him he did not believe in it and he was going to see Joseph about it and if he had a revelation on the subject he would believe it. And after that Hyrum read a revelation on it in the High Council and he Marks felt that it was not true but he saw the High Council received it.“ (Minutes of a Meeting, 2 May 1865, Council of Twelve Minutes 1865-67, RLDS Archives)

Hmm. Thanks for this. This seems to be a 3rd person accounting of someone’s recollection from a meeting that had occurred over 20 years earlier. This I would consider evidence that William Marks may have believed Joseph had a revelation on the subject….
I would consider something from 1845-1847 to be a bit more compelling…

Still it’s evidence I’ll put on my shelf… Though not iron cast proof of anything…

Marks was at the meeting. It’s someone making a minute of what Marks himself said at this meeting.

Clearly first hand information, and not third hand.

Him hearing what William Marks said was firsthand, but his saying what Marks said about what other people said makes it third hand information, right? All we can say that was first hand was that he witnessed William Marx saying some things.

Or am I wrong?

[cab]

If Joseph actually did teach them polygamy, I still contend that it was never from God

The hatred of polygamy on this forum makes me sad.

Well brother, I feel that way about those who aspire to it.

Why?

Because I think it’s a sad practice.

[Luke]

The hatred of polygamy on this forum makes me sad.

Well brother, I feel that way about those who aspire to it.

Why?

Because I think it’s a sad practice.

Yet I’ve witnessed more happiness in plural marriage than in any other situation.

Granted, there are poor examples of polygamist lifestyles out there—but that is no different to there being bad examples in other lifestyles. So this argument that there are bad polygamy situations out there is a non-starter.

[Luke]

“The question arose as to whether Joseph the Martyr taught the doctrine of polygamy. President Marks said Brother Hyrum came to his place once and told him he did not believe in it and he was going to see Joseph about it and if he had a revelation on the subject he would believe it. And after that Hyrum read a revelation on it in the High Council and he Marks felt that it was not true but he saw the High Council received it.“ (Minutes of a Meeting, 2 May 1865, Council of Twelve Minutes 1865-67, RLDS Archives)

Hmm. Thanks for this. This seems to be a 3rd person accounting of someone’s recollection from a meeting that had occurred over 20 years earlier. This I would consider evidence that William Marks may have believed Joseph had a revelation on the subject….
I would consider something from 1845-1847 to be a bit more compelling…

Still it’s evidence I’ll put on my shelf… Though not iron cast proof of anything…

Marks was at the meeting. It’s someone making a minute of what Marks himself said at this meeting.

Clearly first hand information, and not third hand.

Him hearing what William Marks said was firsthand, but his saying what Marks said about what other people said makes it third hand information, right? All we can say that was first hand was that he witnessed William Marx saying some things.

Or am I wrong?

William Marks is a FIRST HAND witness.

The minute taker wrote his statement FIRST HAND.

So it’s a first hand witness.

You could argue that it’s second hand, and I would accept that point of view, but it’s hardly third hand.

[cab]

Well brother, I feel that way about those who aspire to it.

Why?

Because I think it’s a sad practice.

Yet I’ve witnessed more happiness in plural marriage than in any other situation.

Granted, there are poor examples of polygamist lifestyles out there—but that is no different to there being bad examples in other lifestyles. So this argument that there are bad polygamy situations out there is a non-starter.

Well that’s obviously not how I see it. There’s really happy Amish people too. And really happy Muslims and Buddhists.

I have friends who seem really happy in their homosexual relationships. You’d probably agree that they’re nonetheless a sad situation, wouldn’t you?

[Luke]

I have friends who seem really happy in their homosexual relationships. You’d probably agree that it’s nonetheless a sad situation, wouldn’t you?

Completely different things.

First, I’ve never met a happy homosexual.

Second, there is a difference between fleeting pleasure and the Spirit of God so clearly and genuinely present in polygamous situations.

[cab]

I have friends who seem really happy in their homosexual relationships. You’d probably agree that it’s nonetheless a sad situation, wouldn’t you?

Completely different things.

First, I’ve never met a happy homosexual.

Second, there is a difference between fleeting pleasure and the Spirit of God so clearly and genuinely present in polygamous situations.

You haven’t known enough homosexuals then. I know a lot in the theater world. Just like you’d argue that I don’t know enough polygamists.

At least homosexuals get to make a choice. A young girl brought up in a polygamist culture, however, seems to have far less autonomy - it’s all she knows.

And I don’t believe that’s the spirit of God “so clearly present” in polygamy.

[Baurak Ale]

I have friends who seem really happy in their homosexual relationships. You’d probably agree that it’s nonetheless a sad situation, wouldn’t you?

Completely different things.

First, I’ve never met a happy homosexual.

Second, there is a difference between fleeting pleasure and the Spirit of God so clearly and genuinely present in polygamous situations.

You haven’t known enough homosexuals then. I know a lot in the theater world. Just like you’d argue that I don’t know enough polygamists.

At least homosexuals get to make a choice. A young girl brought up in a polygamist culture, however, seems to have far less autonomy - it’s all she knows.

And I don’t believe that’s the spirit of God “so clearly present” in polygamy.

Not sure how having the choice to marry an already married man is less autonomy than only being able to risk exaltation with unmarried men.

Perhaps the lack of autonomy you speak of is tied to FLDS practices as opposed generally to polygamy as a marital choice?

[cab]

I have friends who seem really happy in their homosexual relationships. You’d probably agree that it’s nonetheless a sad situation, wouldn’t you?

Completely different things.

First, I’ve never met a happy homosexual.

Second, there is a difference between fleeting pleasure and the Spirit of God so clearly and genuinely present in polygamous situations.

You haven’t known enough homosexuals then. I know a lot in the theater world. Just like you’d argue that I don’t know enough polygamists.

At least homosexuals get to make a choice. A young girl brought up in a polygamist culture, however, seems to have far less autonomy - it’s all she knows.

And I don’t believe that’s the spirit of God “so clearly present” in polygamy.

Not sure how having the choice to marry an already married man is less autonomy than only being able to risk exaltation with unmarried men.

Perhaps the lack of autonomy you speak of is tied to FLDS practices as opposed generally to polygamy as a marital choice?

I mean that polygamist sects are all, by definition, fundamentalist sects.
And any woman raised in a fundamental system teaching that polygamy is the accepted way of life and necessary for exaltation has had their free will compromised.