Image provided by Images of the Restoration
On July 12, 1843 Joseph Smith recorded what Mormons believe was a revelation from God “relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant, as also plurality of wives” (Introduction to D&C 132). In this section of what is now Mormon scripture, Joseph’s wife, Emma, is called out and told to “abide this commandment” (i.e., live The Principle of polygamy), or be destroyed.
Nobody disputes the historical fact that Emma never really warmed up to the idea of sharing her husband with other women. Nevertheless, she remained married to Joseph until he was killed a few months after their 17th wedding anniversary.
Catherine Baldwin Johnston was a young woman who visited Nauvoo with her husband in the early 1840s. She had a noteworthy encounter with Emma Smith related to polygamy, recounted below by her sister, Eudocia Baldwin Marsh.
—–
About two years after the settlement at Nauvoo it was reported that Smith had received a “revelation” in regard to “Spiritual wives” or “celestial marriages” as they were called. This was strenously denied by the better class of Mormons, but the document as put forth and circulated by Smith, among his confederates has since been published and openly advocated by Brigham Young and the Church at Salt Lake, as all the world knows. In this “revelation” great pains had been taken to conciliate Emma, Smiths wife, and to prepare her for the new dispensation. In it she is addressed by name and commanded to “obey” or she will be destroyed. She was apparently obliged to acquiesce in some degree, at least outwardly, but no doubt felt much the same degree of indignation that any other woman would under the same circumstances. That she was not at all reconciled to this state of things I think is proven by the reply she once made to a question on the subject.
Some time after my first visit to Nauvoo one of my sisters accompanied her husband on one of his business trips to that place. They went to Smith’s Hotel and after supper were shown into a large parlor where seated around the room in groups of three or four were ten or twelve well dressed young women. They were laughing and chatting together in a lively manner, some engaged with light needle work, others quite idle. Leaving his wife in the parlor her husband soon after went out into the town to attend to the business which had brought him there. He was detained until rather late, and my sister feeling somewhat fatigued asked to be shown to her room, where she began making preperations to retire for the night.
Her husband whose business to Nauvoo had been with some of the Gentile citizens–and who had been during the evening, regaled with terrible stories of kidnapping and sudden disappearences of visitors to the city–came in shortly afterwards and not finding her in the parlor where he had left her, immediately began storming around inquiring for and calling her loudly by name. As he passed through the long corridors, his wife heard his voice and much surprised opened her door and asked him what was the matter. When he saw her he ran and clasped her in his arms, exclaiming, “my dear wife I feared these wretches had spirited you away and I should never see you again.” She laughed at such an absurd idea, but he said, “If you had been listening to some of the tales I have heard to night, you too would have been alarmed. I shall never again permit you to be out of my sight when in this town.”
When they came down stairs next morning they were ushered into the parlor to await the announcement of breakfast. Most of the young women of the previous evening were again assembled there and presently Mrs. Emma Smith came in, and seated herself near my sister whom she had met before, and with whom she began talking in a friendly way. My sister’s mind however had been a good deal “wrought up” by what she had seen and heard, and she determined to express something of what she felt to some of these people. So she turned to her and said, “Mrs. Smith where do your people get this doctrine of Spiritual Wives?” The woman with a face flushed to a dark red, and with eyes blazing with fury said “Straight from Hell–Madam.” Some of the young women blushed, too. Some giggled, others looked stolid and indifferent, but a call to breakfast relieved the situation and no more was said.
(“Mormons in Hancock County: A Reminiscence,” reprinted in the Journal of the Illinois State Historical Society [spring 1971], Vol. 64 No. 1, 40-41. Punctuation minimally standardized. Paragraph breaks added for readability. Italics in the original.)
I can’t help but feel sorry for Emma. It’s too bad that she didn’t just pack up her children and leave Joseph. I know that it wasn’t as easy to do that back then. Can you imagine how trapped she must have felt. She does seem to have been a strong willed woman. Something Joseph had to put up with. I think that’s why he had to mention her by name in section 132 and have his god tell her she will be destroyed if she didn’t abide by the law of plural marriage. Mormons now days can say all they want about section 132 not meaning polygamy, but we need to look at the time it was written to get the full meaning of what Joseph meant. He had no idea that there would be a stop to his polygamy. No idea that his church would be split apart and some would move West. No idea that one section of his splintered church would be applying for Statehood and the only way that would be granted was to stop the practice of polygamy. As I’ve said before, hindsight is 20/20. Mormons can try and translate section 132 to fit this day and age, but the truth of it lies in the 1830’s -1844.
Kind of interesting that Emma was suppose to be destroyed if she didn’t fall into line with polygamy but Joseph Smith was the one who met his untimely end as a result of the practice.
Let’s face it, Joseph Smith, like all cult leaders, do what they can get away with. He had an insatiable sexual appetite and he found a way to satisfy it while all the time making it appear spiritual.
The Bible tells us to walk by the Spirit and we won’t carry out the deeds of the flesh. Joseph Smith walked by the flesh and unfortunately defrauded a lot of women along the way.
