You are full of miss-information
Being an ancestor of a person who practiced legal plural marriage I have some inside information on this so I can say with some confidence -- you've got it all wrong.
I have no sympathy for modern illegal polygamy/polygamists.
D
2007-09-12 06:35:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by Dionysus 5
·
4⤊
0⤋
I assume you're talking about Jeffs.....who is not a Mormon.
From the beginning of time people have been carnal. Often people use religion as an excuse to do the things they want to do.
Jeffs is a despicable person. He has had a history of trapping, controlling, and forcing underage girls to marry him. Joseph Smith was not excited to practice polygamy. He was commanded to by God. Now, you should really talk to God to find out if he was or was not a Prophet. Yahoo answers probably won't be united on that answer.
If he was a prophet, then it was ok and God had a reason for giving, and later revoking, that instrucion. If he wasn't then it's just part of Joseph Smiths ideology. Ask God...he'll know.
2007-09-17 22:26:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by Ender 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
You are wrong. Joseph did not force the relationship on anyone. Yes, it was taught that if you did not accept the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage, that your eternal progress would be stopped, you could not progress to the highest level. However, no body was forced into it. Joseph did not take underage women to wife. The fundamentalist in Southern Utah and Northern Arizona do not conduct themselves anything like the Prophet Joseph.
For your information, non-LDS sources are the most unreliable sources available. Here is the principle, and it is applicable throughout life. Those that have not the spirit, do not comprehend things of the spirit. Therefore, to ask a non-LDS to explain the LDS doctrines, they cannot because they don't comprehend it in its true nature. Let me give you another example. Thomas F. O'Day wrote a book many years ago, entiteled "The Mormons". He was a Benedictine Monk in the Catholic Church. He was also a trained sociologist. He tried to explain the LDS Church in rational, objective terms. In order to do so, he had to ignore the element of faith and the workings of the Spirit. As a result, he had a highly inaccurate description of the Church. Anybody that tries to explain religion without the element of faith, is eviscerating the religion because faith is the very essence of religion. You cannot understand what the Church is all about without including the workings of the Spirit.
So I sumit to you that the marriage covenants practiced in the 19th century by the LDS Church were entirely different than the counterfeit version that you see today.
You need to study LDS sources and then ponder and pray about the results of your study. Only then can the Holy Ghost manifest the truth of the work to you.
2007-09-17 07:57:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by rac 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Why are we arguing semantics?
Is your position really so WEAK that you must attack a DECEASED historical figure just to feel good about yourself?
If you must tamper with a brother's fame, then do it to Hinckley or Monsen or somebody who can defend themselves and their actions here and now.
For the sake of fairness, I should at least humor your question. If you aren't asking this to defame Joseph Smith, or the LDS Church, then you are asking it rhetorically in defense of modern day polygamists.
Even if this is the case, it doesn't carry water. Likening such men to Joseph Smith is to say that there is no doubt that Joseph Smith told his wives that they would go to Hell if they didn't marry/have sex with him. Mormon or not, a rational person would have a hard time assuming something that is heavy with hearsay and despaired by almost 170 years.
For the sake of argument, let's say that this did in fact happen. Does the fact that Joseph Smith did this and wasn't punished for it (in this world) justify others doing the same thing? If you just answered yes, I dare you to run a red light because the person before you did it and try passing such logic off to the police officer.
2007-09-12 18:44:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by Feelin Randi? 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
Non mormon sources are like antimormon sources. Should I learn about protestantism from Catholics or Muslims..
Got this from a website about Smith's Plural wives.
In Mormon theology and ritual, spouses were generally married for time and eternity, but under special circumstances, as when a widow had already married her first husband for time and eternity, the partners were "seated" for time only. Most of Joseph Smith's plural marriages were re-solemnized in the Nauvoo temple, with living men standing proxy for Smith; generally, the proxy husbands were then married to the women for time.
Here's what you said on another question:
Sifting Member since: February 03, 2007
Sifting
Royal jelly is an aphrodisiac
2007-09-16 09:04:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by Brother G 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
1. Joseph smith had only one wife.
2. Jeffs is not "Mormon", he is called a fundamentalist. He is not associated with the core LDS faith, and is not recognized.
