New one to me: Joseph not really a Polygamy kind of guy?

No, when you take all the testimonies of all the people who personally knew Joseph, it becomes an absurd argument to try to prove he did not practice polygamy. The saints that went to Utah may be “easy” to put in some conspiracy bucket, but how do you explain William Law, William Marks etc.? How do you explain Oliver Cowdery’s accusations as part of his own excommunication in 1838? There were other accounts that follow Joseph from the time of Kirtland, it did not start with John C. Bennett or anyone else. All the evidence from the time taken in whole says Joseph did teach and practice polygamy, even though he and Emma always (publicly) denied it.

That’s my humble opinion at least. 🙄

I do however share a sentiment with the author. I do not believe polygamy is an eternal principle.

:thumbup: Well said Orson.

It was interesting about the Cochronites though. Perhaps the idea of polygamy might have origenated with them and given JS the thought (which he may have later prayed over and developed into an LDS version).

I was really saying I would like to find out that he didn’t practice polygamy because of all the stories of how he coerced women to be his wife. He was either delusional or evil in his manipulation through guilt and pressure using their naive belief.

I prefer the conspiracy vs an evil or crazy prophet

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

This is so painful for some women. Me included. I wish that people would stop and ask how they’d feel if their 17 year-old daughter was going to be a 45 year-old man’s eighth wife. The only way I can stay in the church is to believe that God is pleased with a people who no longer consider it acceptable. I have to believe that we have gotten to a better place and aren’t going back.

I was really saying I would like to find out that he didn’t practice polygamy because of all the stories of how he coerced women to be his wife. He was either delusional or evil in his manipulation through guilt and pressure using their naive belief.

I prefer the conspiracy vs an evil or crazy prophet

I wonder what you have been reading. I think history shows we are not limited to the options of Joseph being “either delusional or evil in his manipulation through guilt and pressure using their naive belief.” Lucy Walker called plural marriage “that grand and glorious principle that God had revealed to the world” and Zina Huntington Jacobs said:

It was something too sacred to be talked about; it was more to me than life or death. I never breathed it for years. I will tell you the facts. I had dreams–I am no dreamer but I had dreams that I could not account for. I know this is the work of the Lord; it was revealed to me, even when young. Things were presented to my mind that I could not account for. When Joseph Smith revealed this order [Celestial marriage] I knew what it meant; the Lord was preparing my mind to receive it.

And from Mary E. Lightner:

The words of the Prophet that had been revealed to him always have been with me from the beginning to the end of the gospel. Every principle that has been given in the Church by the prophet is true. 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. Joseph said he talked to him soberly about it, and told him it was an abomination and quoted scripture to him. He said in the Book of Mormon it was an abomination in the eyes of the Lord, and they were to adhere to these things except the Lord speak. I am the first being that the revelation [D&C 132] was given to him for and I was one thousand miles away in Missouri, for we went up to Jackson County in 1841 [1831]…

I asked him if Emma knew about me, and he said, “Emma thinks the world of you.” I was not sealed to him until I had a witness. I had been dreaming for a number of years I was his wife. I thought I was a great sinner. I prayed to God to take it from me for I felt it was a sin; but when Joseph sent for me he told me all of these things. “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…

Well, I talked with him for a long time and finally I told him I would never be sealed to him until I had a witness. Said he, “You shall have a witness.” Said I, “If God told you that, why does he not tell me?” He asked me if I was going to be a traitor. “I have never told a mortal and shall never tell a mortal I had such a talk from a married man,” said I. “Well,” said he, “pray earnestly for the angel said to me you should have a witness.”…

I made it a subject of prayer and I worried about it because I did not dare to speak to a living being except Brigham Young. I went out and got between three haystacks where no one could see me. As I knelt down I thought, why not pray as Moses did? He prayed with his hands raised. When his hands were raised, Israel was victorious, but when they were not raised, the Philistines were victorious. I lifted my hands and I have heard Joseph say the angels covered their faces. I knelt down and if ever a poor mortal prayed, I did. A few nights after that an angel of the Lord came to me and if ever a thrill went through a mortal, it went through me. I gazed upon the clothes and figure but the eyes were like lightning. They pierced me from the crown of my head to the soles of my feet. I was frightened almost to death for a moment. I tried to waken my aunt, but I could not. The angel leaned over me and the light was very great, although it was night. When my aunt woke up she said she had seen a figure in white robes pass from our bed to my mother’s bed and pass out of the window.