Where did the Mormon doctrine of God come from? Answer: from Mormon prophets,
men who felt deeply that God was speaking to them, calling them to proclaim His truth
to mankind. Yet, like many doctrines that these men taught, this one was also the
product of their own reasoning. They imagined that the deep inner conviction that
they felt was that of the Holy Ghost communicating with them. Adding to the plain
gospel message of the New Testament Church , they felt that they were being used to
introduce new light from God. Sadly, this behavior is nothing new . Such end time/
latter-day prophets were predicted to come. Important information relative to this
subject: Jer. 23:16 . Matt.7:15,24:11,24 ; Gal.1:8-9 ; 2Tim.2:15-19; 1Jn.4:1;2Jn.1:9
My previous post should have read , “Where did the Mormon doctrine of POLYGAMY
come from.
M.R.
Mike,
You’ve hit the nail on the head. This is where something like “revelation” takes people down a road of doctrinal error and eventual spiritual destruction. I saw it happen in a church in my area about thirty years ago. The church started out fairly conventional. It was an independent church with an affiliation to a group with a dynamic leader in another part of the country. The church became undone when they started a practice of “spiritual connecting”. It all started with couples dancing together during the church service. Pretty soon the pastor was telling folks who they were to spiritually connect with. It was a process of breaking down inhibitions. You guessed it turned out to be what’s now known as “hooking up”.
It was a real mess as the church fell a part along with marriages.
It was the devil from beginning to end, but these people had given themselves over to the leadership of a man who had manipulated them into gross immorality. We see that this happened with Joseph Smith. He was a master at using his authority and influence to break down people’s inhibitions, directing them into gross sexual sin.
When Mormons defend this and when the leadership still has the practice of polygamy on the books of the church, we see that modern day Mormonism isn’t much different than the spiritually deranged crowd from the eighteenth century.
Spiritual delusion is a powerful and insidious thing. It makes people affirm beliefs and practices that are clearly wrong and say they are right.
Mormonism is guided by a deceitful spirit that manipulates the thinking of the members so that they can’t even see the gross error. They need deliverance.
Another way that the women of polygamy get manipulated is through the idea that their jealousy is a spiritual failing. These women are expected to “mature” spiritually so that they see plural marriage as God’s will and His best for their lives.
One can just imagine the anguish of a woman who has been convinced that she is failing God and not being the spiritual person she is to be because of a very natural reaction to a very unnatural situation. So in order to grow spiritually, in the polygamy system, the woman is not only to suppress her feelings, but take on an attitude of contentment and joy regarding her husband’s dalliances with other women.
I remember watching the video of a woman who had escaped a polygamous marriage despite the threat that she’d go to hell if she left. I remember her remark, “I figured hell couldn’t be any worse than what I was living in so I left.” Thankfully she was able to begin to think clearly once she left the tyranny of her situation and now speaks out against the hideous practice of polygamy.
One of my High School teachers had a best friend who belonged to a polygamous sect. He said his friend was basically thrown out of the flock at age 18. I understand that most of the young men are thrown out so that they aren’t competing with the oldsters for the young women. Anyhow, he left and made his way to California. After a few years out of the lifestyle, he figured out that what he was raised in is not normal and is destructive to women. He had 2 younger sisters and decided to get them both out. He was successful sneaking the oldest one out, but when he tried sneaking the younger one out, she ended up dead in the river. So sad. How is murder justified? I also saw a video about a woman who escaped with her 8 children. Two of the older girls were High School age and were enrolled in a public High School. One blossomed but the other one just couldn’t adjust to the outside world. She ended up going back and is now married to an old man. What’s sad is how these women must escape and live in fear of their lives. Women are nothing but cattle when polygamy is involved. I also can’t help but feel sorry for the boys born into polygamy. I’ve read testimonies of several Salt Lake City Mormons who have converted to the polygamist sects. They figured out that polygamy was put in place by their god and needs to be practiced to obtain exaltation. I guess even the polygamist missionaries are converting people.
Funny coincidence but I did a long blog post which talks about this heavily, yesterday (link). The polygamy of the Joseph Smith year, alpha males having more than one mate, is not unusual at all. What is unusual is the structural polygamy of the Brigham Young years.
I won’t do the argument here but what I argue is that starting in 1848 till about 1877 the structure of American Spiritualism led Mormons missions to have highly gender unbalanced results, they had a problem of too many women. The situation in fundamentalist sects today is different. There is no way to have widespread polygamy without some sort of offsetting system.
Kate,
The lost boys of polygamy is just one of the side effects that occur because of this practice. The boys become competition. There just aren’t enough girls to go around so competition for godhood is fierce. And that’s the point. Polygamy is practiced so that the men can become gods. I don’t know which of Joseph Smith’s practices and beliefs is the most hideous, but I think the men to gods blasphemy would probably take the prize. Smith used it as an excuse to satisfy his sexual lust and led others into his sin.
I feel sorry for the girls that are born into this cult.
What an interesting account you have shared with us, Sharon, about Nauvoo’s early days. Thank you. Firsthand accounts are so compelling.