3. There's no proof he said anything like that, even if there was something written to that effect who's to say it wasn't written by one of his enemies.
4. Granted, Joseph wasn't exactly the most humble person (especially just before his death), but when ever he was arrested, he was released with no charges. Jeffs is on trial.
5. like any culture, ours has changed. Today a 21 year could get married, but any younger is frowned on. 18 is the legal age. not long ago 18 year olds married. In Joseph smith's time it was very common for 16 year olds to marry.
6. Why would Joseph Smith say wives would go to hell when the church doesn't believe in hell.
7. It is true that the main body of "Mormons" have practiced polygamy at one point in time. But when it was legal, and not any more. Anyone found in polygamy is excommunicated. It is a very bad practice, but what's "natural"? Plural marriage or gay marriage. The bible has many men of god the had more the one wife.
8. I would bring up even more points but I doubt your mind is open to any thoughts at this time.
2007-09-12 04:11:18
·
answer #6
·
answered by Coool 4
·
4⤊
4⤋
Yes there certainly is, we aren't meting out justice nowadays like we did in the "good old days", are we? We should organize mobs and go in to where Jeffs' followers live and rape their women, kill their men, and burn all their homes down. Then we should force them to walk on foot across the plains during the winter, during which many of them will die. Oh, and we should also organize a mob to go in and murder this Warren Jeffs fellow in jail. That would be more equal treatment, wouldn't it...
Joseph Smith never told anyone that. It's easy to slander the prophet here on an anonymous forum without any supporting evidence for your claims, isn't it?
EDIT: We're still waiting for some of this readily obtainable, verifiable evidence to support your claims......
2007-09-12 04:08:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by Open Heart Searchery 7
·
5⤊
1⤋
OMG: Coool doesn't know what he is talking about. He says that Joseph Smith only had one wife...does he even know anything about his own church? Joseph Smith had over 30 wives. That can be determined by going to lds.org and clicking on the family history website and searching on Joseph Smith.
Liesel.
2007-09-17 16:33:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by Liesel 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
You don't even have to look at "non-Mormon sources"... D. Michael Quinn (Mormon Historian) documents it all in three of his books:
Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power
Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power
Early Mormonism and the Magic World View
Smith had at least three child brides, one of whom was Heber C Kimball's daughter. There is strong evidence, both inside and outside of Smith-descended churches, that he also had others, such as Fanny Alger in 1831 or 1833. These girls ranged from 14 to 17 years in age. At least four later testified (although Alger's testimony is disputed, but Emma testified to have caught her "in the act" with Joseph) that they had had sexual relations with Smith. We have VERY well-documented evidence of Smith swooning Helen Mar Kimball into the marriage with a heaven/hell plea, and in her own handwriting, as well as that of her father.
Lucy Walker (the day after her 17th birthday)
Helen Kimball (14 years old)
Sarah Lawrence (shortly after 17th birthday)
Sarah Ann Whitney (2 mos after 17th birthday)
Catherine Walker (16 or 17 years old):
Fanny Alger (14 or 16 years old)
2007-09-17 07:01:11
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
ok. first off, a little clarification.....
Jeffs is the leader of a polygamist group that has members in the Intermountain West of the US and in western Canada. Jeffs is not now, and never has been a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons). Neither does he have any connection or association, official or unofficial, with the Church. Jeffs and his followers are in violation of the civil law. They know they are in violation of the law. They are subject to its penalties.
If any of the LDS members are found to be practicing plural marriage, they are excommunicated, the most serious penalty the Church can impose. They are in direct violation of the civil law, they are in violation of the law of this Church. The LDS article of our faith is binding upon us - “We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law”.
LDS believe that more than a century ago God revealed unto His prophet Wilford Woodruff that the practice of plural marriage should be discontinued, which means that it is against the law of God. Even in countries where civil or religious law allows polygamy, the Church teaches that marriage must be monogamous and does not accept into its membership those practicing plural marriage.
That being said - Joseph Smith did some things I personally do not agree with. So did some of the prophets from the Bible. There is also written accounts of Joseph's chastisement from God as He worked with him to restore His church. Man is fallible and capable of mistakes. The church itself has corrected the situation with poygamy as afore mentioned.
2007-09-12 08:23:29
·
answer #10
·
answered by phrog 7
·
3⤊
1⤋