Questions About Joseph Smith And His Wives

[Canuck Mormon]

<div class='quotemain'>

'the Lord spake unto me, saying: Fools mock, but they shall mourn; and my grace is sufficient for the meek, that they shall take no advantage of your weakness' (Ether 12:26)

No one's mocking... just voicing opinions. One question though, a-train: Would you allow your 14 yr old daughter to marry an apostle if they requested?

That is a ridiculous comparison. First, Joseph Smith was NOT an 60+ year old man. Second, in this day and age that would be considered rape. Let's not forget that this was 200 years ago when people did marry very young and it was considered normal. Now, I'm not condoning marrying someone as young as 14, but we are looking at it with our 21st century morals. It was not the 21st century.

Expected backlash can begin.

[AnthonyB]

<div class='quotemain'>

a-train,

What Gaia siad disconcerted me. I was troubled by the implications.

My personal veiw is tha divorce is not to be sort under any circumstance except marital unfaithfulness and even then the believing spouse should always seek restoration, if at all possible.

What about abuse? Would you consider divorce acceptable due to abuse?

M.

(Please note the following is my response to Maureen and is from my non-LDS view.)

Maureen,

We are all flawed individuals and God is merciful. I don't think anyone should ever stay in any situation (including marriage) if they are being abused.

I said divorce should not be sort (not that it shouldn't occurr), it should be seen as a terrible remedy for horrible situations. Not the easy option for those who just can't be bothered working on their marriage.

People should prize their marriages and ensure that they are continually maintained and worked upon. I am very aware of my personal responsibility to treat my wife (and kids) as Christ did the church and lay down my life for them. I am to be her servant in the way Christ served the church. I believe the bible teaches that if I do not treat my wife rightly God will not hear my prayers.

In a breakdown, the first step should be seperation, followed by an attempt at reconsiling the marriage if at all possible. A serious effort should attempted, especially by a believing spouse: divorce should never be seen as the right outcome in all circumstances. However I would never encourage a woman to go back to a physcially abusive man unless he had shown several years of continuous reformed behaviour.

If reconsillation is impossible then remaining single should be considered, especially if children are involved. I've seen too many people rebound from one bad marriage to another and really injure kids. In any relationship decisions the interest of the children should be at the forefront. From my personal ancedotal evidence kids do better with one committed parent then two half committed ones. There are serious disadvantages to a blended family, along with the generally obvious advantages.

I would veiw that remarriage after divorce is a breach of covenant. Even if the other party forced that breach to occur, it should never be taken lightly.

Sorry for prattling on, it is a very personal subject for me. I am the only non divorced person in my immediate family and divorce is the norm in the rest of the family.

[Moksha]

I understand that a couple of centuries ago, it was more common for men to marry much younger women, even though 15 sounds like it's kinda pushing it. But for the life of me I don't understand why he would marry women that already had husbands. Does anyone have any thoughts?

Cheers!

Men did indeed marry earlier in those days. I have one genealogical report from a Church member in Alabama marrying a twelve year old. That however was a monogamous marriage.

Two of Joseph's wives were actually 14 years old.

As to why a he would marry an already married woman, I have heard the argument that the Angel with the Flaming Sword did not provide crystal clear instructions as to whom it was proper to marry. However, marrying or even proposing to already married women was asking for trouble.

I have always suspected that Zina (one of Joseph's and Brigham's co-married wives) must have been a hot number in her younger days.

[AnthonyB]

<div class='quotemain'>

What about abuse? Would you consider divorce acceptable due to abuse?

M.

I want to answer this, because my church also argues for only the two exceptions--unfaithfulness or abandonment. When there is abuse of wife or child, we generally encourage separation. The abuser is told there will be no reconciliation unless counseling and progress are made. If the abuser is unrepentent, the abuse will turn into abandonment, and a divorce can be filed.

PC,

My wife was raised in the Aussie AOG, and we were married by an AOG pastor (in a Lutheran Chapel). I'd agree with your saying but would add that there is forgiveness for all sins (except blaspheming the Holy Spirit.) Not that we should set out to sin.

[AnthonyB]

Since the Polygamy can of worms has been opened, I will give my rant as well.

Whilst there is no command in my bible explicitly forbiding it and putting aside the whole in the garden before the fall, there was one woman and one man, just looking at the OT, polygamy doesn't look that enticing....

