Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Was Polygamy, in the Nineteenth Century, Started by the FLDS Church, or the LDS Church?
Faith and Reason Forum.com ^ | 2003 | Donna Morley

Posted on 08/15/2011 4:53:20 AM PDT by Colofornian

During the early 1830s, Emma Smith was beginning to have some strong suspicions that her husband, Joseph (Mormon prophet) might be involved in infidelity. While these were only suspicions, Oliver Cowdery (one of the three “witnesses” to the Book of Mormon) had proof of Smith’s adultery and confronted him on it. Smith denied to Cowdery that he was in any such activity. Cowdery would be excommunicated from the Mormon church on several counts including, “by falsely insinuating that he [Smith] was guilty of adultery.” 1

Emma’s suspicions were confirmed when she caught Joseph and 19-year-old Eliza Partridge locked in a room upstairs together. Emma had hired Eliza to take care of their newborn. 2 Joseph admitted to his personal secretary, William Clayton, that if he took Eliza and Emily Partridge (twin sisters) as wives, he knew that Emma “would pitch on him and obtain a divorce and leave him.”3 But, Joseph added that “he would not relinquish anything.”4 And he didn’t. He would eventually marry the sisters in March, 1843 (without Emma’s knowledge).

In the meantime, Smith shared to his friend John Bennett his dilemma and the trouble he was having with Emma. He wondered what he should do, and Bennett replied, “This is very simple. Get a revelation that polygamy is right, and all your troubles will be at an end.”5

The Revelation

Joseph didn’t waste any time. In 1843 he sat down and wrote a command from the Lord that Emma would be destroyed if she didn’t “receive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph.” If she didn’t obey this command, not only would the Lord destroy her, but the Lord will bless Joseph and multiply him with “wives and children and crowns of eternal lives in the eternal worlds” (see the Mormon scripture Doctrine & Covenants 132:52, 54, 56, 61-62).

In this same command, Emma was told to forgive Joseph’s trespasses if she wanted to be forgiven (D&C 132:56). She was then told that the Lord would justify Joseph: “If he have ten virgins given unto him by this law [the law of priesthood], he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified (D&C 132:61-62).

Interestingly, Martin Harris affirmed Joseph had practiced polygamy as early as 1838–five years before Joseph received his revelation.”6 But after receiving the supposed revelation in 1843, Joseph no longer had to keep his affairs from his wife or the public. And, he made this plural-wife doctrine available to all Mormon men under the condition that they get permission from their first wife. Doctrine and Covenants says that the first wife must give consent before her husband can take another wife. The second wife also had to be a virgin and not married to any other man. If the first wife consented then the man would not be committing adultery (D&C 132:61).

It isn’t know if Joseph sought permission from Emma for each of his many wives, but it is known that Joseph didn’t just marry virgins. He married other men’s wives. 7 We have documentation of at least some of the women Joseph married (there may have been more 8): Eighteen of Joseph’s wives were single when he married them and had never been married previously. Another four were widows. But the remaining 11 women were already married to other men, cohabiting with their legal husbands when Smith married them.9

In addition, 11 of Smith’s wives were 14 to 20 years old when they married him. Nine wives were 21 to 30 years old. Eight of his wives were between the ages of 31 to 40. Two wives were between 41-50, and three wives were between 51 to 60 years of age. 10 After Smith’s death, many more women married him by “proxy,” sealed to him for eternity. And for the record, Smith had at least on acknowledged polygamous child named Josephine. The child’s mother was Sylvia Sessions Lyon.11

The Extent

Many Mormons today have no idea how widespread polygamy was. For instance, Mormon singer Donny Osmond believes that “only a relatively small number of church members did so [practiced polygamy] prior to the late 1800s when the Church decreed the practice unacceptable.”12 However, polygamy was an accepted practice, and it wasn’t restricted to a mere few. Let’s take a look at what a few of the church prophets and leaders said.

First Prophet and President Joseph Smith said in 1843: “....God...gave me this revelation and commandment on celestial and plural marriage and the same God commanded me to obey it. He said to me that unless I accepted it and introduced it, and practiced it, I, together with my people, would be damned and cut off from this time hence forth....But we have got to observe it. It is an eternal principle and was given by way of commandment and not by way of instruction.”10

Second Prophet and President Brigham Young said in 1865: “...the whole question, therefore, narrows itself to this in the ‘Mormon’ mind. Polygamy was revealed by God, or the entire fabric of their faith is false. To ask them to give up such an item of belief is to ask them to relinquish the whole, to acknowledge their Priesthood a lie, their ordinances a deception, and all they have toiled for, lived for, bled for, prayed for, or hoped for, a miserable failure and a waste of life.”11

Third Prophet and President John Taylor said in 1880: “The United States says we cannot marry more than one wife. God says different...when adulterers and libertines pass a law forbidding polygamy, the Saints cannot obey it....”11

On September 27, 1886 Taylor gave this revelation: “Thus saith the Lord...I have not revoked this law [plural wives doctrine] nor will I for it is everlasting & (sic) those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof, even so Amen.”13

These statements raise some important questions. Did God really use these men, especially Joseph Smith? God’s Word says that “holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Peter 1:21, emphasis added). Only holy men (although not sinless) would be used of God to write His Word. Because of this fact alone, Mormons must question whether Doctrine & Covenants is truly the revelations of Jesus Christ.

According to the Bible (especially since the New Testament was written) men are to have only one living wife (1 Corinthians 7:2; Titus 1:6). Because the Bible contradicts Doctrine & Covenants Mormons must question the validity of one or the other. They can’t both be right.

If our Mormon friend still believes the Lord gave Joseph Smith and other Mormon prophets a revelation on plural marriage, we can ask this: Why would the prophets (such as Taylor in 1886) say the plural wives doctrine was everlasting, and then some short years later (1890), deny having anything to do with such a doctrine? In 1869, fourth prophet and president Wilford Woodruff said, “If we were to do away with polygamy...we must do away with prophets and Apostles, with revelation and the gifts and graces of the Gospel, and finally give up our religion altogether.”14

He changed his tune when he wrote an “Official Declaration,” also referred to as The Manifesto (found at the end of octrine and Covenants). Woodruff wrote:

Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes...allege that plural marriages are still being solemnized...that...the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamy–I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner declared that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice....I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.15

President Lorenzo Snow affirmed Wilford Woodruff’s statements and that he was “the only man on the earth at the present time who holds the keys of the sealing ordinacnes, we consider him fully authorized by virtue of his position to issue the Manifest...which is dated September 24, 1890.”16

Yet, the U.S. Senate’s Committee on Privileges and Elections submitted a report in which it stated, “A sufficient number of specific instances of the taking of plural wives since the manifesto of 1890, so called, have been shown by the testimony as having taken among officials of the Mormon church to demonstrate the fact that the leaders in this church, the first presidency and the twelve apostles, connive at the practice of taking plural wives and have done so ever since the manifesto was issued.”17

The Response

A Mormon woman, we’ll call “Marjorie,” discovered that the Mormon church first defended polygamy, then said they would stop it. Yet while the church leaders condemned followers who were still in polygamous relationships, some remained polygamous in secret.18 Marjorie may not have known that the Mormon leadership even considered the idea of secret concubines, wherein men and women could live together in secret. 19 After discovering this apparent hypocrisy, Marjorie became concerned about other revelations that Joseph proclaimed in Doctrine and Covenants.

