Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

For non-mainstream, heterodoxical discussions. Request access to the Heretic Group here.
User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by iWriteStuff »

Hi all,

Been thinking about this a little lately... There are tons of stories out there about Joseph's claim that an angel with a drawn sword essentially forced him into polygamy (source: https://docslib.org/angel-with-a-drawn-sword).

For one, that seems a little too convenient.

For another, did he even bother trying to shake hands with the angel first? Per D&C 129:

4 When a messenger comes saying he has a message from God, offer him your hand and request him to shake hands with you.

5 If he be an angel he will do so, and you will feel his hand.

6 If he be the spirit of a just man made perfect he will come in his glory; for that is the only way he can appear—

7 Ask him to shake hands with you, but he will not move, because it is contrary to the order of heaven for a just man to deceive; but he will still deliver his message.

8 If it be the devil as an angel of light, when you ask him to shake hands he will offer you his hand, and you will not feel anything; you may therefore detect him.


Is it possible he got a message from the devil and just took it for fact that it came from God?

User avatar
cab
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2986
Location: ♫ I am a Mormon! ♫ And... dang it... a Mormon just believes! ♫

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by cab »

I think it’s far more possible that it never happened at all.

Just look at the dates from all those sources. The earliest possible account of this is from someone no one ever heard of… and even that is 10 years after the fact.

Then 15 years after that everyone starts using the same story, magically recalling the account word for word.

If it did happen, I’d say it was from the devil. The loving God I know doesn’t threaten destruction to people who don’t want to have multiple partners.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Shaking Hands with Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by iWriteStuff »

cab wrote: July 19th, 2022, 7:12 am I think it’s far more possible that it never happened at all.

Just look at the dates from all those sources. The earliest possible account of this is from someone no one ever heard of… and even that is 10 years after the fact.

Then 15 years after that everyone starts using the same story, magically recalling the account word for word.

If it did happen, I’d say it was from the devil. The loving God I know doesn’t threaten destruction to people who don’t want to have multiple partners.
Your remarks on the timeline are interesting too. Fanny Alger was 1833-1835, but the "angel" didn't show up until 1841. So who was forcing him to "marry" Fanny?

User avatar
cab
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2986
Location: ♫ I am a Mormon! ♫ And... dang it... a Mormon just believes! ♫

Re: Shaking Hands with Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by cab »

iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 7:30 am
cab wrote: July 19th, 2022, 7:12 am I think it’s far more possible that it never happened at all.

Just look at the dates from all those sources. The earliest possible account of this is from someone no one ever heard of… and even that is 10 years after the fact.

Then 15 years after that everyone starts using the same story, magically recalling the account word for word.

If it did happen, I’d say it was from the devil. The loving God I know doesn’t threaten destruction to people who don’t want to have multiple partners.
Your remarks on the timeline are interesting too. Fanny Alger was 1833-1835, but the "angel" didn't show up until 1841. So who was forcing him to "marry" Fanny?

I know, right….
And the fact that there is precisely zero evidence of a Fanny marriage to begin with.

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by Luke »

cab wrote: July 19th, 2022, 7:12 am The loving God I know doesn’t threaten destruction to people who don’t want to have multiple partners.
To me this just sounds like the God of mainstream Christendom who just "loves everyone no matter what". Definitely not the type of God I want to be associated with.

You either comply with the law or you can't progess.
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 7:30 am Your remarks on the timeline are interesting too. Fanny Alger was 1833-1835, but the "angel" didn't show up until 1841. So who was forcing him to "marry" Fanny?
Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner said that the angel came three times starting with an appearance around 1834.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by iWriteStuff »

Luke wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:09 am
cab wrote: July 19th, 2022, 7:12 am The loving God I know doesn’t threaten destruction to people who don’t want to have multiple partners.
To me this just sounds like the God of mainstream Christendom who just "loves everyone no matter what". Definitely not the type of God I want to be associated with.

You either comply with the law or you can't progess.
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 7:30 am Your remarks on the timeline are interesting too. Fanny Alger was 1833-1835, but the "angel" didn't show up until 1841. So who was forcing him to "marry" Fanny?
Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner said that the angel came three times starting with an appearance around 1834.
so,

1) You agree he entered the relationship with Fanny before any angels told him to?
2) You also agree that the witnesses to said angel story all seem to contradict each other? For instance, Eliza R. Snow says no revelation until 1837.
3) Was the 1834 angel just there to encourage pre-revelation immorality? If so, did they shake hands on it or not?

