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

LDS Church: Mormon founder Joseph Smith wed 40 wives

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

  • #16
    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    Doesn't change the point of BTC's OP at all -- your Church is being forced to "fess up".

    Eventually, it's possibly YOU will even be led to the truth.
    I have known about the details of polygamy since I began investigating the church when I was in college. Heck, I knew Mormons had a history of polygamy long before then as well.

    -7up

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by seven7up View Post
      I have known about the details of polygamy since I began investigating the church when I was in college. Heck, I knew Mormons had a history of polygamy long before then as well.

      -7up
      Unfortunately, you failed to realize its implications.
      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by seven7up View Post
        I have known about the details of polygamy since I began investigating the church when I was in college. Heck, I knew Mormons had a history of polygamy long before then as well.

        -7up
        One article suggested that most Mormons have believed that Joseph Smith was only married to Emma. I always laugh at claims like this. What study can they cite to support it. Pretty much every member I have known is well aware about the practice of polygamy. How can they not when the Manifesto is in the LDS standard works? Of course the practice had to start somewhere. Of course Joseph Smith had more than one wife. Now members may differ on their knowledge of the subject as one would expect in any population. Some people know more on a subject than others but there is no shock here to the majority of members. I think the best number of wives he had was 35 but whether 35 or 40 is not that big of a difference.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          I'm trying to think of ANYWHERE ELSE in the Bible where an angel threatens to destroy an otherwise obedient follower. Smith was supposedly God's agent, and Emma was his faithful wife.
          I think the implication with the angel issue is that on the issue of polygamy, Joseph Smith was not being an obedient follower and Emma was not being a faithful wife as she did not want anything to do with the issue. In addition when one looks at the evidence, Joseph Smith did not really want to have anything to do with the practice. It was his Abrahamic test. Claims that Joseph Smith involved himself in polygamy because he was a womanizer, lusted after women, ect are all claims that really is not supported by the evidence. They make for good gossip and character attacks but it really does speak to the facts.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by carbon dioxide View Post
            I think the implication with the angel issue is that on the issue of polygamy, Joseph Smith was not being an obedient follower and Emma was not being a faithful wife as she did not want anything to do with the issue.
            You're avoiding the question.

            In addition when one looks at the evidence, Joseph Smith did not really want to have anything to do with the practice.
            Yeah, an a angel FORCED him to do what the BOM had declared an abomination.

            It was his Abrahamic test.
            No, it wasn't.

            Claims that Joseph Smith involved himself in polygamy because he was a womanizer, lusted after women, ect are all claims that really is not supported by the evidence.
            In the overall scheme of things, it fits Smith's arrogance and narcissistic nature.

            They make for good gossip and character attacks but it really does speak to the facts.
            It's not a character attack if it's true.

            So, how bout taking a crack at....

            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            I'm trying to think of ANYWHERE ELSE in the Bible where an angel threatens to destroy an otherwise obedient follower. Smith was supposedly God's agent, and Emma was his faithful wife.
            Where in the Bible does an angel threaten to destroy an otherwise obedient follower for not doing something that is against Scripture?
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Kind Debater View Post
              I've been reading the responses to this on a Mormon forum. There's at least one person who still insists that Smith wasn't a polygamist. Many seem to chalk up Smith's denials of polygamy to either his being human or to having to keep it secret, even from the church at large, due to persecution (particularly from people who left the church).

              Polygamy is a frequent topic there. It breaks my heart that 1) there are several LDS who are asking really good questions* about this and other topics, but they still believe and 2) there are people who have the right attitude, if you will, of being committed to God no matter what, but they use this to defend JS and polygamy.