But not all Mormons will respond as Marjorie did. There are some who still defend this past church doctrine. Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought tells us one of the reasons Mormons defend the plural-wives doctrine:

Many Latter-day Saints–especially those that have polygamous ancestors–take pride in the faithful men and women who practiced plural marriage long ago. Even though LDS men take just one legal wife today, many devout Mormons still believe in the “principle” and may be sealed to more than one woman for eternity. The Mormon church’s present doctrine of celestial marriage–which includes the promise of plural marriage in the afterlife, and the current pracitce of plural marriage among Fundamentalist Mormons, are the legacies of Joseph Smith’s revelation sanctioning Nauvoo polygamy as “new and everlasting covenant.”20

Other Mormons defend Smith’s revelation for another reason. For instance, a while ago I asked Pat, a Mormon friend, “Why is it that the Mormon church accepts Joseph’s polygamy and that of other church leaders, but condemns it for everyone else?”

After thinking about the question for a moment, Pat replied, “Well, it was a command from God during a very special time only. It was the same command that God gave the prophets in the Old Testament. Also, Joseph was concerned about the widows and the older single women who didn’t have a man to protect them. These were the type of women he married. He really had a good heart for doing this.”

Surprised at the answer, I said, “But God was against plural marriage in the Old Testament. Only because of the hardness of man’s heart He did allow it [see Genesis 16:4-7]. There were also consequences because of polygamy,

such as jealousy.”

I later shared with Pat (after doing some homework) what the Bible had to say (see the verses in the box).

After sharing with Pat the Leviticus verses, I told her, “You can’t defend Joseph Smith’s polygamy. He and other Mormon men went completely against the laws of Leviticus. Joseph Smith, for instance, married five pairs of sisters;21 he married a mother and her daughter;22 and he took other men’s wives (which included Joseph demanding the wives of all 12 Mormon apostles).”23

I then gently added, “I know you want to think the best of Joseph Smith. I wish I could, too. But if the Mormon church is about truth, as you say it is, we must look at the truth regarding Smith’s life. He didn’t just marry widows and older single women, as you’ve been told. He married pubescent girls, others in their late teens; women in their twenties and thirties, and only a few in their fifties and sixties. Most of these women had never been married or were already married. Few were widows.”

Pat was at a loss for words and simply said, “Interesting.”

Leviticus 18:18,20; 20:14 tells us that God forbids a man, which included the prophets of the Old Testament, to marry “a woman in addition to her sister...while she is alive (18:18). Neither was he to marry “a woman and her mother” (20:14). Neither was he to “have intercourse with your neighbor’s wife, to be defiled with her” (18:20).

So, the question must be answered, “was polygamy started by the FLDS Church or the LDS church? The answer is, clearly the Mormon (LDS) church. Talk to any FLDS person and they will proudly tell you they are the “true” Mormon, for they obey the Mormon scriptures, which includes all that is written in Doctrine and Covenants.

Notes:

1. Joseph Smith, History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, 7 vols. (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book Co., 1978), 3:16, April 11, 1838.

2. Richard S. Van Wagoner, Mormon Polygamy: A History (Salt Lake City, UT: Signature Books, 1992), 79.

3. William Clayton diary, August 16, 1843, in George D. Smith, ed., An Intimate Chronicle: The Journals of William Clayton (Salt Lake City, UT: Signature Books in association with Smith Research Associates, 1995), 117.

4. Ibid.

5. Dr. W. Wyle, Joseph Smith the Prophet: His Family and His Friends (Salt Lake City, UT: Triune Publishing Co., 1886), 62.

6. Dan Vogel, ed., Early Mormon Documents, (Salt Lake City, UT: Signature Books, 1998), 2:348.

7. W. Wyle, 70.

8. For a list of 36 wives with marriage dates, refer to Fawn Brodie, No Man Knows My History, 335-36. For a list of 84 women who were either married to Joseph Smith and/or sealed to him as his wife for eternity, refer to Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Joseph Smith and Polygamy (Salt Lake City, UT: Utah Lighthouse Ministry), 41-47.

9. Tod Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City, UT: Signature Books, 2001), 15.

10. Ibid., 11.

11. The child was born on February 8, 1844. The mother was legally married to Windsor P. Lyon–cited in D. Michael Quinn’s The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power (Salt Lake City, UT: Signature Books in association with Smith Research Associates, 1994), 642, Appendix 7. One contemporary Mormon woman of Joseph Smith’s said, “You hear often that Joseph Smith had no polygamous offspring. The reason of this is very simple. Abortion was practiced on a large scale in Nauvoo. Dr. John C. Bennett, the evil genius of Joseph, brought this abomination into a scientific system. He showed to my husband and me the instruments with which he used to ‘operate for Joseph.’ There was a house in Nauvoo, ‘right across the flat’...a kind of hospital. They sent the women there, when they showed signs of celestial consequences. Abortion was practiced regularly in this house” (emphasis in original). W. Wyle, 59.

12. Donny Osmond, Life Is Just What You Make It (New York, Hyperion, 1999), 13.

13. Contributor, 5:259; quoted in Ogden Kraut’s The Church and the Gospel (Salt Lake City, UT: Pioneer Press, 1993), 186.

14. Millennial Star, Voume 27:673; quoted in Kraut, 186-187.

40. Salt Lake City Tribune, January 6, 1880; quoted in Kraut, 187.

15. Revelation given by John Taylor, dated September 27, 1886; photocopy of the original appears in 1886 Revelation–A Revelation of the Lord to John Taylor. Published by the “Fundamentalists,” quoted in Tanner and Tanner, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? 242. 15. Journal of Discourses, 13:166.

16. Doctrine and Covenants, 13:166.

17. Ibid.

18. Reed Smoot Case, 4:476-82, quoted in Tanner and Tanner, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? 256-257.

19. For example, in 1896 Mormon apostle Abraham H. Cannon took a plural wife by the name of Lillian Hamlin. President Joseph F. Smithy performed the ceremony and “obtained the acquiescence of President Woodruff [who wrote the manifesto], on the plea that it wasn’t an ordinary case of polygamy but merely a fulfillment of the biblical instruction that a man should take his dead brother’s wife...” Daily Journal of Abraham H. Cannon, April 5, 1894, Volume 18, 70; quoted in Tanner and Tanner, Mormonism: Shadow or Reality? 244-A.

20. According to the Tanners, the “apostle Abraham H. Cannon’s journal not only reveals that the Mormon leaders approved of polygamy after the manifesto [Official Declaration], but it shows they were considering the idea of a secret system of concubinage: George Qu. Cannon said, “I believe in concubinage, or some plan whereby men and women can live together under sacred ordinances and vows until they can be married...such a condition would have to be kept secret....” President Snow said, “I have no doubt but concubinage will yet be practiced in this church...when the nations are troubled good women will come here for safety and blessing, and men will accept them as concubines.” President Woodruff (author of the manifesto) said, “If men enter into some practice of this character to raise a righteous posterity, they will be justified in it...” Daily Journal of Abraham H. Cannon, April 5, 1894, Volume 18, 70; quoted in Tanner and Tanner, Mormonism Shadow or Reality? 244-B.

21. Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought (Salt Lake City, UT: Dialogue Foundation, 1994), Volume 27, No. 1, Spring 1994, 36.

22. The sisters that Joseph married were Prescindia (m. 1838) and Zina Huntington (m. Oct. 27, 1841), Delcena (m. before June 1842) and Almera Johnson (m. April 1843), Eliza and Emily Partridge (m. March 1843). Cited in Fawn Brodie’s, No Man Knows My History (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1945, 1971), 335-36.

23. Joseph Smith married Patty Sessions (age 47 and wife of David Sessions) on March 9, 1842. Smith married Patty’s daughter Sylvia (age 25-26?, around 1843-44). Brodie, 335-36.

24. W. Wyle, 71.


TOPICS: Current Events; History; Moral Issues; Other Christian
KEYWORDS: alittletoomuchlds; antimomonbigot; antimormonblather; antimormonfatwa; antimormonjihad; antimormonmanifesto; antimormonrant; antimormonzealot; ashamedformermormon; bitterformermormon; flamebait; flameon; flamer; flamewar; flds; formermormon; geeihatemormons; harryreid; history; iusedtobeamormon; jonhuntsman; lds; mittromney; mormoaner; mormoaning; mormoanist; mormon; mormonism; mormons; mormophobia; mormophobic; polygamy; polygyny; religiousbigot; religiousbigotry; religioushatred; romney; themormonquestion; walloffootnotes; whinymormons; zealot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100 next last
From the article: Emma’s suspicions were confirmed when she caught Joseph and 19-year-old Eliza Partridge locked in a room upstairs together. Emma had hired Eliza to take care of their newborn. 2 Joseph admitted to his personal secretary, William Clayton, that if he took Eliza and Emily Partridge (twin sisters) as wives, he knew that Emma “would pitch on him and obtain a divorce and leave him.”3 But, Joseph added that “he would not relinquish anything.”4 And he didn’t. He would eventually marry the sisters in March, 1843 (without Emma’s knowledge). In the meantime, Smith shared to his friend John Bennett his dilemma and the trouble he was having with Emma. He wondered what he should do, and Bennett replied, “This is very simple. Get a revelation that polygamy is right, and all your troubles will be at an end.”5
1 posted on 08/15/2011 4:53:25 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All
To see how the Mormon church tried spinning Warren Jeffs as a continuation of 120 years of polygamous Mormon "prophets" yesterday, see: Warren Jeffs and the abandonment of tradition [Real MormonISM]
2 posted on 08/15/2011 5:05:15 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

“To see how the Mormon church tried spinning Warren Jeffs as a continuation of 120 years of polygamous Mormon “prophets” yesterday, see: Warren Jeffs and the abandonment of tradition”

The second paragraph of the article you posted makes clear that the LDS totally disavows this idea. 99% of mormons belong to the LDS, so your statement is incredibly misleading.

So what are you doing referring to a tiny offshoot splinter of the mormon church, as the “mormon church”? Was this intentionally misleading?

How would you feel about someone grossly misrepresenting what you believe?

What do you think of someone holding up what the Westboro church believes, and saying this is what the Christian church believes? That’s equivalent to what you are doing with your statement here.

Was it your intention to smear the whole LDS with this belief? Or did you accidentally neglect to specify that you were talking about a tiny splinter of the mormon church, instead of the “mormon church” as you wrote?

I don’t like Mormon beliefs, but misrepresenting what someone believes is really disgusting behavior.


3 posted on 08/15/2011 5:38:09 AM PDT by Mount Athos (A Giant luxury mega-mansion for Gore, a Government Green EcoShack made of poo for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos

To be clear I’m talking about the posters grossly misleading summary of a linked article in #2 that he posted yesterday, not the article posted here.


4 posted on 08/15/2011 5:42:26 AM PDT by Mount Athos (A Giant luxury mega-mansion for Gore, a Government Green EcoShack made of poo for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

YAMT = Yet Another Mormon Thread.


5 posted on 08/15/2011 5:47:43 AM PDT by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

Ask Mitt. His father (born in Mexico) was part of the group that spit off from the US Mormons and took their act to Mexico.


6 posted on 08/15/2011 5:59:03 AM PDT by wolfcreek (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lsd7DGqVSIc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian

This is important?


7 posted on 08/15/2011 6:04:21 AM PDT by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos; Zakeet
The second paragraph of the article you posted makes clear that the LDS totally disavows this idea. 99% of mormons belong to the LDS, so your statement is incredibly misleading.

#1...Mormons believe marriage is forever.
#2...There are Lds general authorities TODAY who have married twice (widowers marrying again). They married BOTH partners "For eternity." Mormon policy is that these men WILL BE eternal polygamists.

Tell me something: How does this forever "disavow polygamy?"

#3 Mormons have simply "colonized polygamy." They believe all those Mormon "prophets" & leaders are STILL practicing polygamy today on another planet. Tell me something: How does forever "disavow" polygamy.

#4 In 1966, Lds "apostle" Bruce R McConkie taught in his book Mormon Doctrine that the "holy practice" of polygamy would be re-instituted when the Mormon Jesus returns. Please show me anywhere that Mormon leaders have "disavowed" this futuristic prophesy of Mormons practicing polygamy on Planet Earth.

The fact is that the Mormon god has changed his mind several times on polygamy:
* In the 1830 Book of Mormon, he severely condemns it multiple times.
* By 1831, he's supposedly revealed to Joseph Smith to practice it.
* By 1890, he's supposedly telling Mormons to curtail it.
* Yet by 1904, the Mormon god is having to tell his people, "Hey, I really meant what I said in 1890" cause hundreds of additional plural unions solemnized by Lds leaders showed they had yet to even begin to fully "disavow" it: See Second Manifesto
* By 1910, the Mormon god is having to say thru his leaders, "Hey, I really, really meant what I said in 1890 and 1904." Per a BYU paper by a BYU author, by the name of Daynes, 1910 "coincides with a letter sent to stake presidents instructing them to enforce the 1904 decree that those who entered into or performed new plural marriages would be liable to excommunication."

* By 1966, the Mormon god speaking thru Lds "apostle" McConkie says, "Hey, just wait til I send my son Jesus back. THEN you can resume polygamy on earth."

So much for your notion of disavowel. But, hey, I understand. Those lines have been fed by plenty of Mormon leaders & grassroots Mormons' alike...not to mention the MSM.

Or did you accidentally neglect to specify that you were talking about a tiny splinter of the mormon church, instead of the “mormon church” as you wrote?

Sorry. Mormon 1998 policy about how even women can be sealed post-death to multiple husbands isn't some "tiny splnter" -- nor is McConkie's teaching in effect for 45 years!