Abraham: Sarah kicked Hagar and Ishmael out of the house and they nearly died from thirst. Isaac and Ishmael descendants haven't gotten on that well.

Jacob: Had his favourite wife and her kids got specail treatment leading to the other sons enslaving thier half-brother and pretending he had been killed.

David: One son raped his half-sister and then He was murdered by her brother. That son who murdered was exiled from court, and when he returned he overthrew David and then raped David's wives.

Solomon: Bible makes it clear that his wives lead him to worship other God's.

[a-train]

<div class='quotemain'>

'the Lord spake unto me, saying: Fools mock, but they shall mourn; and my grace is sufficient for the meek, that they shall take no advantage of your weakness' (Ether 12:26)

No one's mocking... just voicing opinions. One question though, a-train: Would you allow your 14 yr old daughter to marry an apostle if they requested?

Absolutely.

We praise and honor Abraham's obedience in the taking of Isaac to the alter. We are to understand that he had every intention of killing his son. It would have been absolute folly if it was not the will of God, but because it was God's will, it would have been just as dishonorable for Abraham to disobey.

If a radical, militant, Islamist put a gun to your 14 year old daughter's head and said: 'Deny the Messiahship of Jesus of Nazereth or I'll blow her brains out!', would you? If he said: 'Renounce Christianity and she'll live.', would you?

The LORD gave his Only Begotten for me, if He asks such a sacrifice of me would I be blessed in disobedience?

I'm not a Mormon because I woke up one day and found that my life just happened to be aligned with Mormon teaching. I didn't say 'Oh gee, Mormonism, that's exaclty how I am, I'll join the club and won't have to change a thing!' I didn't wake up and say, 'I like those guys in Utah, I'll just do whatever they say and believe whatever they teach.' I have personally received revelation from God that the LDS Church is what it claims to be--led by God through revelation. I only believe the Book of Mormon because God has told me it is true, individually.

Certainly, if I were asked by a General Authority of the LDS Church for the hand of my 14 year old daughter in marriage and the LORD told me not to, I would do the will of the LORD and keep my daughter. But, if the LORD manifested to me by the power of the Holy Ghost that it was His will that she should go to the alter of marriage in that manner, I would act in faith give my blessing.

-a-train

[Moksha]

Certainly, if I were asked by a General Authority of the LDS Church for the hand of my 14 year old daughter in marriage and the LORD told me not to, I would do the will of the LORD and keep my daughter. But, if the LORD manifested to me by the power of the Holy Ghost that it was His will that she should go to the alter of marriage in that manner, I would act in faith give my blessing.

-a-train

Considering that Elder Kimball was promised Celestial Carte Blanch for he and his descendants if he handed over his 14 year old daughter Helen Mar, you might get big blessing in return.

However in this day and age, you might keep in mind the recent trial and conviction of Warren Jeffs for the marriage of that 14 year old girl, in making your decision.

[AnthonyB]

a-train,

Clealry giving a 14 year old in marriage would contravene the law in most countries.

LDS believe in obeying the law of land. (Why you dropped ploygamy in the first place.) (Is that true?)

But obedience to God ultimately trumps the obedience to the law of the land. (If ordered to worship another god by the government, it is right to disagree.)

For trad christians, the solution to that problem is that any personal revelation must come into line with the teaching of the bible. (Of course we argue endless what it is precisely the bible teaches.) (eg: You can't get a revelation from God to murder people, cause God had forbidden it in the bible.)

In the words of song I know...

You say you gotta do it and you've got no choice,

Cos you had a revelation form the still small voice,

If the bible doesn't back then it seems quite clear,

perhaps it was the devil who whispered in your ear!

How do LDS handle the distinction between personal and declared doctrine?

[a-train]

Certainly child marriage is against the law, but now we are introducing new information to the question. The question wasn't 'even if it is against the law'. It was NOT against the law in the time of Joseph Smith. The context of the question was Joseph Smith's marriages.

But even if I was asked by the LORD to break the law of the land (and I haven't been) I would. If I was told by the LORD to leave the LDS Church and join with the Catholics, I would. The LORD asked me to give up two years of my life for a full-time mission, I did. The LORD has asked me to serve in the Church, I do. He wants me to read the scriptures daily, I do. This all takes sacrifice. I'm not perfect, but at least I'm willing. What matters more, whether we like the will of God or whether we do it?

