Announcement

Collapse

LDS - Mormonism Guidelines

Theists only.

Look! It's a bird, no it's a plane, no it's a bicycle built for two!

This forum is a debate area to discuss issues pertaining to the LDS - Mormons. This forum is generally for theists only, and is generaly not the area for debate between atheists and theists. Non-theists may not post here without first obtaining permission from the moderator of this forum. Granting of such permission is subject to Moderator discretion - and may be revoked if the Moderator feels that the poster is not keeping with the spirit of the World Religions Department.

Due to the sensitive nature of the LDS Temple Ceremonies to our LDS posters, we do not allow posting exact text of the temple rituals, articles describing older versions of the ceremony, or links that provide the same information. However discussion of generalities of the ceremony are not off limits. If in doubt, PM the area mod or an Admin


Non-theists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

The DESTRUCTION of Emma Smith

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The DESTRUCTION of Emma Smith

    OK, so she wasn't "destroyed", but, IMOHBAO, that was the threat Smith made against her under the guise of a "revelation" from God. Here's what triggered this post:

    Originally posted by seven7up View Post
    Obviously he wasn't perfect, but I don't think that Joseph made as many errors as people accuse him of. I think that God placed him in very, very difficult circumstances. I know you don't believe that God did this, but just imagine for a moment. Imagine that God personally visits you tonight and asks you to start practicing polygamy as a direct command. How would you handle it? How would you go about it? Who would you ask? How would you tell your wife?


    -7up
    First of all, I obviously do not believe God would command me to become a serial adulterer, only to later rescind that command.

    Secondly, I was less disposed to calling Smith an outright fraud than some of my Tweb friends, until I discovered the threat Smith made to his faithful wife, Emma. I can't think of many things more blatantly abusive of God's power than to use a bogus "revelation" to try to force somebody who loves you into letting you do something that is obviously against the Scripture.

    To me, this was the "final straw", that Smith would threaten his wife with DESTRUCTION if she didn't put up with his serial sexual trysts.

    Source: LDS.org D&C 132

    51 Verily, I say unto you: A commandment I give unto mine handmaid, Emma Smith, your wife, whom I have given unto you, that she stay herself and partake not of that which I commanded you to offer unto her; for I did it, saith the Lord, to prove you all, as I did Abraham, and that I might require an offering at your hand, by covenant and sacrifice.

    52 And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, receive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.

    53 For I am the Lord thy God, and ye shall obey my voice; and I give unto my servant Joseph that he shall be made ruler over many things; for he hath been faithful over a few things, and from henceforth I will strengthen him.

    54 And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.

    55 But if she will not abide this commandment, then shall my servant Joseph do all things for her, even as he hath said; and I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an hundred-fold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children, and crowns of eternal lives in the eternal worlds.

    © Copyright Original Source



    Now, according to FairMormon.org, the command that Emma "cleave to" her husband had nothing to do with his adultery (plural marriages), but was just instructing her to "cleave to him".

    Note that if she does NOT obey, Smith conveniently gets an added bonus.
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

  • #2
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    OK, so she wasn't "destroyed", but, IMOHBAO, that was the threat Smith made against her under the guise of a "revelation" from God. Here's what triggered this post:



    First of all, I obviously do not believe God would command me to become a serial adulterer, only to later rescind that command.

    Secondly, I was less disposed to calling Smith an outright fraud than some of my Tweb friends, until I discovered the threat Smith made to his faithful wife, Emma. I can't think of many things more blatantly abusive of God's power than to use a bogus "revelation" to try to force somebody who loves you into letting you do something that is obviously against the Scripture.

    To me, this was the "final straw", that Smith would threaten his wife with DESTRUCTION if she didn't put up with his serial sexual trysts.

    Source: LDS.org D&C 132

    51 Verily, I say unto you: A commandment I give unto mine handmaid, Emma Smith, your wife, whom I have given unto you, that she stay herself and partake not of that which I commanded you to offer unto her; for I did it, saith the Lord, to prove you all, as I did Abraham, and that I might require an offering at your hand, by covenant and sacrifice.

    52 And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, receive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.

    53 For I am the Lord thy God, and ye shall obey my voice; and I give unto my servant Joseph that he shall be made ruler over many things; for he hath been faithful over a few things, and from henceforth I will strengthen him.

    54 And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.

    55 But if she will not abide this commandment, then shall my servant Joseph do all things for her, even as he hath said; and I will bless him and multiply him and give unto him an hundred-fold in this world, of fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and children, and crowns of eternal lives in the eternal worlds.

    © Copyright Original Source



    Now, according to FairMormon.org, the command that Emma "cleave to" her husband had nothing to do with his adultery (plural marriages), but was just instructing her to "cleave to him".