              *Someone even pointed out that one of the things that bothers them is how many cult leaders institute polygamy within their cults.
              Cult members like Abraham and Jacob? You do know that the Bible is a great resource one can go to defend the practice. You do know that the only reason people have a problem with the practice is they have a modern, westernized view that it is wrong. If one looks at notable Christians who in history who did not grow up with a modern, westernized view, polygamy is not that big of a deal. Justin Martyr and Augustine

              "Again, Jacob the son of Isaac is charged with having committed a great crime because he had four wives. But here there is no ground for a criminal accusation: for a plurality of wives was no crime when it was the custom; and it is a crime now, because it is no longer the custom. There are sins against nature, and sins against custom, and sins against the laws. In which, then, of these senses did Jacob sin in having a plurality of wives? As regards nature, he used the women not for sensual gratification, but for the procreation of children. For custom, this was the common practice at that time in those countries. And for the laws, no prohibition existed. The only reason of its being a crime now to do this, is because custom and the laws forbid it." (Augustine, Reply to Faustus 22:47, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Series 1, 4:288)

              "And this one fall of David, in the matter of Uriah's wife, proves, sirs," I said, "that the patriarchs had many wives, not to commit fornication, but that a certain dispensation and all mysteries might be accomplished by them; since, if it were allowable to take any wife, or as many wives as one chooses, and how he chooses, which the men of your nation do over all the earth, wherever they sojourn, or wherever they have been sent, taking women under the name of marriage, much more would David have been permitted to do this." (Justin Martyr, Dialogue With Trypho 141, in Ante-Nicene Fathers 1:270)

              Martin Luther takes a view that is found in Jacob 2 in the Book of Mormon.

              "Consequently it is my opinion that a Christian is not free to marry several wives unless God commands him [See Jacob 2:30] to go beyond the liberty which is conditioned by love."(Luther to Joseph Levin Metzsch, 9 December 1526, in Theodore G. Tappert, ed. and trans., Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel, vol. 18 of the Library of Christian Classics (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1955), p. 276)

              Even more modern day Christians who live in Africa have not been completely against it.

              "Baptist and Methodist missions baptize those who entered a polygamous marriage before coming into contact with the Gospel or, more specifically, before making a decision to accept Christ. They do not consider polygamy a sin but feel that it is not the ideal of God." (Robert Hoist, in International Review of Missions 56 (April 1967): 205)

              "Let it be publicly declared that a polygamous African church may still be classified as a Christian church, even while monogamy remains the Christian norm, and that no such church will be excluded from Christian councils and full Christian fellowship solely because of its polygamy." (H. W. Turner, "Monogamy: A Mark of the Church?" International Review of Missions 55 (July 1966): 321)

              Mistakes may have been made when the LDS Church instituted polygamy. That is to be expected when anything new is started. Especially when what is being done is hard and controversial. I avoid finding too much fault simply because if I was in the position, I probably would not have done much better.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by carbon dioxide View Post
                Mistakes may have been made when the LDS Church instituted polygamy.
                Absolutely no doubt about it.

                That is to be expected when anything new is started. Especially when what is being done is hard and controversial. I avoid finding too much fault simply because if I was in the position, I probably would not have done much better.
                Yeah, so much for a "for really" prophet of God!
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                  Absolutely no doubt about it.



                  Yeah, so much for a "for really" prophet of God!
                  My view is that only Jesus was perfect. Everyone else including all the important figures in the Bible made mistakes. Perhaps you think prophets are perfect, infallible men who never make mistakes. That is not my view of what a prophet is.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by carbon dioxide View Post
                    My view is that only Jesus was perfect.
                    Something on which we can agree!

                    Everyone else including all the important figures in the Bible made mistakes.
                    NOTHING on a par with the bumbling and fumbling Smith did. WHICH of the real prophets, for example, preached against the use of alcohol, then set up a bar in his own hotel? Which of the real prophets swindled their flock out of money by setting up a bogus bank? Which of the prophets came up with a hairbrained "prophecy" threatening destruction of his own faithful wife? Which of the real prophets stole the wives of their own faithful followers?

                    I could go on and on.

                    Perhaps you think prophets are perfect, infallible men who never make mistakes.
                    Yeah, NRAJeff used to play that game, too.