Personal revelation is the final authority for each man in his quest for the LORD. Daniel went to the lions den and would have faithfully died there had the LORD so called him to do so. How did he know to do so? He prayed and got answers, that's how! Faithful LDS men served time in prison to keep the commandments of the LORD. It wasn't until the LORD released them of their duties to plural marriage that they departed from it.

Wilford Woodruff said of quiting polygamy: 'I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me. I went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. . .' (Official Declaration 1)

Shouldn't we honor and respect the efforts of all people of all faiths who endeavor to obtain personal revelation and to do the will of God regardless of all hazards?

-a-train

[AnthonyB]

a-train,

I’m truly gobsmacked by your response. Although I agree we should be willing to sacrifice all we have including our lives for the LORD, if he required that. I am not quite sure how to respond. You sound quite “quakerish” in your appeal to personal revelation as the final authority. Surely God is the final authority, not our personal revelation of God but God himself, then followed by the books that He has left us to tell us about Himself and then our personal revelation of Him.

If someone wrote you instructions but you refused to read them or put what they had instructed into place but instead you kept phoning them to ask them what you should do, I think you would get the reply go read the instructions. God caused men to write His instructions (words) (LDS think He has written a lot more then I do) and we have those instructions as scripture, our job (IMHO) is get the best picture of God from the scriptures and use that to guide our personal revelations.

If someone turned up and said the Lord had told them to commit adultery (or to sacrifice children), would you merely reply to confirm whether God has really personally revealed that to them and if they were adamant you would let them go and do it. I could not conceive that you wouldn’t produce the scriptures and show them that God couldn’t have revealed that to them, because He has already clearly said they shouldn’t and maybe they weren’t hearing God properly.

How do you know that any revelation that you get is from God and not from self or Satan? Paul clearly says that Satan can appear as if an angle of light and that he tries to deceive people. The “trad” response is that by knowing and obeying what God has revealed in the scripture you can know God better and therefore discern his will. I’m not saying people shouldn’t ask for and expect divine guidance but why would God have to repeat what He has already said.

I’d agree that God is limited by his nature; He cannot be what He is not. He has revealed himself and what He is like (Christ Jesus), and that revelation has been recorded by men in books. Personal revelation (IMHO) can not ever truly contradict that else God would be a liar. If God is liar than both our faiths lie in ruins, for how could we trust anything He says to us. (That isn’t to say he couldn’t contradict our interpretations of scripture but that change would have to be shown to align with scripture not just a personal revelation.)

Sorry for the rant and for me taking up so much space in describing my own view, thank you for your honesty in expressing yours. I guess I’ll never be a Mormon, unless I am convinced from scripture that it was true. I have had personal experiences of God and personal prophesies given (from someone who had no way of knowing anything of me) to me that can only have been God given but in the end even if an angel from heaven appeared before me, any revelation that didn’t align with God’s revealed word, I would not receive.

Yours in Christ,

AnthonyB

[Alaskagain]

<snipped>

One question though, a-train: Would you allow your 14 yr old daughter to marry an apostle if they requested?

I'm not a-train, but . . .

If a GA came to me and asked for the hand of my 14 yr old daughter, I would probably tell him of my firm testimony of the church, and that I would like to fast and pray about it first.

Then I would fast and pray . . .

for at least 4 years.

[Dale]

Todd Compton who wrote In Sacred Lonliness concluded sexuality between Joseph Smith and Helen Mar Kimball was unlikely. Though he speculated as she got older sexuality might have beeen included. I speculate myself it was a platonic sealing that would never have included sexuality. I figure she would have taken another husband at some point.

With Joseph's polyandry no children has beeen proven as Joseph Smith's from any married woman. I remain unconvinced that Sylvia Session's daughter Josephine was Joseph Smith's. DNA studies have been done on the claim, but havn't been publishable.

The purpose of polyandry was to spiritually adopt other men's kids as Joseph's kids. In each of the cases I studied I wasn't convinced Joseph Smith behaved improperly with other men's wives. The women all appeared to have continued to live with the legal husband as normal.

[a-train]

Haha nice Alaskagain...

Anthony,

It was very non-scriptural for Abraham to offer Isaac. Cain was not blessed in his offering of vegetables. Certainly a human sacrifice would have been unprecedented, but Abraham went up in obedience anyway. Should he have said, 'This is against the scriptures LORD, I will not do it.'? I think Abraham didn't refuse to read his scriptures, nor do I.

