Polygamy according to Pure Mormonism

Waterman has various positions that paint Joseph as “cleanly” as possible. In that way, he is fundamentalist at the most basic level.

He has some things that I like and some things that I don’t like. I think his desire to defend Joseph gets in the way of objectivity, even more than it does for many people.

I think his view of polygamy is one of the best examples of that tendency.

I agree with Ray on this. I like a few of Rock’s posts, and have even shared some with friends. Early in my faith transition I was very drawn to fundamentalist ideas. If the blame for the…complicated nature of the church…could be blamed on post JS leaders, one can still cling to mormonism at it’s roots. I even read this post on polygamy and really liked it and wanted it to be true. But further study just wouldn’t let me hold on to it. There’s just better, stronger evidence (IMO) that he did institute and practice polygamy. My views have changed (and likely will continue to change) concerning polygamy. There are other ways to come to terms with it than denying that it happened.

I would love for the article to be how it actually happened, but sadly it is not. Waterman is either so blind or so intentionally deceitful that I could not finish reading the piece. A couple examples:

– The 1835 did indeed include in Section 101 an article on marriage. Waterman doesn’t mention that this section was neither written as nor presented as a revelation. It is clearly written as a policy document. First sentence: “According to the custom of all civilized nations, marriage is regulated by laws and ceremonies: therefore we believe, that all marriages of this church of Christ of Latter Day Saints, should be solemnized in a public meeting…” More importantly, Waterman doesn’t mention that the article was drafted, voted on, and placed into the D&C by the publishing committee, all while JS was away. Generally, I believe it is considered an attempt by Oliver Cowdery to force JS away from polygamy, something that OC hated and actively fought during his time with the Church.

– Speaking about Section 132, Waterman says, “No one had ever heard of it during Joseph Smith’s lifetime. It showed up as if by magic eight years after his death.” That is completely inaccurate. I have my doubts that Section 132 as we have it today originated with JS, but there WAS a “revelation” that JS used to legitimize polygamy. We don’t know whether 132 is that revelation or no. We can’t know. First of all, surely Waterman realizes that you can’t prove a negative, so his assertion that “No one had ever heard of it during JS’s lifetime” is an impossible position to hold. In fact, many referenced the “revelation”, including William Law. Law wrote in the Nauvoo Expositor, printed during JS’s lifetime, the following: “I hereby certify that Hyrum Smith did, (in his office) read to me a certain written document, which he said was a revelation from God, he said that he was with Joseph when it w as received. He afterwards gave me the document to read, and I took it to my house, and read it, and showed it to my wife, and returned it next day. The revelation (so called) authorized certain men to have more wives than one at a time, in this world and in the world to come. It said this was the law, and commanded Joseph to enter into the law. And also that he should administer to others. Several other items were in the revelation, supporting the above doctrines.”

Finally, let me add that even the Reorganized Church (Community of Christ), which had as its main platform a complete denial of polygamy for its first 100 years, now openly admits that JS himself “was a significant source for plural marriage teaching and practice at Nauvoo”.

“Why I’m Abandoning Polygamy”

Because it requires me to believe in a God who gives a 19th-century American man, married to the bride of his youthful choosing, a direct, specific order to break apart their marriage and her heart. I don’t believe it.

For me, polygamy in the church isn’t about all the obedient people who practiced it. It isn’t about the self-serving or desperate practitioners of it. It isn’t about the heartbreak and sadness of it, or the peace and contentment of it. Or about the millions of good members (I’m married to one) descended from polygamist ancestors whom they revere. It’s about God. Every time the church insists, No, no, really, God absolutely did command it, step by step laid it all out for Joseph, my spirits sink.

It seems as if God is the scapegoat for bad decisions, here as in other instances. Kind of ironic, but understandable, that a church claiming divine authority uses God as the scapegoat in such a way.

Sent from my SGH-I747M using Tapatalk

I like some of Alan’s stuff, my all time favorite has to be the ‘why people don’t like us’ one, have quoted it several times…

http://puremormonism.blogspot.co.uk/2010/08/why-dont-they-like-us.html