There are so many things which could be said about this I don’t really know where to begin. While considering, I remembered something I wrote many years ago, and thought it might relate to this subject. I had been reading the book of Romans’ first chapter. And in it there was one obvious parallel with the founder of the LDS religion. Could there be others, I wondered? The following looks at the people described in verses 22 to 25:
1. Claimed to be wise.
2. Substituted the glory of the immortal God with images of mortal man.
3. God gave them over to their sinful hearts; sexual impurity followed.
4. Exchanged the truth of God for a lie.
5. Worshiped and served created things vs. the Creator.
Well, do we find in Emma’s husband some parallels? Let’s consider whether the numbered items below match up with the ones above:
1. Claimed to be the oracle of God.
2. Taught God was a highly progressed man.
3. Took other men’s wives, claiming they were to be his spiritual wives for a glorious purpose.
4. Exchanged early monotheistic teachings for heresies, including a plurality of gods.
5. Taught God was not always God, but was once a man; as such, a created being was the object of his worship and service.
In this section of Romans, we see a certain pattern of events. It is interesting that this pattern echos down through the ages and is seen in a 19th century New Englander, Emma’s husband. Does the Bible speak of him? Certainly it does.
There was a great testimony on the “Mormons are Christians Aren’t We” blog awhile back (anyone know what happened? it’s gone private or something) about a woman who was trapped in a polygamous sect. Her dad was mainstream mormon when he realized that the fundamentalists had it “right” and were practicing the religion the way it was originally set up. Thankfully, she found a way out. But for most of these women, they feel there’s no escape. If they leave? They go to hell and face a world that’s totally foreign to them. And they’ve been convinced that this jealousy is something to overcome, in order to be a better person. Deception is blinding and absolutely heartbreaking to watch.
Here’s the deal. People have to be convinced that all of this (men progressing to gods, polygamy to attain the highest level etc.). I’m curious as to what hits the switch so that folks are willing to suspend credulity and embrace bizarre practices and beliefs such as this. What’s equally interesting is when people hit the switch and see the fallacy of the teachings, reject them, and escape from the bondage they are in. I’ve read some where, the signs that tip a person off as to if they are in a cult. You’d think that people would know it but I guess if they knew it they wouldn’t have gotten into it in the first place.
Thank God for Christ Jesus who sets us free.
Brian,
Fantastic post! God’s Word does warn us of false prophets and those who would deceive us by perverting the Word of God. Mormonism is so far off from Christianity. I don’t understand at all how the LDS who have researched all of this out and are aware of the things that were hidden by leaders, can still call themselves Christians. They are a different religion. One that uses occult practices. That is not of the Christian God.
Thanks, Kate. Speaking of false prophets, Mike has shared an excellent scripture relating to the same: Galatians 1:8-9. My, what fireworks that contains. I’ve recently been studying Galatians, and appreciated the reminder of this passage, Mike.
On a side note, I receive biweekly (or fortnightly) email from Del Tackett, who hosts The Truth Project. What’s that? It is a DVD series produced by Focus on the Family. It is for small-group study, an aide in equipping Christians for a Biblical worldview. I mention this since I got an email from Del today. He talks about the nature of truth and lies. Truth is simple; lies are complex. And he discusses the Biblical standard for establishing truth in a courtroom: “Every fact is to be confirmed by the testimony of two or three witnesses” 2 Corinthians 13:1.
Why do I mention this? There was a passage in it which I think relates to this topic:
“The criticality of having witnesses is clearly taught throughout the Scripture. Paul states that we are not to even entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses.
…
This is also why a single prophet, i.e. Mohammed or Joseph Smith, should be deemed insufficient to establish new and radical revelation. The Scripture is filled with multiple, corroborating witnesses whose testimony all fits together in simple harmony.”
For those interested, the link to his commentary is:
http://deltackett.com/2011/07/07/casey-anthony—another-view/
Just revisiting to say hello. Not sure if people remember me. Looks like some of the same commenters are still around (like falcon). I just found better usage of my time. Just saying hello. Enjoy the disinformation from Mormon Coffee!
The LDS Articles of Faith # 3 states : ” We believe that through the atonement of Christ
all mankind may be SAVED ,BY OBEDIENCE TO THE LAWS and ORDINANCES OF
THE GOSPEL ” . With this in mind let’s see how polygamy was referred to by sincere
Mormons : [ references available].
Plural marriage is an ordinance of the Church. Plural marriage is an essential teaching
of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Plural marriage is a commandment of God. Plural marriage
is a covenant . Plural marriage is a law under the “Christian dispensation”. Plural marriage
is the religion and economy of Heaven. Plural marriage is a “saving principle”.
Concerning those who oppose “this Gospel which God has restored in these last
days” , which includes polygamy, will be ” damned ” and ” the Spirit of God will withdraw
from them” . Also a part of this particular gospel is another important doctrine. A man,
Henry Jacobs, marries Zina Huntingon . Henry, submitting to the prophet, consented for
his wife,six months pregnant , to be “sealed” in marriage to the deceased Joseph Smith,
to be his wife after her death . Zina would live with Henry until then. Three years later she
was “re-sealed” by proxy to Smith, and in that same session she was married “sealed for time”
to Brigham Young with Henry standing in as an official witness to both marriages ! Prophet
Young later sent Henry on a mission over seas . Zina went to live with Brigham,they had one
child together. Henry simply obeyed his prophet and this “restored ” gospel.
This is the good news, the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ ? [ 1Cor.15:1-4 ] or a different
gospel ? Gal. 1:8-9 . The precious people need to exchange their prophets gospel .
