Jared, a Mormon Fundamentalist, brought his sign to the streets of Manti, Utah preceding a 2011 Mormon Miracle Pageant performance. He graciously agreed to give Aaron an interview (below).
Viewpoint on Mormonism Archives
Blogroll
- 365 Reasons
- Apologetics 315
- Ensign vs. The Bible
- Heart Issues for LDS
- Heart of the Matter
- I Love Mormons
- Keith Walker
- Latter-day Saint Woman
- Mark Cares
- Mormonism Investigated UK
- Mormonite Musings
- Mormons are Christians… aren't we?
- Musings on Mormonism
- Of First Importance
- Share the Son Ministries
- The Mormon Chapbook
- The Religious Researcher
- Utah Advance
Links
Subscribe
Join the Discussion
Check out our comment policy.Categories
Afterlife Authority and Doctrine Baptism for the Dead Bible Book of Mormon Brigham Young Christianity Coffee Beans D&C and Pearl of Great Price Early Christianity Early Mormonism Forgiveness Friendship, Interaction, and Evangelism General Conference God the Father Gospel Grace Great Apostasy Jesus Christ Joseph Smith King Follett Discourse LDS Church Marriage and Singlehood Misconceptions Mitt Romney Mormon Culture Mormon History Mormon Leaders Mormon Missionaries Mormon Scripture Mormon Temple Multimedia Nature of God Nature of Man Nauvoo Personal Stories Polygamy Priesthood Prophets Salvation Truth, Honesty, Prayer, and Inquiry Uncategorized Viewpoint on Mormonism Virgin birth Worthiness
On October 8th 1854, Brigham Young gave what Wilford Woodruff said was the greatest discourse ever given to the Latter-day Saints as a people. Young said, shortly after beginning:
I feel inclined here to make a little scripture. (were I under the necessity of making scripture extensively I should get Bro. Heber C. Kimball to make it, and then I would quote it. I have seen him do this when the [Elders] have been pressed by their opponents, and were a little at a loss; he would make a scripture for them to suite the case, that never was in the bible, though none the less true, and make their opponents swallow it as the words of Paul, Christ, or some of the Prophets. The Elder would then say, “Please turn to that scripture, and read it for yourselves.” No they could not turn to it but they recollected it like the devil for fear of being caught.) I will venture to make a little. scripture …
He then said:
All things are first made spiritual, and brought forth into his kingdom. The spirits of all the human family were born of one father. Now be watchful, for if I have time, and feel able, I shall communicate something in connection with this you are not expecting. Yes, every son and daughter of Adam according to the flesh can claim one parentage; the heathen, and the christian, the jew and the gentile, the high and
the low, the king and the beggar, the black and the white, all who have sprung from Adam and Eve have one father. “Then you make it out we are bretheren and sisters.” Certainly for the whole human family are made of one blood; – the same material; they are all begotten and brought forth by one parentage, and from one generation to another they are of one flesh and blood, and of one kindered. The God and father [of] our Lord Jesus Christ is the father of our spirits.
Moses said Adam was made of the dust of the ground, but he did not say of what ground. I say he was not made of the dust of the ground of this earth, but he was made of the dust of the earth were he lived, where he honered his calling, beleiving in his saviour, or elder brother, and by his faithfulness, was redeemed, and got a glorious ressurection. All creatures that dwell upon this earth are made of the elements that compose it; which are organised to see if they will abide their creation, and be counted worthy to receive a resurrection.
I tell you more, Adam is the father of our spirits. He lived upon an earth; he did abide his creation, and did honor his calling and priesthood, and obeyed his master or Lord, and probably many of his wives did also , and they lived, and died upon an earth, and were resurrected again
to immortality and eternal life.
Now, many inquiries will be made about the saviour such as, Who is he? Is he the Father of Adam? Is he the God of Adam? When Christ has finished his labor and presented it to his father, then he, Adam will receive A fullness. That is all easily understood by me. He cannot rec[e]ive a fullness of the kingdoms he has organised until they are completed. If he sends his servants off to the right and to the left to perform a certian [certain] labor his kingdom is not complete, until his ministers have accomplished every thing to make his kingdom complete and returned home again.
Many inquire who is this saviour? I will tell you what I think about it, and what the revelations say as the [ ] say I re[c]kon, and as the Yankys [Yankees] say I guess; but I will tell you what I reakon [reckon].
I reakon that father Adam was a ressurrected being, with his wives and posterity, and in the Celestial kingdom they wer[e] crowed with glory immortality and eternal lives, with throwns [thrones,] principalities and powers: and it was said to him it is your right to organise the elements; and to your creations and posterity there shall be no end, but you shall add kingdom to kingdom, thrown [throne] to thrown [throne]; and still behold the vast eternity of unorganised matter. Adam then
was a ressurected being; and I reakon, Our spirits and the spirits of all the human family were begotten by Adam, and born of Eve.