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by Luke »

iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:16 am 1) You agree he entered the relationship with Fanny before any angels told him to?
I don't know whether he did or not. He might have done, he might have not.

As far as I'm aware, the angel only came with a flaming sword the third time, which was after Fanny was off the scene, and Joseph was fed up with the concept of CPM. Clearly some "fire and brimstone" preaching was necessary for him.
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:16 am 2) You also agree that the witnesses to said angel story all seem to contradict each other? For instance, Eliza R. Snow says no revelation until 1837. Was the 1834 angel just there to encourage pre-revelation immorality?
It was pretty universally agreed by the Utah Saints that the FIRST revelation given on the subject of CPM was in 1831. I'm not aware of Eliza ever saying such a thing.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by iWriteStuff »

Luke wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:20 am
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:16 am 1) You agree he entered the relationship with Fanny before any angels told him to?
I don't know whether he did or not. He might have done, he might have not.

As far as I'm aware, the angel only came with a flaming sword the third time, which was after Fanny was off the scene, and Joseph was fed up with the concept of CPM. Clearly some "fire and brimstone" preaching was necessary for him.
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:16 am 2) You also agree that the witnesses to said angel story all seem to contradict each other? For instance, Eliza R. Snow says no revelation until 1837. Was the 1834 angel just there to encourage pre-revelation immorality?
It was pretty universally agreed by the Utah Saints that the FIRST revelation given on the subject of CPM was in 1831. I'm not aware of Eliza ever saying such a thing.
Eliza, from the same link up top:

“[Joseph Smith] received the revelation in 1837, but he was himself afraid to promulgate it until the angel came and stood beside him with flaming sword and bade him do the command of God. Not until then did Joseph enter into polygamy, or get any of his disciples to take plural wives.”
- "Two Prophets' Widows A Visit to the Relicts of JosephSmith and Brigham Young," J. J. J., inSt. Louis Globe-Democrat (St. Louis, MO) Thursday, August 18, 1887; pg. 6; Issue 85; col E

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by Luke »

iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:23 am
Luke wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:20 am
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:16 am 1) You agree he entered the relationship with Fanny before any angels told him to?
I don't know whether he did or not. He might have done, he might have not.

As far as I'm aware, the angel only came with a flaming sword the third time, which was after Fanny was off the scene, and Joseph was fed up with the concept of CPM. Clearly some "fire and brimstone" preaching was necessary for him.
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:16 am 2) You also agree that the witnesses to said angel story all seem to contradict each other? For instance, Eliza R. Snow says no revelation until 1837. Was the 1834 angel just there to encourage pre-revelation immorality?
It was pretty universally agreed by the Utah Saints that the FIRST revelation given on the subject of CPM was in 1831. I'm not aware of Eliza ever saying such a thing.
Eliza, from the same link up top:

“[Joseph Smith] received the revelation in 1837, but he was himself afraid to promulgate it until the angel came and stood beside him with flaming sword and bade him do the command of God. Not until then did Joseph enter into polygamy, or get any of his disciples to take plural wives.”
- "Two Prophets' Widows A Visit to the Relicts of JosephSmith and Brigham Young," J. J. J., inSt. Louis Globe-Democrat (St. Louis, MO) Thursday, August 18, 1887; pg. 6; Issue 85; col E
Eliza clearly stated otherwise elsewhere, so I'm not sure why she said this.

Reading the actual article itself, Eliza didn't say this. The author of the article wrote down what they remember her saying. They must have remembered it wrong.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by iWriteStuff »

Interesting secondary quote:

Levi Richards recorded a portion of Hyrum’s May 14th (1843) discourse:

"I attended meeting at the temple in the afternoon. Hyrum Smith addressed the people... He said there were many that had a great deal to say about the ancient order of things as Solomon and David having many wives and concubines, but it is an abomination in the sight of God. If an angel from heaven should come and preach such doctrine, some would be sure to see his cloven foot and cloud of darkness over head, though his garments might shine as white as snow. A man might have one wife but concubines he should have none."27

Strange choice of words regarding angels, and speculations about how they would most likely be false ones if they were pushing such doctrine.