“A living woman may be sealed to only one husband. If she is sealed to a husband and later divorced, she must receive a cancellation of that sealing from the First Presidency before she may be sealed to another man in her lifetime and later: A DECEASED woman may be sealed to ALL men to whom she was legally married during her life.” (p.73) LDS Church, Church Handbook of Instructions, (LDS Church, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1998), page 72-73, “Sealing Policies”)

(This same source talks about men being sealed forever to multiple wives...just has to be wives taken serially now)

If you want to continue to eat @ the Mormon PR trough, that's your privilege.

8 posted on 08/15/2011 6:18:43 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
This is important?

Yes. It shows that the "legacy" an individual may start in the year 2011, may come into fruition in the form of another Warren Jeffs-like character in 160 years. Take care what you build. It may last way too long as an "institution."

9 posted on 08/15/2011 6:21:22 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr; wolfcreek; Mount Athos

i think this is very important.
(and, do you ask others on FR who post vanity threads about movies, etc., “Is this important”?)

aside from Smith’s arrest and CONVICTION in New York, for working a “magic stone” con, there is much that shows the entire LDS religion to be false. NO evidence in any science for any of the claims.
and this is VERY similar, to utterly CONVENIENT “revelations” from “ALLAH” that Mohammad got.
(my favorite was the one that when Allah said visitors shouldn’t overstay their welcome to Mohammad. and that dogs were evil, when they barked at “peeping Mohammad”.)
= = =
“In the meantime, Smith shared to his friend John Bennett his dilemma and the trouble he was having with Emma. He wondered what he should do, and Bennett replied, “This is very simple. Get a revelation that polygamy is right, and all your troubles will be at an end.”5

The Revelation

Joseph didn’t waste any time. In 1843 he sat down and wrote a command from the Lord that Emma would be destroyed if she didn’t “receive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph.” If she didn’t obey this command, not only would the Lord destroy her, but the Lord will bless Joseph and multiply him with “wives and children and crowns of eternal lives in the eternal worlds” (see the Mormon scripture Doctrine & Covenants 132:52, 54, 56, 61-62). “

In this same command, Emma was told to forgive Joseph’s trespasses if she wanted to be forgiven (D&C 132:56). She was then told that the Lord would justify Joseph: “If he have ten virgins given unto him by this law [the law of priesthood], he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified (D&C 132:61-62).


10 posted on 08/15/2011 6:23:16 AM PDT by Elendur (It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. - Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
I do not agree with all the doctrines of the LDS but America was built on freedom of religion. When they left the Midwest and headed to Utah they took themselves and their doctrine with them. They practiced their beliefs and no one bothered them. When they became a territory no problem but when they wanted to become a state the powers to be in DC said you have to drop your practice of multiple wife's if you want to become a state. So DC drove this doctrine underground.

How would you like DC to tell you what you can and can not practice in your religious belief system?

11 posted on 08/15/2011 6:25:32 AM PDT by guitarplayer1953 (Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to GOD! Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos
I don’t like Mormon beliefs, but misrepresenting what someone believes is really disgusting behavior.

What's also telling is how far your moral compass is off...
...instead of being digusted how Joseph Smith forced himself upon 14 yo and 16 yo like Lucy Walker -- a girl whose mother had died & whose father was sent to the east coast by Smith...
...instead of being disgusted by how Smith "married" 11 women still married to other men...and how a lot of these men were likewise sent to the mission field...
...instead of being disgusted by Smith, Brigham Young & Warren Jeffs compiling at least 178 wives between this trio...
...instead of being disgusted by how about 120 years of Mormon "prophets" practicing polygamy leads to the likes of a Warren Jeffs...
...you are disgusted by an "expose'" of sorts on all this.

12 posted on 08/15/2011 6:27:24 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: glorgau
YAMT = Yet Another Mormon Thread.

Hmmm...
This could be interesting

YACT = ... Catholic
YAPT = ... Protestant
YABT = ... Buddhist
YATT = ... Taoist

etc.

This site would do well to be vigilant to
... Drop Belief threads except in sidebars
... Judge Not, for as you Judge, so Shall You be Judged
... Those who are Enemies of Conservatism are watching

13 posted on 08/15/2011 6:37:59 AM PDT by HangnJudge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953
They practiced their beliefs and no one bothered them. When they became a territory no problem but when they wanted to become a state the powers to be in DC said you have to drop your practice of multiple wife's if you want to become a state. So DC drove this doctrine underground.

You've got your historical facts screwed up.

The Mormon apologist group FAIR says Smith was told by the Mormon god about practicing polygamy in 1831. Yet it took Smith a dozen years to write it down and give it to his original wife to convince him to let him continue.

You've got to understand that Smith took 10 additional wives 'tween February 1843 and July 1843...and his first wife was putting her foot down.

It then took another 9 years -- 21 years total -- for the Mormons to go fully public with their practice. So when you falsely claim that "DC drove this doctrine underground," you're dead wrong! That's exactly how it started out: Underground -- for 21 years! In fact, that's what Emma later said Even his first wife, Emma Smith, said: "It was secret things which...cost Joseph and Hyrum their lives, and it will cost you and The Twelve your lives as it has done to them." (Source: Solemn Covenant, by B. Carmon Hardy, Univ. of Illinois)

Hence, Emma thought it literally drove the Smith brothers underground -- as in a coffin!

They practiced their beliefs and no one bothered them. When they became a territory no problem...

Well, this is your second historical error. Bigamy was already the law of the land...that included territories not just states. But it is true that with territories, the U.S. govt had a law enforcement problem...

Otherwise, how was it that Federal marshals finally came to be putting Mormon polygamists by the hundreds in jail in the 1880s? (Utah was STILL a territory in the 1880s). Congress passed a series of new laws aimed at Mormon polygamists in three decades: The 1860s, the 1870s (Reynolds case) & the 1880s...

For you to now claim in a revisionist manner that this was all supposedly "no problem" to anybody is mistaken.

14 posted on 08/15/2011 6:38:36 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953
So DC drove this doctrine underground. How would you like DC to tell you what you can and can not practice in your religious belief system?

A certain CA congressman, Rep. Leo Ryan, flew to Guyana in 1978. He was on a mission per concerns from family members of Jim Jones' cult there. I suppose you might interpret that as "DC...tell[ing]" others what they "can and can not practice" in their "religious belief system"...but sorry, cyanide poisoning via mass-drinking of koolaid is not a "sanctioned" religious belief free from "government interference."

As it was, Rep. Ryan -- along with four others @ that Guyana airstrip -- paid for that trip with their blood...as Ryan was assassinated.
Source: Jonestown

Besides, you also underestimate the reality that at times "DC" really has represented the people. (Just 'cause they tend not to now; doesn't mean they never have)

In 1898, after Utah became a state, it elected a Democrat to Congress (B.H. Roberts). Roberts, though, had taken his third simultaneous wife about 5 years prior. "D.C." -- Congress kept Roberts from being placed into office.

Why? Because "D.C." was "driving" Roberts not to keep picking up additional wives and they didn't like it? Nope. In fact, 'twas the people of the U.S. who were primarily riled with Roberts & Utah.