This people, is the Adam-god revelation to Young. He taught it, believed it, and said it was a revelation to him from his god. _johnny
Excellent job grindael however I must point out the Mormon Escape Clause when it comes to revelation. It has several different points to it but primarily if a revelation sounds nutty in years subsequent to its pronouncement, it is null and void. In-other-words, it’s the “doesn’t count” part of the Escape Clause.
If you were still a Mormon, this would all make sense to you!
Johnny,
The LDS blow all of this off as just Brigham Young’s “opinion.” I wonder what he would think about that? At least the FLDS continue in the original faith started by Joseph Smith and the following 5 or so prophets after him. I don’t know how anyone can pinpoint what the LDS believe. It can be changed at the whim of the next person in line, with LDS apologist waiting to twist or spin the last prophet’s words into something that makes that prophet look less like a prophet of their god and more like a man who had no idea what he was talking about.
Great interview Aaron! I could see Jared really thinking about what you were saying. I’ve never really spoken to any FLDS concerning doctrine. It is so refreshing to have someone come right out and say they believe Adam is god and give honest, straightforward answers to these questions. Hopefully Jared will take your challenge and read John or Romans with new eyes and come to the saving Grace that is in Christ alone. Good job!
Kate, Young spoke to this just a few years before he died, and said:
“How much unbelief exists in the minds of the Latter-day Saints in regard to one particular doctrine which I have revealed to them, and which God revealed to me – namely that Adam is our Father and God” – Deseret News, June 14, 1873
And here are a few other memorable quotes:
“You talk about teaching false doctrine and being damned. Here is a list of false doctrines that if anyone teaches he will be damned. And there is not one of these that I have ever known to be taught in the Church, but I am giving you the list for a perspective because of what will follow. Teach that God is a Spirit, the sectarian trinity. Teach that salvation comes by grace alone, without works. Teach original guilt, or birth sin, as they express it. Teach infant baptism. Teach predestination. Teach that revelation and gifts and miracles have ceased. Teach the Adam-God theory (that does apply in the Church). Teach that we should practice plural marriage today. Now, any of those are doctrines that damn” (Sermons and Writings of Bruce R. McConkie, p.337).
And McConkie said this about the Adam-god doctrine:
I think you can give me credit for having a knowledge of the quotations from Brigham Young relative to Adam, and of knowing what he taught under the subject that has become known as the Adam God Theory. President Joseph Fielding Smith said that Brigham Young will
OK, I got through the entire interview and it was very enlightening. I watched Jared’s body language and he went from a very confident young man to one who was being pushed to the limits by things he had never considered.
He just couldn’t fully accept the idea that someday, in his religion, he will be worshiped, adored and prayed to by the countless minions who would call (Jared) god. It was apparent that he was very uncomfortable with even the thought of such a thing.
It is very difficult for someone like Jared to give-up his Mormon doctrine because he had that intense emotional and physical reaction when he listened to his prophet speak. He considered it a witness from the Holy Ghost. So he’d have to deny that that reaction came from the Holy Ghost and begin to consider other possible explanations (for it). It is a good ploy however for a “prophet” who’s a gifted speaker and has the ability to move people emotionally to attribute the emotional/physical reaction to the Holy Ghost. Once Jared begins to think that possibly, maybe that the feeling wasn’t from God, then he can begin to consider that the prophet isn’t a prophet and that the revelations attributed to God, aren’t from God at all.
Jared’s a very nice young man. My prayer is that the Spirit of God will witness to Him the truth of the Biblical message that there is but One God, infinite, eternal, self-sufficient and complete.
Watched the whole interview, impressed with both Jared and Aaron for knowing their scriptures.
Aaron particularly had his verses well memorized concerning the nature of God, everlasting to everlasting, etc. Jared might have not been up to speed on this aspect but carried himself very well in explaining early history of the Church and various prophets and doctrine. Jared was there most likely to defend his religion through the teaching of BY and others. He does admit to the preexistence, the truth of the BOM and most likely other Mormon Doctrine. He seemed very nervous at first but totally got up to speed and admitted he even liked the debate with Aaron since there seemed to be little contention. Wish we could find a little bit more of that here at MC. đ
What did I get from all of this, not much more then we seem to agree not to agree when TBM’s face off with enemies of the Church. I use the word enemies since so much is said untruthfully about our Prophet JS and his early history regarding the New and Everlasting Covenant. Any way that my two cents.
Helen/Louis đ
Aaron really got at the essential question when he walked Jared through the BoM and more importantly the Bible to show him how both identify God as One and eternal. Now there will be those Mormons who will try to pull out the “of this world” view of those verses I’m sure but neither are saying that. It would be beyond speculation and would be a typical Mormon add-on to suggest such a thing.
That’s typical Mormonism. What the Bible says is not important it’s the latest revelation from the latest false Mormon prophet that drives their commitment to the cult of Mormonism.
I think the interview points out, right at the outset, how many different sects of Mormonism there are from those who hold to an original Mormonism, to those who are full-fledged BY Mormons as is Jared, and then the hybrid version of Mormonism as practiced by the Salt Lake City sect. Yup, and they each claim to have the true blue revelation.