HA!
This is funny. I see our old buddy “7” made a drive-by appearance to fire off a quick round, throw a bomb and keep on motoring. For those of you new to this, it’s a common Mormon tactic. Guys like “7” aren’t really interesting in engaging in dialogue and they certainly can’t stand-up to a challenge to their false religious system, so they just sort of hit-and-run. It’s kind of like their practice of plugging their ears, closing their eyes, jumping up-and-down and singing, “LALALALALALA, I can’t hear you.”
BTW, “disinformation” in the Mormon world is what we who live in reality-ville call facts and evidence. This is in contrast to the Mormon experience of faux revelation with accompanying false emotions which form the foundation of their religious experience. It tastes good to them but is definitely less filling in terms of real substantial spiritual food.
Did anyone hearing a “clunk” when “7” threw his magic rock?
The question was asked if the “restored” gospel as preached by Mormons was another
gospel, a different gospel- – Gal. 1:8-9 ? Commenting on how Joseph Smith was
instructed by an angel of the Lord to reject all other churches, Brigham Young said:
” I pause now to ask , had not Joseph Smith a right to promulgate and establish a different,
a new religion and form of worship in his government ? Everyone must admit he had. ”
The evidence is clear, the gospel as promulgated by Mormon prophets and apostles is
at variance with that which was spread by Jesus’ original apostles. The warnings in the
New Testament concerning those who would preach false doctrines are numerous.
May our LDS friends realize the danger they are in by embracing false doctrines on
fundamental issues. All the good deeds done for others can not make up for following
a false prophet with a counterfeit gospel. Even a Mormon apostle knows what’s at stake:
” …false prophets lead people astray, men choose, at the peril of their salvation, the prophets
whom they follow.” May the precious Mormon people ex-change their prophets and gospel.
Falcon,
I was going to say I remember iam7 before you replied. I was going to say pretty much the same thing you did. I really think he is younger than 7. Typical Mormon not helping his casue, she tells us we are spreading disinformation, yet in no way will she tell us where we are wrong. This just brings me back to the question I keep asking, where is the love in mormonism for their fellow man/women.
They claim we are blind, and according to them will either end up in outer darkness or the lowest heaven, yet they will not try and help us move up the latter by showing us love. The LDS even do this to new converts, they show them “love” By giving them money, or doing yard work, or what ever, then when you convert then they leave you alone.
Mike,
Very interesting post about Zina Huntington. I’m wondering if her husband was a polygamist also, and didn’t need her to gain his salvation and godhood. Like I said, women in polygamy are nothing but cattle, to be baby factories and to be traded about. What a sick and twisted life that poor woman lived.
So she had three husbands all at the same time? I know you said she was sealed to Joseph after his death but still! Do you know if she obtained a divorce from her legal husband before marrying Brigham Young?
I’m cracking up at iamse7en! The comment about finding something better to do with his/her time! I’ll bet iamse7en comes here often to lurk about.
Rick,
You’re right! Mormons come on here and tell us we are lying, misinformed, spreading lies about Mormonism. The problem is that they can’t refute what it is we report. They simply don’t like that we don’t believe Mormonism. We understand it. Mormons want to often get into “high level”, esoteric, philosophical, “deep” thinking and discussion. I just keep pulling them back to Joseph Smith and his magic rock in his hat. They hate this because don’t we know, Mormonism is soooooooo much more?
They’d love to have us forget the magic rock in the hat, the hunt for buried treasure, men becoming gods and ruling their planets with their goddess wives, procreating spirit children via Celestial sex into eternity, magic underwear with occult symbols, Free Masonry rituals and temple costumes that look like they all work in a bakery. This is tedious for Mormons. They want to move on, but we won’t let them because these things are the essence and foundation of Mormonism. This is Mormonism!
Here’s a one stop shopping site for those investigating Mormonism or who are looking for information as they examine just exactly is this religion (Mormonism) that they belong to.
http://www.exmormon.org/tract2.htm
And as to polygamy; one little known fun fact is that early BY Mormonism found the “Saints” sealing anyone they could to themselves. This was because like a multi-level marketing business, it was all about building your “down-line” of distributors. The more people you get sealed to you, the more expansive your organization and the bigger god-guy you become. The competition was so intense that brother Young had to finally bring an end to it.
Other than having a variety of sex partners, polygamy is about building your organization.
Kate said
Sadly IAM7 Cannot honestly say, the thing that I want to do that is better is, Share the true Gospel and show the love of Christ that I found with these poor souls that tell me I am wrong. They are so mis-guided that they spend days, weeks even years telling us we are wrong, but they do it because they feel that the love of Christ compels them to share what they believe is true with us, So the least I could do is show them the Love I found in Christ, correct them as they go astray and do as James says,
Seems we Christains are Doers and not hearers only since we are doing something, 7 is a hearer only since he is doing nothing. I wonder then, do you know the Bible? Do you know Jesus as you thing you do? If so, why not do something as He says?
How about this also? James 4:17
I seem to recall Jesus saying go unto ALL the world and share the Gospel, Yet 7 does not want to share with us, So he knows the Good he ought to do, yet he refuses, seems he then is in sin.