There are some BIG problems with trying to limit our understanding to our personal interpretation of the scriptures. The first is: 'How do we know we are interpreting the scriptures correctly?' We know that a great number of the Jews found our LORD to be in violation of the scriptures. In their interpretation, He was out of step and out of line. To them, he was a heretic and a blasphemer. Their interpretation of scripture stood between them and the LORD.

How did those who accepted Christ see Him for who He was? How did they see through the interpretations of the scriptures by the religious leaders of their day? Did they find Jesus to meet up to all of their interpretations of the scriptures and therefore receive Him? Perhaps a great many gave him little thought and accepted the interpretation of the scribes as authoritative and the activity of Jesus' disciples as fanatacism.

According to the New Testament, it was not through the scriptures at all that the disciples accepted Christ. 'He asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.' (Matt. 16:13-17)

Paul went so far as to say: 'no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.' (1 Cor 12:3)

The LORD said: 'And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.' (Matt. 21:22) And again: 'Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:' (Matt. 7:7)

James said: 'If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.' (James 1:5)

The position to believe in prayer and revelation has tremendous scriptural basis. Those who hold the notion that the scriptures teach that we are to simply read and believe and refrain from prayer and revelation make me wonder if they have ever actually read. Now did the Apostles throw out their scriptures?

Of course not. 'All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:' (2 Tim. 3:16) The resurrected LORD taught from the scriptures: 'And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.' (Luke 24:27)

Further, the LORD commanded: 'Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.' (John 5:39)

But it was by personal revelation that our LORD's disciples knew Him and accepted His doctrine, not by their interpretations of the scriptures. 'And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?' (Luke 24:32)

The Spirit of Revelation includes the scriptures: 'But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.' (John 14:26)

The scriptures and our interpretation thereof do not interpret nor constrain revelation by the Holy Ghost, but by revelation of the Holy Ghost we interpret scripture: 'Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.' (2 Peter 1:20-21)

It is fear that says: 'You cannot know a revelation is from God.' My question then is: 'How do I know that my interpretation of scripture is from God?' Further, 'How do I know my scriptures are from God?' Perhaps Satan inspired all those old prophets and gave us the Bible. Perhaps the Koran is the only true scripture. How do we know?

We say often that only a personal relationship with Christ can save a man. Now can we have this without personal revelation? What relationship can we have with Him whom we have no contact?

It is said: 'Satan can appear as an angel of light.' How so? Do good intending, honest followers of the LORD mistake Satan for one of the LORD's representatives and accept lies? Absolutely not! Do we see this in the scriptures?

Remember this?: 'For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.' Now many think this means that it is possible for Satan to deceive the elect. But look at it! 'if it were possible'. The LORD will not leave us to be led about by the devil if we call for Him. It is NOT possible for Satan to deceive the elect.

And who are the elect anyway? The LORD told Isaiah 'I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains: and mine elect shall inherit it, and my servants shall dwell there.' (Isaiah 65:9) The elect are the LORD's servants. They do his will.

We see this promise from the LORD: 'If any man will do [God's] will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.' (John 7:17) It is only in our own pride and disobedience that we can be misled. If we cannot tell the difference between Satan and the LORD, it is because we are lacking in humility and obedience. The LORD promises His guidance to those that seek it.

The LORD said 'My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:' (John 10:27)

Do you know the feeling of the Holy Ghost? Have you had that burning of the heart described by the disciples on the road to Emmaus? Don't let me sound prideful as if I have an angle on revelation above anyone else. All of mankind has available to them the Holy Ghost if they will ask, and you can't receive the Holy Ghost without receiving revelations.

'Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.' (1 John 4:13) Read the whole chapter of First John Chapter 4. It contains fantastic teaching on 'trying spirits'.

Satan wants very badly for us to reject the Holy Ghost. He wants us to rely on the intellect, the eyes, the physical. He scares us with words like: 'Don't believe in revelations, you'll be deceived!' 'You can't trust a feeling to be from the Holy Ghost!' I am unable to see this teaching in the scriptures.

Satan also says: 'Don't burden the LORD with prayer!' Certainly I am annoyed with calls from those I have no interest in hearing from, at least in the capacity wherein they are calling (stinkin' salesmen). But I love to hear from my wife and child. Did the LORD say: 'Children, don't annoy me with too much prayer.'? Of course not!