I’d advice Mormons to dump the whole matter and turn back to Christ.
Helen said
Since you said it, why not back it up with quotes said from people.
Enemies of the Church claim JS was adulterous, was convicted for fraud, a liar and etc, etc.
So Rick B. do you or do you not agree with the above? I call them enemies of the Church if they misrepresent Joseph Smith without any facts or evidence to bolster their accusations.
Helen/Louis đ
Helen,
Get a grip…….on your Kool Aid. I still think you’re a plant on this blog just messing around for the fun of it; trying to get a raise out of people. I can’t believe anyone could possibly be as naive and uninformed as you present yourself. If you are the real deal and are an example of what’s sitting in the pews of the Mormon churches, it says volumes about what kind of people join cults.
You did provide me with a snicker before I head off to bed.
I accomplished a good deed today, I got someone to snicker and feel good. Yes I am the real deal, TBM or whatever that might mean to some.
True blue or totally blind mormon! so what is in a Acronym? just a label for the those ignorant of what a LDS person really is.
As I have stated repeatedly, some come here to sensationalize and some like me come to correct.
Still waiting for further evidence that JS was convicted of Fraud, or that BY stated only those who practices Plural Marriage were exalted.
Ok, I haven’t gotten a chance to watch the whole thing yet, but just the first few minutes are fascinating. I have to give the guy credit, he knows his church’s original teachings and isn’t afraid to admit he believes them. The majority of mainstream Mormons try to either ignore it or explain it away. At least this guy is willing to step up and own the original doctrine. Can’t wait to finish it.
In some ways it was painful to watch Jared as he went from being very confident repeating his talking points and then getting knocked off his game as he began to consider the implications of what Aaron was asking him. First of all where was he to go with the references in the Bible and then the supporting verses in the BoM that clearly show that there is One God. Just that realization would shake any Mormon and cause them to try and find some possible explanation for the discrepancy between what they say they believe and what is written.
Of course the explanation from some Mormons is that there is new and better revelation; more light. The problem is that Mormons don’t follow-up with the next question because to do so renders their explanations inadequate.
Also, it doesn’t take long, in the conversation, before applying some logic to BY and what he taught begins to fall apart.
I think if Jared does what Aaron advised him to do, read John and Romans in light of this information regarding God, that (Jared) will conclude rightly that these men he has been trusting in are very poor guides in finding his way to the Father.
Honestly, I’m so impressed at the way Aaron engaged this guy. I hope to one day be able to be that kind and considerate of the Mormon I’m speaking to. I’m not there yet. I may have a long ways to go! đ I hope that some LDS here at MC are watching this video. I would love for them to see a fellow Mormon unashamed at his doctrines and prophets. Jared just puts it all out there, even the doctrine on the Blacks, which shows that Brigham Young was a racist. I understand the time that he lived in, but LDS apologists love to make Brigham out to be a lover of all races. Yes, open honesty in Mormonism is very refreshing.
Falcon reasoned, “I think if Jared does what Aaron advised him to do, read John and Romans in light of this information regarding God, that (Jared) will conclude rightly that these men he has been trusting in are very poor guides in finding his way to the Father.”
It is obvious that Jared is not up to speed on scriptures that Aaron knew and practiced so well, showing Aaron’s obvious superiority, in a subject he was well versed in versus Jared who apparently felt his own personal argument was more in keeping with the sign he brought along and was more prepared to show and explain where he was coming from; the debate might have been a little different.
I give both of them kudos for keeping the love of Christ above any personal bashing of the others beliefs or contention. Jared obviously when he had calmed down was really getting into the debate and showed a mature and collected young man that agreed he never really though much about becoming a God or having others worship him, kudos to you Jared.
Helen/Louis
For now i just want to comment on that BY quote posted by Grindael. One thing that never crosses a mormon´s mind is that we might be children of the same father but not of the same mother. That´s very weird isn´t it? Isn´t it true that Elohim is god because he lives all of the celestial laws, if that´s so then you have to accept that “truth” that we are half-brothers and sisters.
And a while back we were talking about mormons worshiping heavenly mother, can you imagine the mess it would be if everyone started getting their heavenly mother´s name in the patriarchal blessing, they would be praying to a hundred or more different women from the pulpit and some would be claiming to be more special than others because they were born of the original first wife? That´s disturbing to say the least.
All thanks to Joseph Smith and Brigham Young – If all of Brigham´s teachings are true i hope i´ll soon see the first presidency clarifying that to the people. But they know those teachings are not true. I even heard one mormon saying once that god used Brigham Young because of his leaderships skills to take the members of the church to Utah and that everything else was his own fault and it doesn´t mean anything to the church in general. I wonder if that would be said of Monson if he actually spoke his mind instead of being just a PR tool.
I think Jared is a perfect example of the mess that Mormonism is. Let’s remember that Joseph Smith started out with a very conventional orthodox view of who God is. He later repudiated the Bible (developing his own) and the teaching of the BoM which he wrote, concerning the nature of God.