Kate, Zina’s husband was not a polygamist. He was simply one who believed that
“when the prophet speaks the debate is over” . He , like so many , was a victim of
a latter-day false prophet’s “new light ” from God. Once you accept the lie that what
Jesus’ original apostles taught as His gospel was not enough to completely reconcile
you to God , then you can fall victim to counterfeit gospels. Sad. I don’t believe there
was a divorce involved at all.Interesting that there is evidence from Mormon
sources that reveals a doctrine from Brigham where he believed that if a woman desired
to be a wife of another priesthood holder, if that priesthood holder was higher up in the
priesthood and if her present husband gave his consent then she could leave him, no
divorce necessary . [ consult p.44 of Mormon Polygamy , by Richard Van Wagoner ]
There are some Mormons who are out of luck in the Mormon system. Single women are way down on the food chain probably lower down than single men. Gay men are way down on the social-cultural ladder even if they abstain from sex. The basis for Mormonism is becoming a god and part of that path includes having a whole bunch of kids. The more the better. Mormonism is like that horse race where the participants vie for the Breeders Cup.
So if there was polygamy practiced as it’s suppose to be in Mormonism, there wouldn’t be any single Mormon women because some god-to-be would want as many wives as he could collect. According to legend, single Mormon babes get assigned husbands by the Mormon god. Maybe there’s like a council of the gods, with the higher up gods, who sit in council taking these cases on. I don’t know what they do with the gay men. Maybe they aren’t gay after they die and maybe they get assigned to the single women.
I think a revelation on these matters is called for!
falcon —
They might just find the blasphemous ways you are describing their faith offensive. I could equally well refer to normative Christianity in the same sort of disrespectful terms. Say something like
They’d love to have us forget their ridiculous invisible God obsessed with Israel living above the dome over the flat earth popping down once in a while. His enthusiasm for genocide, support for slavery, polygamous dishonest and viciously cruel prophets. Oh yeah and the rituals, like taking a bath to change your supernatural state, or magic crackers. This is tedious for Protestants. They want to move on, and discuss “saving grace” but we won’t let them because these things are the essence and foundation of their Bible. This is Evangelical Christianity!
The entire Numbers 22-4 has the story of Balaam a diviner (i.e. rock in a hat) chosen by God and considered a messenger of God by God. Is the book of Numbers of wrong in its opinion of divination?
CD,
I stated facts……..period. But Mormons have very thin skin and want to claim “persecution” for anyone who reports the facts about (Mormonism). The major difference here is that the Mormon god doesn’t exist. Mormons may as well be chanting at the moon and dancing about naked for all the good that their polytheism will do them. What do you think God thinks about Mormons rejecting Him, claiming that they will become gods and their wives goddesses?
People do insult Christianity, all the time. When Christ was crucified, He had insults hurled at Him as He hung there shedding His blood for the sins of mankind. Do you remember how Jesus was mocked and scourged the night before He died? Mormons mock God everyday by saying that Christ’s death on the Cross was not the focal point of the atonement. What about the drama that used to be acted out in the Mormon temple with the Christian minister being mocked as part of the show along with the Mormon insults towards Christianity. That was institutional mocking. Didn’t Bruce McConkie get called on the carpet for calling the Catholic Church the Whore of Babylon or some such thing?
As for Numbers 22:4, I think you better do a little in depth study of that situation before you draw erroneous conclusions.
Falcon —
First off I think you misread what I meant I’m sorry if I was being ambiguous. The reference was “Numbers 22–4″ by which I meant Numbers chapter 22, 23 and 24; the story of Balaam.
I think they want their religion’s doctrines described accurately, respectfully and charitably. And let me use that as your very next sentence.
Do you honestly think the intent of the Mormon doctrine of Gethsemane is to mock God? I’ve never seen anything but a reverent love for God and Jesus from Mormons. You may disagree with their scriptural interpretation but to call what they do “mocking” is not speaking the truth. Its misrepresenting them, and they are absolutely right to be offended.
As for the rest of the denomination conflicts. In general intra denominational hostility has been on the decline for several centuries. Mormons were subjected to institutional violence by evangelicals. They’ve had serious and severe threats made against their civil rights. They have had elected officials not be seated. They still are concerned that Mitt Romney is going to face discrimination.
I don’t think whatever limited mean stuff they have said justifies bad behavior by you.
And CH as long as you brought up the “insult” charge, let me ask you a question. What’s the deal with the Mormon posters writing very strong and I would say boarding on snarky comments and then pasting a “smiley” decal on it? I don’t get it.
The only thing I can figure out is that it’s the Mormon way of giving someone the finger or doing some sort of Mormon taunt. I don’t know, maybe Mormons are socially awkward or something. I don’t deal directly with Mormons in person on a day-to-day basis but it is my understanding that there are some strange social nuances in Mormon culture.
Perhaps those who have been Mormons could enlighten me regarding this topic. I did read something pretty funny one time about stereotypical Mormon wedding receptions.
CD,
I have a few questions for you? Are you a Bible believing Christian? If you say yes, then is it the Bible only? or are you a mormon? If you say no your not a christain, are you athiest? I checked out your blog and maybe I missed something, but you dont really seem to state where you stand.