He said: 'Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.' (Luke 21:36) Take a look at that chapter. What are 'these things' which those who pray will escape? False Christs and falsehoods in general are on the long list in that chapter.

If I take up your advice and use the scriptures to determine whether to accept revelation or not, then I am constrained to accept personal revelation.

-a-train

[shanstress70]

Certainly, if I were asked by a General Authority of the LDS Church for the hand of my 14 year old daughter in marriage and the LORD told me not to, I would do the will of the LORD and keep my daughter. But, if the LORD manifested to me by the power of the Holy Ghost that it was His will that she should go to the alter of marriage in that manner, I would act in faith give my blessing.

-a-train

Ick, this made me feel physically ill for a second. But once again, that's just my silly opinion. Keep in mind that supposedly in her mind, the Houston mother thought God told her to drown all of her children.

Alaskagain, I'm with you! Wait 4 years then let the burden of the decision be on her.

[a-train]

But once again, that's just my silly opinion. Keep in mind that supposedly in her mind, the Houston mother thought God told her to drown all of her children.

Was she a healthy devout believer who in her daily prayers and scripture study was interrupted by a sudden voice from nowhere saying: 'Drown the kids!' or was she a troubled lunatic who showed signs of severe mental difficulty for years leading up to her murders?

Should we assume, like her, Abraham was a lunatic, crazed and fanatacized?

-a-train

[Guest bizabra]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

'the Lord spake unto me, saying: Fools mock, but they shall mourn; and my grace is sufficient for the meek, that they shall take no advantage of your weakness' (Ether 12:26)

No one's mocking... just voicing opinions. One question though, a-train: Would you allow your 14 yr old daughter to marry an apostle if they requested?

Absolutely.

We praise and honor Abraham's obedience in the taking of Isaac to the alter. We are to understand that he had every intention of killing his son. It would have been absolute folly if it was not the will of God, but because it was God's will, it would have been just as dishonorable for Abraham to disobey.

If a radical, militant, Islamist put a gun to your 14 year old daughter's head and said: 'Deny the Messiahship of Jesus of Nazereth or I'll blow her brains out!', would you? If he said: 'Renounce Christianity and she'll live.', would you?

The LORD gave his Only Begotten for me, if He asks such a sacrifice of me would I be blessed in disobedience?

I'm not a Mormon because I woke up one day and found that my life just happened to be aligned with Mormon teaching. I didn't say 'Oh gee, Mormonism, that's exaclty how I am, I'll join the club and won't have to change a thing!' I didn't wake up and say, 'I like those guys in Utah, I'll just do whatever they say and believe whatever they teach.' I have personally received revelation from God that the LDS Church is what it claims to be--led by God through revelation. I only believe the Book of Mormon because God has told me it is true, individually.

Certainly, if I were asked by a General Authority of the LDS Church for the hand of my 14 year old daughter in marriage and the LORD told me not to, I would do the will of the LORD and keep my daughter. But, if the LORD manifested to me by the power of the Holy Ghost that it was His will that she should go to the alter of marriage in that manner, I would act in faith give my blessing.

-a-train

BIZ: YOU may "honor and praise" Abraham for being willing to sacrifice his son just because he was "told" to do so by "god". I do not. I have always thought this was one of the weirder and more twisted bible stories. I could NEVER understand how a parent could kill his child over a religious belief.

If a "prophet of god" told me he was commanded to take my 14 year old daughter to wife, I'd tell him "where" to go. If a religious madman had a gun to my 14 year old daughters head, I would confess or profess ANYTHING to get him to drop the gun and let her go.

I am not and cannot be certain what happens after death. I presume that nothing does, that we go back into the same nothing that we came from. I would never sacrifice my child for a belief. All I know and can know is THIS LIFE, and I would never kill my child or give her away or abandon or disown her over a BELIEF.

I want my kid alive and safe, so I can enjoy her in THIS LIFE, which is the ONLY life we can be sure of.

I think it's stupid to admire Abraham for being willing to kill his child. Sheesh.

<div class='quotemain'>

But once again, that's just my silly opinion. Keep in mind that supposedly in her mind, the Houston mother thought God told her to drown all of her children.

Was she a healthy devout believer who in her daily prayers and scripture study was interrupted by a sudden voice from nowhere saying: 'Drown the kids!' or was she a troubled lunatic who showed signs of severe mental difficulty for years leading up to her murders?

Should we assume, like her, Abraham was a lunatic, crazed and fanatacized?