But did anyone offer to shake hands? Especially if said angel showed up three times? What good are keys of knowledge if we don't use them?

User avatar
cab
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2986
Location: ♫ I am a Mormon! ♫ And... dang it... a Mormon just believes! ♫

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by cab »

Luke wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:09 am
cab wrote: July 19th, 2022, 7:12 am The loving God I know doesn’t threaten destruction to people who don’t want to have multiple partners.
To me this just sounds like the God of mainstream Christendom who just "loves everyone no matter what". Definitely not the type of God I want to be associated with.

You either comply with the law or you can't progess.
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 7:30 am Your remarks on the timeline are interesting too. Fanny Alger was 1833-1835, but the "angel" didn't show up until 1841. So who was forcing him to "marry" Fanny?
Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner said that the angel came three times starting with an appearance around 1834.

And I don’t believe her.

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by Pazooka »

iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:31 am Interesting secondary quote:

Levi Richards recorded a portion of Hyrum’s May 14th (1843) discourse:

"I attended meeting at the temple in the afternoon. Hyrum Smith addressed the people... He said there were many that had a great deal to say about the ancient order of things as Solomon and David having many wives and concubines, but it is an abomination in the sight of God. If an angel from heaven should come and preach such doctrine, some would be sure to see his cloven foot and cloud of darkness over head, though his garments might shine as white as snow. A man might have one wife but concubines he should have none."27

Strange choice of words regarding angels, and speculations about how they would most likely be false ones if they were pushing such doctrine.

But did anyone offer to shake hands? Especially if said angel showed up three times? What good are keys of knowledge if we don't use them?
The same Levi Richards who took a plural wife in 1846?? Obviously his heart softened a little.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by iWriteStuff »

Pazooka wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:26 am
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:31 am Interesting secondary quote:

Levi Richards recorded a portion of Hyrum’s May 14th (1843) discourse:

"I attended meeting at the temple in the afternoon. Hyrum Smith addressed the people... He said there were many that had a great deal to say about the ancient order of things as Solomon and David having many wives and concubines, but it is an abomination in the sight of God. If an angel from heaven should come and preach such doctrine, some would be sure to see his cloven foot and cloud of darkness over head, though his garments might shine as white as snow. A man might have one wife but concubines he should have none."27

Strange choice of words regarding angels, and speculations about how they would most likely be false ones if they were pushing such doctrine.

But did anyone offer to shake hands? Especially if said angel showed up three times? What good are keys of knowledge if we don't use them?
The same Levi Richards who took a plural wife in 1846?? Obviously his heart softened a little.
Did Levi meet the same angel? Or did he just figure out which way the wind was blowing?

If the reports are accurate, Hyrum himself married two additional ladies less than three months after making statements about angels, cloven feet, and clouds of darkness.

I'll grant you the doctrine came into vogue almost overnight, it seems, but my question is still about the origins and the presence of the angels with swords story used to justify it.

Side thought: What if Abram had refused to sacrifice his son? Would God have sent an angel with a sword to threaten him too? Does that seem like God's way of ensuring obedience to commands?

User avatar
nightlight
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8407

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by nightlight »

The handshake thing is a fasle doctrine.

It's just that simple.

What would this little knowledge do to most LDS?

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by Pazooka »

iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:37 am
Pazooka wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:26 am
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:31 am Interesting secondary quote:

Levi Richards recorded a portion of Hyrum’s May 14th (1843) discourse:

"I attended meeting at the temple in the afternoon. Hyrum Smith addressed the people... He said there were many that had a great deal to say about the ancient order of things as Solomon and David having many wives and concubines, but it is an abomination in the sight of God. If an angel from heaven should come and preach such doctrine, some would be sure to see his cloven foot and cloud of darkness over head, though his garments might shine as white as snow. A man might have one wife but concubines he should have none."27

Strange choice of words regarding angels, and speculations about how they would most likely be false ones if they were pushing such doctrine.

But did anyone offer to shake hands? Especially if said angel showed up three times? What good are keys of knowledge if we don't use them?
The same Levi Richards who took a plural wife in 1846?? Obviously his heart softened a little.
Did Levi meet the same angel? Or did he just figure out which way the wind was blowing?

If the reports are accurate, Hyrum himself married two additional ladies less than three months after making statements about angels, cloven feet, and clouds of darkness.