Then to the numbers issue, I understand whats going on, but I dont think you do and that is your problem, so in order for me not to influnace you, what are your thoughts on that passge? Then I will share mine, and I assume Falcon will also, but thats only based upon what I read from Him speaking to you. Thanks, Rick
(part 2)
This a a meaty passage, structurally in terms of cultic ritual, in term of archeological support, the different poetic structure, some unusual phrasing… Also the translation in the LXX is very different than the Hebrew, which means we might be looking at a late revision. So I appreciate you listening first before jumping in, but the question is too open ended for me to know exactly what aspect you wanted me to hit on. He’s an interesting figure because he shows up 3 times on the New Testament, in Archeology (Deir Alla ) in the Qur’an in all sorts of Hellenistic Jewish literature.
In terms of New Testament references like Jude 11, I think they refer to Numbers 31. So again I appreciate the intent, but I gotta ask you to fire first. I have no idea what issue you want to hit on.
Rick —
For some reason part 1 got caught in moderation. I’ll try and break it into 2 parts and see which one created the problem.
(part 1a)
I’d call myself a fan of Mormonism. I like many of the ideas of their religion but I’m way to personally undisciplined to make a decent Mormon Though I never did develop a morning coffee habit and don’t particularly love drinking alcohol so… I have potential In all seriousness, I’m a x-Evangelical, Atheist with Gnostic Christian sympathies. But if you read the blog you’ll see a very large range of religions discussed.
(part 1b)
My opinion on the passage, the reason I used it, was that it presents divination as effectual and powerful. Falcon’s intent in the “hat” comment was to mock divination but Numbers 22-4, presents a very different view that divination can reveal knowledge of God. For example Numbers 22:7 specifies Balaam as a diviner. Then in 23:11 Balaam specifically states even though he’s being paid by Balak to curse Israel, that divination is a manifestation of divine will and he’s unable (not unwilling) to comply with Balak’s intent. This happens a 3rd time. He then via. divination delivers to Balak an even longer prophecy that is fulfilled in 2Sam 8, 11-14. Which shows the accuracy.
Hmmm… OK its the paragraph where I try and answer your question about what the passage means to me that’s getting caught. No clue what the filter is upset about.
CD,
I will reply tommorow, But I’m just wondering, if your saying your an athiest, why are you even here? I figure if your not a believer then why do you care what we say to the Mormon, or what the mormon says to us.
Hey falcon, speaking of certain people with excessive snarky smileys…
I was doing some backreading in the archives. Came across someone called “The Hammer” that was apparently Christian. Does anyone remember them? Well, they had a blog connected to their name, so I clicked on it. Lo and behold… Helen/Louis. So now I’m all “Whaaaaa….??” A little weirded out, to say the least.
The filter is acting up on me too. I had a comment before that last one.
Hi Rick —
Why am I on mrm? To learn more about Morminism. It’s is a pretty solid anti site in terms of dealing with the deep areas of disagreement. On the other hand letting this degenerate into rude, unfair and contemptuous comments destroys that. Further I think those sorts of attitudes are bad and I think its a good thing if neutral observers step in when they see bad stuff being done and object. I don’t want to give silent sanction to immorality. Romans 1:18-23 kinda morality that applies to all people.
In terms of what’s my deeper interest in Mormonism. I’m still trying to figure out how a religion this socially / politically conservative can have a theology which contains so many ultra liberal elements. I started my essay or Mormons addressing this very point Mormonism as Hermetic Christianity (part 1), with lines like “I’m still getting over the idea of KJVonlyists who are to the left of Elizabeth Johnson on re-imaging God”. I want to try and figure out this paradox. I’m starting to understand Joseph Smith a little better but I can’t quite figure out how he drew to himself the people he’s drew and how this religion made it through another 6 generations since then.
CH
I don’t have much time today so I’ll answer part of your post that seems to be getting at my strategy with the way I write. I want to get the attention of the Mormon questioner who is starting to figure out that somethings not quite right in Mormonism. Shocking statements provoke people to do some investigating, even if it’s an attempt to prove me wrong. I know that once they start digging, they will find things that the Mormon church attempts to bury or gloss over.
For example my statement about Mormons mocking God regarding the atonement. Cults generally attack the person and work of Jesus, the veracity of the Bible, and salvation by grace/faith. Why would a religious group try to promote a doctrine where by the cross and the shed blood of Christ are not the focal point of the atonement? Satan was defeated at the cross. It’s where our salvation was secured. I think it’s mocking God when a religious group attempts to draw attention away from what God did for us there on the cross. Mormonism draws attention away from the cross at every turn.
The Mormon Jesus isn’t God. Only God could make a perfect sacrifice for sin because He is perfect. The Mormon God was not perfect, having been a sinful man who through effort/works transformed himself into a god. This is mocking God.
I want the questioning Mormon to get provoked and start looking for answers. It’s not uncommon for a Mormon not to know that the god they worship is not the God of the Bible but merely one of a million or billion gods, all former sinful men who were particularly good at self-improvement.
Falcon —
Why would a religious group try to promote a doctrine where by the cross and the shed blood of Christ are not the focal point of the atonement?