    Note that if she does NOT obey, Smith conveniently gets an added bonus.
    The whole D&C132 is about Smith using "God" to justify his sexual perversions. He can have as many women as he wants and not be sinning, but if any of the women cheat on him, well then, they are condemned. Or if they refuse to allow him to have his way, then they are condemned.

    The whole thing is such an obvious ploy that the Mormons around him must have been complete rubes to fall for it. It simply amazes me how gullible they were. And still are.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      The whole D&C132 is about Smith using "God" to justify his sexual perversions. He can have as many women as he wants and not be sinning, but if any of the women cheat on him, well then, they are condemned. Or if they refuse to allow him to have his way, then they are condemned.

      The whole thing is such an obvious ploy that the Mormons around him must have been complete rubes to fall for it. It simply amazes me how gullible they were. And still are.
      Yeah, where FairMormon "defends" Smith's "revelation" about Emma, it conveniently takes that one verse out of context, and I guess they hope you don't try to read the whole section.
      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

      Comment


      • #4
        You will hear crickets...
        That's what
        - She

        Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
        - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

        I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
        Stephen R. Donaldson

        Comment


        • #5
          *chirp*

          "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot


          "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

          My Personal Blog

          My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
            You will hear crickets...
            Yeah, OC very dutifully took this on, but it didn't seem like his heart was in it, particularly when I asked questions like "what if the Lord revealed to me that I should take YOUR wife to be mine...."
            "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

            Comment


            • #7
              I had two young Mormon Missionaries at my door and we read this together because of course they aren't afraid to read their own scripture. I asked them what it meant to them after they read it. The one honest young man said it was disturbing and he would ask his leaders and get back to me on the interpretation. The whole conversation was cordial and polite and lasted only about 5 minutes. They never came back. I suspect they were told by their leaders that I was doomed to outer darkness or something.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by DigitalInkling View Post
                I had two young Mormon Missionaries at my door and we read this together because of course they aren't afraid to read their own scripture. I asked them what it meant to them after they read it. The one honest young man said it was disturbing and he would ask his leaders and get back to me on the interpretation. The whole conversation was cordial and polite and lasted only about 5 minutes. They never came back. I suspect they were told by their leaders that I was doomed to outer darkness or something.
                Yeah, Other Cheek tried valiantly to defend Smith on this, but when put in terms of his own wife, he had a really hard time... This is a classic case of Smith just "making up a revelation" to save his own skin. REAL prophets don't do that.

                I'll light a for you, DI, so you won't be in the dark.
                "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                Comment


                • #9
                  I reread the D&C 132 and it is so horrible. I believe it is one of them most controlling verses in the Mormon scriptures. If you are not troubled by this verse as a Mormon you have no compassion for Emma. I will say even if you believe Joseph was a prophet the "God" that inspired this would need to be questioned. Scary stuff.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by DigitalInkling View Post
                    I reread the D&C 132 and it is so horrible. I believe it is one of them most controlling verses in the Mormon scriptures. If you are not troubled by this verse as a Mormon you have no compassion for Emma. I will say even if you believe Joseph was a prophet the "God" that inspired this would need to be questioned. Scary stuff.
                    I have been absolutely amazed at the way Mormons on TWeb have tried to "explain" this... it's almost like excusing the sexual assault of their sister because the "bad guy" was somebody they were trying to protect. It is the "final straw" that convinced me that Smith was a lying manipulating opportunistic.... I get angry just thinking about this.
                    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      I have been absolutely amazed at the way Mormons on TWeb have tried to "explain" this... it's almost like excusing the sexual assault of their sister because the "bad guy" was somebody they were trying to protect. It is the "final straw" that convinced me that Smith was a lying manipulating opportunistic.... I get angry just thinking about this.
                      Originally posted by DigitalInkling View Post
                      I reread the D&C 132 and it is so horrible. I believe it is one of them most controlling verses in the Mormon scriptures. If you are not troubled by this verse as a Mormon you have no compassion for Emma. I will say even if you believe Joseph was a prophet the "God" that inspired this would need to be questioned. Scary stuff.
                      And atheists say the same thing about stuff like God telling Abraham to sacrifice Isaac and telling the Israelites to wipe out the Canaanites. We have to draw a distinction here between legitimate commands of God and lies. God can command someone to do something that would be wrong unless God himself commanded it, like child sacrifice and genocide. And he does have the right to kill or condemn people who disobey him, especially a direct or obvious command. Given that LDS believe Smith was a true prophet and therefore God himself was the one issuing the command, of course they're going to defend it even if they find it personally distasteful. If you believe that God is perfect, holy, omniscient, etc. and you're committed to following him, then you have to trust God's judgment over your own. That's part of what following God means.