-a-train

BIZ: yes, we can assume this. I do. Try and prove me wrong.

[shanstress70]

<div class='quotemain'>

But once again, that's just my silly opinion. Keep in mind that supposedly in her mind, the Houston mother thought God told her to drown all of her children.

Was she a healthy devout believer who in her daily prayers and scripture study was interrupted by a sudden voice from nowhere saying: 'Drown the kids!' or was she a troubled lunatic who showed signs of severe mental difficulty for years leading up to her murders?

Should we assume, like her, Abraham was a lunatic, crazed and fanatacized?

-a-train

Who knows? I'm saying that it gets dangerous when believing this way. People have done all kinds of things in the name of God. And maybe they really do believe that these atrocities were God's will. God gave us brains for discernment and so that we have the sense to make these decisions.

Biz, I have to say that I'm with you on all that!

[a-train]

This is exactly how Satan does it: 'Watch out, too much faith in God leads to disaster!' 'Don't say your prayers and look for answers, you'll just be a fanatic led about in craziness.' Notice this is fear, not faith.

Rhetorical extreme scenarios are not what we live in. None of us here believe God has asked us to do anything outside of those things we find in the scriptures, far removed from drowning our children.

Further, I don't expect the LORD to give such extreme commandments to many. Most of us can't even get on our knees and offer a prayer every night before bed, I can't see people passing through tests of faith of Abrahamic proportions if they can't even read the scriptures daily or honor the sabbath.

Were these women married to Joseph Smith ruined? Did they somehow suffer some great affliction by virtue of their sealings to him? They weren't drowning their children. They weren't locked in a compound somewhere serving as slaves. They weren't part of some harem.

We act like some parent said: 'OK, here you go. Here is my daughter.' and they never saw her again. In reality, most of these families lived out their lives in peace and happiness (with the acknowledgement of their afflictions offered by the enemies of Mormonism) and saw kids and grandkids. The marriages in early Mormonism, like today, kept families together; it didn't break them up.

-a-train

[Guest bizabra]

A-train, what do you think of folks in the middle east who kill their daughters for even talking to a "western" man or wearing western dress or going out of the home without a male escort? They are doing what they think is "god's will". They fully believe that they are doing what "god" wants of them, that they are following the "words of god" as taught them by their leaders.

Are they wrong? Why would they be wrong to do this if it is in line with what they understand "god" wills?

If a "god", through his all-too-human "mouthpieces", ever demands anything that goes against what we all can agree (or SHOULD agree) to be basic human rights, then that "god" or his "prophets" are a lie and we should call it the BS it is!

IF there is a god, and he devises such things as a "test" of our obedience, then he/it is really an evil being, one I want nothing to do with.

I would prefer to think that any being that is as powerful, wise, and loving as "god" is supposed to be would be horrified at people thinking he would be pleased if they were to sacrifice their children to him, out of OBEDIENCE ALONE! I would imagine he would be more pleased if we were to exercise our MINDS instead and tell him (or more likely, the "mouthpiece") to stuff it!

Why would god want us to be obedient little drones instead of thinking, feeling, compassionate human beings? I would hope he would want us to obey what we know in our hearts to be RIGHT, even if it meant we had to DEFY any commandment that he supposedly gave us. Maybe THAT is the real test, and blind obedience (instead of normal parental refusal to kill or offer our children) would be the FAILURE instead.

Ever think of that?

[Guest bizabra]

This is exactly how Satan does it: 'Watch out, too much faith in God leads to disaster!' 'Don't say your prayers and look for answers, you'll just be a fanatic led about in craziness.' Notice this is fear, not faith.

Rhetorical extreme scenarios are not what we live in. None of us here believe God has asked us to do anything outside of those things we find in the scriptures, far removed from drowning our children.

Further, I don't expect the LORD to give such extreme commandments to many. Most of us can't even get on our knees and offer a prayer every night before bed, I can't see people passing through tests of faith of Abrahamic proportions if they can't even read the scriptures daily or honor the sabbath.

Were these women married to Joseph Smith ruined? Did they somehow suffer some great affliction by virtue of their sealings to him? They weren't drowning their children. They weren't locked in a compound somewhere serving as slaves. They weren't part of some harem.

We act like some parent said: 'OK, here you go. Here is my daughter.' and they never saw her again. In reality, most of these families lived out their lives in peace and happiness (with the acknowledgement of their afflictions offered by the enemies of Mormonism) and saw kids and grandkids. The marriages in early Mormonism, like today, kept families together; it didn't break them up.