So here’s the thing with Mormonism, it has a series of prophets who rule by revelation, with no regard to what has been revealed before or with no regard for any Scripture (I don’t consider the BoM Scripture but for the sake of argument, we’ll say that Mormons do).
So here’s a couple of points.
1. What’s the point of a Mormon saying that he/she has a testimony of the BoM when the most fundamental doctrine dealing with the nature of God (in the BoM) is ignored?
2. Which of the 70 branches of Mormonism has the best case for declaring that their revelation is “real” Mormonism?
3. Jared wants to follow BY who had 55 wives, taught that Adam was God and that blacks couldn’t receive the priesthood. Subsequent Mormon prophets rejected polygamy, repudiated the Adam-God doctrine, and allowed blacks into the priesthood.
4. The Community of Christ, which was headed by Joseph Smith’s son and claimed Emma Smith as a member, repudiated BY as a prophet, rejected Joseph Smith’s teaching on the doctrine of God and rejected polygamy which Joseph Smith said was necessary to practice to reach the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom.
Mormonism is a mess!
Prophet, prophet whose got the prophet could be a favorite Mormon game.
Because at the end of the day, that’s what Mormonism is built on; prophets and revelation. Forget Scripture. Forget tradition. Forget religious practice. Forget Bruce McConkie who was the go to guy for LDS doctrine whose book doesn’t even get published any more.
Mormons have a high tolerance for ambiguity and in fact embrace it as one of the salient features of their religion. Mormonism is a free flow stream of currents some stronger than others, but the currents and their strength change with conditions. That’s what is so attractive about Mormonism to many of its members.
Everyone can claim revelation and hear the voice of God. Confirmation of truth comes with feeling good about what someone thinks God told them. The prophet, in Mormonism, is suppose to be some sort of special religious guru, but as we see, a Mormon prophet who is dead, is no prophet at all. And that includes Joseph Smith.
Some Mormons see Smith as a fallen prophet who took the church away from the original revelation. They see themselves as the guardians of the truth. Others, like our friend Jared in the interview, see all sorts of prophets of Mormonism as fallen from grace and misled.
I get a kick out of the way Jared uses the term “spirit” as in a good one or bad one. Actually conflict would be a bad spirit. Being nice would be a good spirit. It really has nothing to do with the Holy Spirit. It’s just an attitude.
Helen,
If you want to know if Joseph Smith was convicted of fraud I’d suggest you look it up. There’s an old saying, “If I tell you something, you can doubt me. If you say it, it’s true.” In regards to this, I think that Mormons who are not at the questioning stage yet, won’t listen or believe certain facts regardless of the evidence presented to them. Those who have come to that point where they are contemplating the veracity of Mormonism and considering if it is true, will do the work and get their answers.
You’re not motivated yet and anything that is provided to you will be rejected (by you). There are emotional stages that Mormons go through when they begin to question the religion. Denial is one and when that doesn’t work they turn to rationalization.
I’ve posted this link before. But here it is again. It’s by John Dehlin and it’s titled “Why People Leave the LDS Church”.
http://mormonstories.org/?p=50
also
http://mormonstories.org/?page_id=102
Helen,
At least our TBM Aussie friend Ralph had gotten himself to the second emotional level. He wasn’t denying any more, but he had some creative rationalizations and mental devices to maintain his faith in Mormonism. For too many Mormons however, the preponderance of evidence becomes too much and in order to maintain their own personal integrity, they bolt the Mormon church.
Again, the chief characteristic is that these folks are at the questioning level and they do their own search/work.
Thank you so much Falcon. I have satisfied my self through diligent research that there is no one conviction for Fraud. A lesson to be learned from all this is if someone still wants to state such and such is true without any verification or reference; we as LDS will maintain that this person is only speculating or assuming.
Your faithful and loving corrector, Helen/Louis đ
Say now Helen,
Are you playing games? What I mean by this are you kind of fudging on the facts. Could you please provide the documentation that the conviction wasn’t a conviction or the charge wasn’t fraud?
What I’m guessing is that you’ll say he was “charged” but not “convicted” and that the charge was not fraud but something else.
You have to build some trust here with me Helen.
A TBM made this comment:
Enemies of the Church claim JS was adulterous, was convicted for fraud, a liar and etc, etc.
So Rick B. do you or do you not agree with the above? I call them enemies of the Church if they misrepresent Joseph Smith without any facts or evidence to bolster their accusations.
Here are the facts. The Illinois state law for the period in which Smith was committing adultery is:
“Sec 121. Bigamy consists in the having of two wives or two husbands at one and the same time, knowing that the former husband or wife is still alive. If any person or persons within this State, being married, or who shall hereafter marry, do at any time marry any person or persons, the former husband or wife being alive, the person so offending shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by a fine, not exceeding one thousand dollars, and imprisoned in the penitentiary, not exceeding two years. It shall not be necessary to prove either of the said marriages by the register or certificate thereof, or other record evidence; but the same may be proved by such evidence as is admissible to prove a marriage in other cases, and when such second marriage shall have taken place without this state, cohabitation in this state after such second marriage shall be deemed the commission of the crime of bigamy, and the trial in such case may take place in the county where such cohabitation shall have occurred.”