Joseph came up the next Sabbath. He said, “Have you had a witness yet?” “No.” “Well,” said he, “the angel expressly told me you should have.” Said I, “I have not had a witness, but I have seen something I have never seen before. I saw an angel and I was frightened almost to death. I did not speak.” He studied a while and put his elbows on his knees and his face in his hands. He looked up and said, “How could you have been such a coward?” Said I, “I was weak.” “Did you think to say, `Father, help me?'” “No.” “Well, if you had just said that, your mouth would have been opened for that was an angel of the living God. He came to you with more knowledge, intelligence, and light than I have ever dared to reveal.” I said, “If that was an angel of light, why did he not speak to me?” “You covered your face and for this reason the angel was insulted.” Said I, “Will it ever come again?” He thought a moment and then said, “No, not the same one, but if you are faithful you shall see greater things than that.” And then he gave me three signs of what would take place in my own family, although my husband was far away from me at the time. Every work came true. I went forward and was sealed to him. (source)

I must say that story is at least a bit strange, but I don’t see manipulation there. Joseph essentially counseled people to get their own witness.

Why would you feel better if Joseph did not practice plural marriage? It is not inherently bad.

I disagree. I think polygamy is inherently bad. It is bad for women who don’t get an equal marriage partnership with their husband. It is bad for children to have their fathers time divided among other families.

You bring up good points. Could it be said that all women who entered into plural marriage were not content with the relationship? Could it be said that all children involved did not receive enough attention from their father? If there were plural marriages in which the husband, wives, and children were content, then it is not the practice itself that is inherently evil; it is the discontent relationships and neglect of children that are evil. For another viewpoint, could it be said that drugs are inherently evil? No; whether they are good or evil is determined by how they are used. I confess that I can’t say polygamy was not misused, though I don’t know of the specific instances.

This is so painful for some women. Me included. I wish that people would stop and ask how they’d feel if their 17 year-old daughter was going to be a 45 year-old man’s eighth wife. The only way I can stay in the church is to believe that God is pleased with a people who no longer consider it acceptable. I have to believe that we have gotten to a better place and aren’t going back.

I am sorry that it is painful for some women. I will not say I understand, because I am not in a position to, but I do not blame you at all for your feelings. It is actually disturbing to me to think of a 17 year-old girl marrying a 45 year-old man, but such a marriage was not always seen that way before the 20th century. I believe no one will be compelled to enter into plural marriage in the future, so we “aren’t going back.” I hope you can have peace.

I must appear to be a weird proponent of polygamy. If so, it is because I believe it really was sanctioned by God, and I have good reason to believe so as long as it was done correctly with the proper authority – and I confess that was probably not always the case – and if it wasn’t so sanctioned, then the highest leaders of the church were guilty of long-term organized adultery. That would just not be okay. I really try to approach it objectively, and I am totally fine with it never happening again.

(I think I have taken to writing long sentences with many commas, some semi-colons, some dashes, and parentheses because I have been reading David Copperfield and Don Quixote.)

Ok…for clarity I dug up the quote.

HINCKLEY: I condemn it, yes, as a practice, because I think it is not doctrinal. It is not legal. And this church takes the position that we will abide by the law. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, magistrates in honoring, obeying and sustaining the law.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

Can’t disagree with anything you said. And for those talking about men’s biological needs…turns out women have some of those same inclinations….funny how rare it is that God asks women to gather a gaggle of hubbies.

Anyways…your paragraph describes why I would feel better if it turned out Joseph Smith has been framed as polygamist…I already thought Brigham young was a nut…if we could lay all polygamy at his feet it would ease my soul some. No such luck it seems

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

You bring up good points. Could it be said that all women who entered into plural marriage were not content with the relationship? Could it be said that all children involved did not receive enough attention from their father? If there were plural marriages in which the husband, wives, and children were content, then it is not the practice itself that is inherently evil; it is the discontent relationships and neglect of children that are evil. For another viewpoint, could it be said that drugs are inherently evil? No; whether they are good or evil is determined by how they are used. I confess that I can’t say polygamy was not misused, though I don’t know of the specific instances.

No, I have to disagree, even if there are people who were content with it, it is still inherently evil. It takes women from being equal partners with her husband to being subservient to him. Even if she is ok with that, it is still wrong. Even is children don’t mind their father having his attention divided it is still wrong. Even if none of those things happen, it is still wrong.

Here is another viewpoint. My husband and I decide that we both want to have affairs with other people, we are both content with it, as are the people we are having affairs with. Is what we are doing wrong at that point? Even if we are all happy with the situation?