I'll grant you the doctrine came into vogue almost overnight, it seems, but my question is still about the origins and the presence of the angels with swords story used to justify it.

Side thought: What if Abram had refused to sacrifice his son? Would God have sent an angel with a sword to threaten him too? Does that seem like God's way of ensuring obedience to commands?
What if he actually did sacrifice his son and the angel was there to raise him up again? Because that’s the story that is told in some places. And I tend to believe it.

User avatar
iWriteStuff
blithering blabbermouth
Posts: 5523
Location: Sinope
Contact:

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by iWriteStuff »

Pazooka wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:43 am
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:37 am
Pazooka wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:26 am
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:31 am Interesting secondary quote:

Levi Richards recorded a portion of Hyrum’s May 14th (1843) discourse:

"I attended meeting at the temple in the afternoon. Hyrum Smith addressed the people... He said there were many that had a great deal to say about the ancient order of things as Solomon and David having many wives and concubines, but it is an abomination in the sight of God. If an angel from heaven should come and preach such doctrine, some would be sure to see his cloven foot and cloud of darkness over head, though his garments might shine as white as snow. A man might have one wife but concubines he should have none."27

Strange choice of words regarding angels, and speculations about how they would most likely be false ones if they were pushing such doctrine.

But did anyone offer to shake hands? Especially if said angel showed up three times? What good are keys of knowledge if we don't use them?
The same Levi Richards who took a plural wife in 1846?? Obviously his heart softened a little.
Did Levi meet the same angel? Or did he just figure out which way the wind was blowing?

If the reports are accurate, Hyrum himself married two additional ladies less than three months after making statements about angels, cloven feet, and clouds of darkness.

I'll grant you the doctrine came into vogue almost overnight, it seems, but my question is still about the origins and the presence of the angels with swords story used to justify it.

Side thought: What if Abram had refused to sacrifice his son? Would God have sent an angel with a sword to threaten him too? Does that seem like God's way of ensuring obedience to commands?
What if he actually did sacrifice his son and the angel was there to raise him up again? Because that’s the story that is told in some places. And I tend to believe it.
Yeah the Jews have a different take on it, too. I like that there are many ways to view that story.

That being said, how many cases in the scriptures point to God using force to compel obedience? Compulsion doesn't seem to be His MO, if you ask me...

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by Luke »

iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 8:31 am Interesting secondary quote:

Levi Richards recorded a portion of Hyrum’s May 14th (1843) discourse:

"I attended meeting at the temple in the afternoon. Hyrum Smith addressed the people... He said there were many that had a great deal to say about the ancient order of things as Solomon and David having many wives and concubines, but it is an abomination in the sight of God. If an angel from heaven should come and preach such doctrine, some would be sure to see his cloven foot and cloud of darkness over head, though his garments might shine as white as snow. A man might have one wife but concubines he should have none."27

Strange choice of words regarding angels, and speculations about how they would most likely be false ones if they were pushing such doctrine.

But did anyone offer to shake hands? Especially if said angel showed up three times? What good are keys of knowledge if we don't use them?
It's well known that Hyrum was preaching against polygamy until Joseph went for a little chat with him.

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by Pazooka »

iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:46 am
Pazooka wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:43 am
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:37 am
Pazooka wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:26 am

The same Levi Richards who took a plural wife in 1846?? Obviously his heart softened a little.
Did Levi meet the same angel? Or did he just figure out which way the wind was blowing?

If the reports are accurate, Hyrum himself married two additional ladies less than three months after making statements about angels, cloven feet, and clouds of darkness.

I'll grant you the doctrine came into vogue almost overnight, it seems, but my question is still about the origins and the presence of the angels with swords story used to justify it.

Side thought: What if Abram had refused to sacrifice his son? Would God have sent an angel with a sword to threaten him too? Does that seem like God's way of ensuring obedience to commands?
What if he actually did sacrifice his son and the angel was there to raise him up again? Because that’s the story that is told in some places. And I tend to believe it.
Yeah the Jews have a different take on it, too. I like that there are many ways to view that story.