Revised Laws of Illinois, 1833, p.198-99
Joseph Smith committed adultery.
Here is the examination of Smith:
http://mormonscripturestudies.com/ch/dv/1826.asp
Joseph Smith was found guilty of a misdemeanor, to be held over for trial. He took âleg bailâ. Smith was guilty of adultery, a fraud and a liar. _johnny
f melo, here are some interesting things on that brothers and sisters thing. From the 1854 discourse by Young:
This is something pertaining to our marriage relation. The whole world will think what an awful thing it is. What an awful thing it would be if the Mormons should just say we beleive [believe] in Marrying brothers and Sisters. Well we shall be under the necessity of doing it, because we cannot find anybody else to marry. (this discourse naturally seemed to end with this thought, he closed after this comment) and this one:
In the evening Rud and I had a conversation with Bro. Snow about various doctrines. Bro. Snow said I would live to see the time when brothers and sisters would marry each other in this church. All our horror at such a union was due entirely to prejudice, and the offspring of such unions would be as healthy and pure as any other. These were the decided views of Pres. Young, when alive, for Bro. S. talked to him freely on this matter.–Bro. S. believes that Jesus will appear as a man among this people and dwell with them a time before he comes in His glory. The Gentiles will hear of it and they will reject him, as the Jews did anciently, but they will have no power over him at all. –He says that if a man will place himself in a position where he is ready to sacrifice everything at the command of the Lord, he is then in a position to ask and receive Heavenly revelation. ~ Abraham H. Cannon Diary, July 16, 1886. _johnny
The exact number of women whom Mormonism founder Joe Smith copulated while being married to Emma, his only legal wife under USA law, is unknown. In 1887, assistant LDS historian Andrew Jenson made a list of 27 women who were “sealed” to Joe Smith (Historical Record, vol. 6, page 233). Mormon author John J. Stewart put the number “three to four dozen or more” (Brigham Young and His Wives, 1961, pp. 30-31). Fawn Brodie put the number at 48 (Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History, Alfred A. Knopf, 1946, pp. 434-65). Former BYU professor D. Michael Quinn put it at 46, and George D. Smith put it at 43 (Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith, Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997).
The youngest girl whom Smith “married” and copulated was fourteen-year-old Helen Mar Kimball (Ibid., p. 487). As with most of the other women, Smith hid his adultery with her from Emma.
Lavina Fielding Anderson, editor of the Journal of Mormon History, wrote, “I was shocked and disgusted to discover that Joseph Smith married a fourteen-year-old girl, fully consummated that marriage, and concealed it from Emma. My image of “prophet” did not accommodate this kind of behavior. I could not begin to find holy motives for such behavior” (“The Garden God Hath Planted: Explorations Toward a Maturing Faith,” Sunstone, October 1990, pp. 26-27).
With his “church” flunkies, Joe Smith freely talked about his stable of women, and he ranked them according to the sexual pleasure they gave him. William Law, who was a Second Counselor to the LDS “church,” recalled a conversation in which Smith discussed a particular woman who had given him the best sex:
“Joseph was very free in his talk about his women. He told me one day of a certain girl and remarked, that she had given him more pleasure than any girl he had ever enjoyed. I told him it was horrible to talk like this” (“Interview with William Law. March 30, 1887,” Daily Tribune: Salt Lake City, July 31, 1887).
Lewdness was nothing new to Smith, as he had had a long history of being lewd. All of the following quotations are taken from Richard C. Evans book Forty Years in the Mormon Church-Why I Left It! (Toronto, Canada, 1920):
Dr. McIntyre, family physician of the Smiths in Manchester, N. Y., declared that the house of Joseph Smith, Sen., was a perfect brothel.
Eza Pierce, Samantha Payne and other school-mates of the Smiths testify that Smith was lewd, and so were the family.
Levi Lewis testifies that while Smith was pretending to translate the plates, he tried to seduce Eliza Winters, declaring that adultery was no sin.
Eli Johnson led a mob against Smith for being intimate with his sister, Marinda, who afterwards married Orson Hyde. Brigham Young twitted Hyde with this fact, and Hyde put away his wife.
Fanny Brewer testifies that Smith had serious trouble in Kirtland arising from his seducing an orphan girl.
Mr. Moreton told his daughter and her husband that Emma Smith detected Joseph in adultery with a girl by the name of Knight, and that Joseph confessed the crime to the officers of the church.
In his book, Todd Compton notes that a full one-third of the women Smith “married” were already married to other men when Smith married them:
“A common misconception concerning Joseph Smith’s polyandry is that he participated in only one or two such unusual unions. In fact, fully one-third of his plural wives, eleven of them, were married civilly
to other men when he married them. If one superimposes a chronological perspective, one sees that of Smith’s first twelve wives, nine were polyandrous (Compton, pp. 15-16).