For the same reason virtually every religion on the planet including most Christians reject it. You seem to have respect for the early fathers of the church, but De Incarnatione by Saint Athanasius puts the primacy of the atonement in the incarnation not the crucifixion. Saint Gregory essentially put the atonement on the actions of Satan and Christ sinlessness, the “mouse trap” theory, that the fall had created a debt between man and Satan; and that Satan lost dominion. As an aside, that theory has a lot of biblical support, possibly more than Luther’s. Augustine has the atonement be the cross but puts the power of mediating that salvation in the church. The church is empowered by the cross, not the individual. So for example Christ’s baptism, as well as the believer’s is key to salvation. A doctrine not unlike the ones you see in Mormonism. I would say you really don’t see the full blown Protestant theory until Thomas Aquinas, anywhere I know of.
And still most Catholics today would argue that the atonement empowered the Sacrament of Confession, and it is the Sacrament that grants remission from sin and the cross which empowers the Sacrament. Liberal Christianity in general would totally redefine the question.
There’s a big difference in the statements falcon makes and actually being a hateful person. Like he said, he points out pivotal doctrinal issues in Mormonism. A lot of the time, he phrases it in a way that most Mormons would find insulting (“the magic rocks in a hat” stuff), but it gets their attention. And really, you can’t expect to go to a website solely designed to discuss the doctrinal errors of a religion claiming to be Christian and be totally happy with everything you read. If you call yourself a Christian, yet you are in obvious error, other Christians are going to call you out on it. Simple as that.
However, I have been on several sites, many which are not set up for religious discussion at all, where the lds people literally bash evangelicals (and anyone else not lds). Ever read the Deseret comment section? It’s lovely.
My point is that, while every religion is going to have its less-than-loving members, at MC the whole point is not to belittle a religion just for the fun of it…. but to hopefully cause any unsure lds members to question the claims on here. Research it for themselves. Many exMormons came to Christ only using pre-approved lds texts. How many more is MC reaching by shedding light on parts of the religion these people may have never heard about? And while most Mormons are very nice people with good hearts, that’s not really Christ’s qualifications to get into heaven. Sometimes the truth isn’t always fun to hear (read), but in the end, it can save your soul.
(part 2)
Now if we move into non-Christians groups almost none of them see the cross as instrumental. Islam because it came after Christianity specifically rejects blood sacrifice in any form, “It is not their meat nor their blood that reaches Allah. it is your piety that reaches Him.” Sacrifices in Islam are seen as acts of worship. Remembrances of sacrifices ranging from Abrahams sacrifices through to God’s with Jesus. Same idea you see in Baha’i with regard to sin. Judaism completely rejects the idea that Jesus’ sacrifice was even a sacrifice in any sense but rather nothing more than a death, not much different than a car accident. Again for reconciliation for sin you see the same concept as Islam.
Go out further, and you have Hinduism, which also has dying / resurrecting Gods and sees Jesus as a western representation of one of them but puts the atonement on the individual’s response to those actions. Buddhism would reject the whole Christian concept of sin, and really only has a theory of ethics; not much different than atheism.
So obviously for the vast majority of the planet rejecting the atonement makes a lot of sense. The outlier is Protestant Christianity.
And not only is the cross not considered the focal point of the atonement; to mormons, the image is viewed as derogatory and something to be disgusted by. My husband kidded that if we wanted to keep Mormons from visiting us (so they’d stop asking him to come to church), all we’d have to do is stick big crosses all over our house. That would be enough.
On a friend’s blog, she was talking about redecorating their apartment. They had one spot where normally a cross would go. But she said they didn’t want to “make it look like they were worshipping anything” (exact quote), so they put a clock there instead.
While he was just joking around, it was very telling. To the Christian, it is the saving grace of mankind. A holy God who sacrificed Himself in order to be with his creation. To the Mormon, it’s a death tool that should be scorned. You can talk about all the scholars and saints and all that all day long if you like. What’s important is what GOD said about the cross.
“For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.” I Cor 1:17-18
CD-Host,
I’m shaking my head at your comments. You are a big fan of Mormonism. Wondering how Joseph Smith’s church has lasted 6 generations. Well I was LDS for 40 years and was born into the religion. We are taught from birth the whitewashed version. What do I mean by that? Well check out church manuals. We are not taught the plain doctrine as falcon shows here. I was never taught that god was once a man, that Joseph used a rock placed into his hat and that he then put his face into the hat to translate the BoM. I was never taught that Joseph Smith had a pistol and shot people when he was killed, or that he enjoyed a bottle of wine before it happened. I was never taught that after his death, Mormon men murdered men believed to be in the mob, mutilating their bodies, cutting throats, stabbing hearts, disemboweling, all Mormon temple stuff. I was never taught that it was Mormon men who butchered 127 innocent men, women and children at Mountain Meadows, leaving their bodies to rot in the sun! Oh no, we were taught (at church) that the Mormon men just couldn’t do something so horrible so they laid down and the Indians shot over them killing these people! LIES! When is the LDS church going to make restitution to these people? They took every belonging that was in that wagon train. Yes the Indians took horses and maybe a few cows, but what about the furniture, money, bedding, dishes, clothing, etc? When is the LDS church going to pay that back to the families of the victims? When will they apologize for what they did?