You see, in 1856, the fledging Republican party had decided on a social agenda that would tackle what they regarded as "the twin relics of barbarism" -- polygamy and slavery.

Now you may hate the 19th century Republican party for tackling polygamy and slavery, but it did. And it did so effectively that within 42 years, grassroots America presented 28 banners to Congress...28 banners including 7 million signatures.

Think of it. 7 million signatures in 1898 America. Before mass media like radio. 7 million people riled up over a single polygamous Congressman from Utah.

And yet you want to pin the concern on just 19th century "D.C." (Sorry...but you needed this history lesson)

15 posted on 08/15/2011 7:04:38 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos
ahhh, lds still practice polygamy. It's called sealing for life and men get dozens of wives for their plant/godhood.

flds are actually practicing what Joseph Smith taught.

16 posted on 08/15/2011 7:07:26 AM PDT by svcw (democrats are liars, it's a given)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953
Well, the lds could have remained a territory or an independent country but they decided their god told them polygamy was a no-no, whala just in time to become a state. Wasn't that convenient.
17 posted on 08/15/2011 7:09:45 AM PDT by svcw (democrats are liars, it's a given)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos; Colofornian
So what are you doing referring to a tiny offshoot splinter of the mormon church, as the “mormon church”? Was this intentionally misleading?

Photobucket

18 posted on 08/15/2011 7:09:54 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (My God can't be bribed by money or good works or bound by manmade "covenants". Romney's can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Was Polygamy, in the Nineteenth Century, Started by the FLDS Church, or the LDS Church?

Neither...


The church teaches that it is a continuation of the Church of Christ established in 1830 by Joseph Smith, Jr. This original church underwent several name changes during the 1830s, being called the Church of Jesus Christ, the Church of God, and then in 1834, the name was officially changed to the Church of the Latter Day Saints.

(From WIKI)

19 posted on 08/15/2011 7:32:22 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39

Just wondering if you realize the graphic you posted confirms my point?


20 posted on 08/15/2011 7:32:24 AM PDT by Mount Athos (A Giant luxury mega-mansion for Gore, a Government Green EcoShack made of poo for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: glorgau

YACHT = Yet Another Chrsitian Heresy Thread


21 posted on 08/15/2011 7:33:47 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos
How would you feel about someone grossly misrepresenting what you believe?

That's a good question?

Have you ever complained to MORMONs for their CONTINOUS slander of the entire CHRISTIAN world?


 

Questions put to Joseph Smith: "'Do you believe the Bible?' [Smith:]'If we do, we are the only people under heaven that does, for there are none of the religious sects of the day that do'. When asked 'Will everybody be damned, but Mormons'? [Smith replied] 'Yes, and a great portion of them, unless they repent, and work righteousness." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 119).
Joseph Smith: "for the teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible" (from Pearl of Great Price 1:12). "What is it that inspires professors of Christianity generally with a hope of salvation? It is that smooth, sophisticated influence of the devil, by which he deceives the whole world" (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.270).
 
 
Brigham Young stated this repeatedly: "When the light came to me I saw that all the so-called Christian world was grovelling in darkness" (Journal of Discourses  5:73); "The Christian world, so-called, are heathens as to the knowledge of the salvation of God" (Journal of Discourses  8:171); "With a regard to true theology, a more ignorant people never lived than the present so-called Christian world" (Journal of Discourses  8:199); "And who is there that acknowledges [God's] hand? ...You may wander east, west, north, and south, and you cannot find it in any church or government on the earth, except the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" (Journal of Discourses , vol. 6, p.24); "Should you ask why we differ from other Christians, as they are called, it is simply because they are not Christians as the New Testament defines Christianity" (Journal of Discourses  10:230).
Orson Pratt proclaimed: "Both Catholics and Protestants are nothing less than the 'whore of Babylon' whom the Lord denounces by the mouth of John the Revelator as having corrupted all the earth by their fornications and wickedness. Any person who shall be so corrupt as to receive a holy ordinance of the Gospel from the ministers of any of these apostate churches will be sent down to hell with them, unless they repent" (The Seer, p. 255).
 
 
Pratt also said: "This great apostasy commenced about the close of the first century of the Christian era, and it has been waxing worse and worse from then until now" (Journal of Discourses , vol.18, p.44) and: "But as there has been no Christian Church on the earth for a great many centuries past, until the present century, the people have lost sight of the pattern that God has given according to which the Christian Church should be established, and they have denominated a great variety of people Christian Churches, because they profess to be ...But there has been a long apostasy, during which the nations have been cursed with apostate churches in great abundance" (Journal of Discourses , 18:172).
 
President John Taylor stated: "Christianity...is a perfect pack of nonsense...the devil could not invent a better engine to spread his work than the Christianity of the nineteenth century." (Journal of Discourses , vol. 6, p.167); "Where shall we look for the true order or authority of God? It cannot be found in any nation of Christendom." (Journal of Discourses , 10:127).
James Talmage said: "A self-suggesting interpretation of history indicates that there has been a great departure from the way of salvation as laid down by the Savior, a universal apostasy from the Church of Christ". (A Study of the Articles of Faith, p.182).
 
 
President Joseph Fielding Smith said: "Doctrines were corrupted, authority lost, and a false order of religion took the place of the gospel of Jesus Christ, just as it had been the case in former dispensations, and the people were left in spiritual darkness." (Doctrines of Salvation, p.266). "For hundreds of years the world was wrapped in a veil of spiritual darkness, until there was not one fundamental truth belonging to the place of salvation ...Joseph Smith declared that in the year 1820 the Lord revealed to him that all the 'Christian' churches were in error, teaching for commandments the doctrines of men" (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 3, p.282).
 
 
More recent statements by apostle Bruce McConkie are also very clear: "Apostasy was universal...And this darkness still prevails except among those who have come to a knowledge of the restored gospel" (Doctrines of Salvation, vol 3, p.265); "Thus the signs of the times include the prevailing apostate darkness in the sects of Christendom and in the religious world in general" (The Millennial Messiah, p.403); "a perverted Christianity holds sway among the so-called Christians of apostate Christendom" (Mormon Doctrine, p.132); "virtually all the millions of apostate Christendom have abased themselves before the mythical throne of a mythical Christ whom they vainly suppose to be a spirit essence who is incorporeal uncreated, immaterial and three-in-one with the Father and Holy Spirit" (Mormon Doctrine, p.269); "Gnosticism is one of the great pagan philosophies which antedated Christ and the Christian Era and which was later commingled with pure Christianity to form the apostate religion that has prevailed in the world since the early days of that era." (Mormon Doctrine, p.316).
President George Q. Cannon said: "After the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was organized, there were only two churches upon the earth. They were known respectively as the Church of the Lamb of God and Babylon. The various organizations which are called churches throughout Christendom, though differing in their creeds and organizations, have one common origin. They all belong to Babylon" (Gospel Truth, p.324).
 
 
President Wilford Woodruff stated: "the Gospel of modern Christendom shuts up the Lord, and stops all communication with Him. I want nothing to do with such a Gospel, I would rather prefer the Gospel of the dark ages, so called" (Journal of Discourses , vol. 2, p.196).