A full one-third of the women Smith copulated were other men’s wives. Soft-headed people can term it “celestial marriage,” or the “Blessings of Jacob,” but it is really just old fashioned adultery and fornication.
The sex with Adam Lightner’s wife, Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner, must have been especially pleasurable. Smith said that all of the devils in hell couldn’t keep him from her. Mrs. Lightner wrote:
“Joseph said I was his before I came here and he said all the Devils in Hell should never get me from him. I was sealed to him in the Masonic Hall, over the old brick store by Brigham Young in February 1842 and then again in the Nauvoo Temple by Heber C. Kimball. . . .” (Affidavit of Mary Elizabeth Rollins Lightner, as quoted in No Man Knows My History, p. 444).
Smith and Emily Partridge copulated, as Todd Compton notes,
“Emily Partridge Young said she ‘roomed’ with Joseph the night following her marriage to him, and said that she had ‘carnal intercourse’ with him.”
“Other early witnesses also affirmed this. Benjamin Johnson wrote: ‘On the 15th of May . . . the Prophet again Came and at my hosue [house] ocupied [sic] the Same Room & Bed with my sister that the month previous he had ocupied with the Daughter of the Later [late?] Bishop Partridge as his wife.’ According to Joseph Bates Noble, Smith told him he had spent a night with Louisa Beaman . . . many of Joseph’s wives affirmed that they were married to him for eternity and time, with sexuality included.” (Compton, pp. 12-14)
Read the rest of this here: http://www.conchisle.com/adultery.htm _johnny
grindael,
Great job! Of course none of it counts……just because! After all it’s the wisdom of men, it happened a long time ago, the people all lied, present day Mormons weren’t there at the time it happened so they don’t know……………..I bear my testimony.
Did I cover it?
Wow, grindael. Very impressive.
And falcon? hahaha.
Yep. Never happened. And he wasn’t convicted. And if he wasn’t “convicted”, then he wasn’t guilty. hehe.
Do present day mormons not realize how easy it is to find this stuff now?? Their history really isn’t that old in the grand scheme of things. Looking for everything that went on at the time is pretty easy. You just have to WANT to look for it. But of course, they don’t have time for that because of their callings and home teaching and firesides and EFY and making their survival kits and going to the temple and staying in church 12+ hours on Sunday. Satan’s best tool to bring down the body of Christ is distraction/busyness.
Watching the video it really illuminates the fact that Scripture is not the starting point for Mormons. It is the “teaching” or “doctrine” that is revealed through the prophet, and then all the writings to which they hold are viewed through this lens. When the current prophet contradicts what a previous prophet has said, then the latest “revelation” takes precedent – even what God has revealed about His nature to Isaiah is subject to revoke if someone else comes along with a different revelation. Mormons could literally end up believing virtually anything – previous revealed Scripture is of absolutely no consequence in their theology. Aaron does a good job of showing this young man how his beliefs derived from Joseph Smith and Brigham Young do not align with what God has previously revealed about Himself, nor does it make sense with the Book of Mormon. When confronted with this, one must either toss out what Joseph Smith and Brigham Young teach, or toss out the Bible. If one refuses to be honest with themselves they can attempt to twist Scripture and reinterpret it through their false beliefs and tenuously hold on to both, while not really affirming the truth of one, or the other.
Grindael,
You said âThe youngest girl whom Smith âmarriedâ and copulated was fourteen-year-old Helen Mar Kimball (Ibid., p. 487). As with most of the other women, Smith hid his adultery with her from Emma.â (ibid = (Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith, Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997)
Todd Compton wrote a letter about the Utah Lighthouse Ministryâs use of his book to make the same claim you do, and this is what Todd Compton said in that letter –
Ralph, You cannot honestly believe if a guy marries a women, he will simply say no to sex and never do it. No man would marry a women and say, well God commanded me to mary you to see your saved but no sex allowed.
I can believe all LDS men would say, I would never sleep with her, but thats just because you would not be honest and admit you want to, at least in my opinion. I have been married for going on 18 years, To say I never want sex or would never want to do anything with my wife would be a flat out lie. You guys can say what you want, but no way can you ever convince me that any man would simply marry for any reason and never have sex.
Ralph,
Given Joseph Smith’s documented behavior, some of it referenced by Grindael right here, it is much more of a stretch to say Joseph Smith did not have sexual relations with his young bride than to say he did. Many are convinced, myself included, that the entire polygamous history of Mormonism is primarily due to the fact that Joseph Smith was a philanderer. He had no qualms about taking and doing the deed with other men’s wives, why not this?
Wow, Aaron, that was just outstanding! I don’t have much to add to what others have said, but to say I have the highest admiration for those of you on this blog who have really taken the time and energy to really know your stuff about Mormon history. I can only add as a former “convert” to mornomnism, I most likely took the “fingers in the ears, lahhh lahhh lahhh lahhhhh approach” to anything I deemed as “anti mormon.” I am still learning so much reading the comments on this blog. To any mormons who read this blog, the people who are faithfully coming on here and giving you hard facts about your religion are motivated by the love of the real Jesus Chirst of the Bible. If that were not so, I guarentee you that they could make much better use of their time.