That being said, how many cases in the scriptures point to God using force to compel obedience? Compulsion doesn't seem to be His MO, if you ask me...
You could probably view the Nephi/Laban incident as a type of angel with a sword story. Laban wouldn’t give up the plates when asked by a legal representative of the Lord and force was used to compel obedience, in the end, that the work of God wouldn’t be hindered. I’m certain we could find so many more if we looked.

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by Pazooka »

Pazooka wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:51 am
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:46 am
Pazooka wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:43 am
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:37 am

Did Levi meet the same angel? Or did he just figure out which way the wind was blowing?

If the reports are accurate, Hyrum himself married two additional ladies less than three months after making statements about angels, cloven feet, and clouds of darkness.

I'll grant you the doctrine came into vogue almost overnight, it seems, but my question is still about the origins and the presence of the angels with swords story used to justify it.

Side thought: What if Abram had refused to sacrifice his son? Would God have sent an angel with a sword to threaten him too? Does that seem like God's way of ensuring obedience to commands?
What if he actually did sacrifice his son and the angel was there to raise him up again? Because that’s the story that is told in some places. And I tend to believe it.
Yeah the Jews have a different take on it, too. I like that there are many ways to view that story.

That being said, how many cases in the scriptures point to God using force to compel obedience? Compulsion doesn't seem to be His MO, if you ask me...
You could probably view the Nephi/Laban incident as a type of angel with a sword story. Laban wouldn’t give up the plates when asked by a legal representative of the Lord and force was used to compel obedience, in the end, that the work of God wouldn’t be hindered. I’m certain we could find so many more if we looked.
And there’s the story of Balaam and the @#$:
Attachments
2FD3BC8F-8E0A-434C-98B6-C74B772EC095.png
2FD3BC8F-8E0A-434C-98B6-C74B772EC095.png (246.7 KiB) Viewed 1081 times

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by Pazooka »

Pazooka wrote: July 19th, 2022, 10:01 am
Pazooka wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:51 am
iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:46 am
Pazooka wrote: July 19th, 2022, 9:43 am

What if he actually did sacrifice his son and the angel was there to raise him up again? Because that’s the story that is told in some places. And I tend to believe it.
Yeah the Jews have a different take on it, too. I like that there are many ways to view that story.

That being said, how many cases in the scriptures point to God using force to compel obedience? Compulsion doesn't seem to be His MO, if you ask me...
You could probably view the Nephi/Laban incident as a type of angel with a sword story. Laban wouldn’t give up the plates when asked by a legal representative of the Lord and force was used to compel obedience, in the end, that the work of God wouldn’t be hindered. I’m certain we could find so many more if we looked.
And there’s the story of Balaam and the donkey:
Oh, and then there’s the angel with the flaming sword sent to keep Adam from eating from the tree of life after his Fall. I mean, Adam wasn’t even given the choice to obey or not at that point, right?

JSmith
captain of 100
Posts: 544

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by JSmith »

I actually don’t believe that story at all. For couple reasons.

the account was only ever narrated to women that he was trying to convince to marry him. But it was never written down. There’s just vague allusions to it. But it is always recounted while trying to convince others about the practice.

Secondly, The reiteration of the story always places pressure on another person to behave in ways to wish they were initially opposed. It essentially states, “I have been forced into doing this, and if you don’t assist me in doing it I’m going to die.”

For young women who viewed him as a prophet , that lays a layer of manipulative force on top of his already powerful position.

Joseph would also lay layers of manipulation on top of that stating that a secret marriage to him, would result in the salvation of entire families based upon one persons choice.

So here you had girls aged 14 through 18, having the burden of their families eternal salvation placed on their shoulders to engage in an illegal, secret activity with an older man.

In short, I think it is clear that Joseph used the angel with a sword narrative as a means of leverage to get people to engage in plural

The fact that He gave no recount of the event, even in his personal journals, to me stands out as interesting. Because that is a Very pivotal concept that was introduced.

I can’t think of too many of the places in scripture where the Lord goes to someone and induces them into a practice, which is open violation of the law, and then tells them that they’ll be executed unless they follow through with a practice when the practice, by default, requires the complicit actions of others.

And the claim behind plural marriage was to “raise up a righteous see. But by all counts Joseph never did that. While he had sexual relations with some of his plural wives, the raising offspring in righteous household never took place.

In fact Joseph was never even sealed to his own children or his parents or siblings until after he was dead.

Emma wasn’t even the first woman sealed to him. She was like the 21st.