When will they come clean and admit the whole thing?? Gordon Hinkley said in and interview with Larry King that “we will never know until we’ve walked in their moccasins!” Still not admitting the truth! Not to worry though, after the massacre, Mormons took the names of the dead and did all their rituals in the St. George temple, including baptism, talk about disrespect!!! You wonder why Mormonism is still here after 6 generations? It’s because most LDS are born into it. Brainwashed. Not told the truth but fluffy versions of what occurred. And it’s their HERITAGE! They pass it along to the next generation, lies and all! As for converts, well LDS missionaries lie by omission. They don’t tell any doctrines. They make Mormonism sound exactly like Orthodox Christianity except you get the added perk of being a family forever. Are you not reading these articles put up by Sharon? Do you not see the harmful effects of Polygamy? Oh and it was never taught that Joseph Smith was a polygamist. Everyone around me are Mormons. They only believe what they are taught at church (and they aren’t being taught the truth) and they won’t read or study anything, even in their own church books such as the Journal of Discourses, for fear they will be cast to hell! You want to know why it’s still here? Well that’s why! There are so many LDS who have resigned and removed records. Mormonism is a fraud. It’s in no way Christianity, even though it claims to be THE Christianity. You need to learn more about actual Mormon culture. I guarantee you know more about LDS doctrine than the average Mormon.
I’m also wondering which brand of Mormonism you are a fan of??? Is it the original taught by Joseph Smith? Or one of the many versions that have morfed into something that would be unrecognizable to Joseph Smith?
Kate —
Well check out church manuals. We are not taught the plain doctrine as falcon shows here. I was never taught that god was once a man
The young woman’s manual:
The very first paragraphs of exaltation in McConkie:
Marriedamormon,
Hammer is actually Rick. He has a blog and has invited Helen to check it out. They are still having dialogue on another thread here at MC.
Kate —
Sorry to have to keep breaking up responses. There is a pretty short response post limit. Anyway I saw an apology from a prophet for Mountain Meadows on the PBS drama which as far as I know was heavily watched. Here is a link to an article in Ensign that opens, “This month marks the 150th anniversary of a terrible episode in the history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. On September 11, 1857, some 50 to 60 local militiamen in southern Utah, aided by American Indian allies, massacred about 120 emigrants who were traveling by wagon to California
Certainly there was a coverup at the time. Brigham Young in his capacity as territorial governor made a command decision to kill civilians for a variety of military reasons. We as a government do that sort of stuff today, Second Battle of Fallujah being a good example from less than a decade ago. People don’t necessarily know the dark sides of their religious heros. I’ll link to an article on my site, Anne Le Fert which is really serious misconduct by Calvin that had disastrous implications for the church of Geneva and in many ways the whole history of Presbyterianism. Yet in my experience, maybe one in ten-thousand reformed persons know anything about the Anne Le Fert story. And there is nothing unusual here, Calvin’s disastrous rule, dictatorial actions and general abuses off offices are generally not discussed in Reformed and Presbyterian churches in any kind of detail. Instead they study the Institues, and learn about what Calvin’s real long term effects were which was the development of a consistent framework for understanding the bible.
CD_Host,
Either the LDS church has added that to today’s manual or I missed that lesson as a young girl. As far as your quotes from Bruce McConkie, his book was NEVER used in church and not all Mormons own/owned it. The Doctrines of Salvation are also NEVER used( most don’t even know they exist) and as for the passages in the D&C, well go back and take a look at dialogue with Helen. It doesn’t matter that it is written here. Mormons twist and spin every strange doctrine to mean something else. I can honestly say that we never studied anything about becoming gods of our own worlds at church. Lessons at church aren’t what you think. We never got into any deep stuff at all. We were taught to “be perfect even as your Heavenly Father is perfect so that we may become “like” him.” Never was it plainly taught that we will be rulers of our own worlds! Now, I take full responsibility for not researching everything out and just believing what was spoon fed to me. I was taught that none of the conflicting things are important. Just follow the prophet and I would never be led astray. Any questions I did have was treated as blasphemy. You don’t question in the LDS church. Once again you need to learn the culture. When you live in Mormonville and 99% are LDS, you just go with the flow. Keep your questions to yourself, or be judged. Mormons aren’t the most loving and friendly people. Lots are very judgmental and self righteous. You wouldn’t believe how a person is talked about for just drinking a cup of coffee! So your remarks to falcon tell me that you really don’t know Mormons at all.
Married said
I am the Hammer, My buddy Falcon nicknamed me that and I liked it. You might find what looks like a lot of people that have my same name(s), Rick, Rick b, Hammer, the hammer, Etc.
The reason why is because this blog has changed from Word press to many different other blog templates, so it causes me problems logging in and I have to keep changing my name, but they are all me. As to my Blog, I started that years ago, I still have it but never add to it, I will reply to people if they stop by and ask questions. I simply dont have time to keep up on it with all I have going on in my busy life, and this blog has plenty to keep me busy. Also if you wondering I have been with this blog since before it started. At one time it was simply questions that you answered, so I answered all but two, then the blog started and I have been with it since day one.
As you you clicking on my blog and seeing, Helen/Louis, not sure what thats all about, I made it clear to Helen, I will not post anything by her on my blog till we get our isse here resolved, and it’s not looking like she will answer the question, probally because in all honesty she cannot.