                    That is not my view of what a prophet is.
                    So, God just happened to choose a "prophet" who was the MOST susceptible to screwups -- God chose THAT "prophet" to "restore" His Gospel?
                    .
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by carbon dioxide View Post
                      One article suggested that most Mormons have believed that Joseph Smith was only married to Emma. I always laugh at claims like this. What study can they cite to support it. Pretty much every member I have known is well aware about the practice of polygamy. How can they not when the Manifesto is in the LDS standard works? Of course the practice had to start somewhere. Of course Joseph Smith had more than one wife. Now members may differ on their knowledge of the subject as one would expect in any population. Some people know more on a subject than others but there is no shock here to the majority of members. I think the best number of wives he had was 35 but whether 35 or 40 is not that big of a difference.
                      So, why did he only testify to having one a month before his death?
                      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


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by carbon dioxide View Post
                        Cult members like Abraham and Jacob?
                        More like John of Leiden.

                        You do know that the Bible is a great resource one can go to defend the practice.
                        I know that the Bible promotes the ideal of marriage as one man and one woman being united. Hence God created one woman for Adam, and Jesus referred back to Adam and Eve and their "becoming one flesh" when he taught about marriage. Not to mention the warnings against kings having too many wives (when polygamy was permitted), the criteria that leaders in the church have only one wife and the documented problems of polygamous families (Leah and Rachel, Sarah and Hagar, Hannah and her husband's other wife).

                        You do know that the only reason people have a problem with the practice is they have a modern, westernized view that it is wrong.
                        So you don't have a problem with polygamy?

                        "Again, Jacob the son of Isaac is charged with having committed a great crime because he had four wives. But here there is no ground for a criminal accusation: for a plurality of wives was no crime when it was the custom; and it is a crime now, because it is no longer the custom. There are sins against nature, and sins against custom, and sins against the laws. In which, then, of these senses did Jacob sin in having a plurality of wives? As regards nature, he used the women not for sensual gratification, but for the procreation of children. For custom, this was the common practice at that time in those countries. And for the laws, no prohibition existed. The only reason of its being a crime now to do this, is because custom and the laws forbid it." (Augustine, Reply to Faustus 22:47, in The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Series 1, 4:288)
                        1. Augustine is defending Jacob by stating that there was no law against polygamy during his lifetime, which is true. That doesn't mean that polygamy was God's ideal for people. God also permitted easy divorce in Israel, but as Jesus said, that was due to the hardness of men's hearts, not because it was truly okay.

                        2. This is the opinion of Augustine, and not the word of God. This is not a direct revelation from God saying that polygamy is A-OK as long as it's legal.

                        The same goes for Justin Martyr and Martin Luther.

                        "Baptist and Methodist missions baptize those who entered a polygamous marriage before coming into contact with the Gospel or, more specifically, before making a decision to accept Christ. They do not consider polygamy a sin but feel that it is not the ideal of God." (Robert Hoist, in International Review of Missions 56 (April 1967): 205)
                        I don't have a problem with this. God is against divorce and I think this is an acceptable compromise given the situation.

                        Mistakes may have been made when the LDS Church instituted polygamy. That is to be expected when anything new is started. Especially when what is being done is hard and controversial. I avoid finding too much fault simply because if I was in the position, I probably would not have done much better.
                        If it were truly a command of God, then your attitude is understandable. But why do you think it was truly a command of God?

                        And while we're on this topic, no LDS poster has responded to this post of mine on polygamy.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          If polygamy was an "Abrahamic test" then God would have stopped Smith before he actually did it, like he did Abraham.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                            If polygamy was an "Abrahamic test" then God would have stopped Smith before he actually did it, like he did Abraham.
                            And I don't remember God threatening Isaac with destruction if he didn't go along with the it.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              And I don't remember God threatening Isaac with destruction if he didn't go along with the it.
                              Just Emma.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                                Just Emma.
                                And Smith, but he was more deserving of destruction.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

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