22 posted on 08/15/2011 7:37:00 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos
I don’t like Mormon beliefs, but misrepresenting what someone believes is really disgusting behavior.

Yes, Maam!

We really ARE Christians!


23 posted on 08/15/2011 7:39:28 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953
They practiced their beliefs and no one bothered them.

That must have been a REAL surprise when the FANCHER party attacked them!

24 posted on 08/15/2011 7:42:31 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge

Thanks for the suggested changes, Satan; but it ain’t gonna happen.


25 posted on 08/15/2011 7:43:49 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos
Just wondering if you realize the graphic you posted confirms my point?

Why no. Just wondering if you realize the graphic shows that the FLDS and LDS were both born in the mind of the adulterous so-called prophet and there isn't any truth to either cult?

26 posted on 08/15/2011 7:45:42 AM PDT by greyfoxx39 (My God can't be bribed by money or good works or bound by manmade "covenants". Romney's can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: svcw
Well, the lds could have remained a territory or an independent country but they decided their god told them polygamy was a no-no, whala just in time to become a state.

Well; the MORMONs are consistant; for they are ALWAYS deciding what their GOD told them is NOT what is PRINTED on the pages that have their GOD's WORDS on them.

27 posted on 08/15/2011 7:46:50 AM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
What's also telling is how far your moral compass is off... ...instead of being digusted how Joseph Smith forced himself upon 14 yo and 16 yo like Lucy Walker -- a girl whose mother had died & whose father was sent to the east coast by Smith... ...instead of being disgusted by how Smith "married" 11 women still married to other men...and how a lot of these men were likewise sent to the mission field... ...instead of being disgusted by Smith, Brigham Young & Warren Jeffs compiling at least 178 wives between this trio... ...instead of being disgusted by how about 120 years of Mormon "prophets" practicing polygamy leads to the likes of a Warren Jeffs... ...you are disgusted by an "expose'" of sorts on all this.

Colofornian, you're wrong about all of that.
I am disgusted by all those Mormon beliefs and practices. I have often criticised them myself.
I have no problem with the articles you posted, I felt they were honest.

It was your summary of the article that was dishonest.

You said, "“To see how the Mormon church tried spinning Warren Jeffs as a continuation of 120 years of polygamous Mormon “prophets” yesterday, see: Warren Jeffs and the abandonment of tradition”

The Mormon church believes and argues no such thing about Warren Jeffs. In fact they've done exactly the opposite of what you say they have -- they explicitly criticise and distance themselves from Jeffs and such groups.

You told a lie about the Mormon Church, you knew it was a lie when you wrote it, and anyone with the most cursory understanding of LDS beliefs knows they don't agree with or sanction Warren Jeffs.

You could have been honest and clarified that you were talking about an offshoot splinter of the Mormon church that is less than 1% of all Mormons, as the article you posted did. But you instead chose to mislead.

What would you think of someone calling the Westboro Baptist group the "Christian church", and falsely arguing that the Christian church loves them and thinks what they do is right? That's the same thing you're doing when you call Warren Jeffs and his ilk the "mormon church", when in reality they're the tiniest splinter offshoot of Mormons today.

Criticise beliefs all you want, but don't lie about what people believe, OK? It's disgusting behavior.

You don't have to agree with someone's beliefs to realize that lying about those beliefs is wrong.
28 posted on 08/15/2011 7:52:03 AM PDT by Mount Athos (A Giant luxury mega-mansion for Gore, a Government Green EcoShack made of poo for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos

Jeffs did nothing that Joseph Smith didn’t do. PLACE MARKER


29 posted on 08/15/2011 8:03:30 AM PDT by svcw (democrats are liars, it's a given)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: svcw
Jeffs did nothing that Joseph Smith didn’t do.

Or Brigham Young.

30 posted on 08/15/2011 8:04:33 AM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: greyfoxx39
Why no. Just wondering if you realize the graphic shows that the FLDS and LDS were both born in the mind of the adulterous so-called prophet and there isn't any truth to either cult?

Yes I realize that. Does that surprise you?
If it does, maybe your reading comprehension is so poor that you thought I was defending the Mormons, rather than criticising someone for lying by claiming that the LDS supports and loves Warren Jeffs. They detest Warren Jeffs.

Your graphic confirms what I said about the FLDS being a tiny offshoot splinter of the mormon church. The graphic says right at the top that such groups together number only 20,000. There are many millions of LDS.

It would be highly misleading to call the FLDS "the mormon church" when they are less than 1% of Mormons.

I have no problem with the graphic which explains Mormon historical beliefs and practices, and how the various splinters relate to each other. Just as I had no problem with both articles criticising Mormon beliefs and history.
31 posted on 08/15/2011 8:09:43 AM PDT by Mount Athos (A Giant luxury mega-mansion for Gore, a Government Green EcoShack made of poo for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
What I was referring to was the government.
32 posted on 08/15/2011 8:11:42 AM PDT by guitarplayer1953 (Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to GOD! Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
What I was referring to was the government.
33 posted on 08/15/2011 8:11:54 AM PDT by guitarplayer1953 (Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to GOD! Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos
Huh? For a person who keeps claiming they are not defending mormonISM you sure do spend much time defending it. The flds practice what Joseph Smith taught, the lds group in SLC does not.
34 posted on 08/15/2011 8:15:42 AM PDT by svcw (democrats are liars, it's a given)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: HangnJudge

You do get that this is the religion forum, right.


35 posted on 08/15/2011 8:16:57 AM PDT by svcw (democrats are liars, it's a given)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos; Edward Watson
What would you think of someone calling the Westboro Baptist group the "Christian church", and falsely arguing that the Christian church loves them and thinks what they do is right? That's the same thing you're doing when you call Warren Jeffs and his ilk the "mormon church", when in reality they're the tiniest splinter offshoot of Mormons today.

Your comparison is poor for at least 2 reasons...

(1) The most important consideration is when you look at the defining characteristic of these false "churches":
For the fLDS, it's polygamy.

And what supposed Mormon "scripture" & doctrine backs that up? (Doctrine & Covenants 132 -- NEVER rescinded or changed or deleted by the mainstream Mormons...it exists like an "old law" still "on the books"...one where the "authorities" promise it will return...Lds "apostle" Bruce McConkie says polygamy will return to earth when the mainstream Mormon "jesus" returns...Source: McConkie's book, Mormon Doctrine)

Now compare Phelps' Westboro.

What defining characteristic is there for this group?
For the Phelps, it's picketing.

Is that mainline Christian "Scripture?" (Answer: NO!)

(2) The Phelps are better defined as one extended family -- versus a "church." (That's about all its "church" is made up of).

(3) Besides, what do you do with the Mormon claim that Mormons = "Christians"? Is it OK for mainstream Mormons to draw boundaries between who is "Mormon" and who isn't? But then they frown upon Christians not defining "Mormons" as Christians? (Is that inconsistent?)

Mormons like to have it both ways: They want Mormons to be considered Christians; but don't you dare define who a Mormon is. Now you're playing that game, too. Of defining who is Mormon -- and who isn't.