                      What distinguishes the difficult commands in the OT from LDS polygamy is that God made it clear that he was the one issuing the commands. God spoke directly to Abraham and Abraham had plenty of direct experience with God prior to this point. God commanded the Israelites through Moses and Joshua, and they both performed miracles that made it clear that God had appointed them. As for Smith, the people affected by his proclamation of polygamy didn't see him do any miracles and didn't have any confirmation that this was truly a command from God. Smith's saying that God commanded polygamy when he really didn't was not only a lie, but a slandering of God's character. And it was incredibly damaging as he convinced many people to follow him into sin. This reminds me of the kings of Israel and Judah, who were held doubly responsible for not only practicing idolatry but leading their people into sin as well.

                      So the problem is not so much LDS defending their church's teachings and history even though they find it repugnant; the problem is in taking Smith at his word and believing him to be a true prophet despite his clearly contradicting Biblical teachings and not providing any real evidence that God was speaking through him. When it's a case of some guy's word versus God's word, you're supposed to go with God's word. This was the error of Smith's followers and it continues to this day.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Kind Debater View Post
                        And atheists say the same thing about stuff like God telling Abraham to sacrifice Isaac and telling the Israelites to wipe out the Canaanites. We have to draw a distinction here between legitimate commands of God and lies. God can command someone to do something that would be wrong unless God himself commanded it, like child sacrifice and genocide. And he does have the right to kill or condemn people who disobey him, especially a direct or obvious command. Given that LDS believe Smith was a true prophet and therefore God himself was the one issuing the command, of course they're going to defend it even if they find it personally distasteful. If you believe that God is perfect, holy, omniscient, etc. and you're committed to following him, then you have to trust God's judgment over your own. That's part of what following God means.

                        What distinguishes the difficult commands in the OT from LDS polygamy is that God made it clear that he was the one issuing the commands. God spoke directly to Abraham and Abraham had plenty of direct experience with God prior to this point. God commanded the Israelites through Moses and Joshua, and they both performed miracles that made it clear that God had appointed them. As for Smith, the people affected by his proclamation of polygamy didn't see him do any miracles and didn't have any confirmation that this was truly a command from God. Smith's saying that God commanded polygamy when he really didn't was not only a lie, but a slandering of God's character. And it was incredibly damaging as he convinced many people to follow him into sin. This reminds me of the kings of Israel and Judah, who were held doubly responsible for not only practicing idolatry but leading their people into sin as well.

                        So the problem is not so much LDS defending their church's teachings and history even though they find it repugnant; the problem is in taking Smith at his word and believing him to be a true prophet despite his clearly contradicting Biblical teachings and not providing any real evidence that God was speaking through him. When it's a case of some guy's word versus God's word, you're supposed to go with God's word. This was the error of Smith's followers and it continues to this day.
                        Agreed. An aggravating factor, of course, is that Smith's "revelations" from God often benefited himself, to the detriment of his followers.
                        "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Kind Debater View Post
                          And atheists say the same thing about stuff like God telling Abraham to sacrifice Isaac and telling the Israelites to wipe out the Canaanites. We have to draw a distinction here between legitimate commands of God and lies. God can command someone to do something that would be wrong unless God himself commanded it, like child sacrifice and genocide. And he does have the right to kill or condemn people who disobey him, especially a direct or obvious command. Given that LDS believe Smith was a true prophet and therefore God himself was the one issuing the command, of course they're going to defend it even if they find it personally distasteful. If you believe that God is perfect, holy, omniscient, etc. and you're committed to following him, then you have to trust God's judgment over your own. That's part of what following God means.

                          What distinguishes the difficult commands in the OT from LDS polygamy is that God made it clear that he was the one issuing the commands. God spoke directly to Abraham and Abraham had plenty of direct experience with God prior to this point. God commanded the Israelites through Moses and Joshua, and they both performed miracles that made it clear that God had appointed them. As for Smith, the people affected by his proclamation of polygamy didn't see him do any miracles and didn't have any confirmation that this was truly a command from God. Smith's saying that God commanded polygamy when he really didn't was not only a lie, but a slandering of God's character. And it was incredibly damaging as he convinced many people to follow him into sin. This reminds me of the kings of Israel and Judah, who were held doubly responsible for not only practicing idolatry but leading their people into sin as well.

                          So the problem is not so much LDS defending their church's teachings and history even though they find it repugnant; the problem is in taking Smith at his word and believing him to be a true prophet despite his clearly contradicting Biblical teachings and not providing any real evidence that God was speaking through him. When it's a case of some guy's word versus God's word, you're supposed to go with God's word. This was the error of Smith's followers and it continues to this day.
                          All good points.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                            You will hear crickets...
                            Yes, we have no Mormons capable of taking this on.
                            "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              Yes, we have no Mormons capable of taking this on.
                              Oh right, I don't count anymore....
                              I am Punkinhead.

                              "I have missed you, Oh Grand High Priestess of the Order of the Stirring Pot"

                              ~ Cow Poke aka CP aka Creacher aka ke7ejx's apprentice....

                              Comment

                              widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                              Working...
                              X