I can guarentee you they are on here and taking the time to learn and know and than tell you about because they love God and they love you. Please open your eyes, your ears and your hearts and seek the real truth of the God who is Everlasting!
RickB,
Well that blows your argument out of the water you made a few years ago about David and his many wives. You said that he had a small group that he had sex with and the others were for political gain only.
Anyway RickB and 4fivesolas,
I was only commenting on Grindael’s referencing, not about JS. Grindael referenced Todd Comptom’s book ‘In Sacred Loneliness’ and says that Todd Compton stated JS consumated his marriage with Helen Mar Kimball. I gave reference to a letter from Todd Compton, himself, in rebuttal to Utah Lighthouse Ministry, stating that he never said in his book that the marriage was consumated and that it was only a dynastic/political marriage and never consumated.
You can say what you like about JS and his marriages, but get the referencing correct.
We need to continually remind ourselves that Mormons operate by “revelation”. They pray, they get a thought that they contend comes from God and then, to solidify the impression, they get a feeling. A good feeling means truth has been revealed. It’s all the better if a physical reaction accompanies the feeling.
So as Christians, we come here and provide mounds of evidence that Mormonism isn’t true and are dismissed by Mormons who say that the evidence is merely the wisdom of men. They on the other hand are hearing directly from God and will believe these felt communiques even if it makes no sense in light of the evidence. This is called “faith”.
After he arose from the dead Jesus told his disciples: “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” Then He opened their minds to understand the Scripture.” (Luke 24:44-45) And in Luke 24:27 “And beginning with Moses and with all the prophets He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures.”
In the video, Aaron opens up the Scriptures to Jared. Jared is dumbfounded. The Scriptures, even the BoM which he sees as Scripture, contradict what he believes. Yet Jared had an experience of emotion with an accompanying physical reaction when he listened to his “prophet” speak.
As far as I could tell, Jared didn’t get an emotional and physical reaction when he and Aaron read the Scriptures. And yet it’s in the Scriptures where the truth lies. The need for an emotional/physical “reward” and the stimulation appears much more important than the Word of God to Mormons.
The tradition of hearing from God, getting a word from the Lord, and receiving revelation knowledge did not start with Mormons. The concept is as old as religion itself. Folks from every religious stripe think they are hearing directly from God. Joseph Smith came out of such a tradition. The area of New York he came from had had so many revivals that it became known as the “burnt over” area.
The testimony of Charles Finney, the great Christian evangelist of the 19th century, was that he went out into the woods to seek God. At one point he describes an experience where by he felt a flood of “liquid love” coming from the Lord and pouring over him. Charles Wesley talks about his heart being “strangely warmed”. Charles Spurgeon, the great English preacher of the 19th century also talks about a burning in the bosom experience.
So this emotional, physical reaction was pretty common. Here’s the difference however. Finney, Spurgeon, and Wesley were deep in the Scriptures and knew God. As Jesus led his disciples to see Him in the Scriptures, so were these men of faith so led. The folks who stood on the Word of God were grounded in the Scriptures and never allowed their thoughts or feelings to run contrary to that which God has revealed in His Word. God did reveal things to these men. But the revelation came from or was supported by the Word.
Joseph Smith took the concept of revelation and used it to his own purposes despite what the Word of God said. Mormons continue in that vain today as, like Jared in the video, revelation means more than the Word. The heart of man is wicked and deceitful above all else. The Word is truth!
Ralph, you have lost you mind.
Just becasue I said some wives of Davids were for a political gain/move. The Bible does not say if he had sex with them or not. But then the Bible did not/does not focus on Davids sex life. I would be willing to bet he did have sex with all of his wives at least once. But then again when you have 300 wives and 700 cocubines, and running from your enemies for months on end, It is hard to have sex with them all. But JS had less then 40, so it is possible to have slept with them at least once. If your hanging your salvation on that, then good luck, your going to need it.
Ralph said,
So Todd Compton, the writer of âIn Sacred Lonlinessâ which you are referencing, is not making any claim that the marriage to Helen Mar Kimball was consummated in his book, as you are leading others to believe.
First, I was quoting from an internet site, which I gave the link to. Do I agree that Smith had sex with Helen Mar Kimball? Yes. Why? Because Smith said God commanded him to. Here is D&C 132:
61And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthoodâif any man espouse a VIRGIN, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, AND THEY ARE VIRGINS, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.
Ok, so, if a man takes a plural wife,
1. They must be virgins. (Smith broke this law by marring and sleeping with the wives of other men)
2. He cannot commit adultery (LOL) Why is ADULTERY mentioned here, if he only married them for show, or to have them in eternity?
Continuing on,
63But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.
Smith married Miranda Richards Hyde, after he sent Orson Hyde on a mission. He broke his own ârevelationâ by doing so, (ONE OF MANY) and committed adultery with her. Why?