Lds "prophet" Hinckley once claimed on the Larry King show that there WAS NO SUCH THING as fundamentalist Mormons. In his view, they don't even exist!

Here, I'll take the time to mention Canadian mainstream Mormon FReeper Edward Watson. Not only does Watson deem the fLDS as Mormon, but he also told me in 2008, "Of course, they're Christian..."

So a fundamentalist Mormon-is a Mormon-is a Christian? (Well, I'm not the one who says "no boundaries exist" for the fLDS or other sociologically outlandish groups like Westboro Baptist).

36 posted on 08/15/2011 8:17:42 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
To all I have had some of my facts wrong. But it was a practice of the LDS to have multiple wife's as part of their religious doctrine. They were forced to drop it.

You may not agree with their belief system and some have even compared it to Jim Jones. The point is government has no place sticking its nose into religion. How would some of you like it if the government said that you have to drop the Eucharist because it is witchcraft, or you Amish folks are to strict and are abusing your children by not letting them have cell phones. Or you Baptist are abusing yourselves by going to all you can eat Sunday buffets and must stop it.

A great example of this is the Waco massacre, they began with to many fire arms protected under the 2nd amendment, when that did not fly they were accused of selling drugs and then finally the children are being harmed, so what did they do they went in and torched the place and killed how many women and children? It is the principle of what the government is doing and if they can do it to the LDS they can and will do it to you.

THINK ABOUT IT!

37 posted on 08/15/2011 8:29:01 AM PDT by guitarplayer1953 (Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to GOD! Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: svcw
For a person who keeps claiming they are not defending mormonISM you sure do spend much time defending it. The flds practice what Joseph Smith taught, the lds group in SLC does not.

I know that. It's funny you think I don't.

You are not following the discussion.

Let's start at the beginning.

Colofornian said this: "To see how the Mormon church tried spinning Warren Jeffs as a continuation of 120 years of polygamous Mormon "prophets" yesterday, see: Warren Jeffs and the abandonment of tradition" [Real MormonISM]

Read the OTHER article Colofornian links here:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700170419/Warren-Jeffs-and-the-abandonment-of-tradition.html

Now SVCW, tell me did Colofornian accurately summarize it? Does the article actually say that the Mormon church today is spinning Warren Jeffs as a continuation of their prophets?

Not even close.
He could have said the LDS historically practiced polygamy. He could have said a tiny offshoot splinter of Mormonism representing less than 1% of the population practices it today. He could have offered a multitude of valid criticisms about Mormonism, questioning the validity of their beliefs and behavior.

Instead he chose to lie and say the LDS sanctions Warren Jeffs and "spins him as continuation" of their prophets. When the truth is exactly the opposite, the LDS has done everything they can to denigrate and distance themselves from Jeffs and other FLDS type splinter groups.

Why lie?
38 posted on 08/15/2011 8:36:16 AM PDT by Mount Athos (A Giant luxury mega-mansion for Gore, a Government Green EcoShack made of poo for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos
From the Deseret News, an lds publication.

Modern Mormons and modern polygamists have thus been pursuing divergent paths for more than a century, a much longer period than the founding generation of Mormonism that they jointly claim. The FLDS are entitled to at least the dignity of their own historical development. A lot happens in a hundred years. It is naive to suppose that Jeffs' world is simply a projection of 19th-century Mormonism into the present.

No misrepresentation here about flds vs lds.

Just not seeing your spin here, in the above statement in an lds publication: the LDS has done everything they can to denigrate and distance themselves from Jeffs.

39 posted on 08/15/2011 8:48:08 AM PDT by svcw (democrats are liars, it's a given)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: svcw

Again, I have no problem with the article.

The article does not confuse LDS vs FLDS.
Colofornian’s summary does.

And the article says exactly the opposite of what Colofornian says it does.

The LDS doesn’t spin Jeffs as a continuation of their prophets, it argues against it.

“It is naive to suppose that Jeffs’ world is simply a projection of 19th-century Mormonism into the present.”

and the concluding sentence,

“Jeffs tells us far less about both modern and historical Mormonism than many observers assume.”

Anyone who says the LDS thinks Warren Jeffs is a continuation of their prophets is simply lying about the LDS. Why conflate the two groups, pretending one sanctions the other, when the orgs are strongly against each other? There are so many valid criticisms of Mormon beliefs, there is no need to stoop to this behavior.


40 posted on 08/15/2011 9:09:53 AM PDT by Mount Athos (A Giant luxury mega-mansion for Gore, a Government Green EcoShack made of poo for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: guitarplayer1953; Colofornian
They practiced their beliefs and no one bothered them.

Sloppy summary of Utah history.

First - polygamy was illegal the entire time it was practiced

Second - Young didn't want to be a territory of the US - he sought to establish his own separate country of Deseret - a theocracy. And continually chased and harassed government officials sent there by DC to oversee the territory.

Third - Young was brutal towards those who disagreed with his rule and many were killed under his approval as 'apostates'

Finally (though there are many other points) they purposefully hid their polygamy - payed lip service to it for statehood - only to be called on the lies and require a second manifesto to be written denouncing it. Infact, mormon church felt that polygamy could continue in countries neutral to it at the time (Canada and Mexico) - wanting to have their cake and eat it too.

How would you like DC to tell you what you can and can not practice in your religious belief system?

LOL, tell that to the pagans who aren't allowed to sacrifice animals guitarplayer. Smith started polygamy - it was illegal by both statutory law as well as mormon church law. If it realllllllly was true, then the mormon church should never have had it's "manifestos" telling its members to follow the law of the land and not the law of "god".

41 posted on 08/15/2011 9:25:43 AM PDT by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos; svcw; Colofornian

One key point here Athos

Smith’s revelation that God told him to institute polygamy is found in the mormon doctrinal book called Doctrines and Covenants, Section 132. In it polygamy is described as an eternal commandment.

When mormons were told to stop practicing polygamy - twice - this section of their DOCTRINE has remained in their scriptures. Modern mormon apostles and even presidents have commented that they expect the practice to be able to resume in the future.

So has SLC mormonism fully renounced and washed their hands of polygamy? Not from the above and there is evidence of secret practice by nonflds mormons today.


42 posted on 08/15/2011 9:43:58 AM PDT by Godzilla (3-7-77)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

You’re just restating what’s already in both articles.

That’s not what’s at issue here.


43 posted on 08/15/2011 9:46:48 AM PDT by Mount Athos (A Giant luxury mega-mansion for Gore, a Government Green EcoShack made of poo for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos
In essence because lds have not removed polygamy from the doctrine and that they seal to men many wives for their future planets, lds do in fact still practice polygamy. The flds are in fact practicing what Joseph Smith handed down. Regardless of their actual numbers they are operating according to the original doctrines. Sorry that's just they way it is.
44 posted on 08/15/2011 9:49:08 AM PDT by svcw (democrats are liars, it's a given)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Elendur

Sometimes, yes. Doesn’t seem very important to me, so I asked.


45 posted on 08/15/2011 9:51:16 AM PDT by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

YO MAMA = yelling outloud means another Mormon atrocity...