And the simple fact is, is Joseph engaged in calculated deception to hide the truth not only from Emma, but from others. If any man in the church behaved as Joseph behaved they would be excommunicated.

Polygamy lead to a series of deceptive behaviors and veiled it in righteous terms.

even in the Utah. Polygamist unions were no more fertile than monogamous unions and a lot of women in Polygamous marriages never had children at all.

To me, there is a grand mythology built up in the church around plural marriage. But the more I dig into the data and numbers and specific of it, the more it begins to fall apart.

I don’t believe the flaming sword narrative. I believe that Joseph had moments of absolute genius, followed by personal ideas that ultimately went nowhere

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5862
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by TheDuke »

Things didn't end up working out so good for Balaam in the end.

I don't buy the angel with a sword story at all, because exactly what is said, he Lord never pressures people to do anything for exaltation (perhaps guilt for starting salvation), all is voluntary. And never would he force someone to get married to even one person. That said I believe JS received revelation for polygamy, not as a command. Seems it is a tough thing in this life and best avoided as the side effects seem to be majorly bad. I just don't think JS or BY implemented it correctly. Bugs me that BY made it a requirement for church leadership. Again if and when commanded it would seem it is ok, but when a person takes it on of their own, it is bad. IMO.

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by Pazooka »

TheDuke wrote: July 19th, 2022, 10:09 am Things didn't end up working out so good for Balaam in the end.

I don't buy the angel with a sword story at all, because exactly what is said, he Lord never pressures people to do anything for exaltation (perhaps guilt for starting salvation), all is voluntary. And never would he force someone to get married to even one person. That said I believe JS received revelation for polygamy, not as a command. Seems it is a tough thing in this life and best avoided as the side effects seem to be majorly bad. I just don't think JS or BY implemented it correctly. Bugs me that BY made it a requirement for church leadership. Again if and when commanded it would seem it is ok, but when a person takes it on of their own, it is bad. IMO.
It wasn’t for the compelling of their personal exaltation that the angel with the sword was employed, it was for the moving forward of God’s purposed upon the earth.

User avatar
Pazooka
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5222
Location: FEMA District 8

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by Pazooka »

iWriteStuff wrote: July 19th, 2022, 6:42 am Hi all,

Been thinking about this a little lately... There are tons of stories out there about Joseph's claim that an angel with a drawn sword essentially forced him into polygamy (source: https://docslib.org/angel-with-a-drawn-sword).

For one, that seems a little too convenient.

For another, did he even bother trying to shake hands with the angel first? Per D&C 129:

4 When a messenger comes saying he has a message from God, offer him your hand and request him to shake hands with you.

5 If he be an angel he will do so, and you will feel his hand.

6 If he be the spirit of a just man made perfect he will come in his glory; for that is the only way he can appear—

7 Ask him to shake hands with you, but he will not move, because it is contrary to the order of heaven for a just man to deceive; but he will still deliver his message.

8 If it be the devil as an angel of light, when you ask him to shake hands he will offer you his hand, and you will not feel anything; you may therefore detect him.


Is it possible he got a message from the devil and just took it for fact that it came from God?
In answer to your last question we have this:

Excerpt from ‘The Testimony of Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner’, (Mary, 23, was married to Adam Lightner at the time Joseph took her as a plural wife):


“I know whereon I stand, I know what I believe, I know what I know and I know what I testify to you is the living truth. As I expect to meet it at the bar of the eternal Jehovah, it is true. And when you stand before the bar you will know. He preached polygamy and he not only preached it, but he practiced it. I am a living witness to it. It was given to him before he gave it to the Church. An angel came to him and the last time he came with a drawn sword in his hand and told Joseph if he did not go into that principle, he would slay him.

…”Well,” said I, “don’t you think it was an angel of the devil that told you these things?” Said he, “No, it was an angel of God. God Almighty showed me the difference between an angel of light and Satan’s angels. The angel came to me three times between the years of 1834 and 1842 and said I was to obey that principle or he would slay me
.

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: Shaking the Hands of Angels with Drawn Swords

Post by Luke »

TheDuke wrote: July 19th, 2022, 10:09 am Bugs me that BY made it a requirement for church leadership.
John Taylor had a revelation in 1882 where God said that the leading men of the Church MUST be polygamists.

Post Reply