1. FOR THEY ARE GIVEN UNTO HIM TO MULTIPLY AND REPLENTISH THE EARTH ACCORDING TO MY COMMANDMENT
2. That they MAY BEAR THE SOULS OF MEN.
How does one do this, without having sex with them? Remember, he was COMMANDED to have sex with them to âmultiply and replentish the earth.â. So if Smith DIDNâT have sex with them, he is also breaking a commandment, the REASON he was given these âvirginsâ in the first place.
And actually, a reference by Compton was not used to support Helen Mar Kimball, it was about his âotherâ wives, to show a pattern. Show me where I said ANYWHERE that Compton said that about Helen Mar Kimball. The author of the article may have said it, I was just quoting him. But the stated commandment of the Lord, that they were given for the express purpose of âbearing the souls of menâ shoots yours and Comptonâs premise down. And the poor women, they were stuck with this:
64And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe, AND ADMINISTER UNTO HIM, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God; for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law.
Gee, the woman MUST âadministerâ unto him. And what does a âwifeâ do? What did God here COMMAND them to do? Have sex and bear children. So they either do what the âpriesthood holder â says and have sex, or they will be destroyed. And if the man DOESN’T have sex with them, he is not fulfilling the COMMANDMENT of God specifically given for the purpose of the ‘revelation’. Nice god that Smith ârevealsâ here. Have sex, or be ‘destroyed’. _johnny
grindael,
You are SO DIRTY!!!!
Don’t you know that all of this wife taking is spiritual and not carnal? In fact Smith and his wives will be having Celestial sex which is a different kind of sex. I’d say I’ve learned to think Mormon.
Mormon reasoning, like we see with Ralph, is so convoluted that he can take a simple term like “adultery” and not see it for what it is. Smith was looking for a way to condone his sleeping around. He declared that he couldn’t commit adultery which in the vernacular is doing it; having sex with someone other than your wife.
Mormons are desperate to protect the lie of their religion at any cost including personal integrity. Like I said in my previous posts, they’ve got revelation that what they believe is true and now they simply rationalize and shoe horn what they want to believe into their revelation.
So is Ralph back to King David now?
David is Ralph’s go-to guy to prove that what Joseph Smith was up to with these Mormon babes was A-OK and in fact Biblical. Just look hard enough at the pages of the Bible and you’ll see where God commands David to take on more wives so that he (David) can reach the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom and become a god. And if you really concentrate your stare, you’ll see where an angel with a sword appeared to David and threatened him with death if he didn’t start taking on more women.
I’m trying to remember, were these woman David was involved with wives or concubines? I can’t remember but it’s probably not all that important of a detail.
The Bible, especially the NT, is replete with accounts of the apostles and their many wives. It has to be because Smith claimed he was restoring all of this lost stuff. OOPS, I forgot. That all got left out of the Bible by the grand conspiracy which rendered the Bible corrupt and untrust-worthy.
Does the BoM support polygamy? I think not but that’s my bad because subsequent revelations take precedent over previous revelations…….and…….the revelation in 1890 I guess restored the truth as it appears in the BoM.
Kind of confusing but if you want to be a Mormon just rely on your testimony and don’t pay attention to those distracting details that indicate that Mormonism is a fraud and a sham.
Adultery doesn’t necessarily make someone a false prophet. Adultery done in the name of the Lord makes someone a false prophet.
In any case, it’d be a welcome change to see the Mormon Church be as up front about Smith’s adultery as the Bible is about David’s.
Unless someone is hopelessly seduced emotionally and spiritually by Mormonism, there’s enough evidence of the fraudulent nature of the cult for the questioning Mormon to decide that what they are entangled in is not a denomination of Christianity.
Jesus came to set men/women free from our hopeless cycle of sin and death. In Christ there is not only hope, but a promise of eternal life not on the basis of our works but because of what He did for us on the cross.
The meaning of grace is that God makes a gift of eternal life to those who will come to Him in faith believing that Jesus paid the price once and for all for our sin. God does not hold out a carrot for us so that we think that if we do maybe one more thing it will be enough to push us over the edge and we will receive a reward.
The truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ is that while we were yet sinners, Jesus died for us-the unrighteous-that through faith in His finished work on the cross we may be justified in God’s sight and declared by Him to be righteous. The life we then lead, walking in the Spirit is in gratitude for what He has done for us.
Nothing can separate us from the love of God. Paul says, “For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in us will complete it in the day of Christ Jesus. God begins the work. God finishes the work.
I admire Jared for being consistent and honest.
If one expresses the belief that Brigham Young is a prophet of God, then I think it follows they would have to believe Brigham Young’s teachings. Jared clearly does.
Compare Jared to a group of people who also say they believe Brigham Young is a prophet of God. But what have they done with his teachings? When presented with his teachings, reactions vary: anger (at the presenter), shock, disbelief (thinking the ‘sermons’ are made up), defensiveness. Though the reactions vary, they reveal the same thing: what the LDS people truly think of Brigham Young.