-a-train

BIZ: Um, the BIBLE contains the story of Abraham being ordered to kill his child. While it wasn't by drowning, it was by knife and fire. So, the scriptures DO give us an example of god (supposedly) telling a parent (Abe) to knife and burn his kid. The bible contains this "Rhetorical extreme scenario".

YOU may think that these women did not "suffer". How can you be so sure? Think of the mental anguish a young woman might feel if she believed she held her families "eternal glory" in her hands and that if she refused, then she might be jeopardizing the same if she did not comply, no matter what her personal wishes might be?

THAT, my friend, would be REAL mental pain, and an awful lot to ask any 14 year old to do. If you would be willing to force your child to make such a decision, simply to please your "prophet", then you would be guilty of child abuse, in my not so humble opinion.

[a-train]

I would hope he would want us to obey what we know in our hearts to be RIGHT, even if it meant we had to DEFY any commandment that he supposedly gave us.

My point exactly. I rest my case.

-a-train

[Guest bizabra]

I fail to see your point.

MY heart would tell me that any religious authority who claimed that "god" wanted my 14 year old to marry him, or to kill her, was full of BS and I would tell him to stuff it. MY heart would NOT tell me that this is what "god" would want of me as a parent.

My heart would know that this is wrong. I would DEFY any religious authority who claimed this was required of me to prove my OBEDIENCE to god.

My point is that my heart would KNOW that human rights are more important than any supposed commandment of god.

My point does NOT prove YOURS.

My point is in opposition to your point.

Again, why would god simply desire OBEDIENCE over normal human parental feelings to protect their children? Why would a god want OBEDIENCE of his children, rather than common sense and human love?

[shanstress70]

Were these women married to Joseph Smith ruined? Did they somehow suffer some great affliction by virtue of their sealings to him?

I don't know the answer to this question because I don't know how these children lived after they were married to him. They positively could have suffered much anguish.

[Gaia]

<div class='quotemain'>

Were these women married to Joseph Smith ruined? Did they somehow suffer some great affliction by virtue of their sealings to him?

I don't know the answer to this question because I don't know how these children lived after they were married to him. They positively could have suffered much anguish.

GAIA:

Some of them reported being glad they had been involved with Joseph, but having lived very lonely, and utimately (i think) rather sad lives.

I would also like to say that while there are many obvious problems with polygamy, there were also some real blessings and benefits that are not often discussed, which need to be acknowledged.

For example, polygamy enabled many women to leave their children and homes in the care of their "Sister Wives", and obtain education and training they would not otherwise have been able to get, and they became among the first female doctors, lawyers, etc in the country.

Many of their stories can be found in the following (LDS) books:

- A WOMAN'S VIEW: Helen Mar Whitney's Reminiscences of Early Church History -

Edited with an Introductory Essay by Jeni Broberg Holzapfel & Richard Neitzel Holzapfel,

Copyright 1997 by Religious Studies Center Brigham Young University

- "Daughters of Light" by Carol Lynn Pearson

- "Women of Covenant: The Story of Relief Society" by Jill Mulvay Derr, Janath Russell Cannon, Maureen Ursenbach Beecher

- "Women of MOrmondom" by Edward Tullidge

- "Women's Voices: An Untold History of the LDS, 1830-1900" by Kenneth W. Godfrey, Audrey M. Godfrey, Jill Mulvay Derr

On polygamy, a good (LDS) resource is "Mormon Polygamy: A History" - by (LDS Historian) Richard S. Van Wagoner.

And of course, the most often suggested books on the specific topic of polyandrous marriages:

- "In Sacred Lonliness" by Todd Compton --

Also, here is Compton's response to his critics: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/7207/rev.html

~Gaia

[Doctor Steuss]

This string strikes an interesting thought in me: the whole controversy surrounding Joseph's Smith's claims, supporters and critics, has a very Old Testament feel to it. This man is either the real voice crying in the wilderness, while the rest of us are tickling itching ears...or he is one of the many self-promoters who throughout history of gathered followings of various sizes and levels of success.

I'm doubtful this controversy will ever end, prior to the 2nd coming.

Sometimes I wonder (perhaps heretically) if in his zeal to restore “all things,” he may have restored some stuff that wasn’t meant to be…