46 posted on 08/15/2011 9:57:16 AM PDT by stuartcr ("Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Mount Athos; Elsie
The Mormon church believes and argues no such thing about Warren Jeffs. In fact they've done exactly the opposite of what you say they have -- they explicitly criticise and distance themselves from Jeffs and such groups.

And this is where you & I disagree on the "facts." The fact is that Mormons say one thing -- and then speak out of both sides of their mouths.

Do they criticize & distance themselves from Jeffs & such groups? (Yes)
Yet, simultaneously, do they present ambivalent info about polygamy and its role with future Mormons? (Yes)

To "disavow" means to go vs. the vow. But what did Lds "apostle" Bruce McConkie say beginning in 1966? (That the Mormon Jesus would bring back polygamy to Mormons when he returned). That's not disavowing; that, my friend, is an open embrace.

Likewise, mainstream Mormons believe fellow Mormon general authorities -- men who have married more than one wife in a serial fashion -- will become eternal polygamists when they die. (Because they believe marriage is forever). Is that militating vs. polygamy? (Doesn't sound like it)

You told a lie about the Mormon Church, you knew it was a lie when you wrote it, and anyone with the most cursory understanding of LDS beliefs knows they don't agree with or sanction Warren Jeffs.

Let's go back to the content of what I stated...and then I'll provide further context: To see how the Mormon church tried spinning Warren Jeffs as a continuation of 120 years of polygamous Mormon "prophets" yesterday, see Warren Jeffs and the abandonment of tradition [Real MormonISM].

The article I linked to was a Deseret News article. They are owned by the Mormon church. The journalist tried spinning why Jeffs & fLDS polygamy supposedly has NOTHING to do with its source -- 19th century Mormon polygamy.

Facts:
Lds "prophets" publicly taught polygamy 1852-1890;
but Lds "prophets" also personally practiced or privately taught polygamy from 1831-1910;
Lds polygamous families existing by 1910 were not broken up by Lds leaders -- and some of these unions were still in existence until they died in the early 1960s (source: B. Carmon Hardy, Solemn Covenant appendix)...again, these families were NOT ex-communicated because their union was solemnized by Lds officials!
Finally, ALL of the Lds "prophets" who were prophets up until 1945 were themselves polygamists.

These men were all "role models" for Warren Jeffs. Heroes of "the Mormon faith."

An analogy I could give would be to compare a father and son from the Bible: David and Solomon.
Were both polygamists? (Yes)
Did both sanction polygamy in general? (Yes)
If David had been around by the time Solomon accumulated all those 700 wives & 300 concubines, would he have sanctioned them? (No, I don't think so...just from Deut. 17:17 alone)

In this way, would David have both criticized as well as try to distance himself from the type of polygamy Solomon embraced? (Yes, I believe so)
But does that mean David had no "legacy" role in Solomon continuing polygamy? (No, we cannot conclude that David's polygamy had no impact on how Solomon embraced it...In fact, it's because Solomon's father embraced it that Solomon likewise followed suit)

MA, if you've ever farmed or gardened, you would know that weed residues and weed seeds from previous crops can have a "carryover" effect into soil bank generations.

So just because Solomon took something to an extreme David would never have thought of...
...just because one of the plural unions between David and one of his wifes was annulled (a form of "disavowal" -- see info about his wife/former wife, Michal)...
...doesn't mean a disavowal of polygamy was in any way true of David.

In fact, David and Joseph Smith both took wives who belonged to other men.

Other relevant facts:

* The Mormon church has NEVER rescinded the doctrinal undergirding of polygamy -- found in Doctrines & Covenants 132. It's still on the books, so to speak. And no follow-up revelation critiques it in any way. Likewise, no Lds leader has critiqued past Mormon polygamists; or the past practice of polygamy. They have not said it was "sinful" -- or generated by a false prophesy -- or anything of the like.

* For you to bring up the Westboro family as some sort of parallel would take a situation where...
...19th century Baptists practiced picketing as a way to reach the highest degree of heaven -- per Revelation chapter 23 from that Baptist god...
...only when extreme picketing was cracked down upon by the government, picketing became low-profile for a while...
...and then picketers were forced out of the Baptist church...
...only for the Westboros to emerge...
...citing Rev. 23 that picketing was still promoted by the Baptist god...
...along with other Baptist content from 1966 that the Baptist god would bring back picketing to the church when Jesus returned...

Sorry. None of that works as any kind of parallel. If a "revelation" on picketing was still in the Bible (Revelation 23), that would "hardly" be a disavowal of it by the Baptist God!

You've flunked discernment and basic comparative logic.

47 posted on 08/15/2011 10:01:20 AM PDT by Colofornian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: svcw
The flds are in fact practicing what Joseph Smith handed down. Regardless of their actual numbers they are operating according to the original doctrines. Sorry that's just they way it is.

It was funny when you jumped into this conversation saying that the FLDS practices what Joseph Smith did (twice), when NO ONE was arguing they weren't.

When you messaged me this a second time, I responded saying "I know that. It's funny you think I don't. You are not following the discussion."

And now you say the same thing a third time, saying "sorry that's just the way it is."

You are sending these messages to me, but you aren't reading what I am writing at all.
Despite telling you directly I agree with you about the FLDS having the same beliefs and practices as Joseph Smith, you persist in pretending I think otherwise and that you must teach me.

That's idiocy.

If you want to argue with yourself, send the message to yourself.
48 posted on 08/15/2011 10:12:02 AM PDT by Mount Athos (A Giant luxury mega-mansion for Gore, a Government Green EcoShack made of poo for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla
The whole point of the post was that the government has no business in saying what is acceptable and what is not. You know the original people who came here left Europe to get away from the Catholic church and all the atrocities they were doing to non catholics. How would you of like it that the government said no catholics are permitted in the original 13 colonies?
49 posted on 08/15/2011 10:35:58 AM PDT by guitarplayer1953 (Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to GOD! Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
Hi Colofornian!

OK Stop one moment and listen.

Look at the two paragraphs you typed here. They say opposite things.

Let's go back to the content of what I stated...and then I'll provide further context: To see how the Mormon church tried spinning Warren Jeffs as a continuation of 120 years of polygamous Mormon "prophets" yesterday, see Warren Jeffs and the abandonment of tradition [Real MormonISM].

The article I linked to was a Deseret News article. They are owned by the Mormon church. The journalist tried spinning why Jeffs & fLDS polygamy supposedly has NOTHING to do with its source -- 19th century Mormon polygamy.


Your original statement was that the LDS (deseret news) argued Warren Jeffs WAS a continuation of their prophets. That's actually exactly the opposite of what the article says. Your second statement is that the LDS (deseret news) WAS NOT a continuation of their prophets. That's an accurate representation of the article, but totally opposite to what you originally said.

If you stand by the newer second statement, then our argument is over, because I don't disagree with anything else you've said. Maybe you accidentally typed the opposite of what you meant originally.

You've flunked discernment and basic comparative logic.

That's really funny for you to say because I agree with everything you typed in your last message about Mormon history and theology.
50 posted on 08/15/2011 10:39:58 AM PDT by Mount Athos (A Giant luxury mega-mansion for Gore, a Government Green EcoShack made of poo for you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson