This year (2011) Mormon ladies have been learning about the history of the Church’s Relief Society, said to be “the Lord’s organization for woman.” Julie B. Beck, the Relief Society general president wrote that “understanding our history is not only important but essential” (Ensign, January 2011, 7. Emphasis in the original). Ms. Beck gave several reasons for knowing, understanding and valuing the history, as well as “the examples of noble Latter-day Saint women” of the Relief Society. Therefore, most of the 2011 visiting teaching messages have included historical information about the early days of what was then called the Female Relief Society.
Come Let Us Rejoice by Walter Rane
In January the history focused on Joseph Smith’s organization of the group, which took place on March 17, 1842, and the diversity of the relatively small group of women who were at that first meeting:
“The youngest were three teenagers, and the oldest, a woman in her fifties. Eleven of the women were married, two were widows, six were unmarried, and the marital status of one is unknown.” (ibid.)
This was the marital status of those women on March 17, 1842, but things soon changed for some of them.
Three months after the formation of the Relief Society (i.e., in June 1842), one of those first members, Sarah M. Cleveland, became the 12th plural wife of Joseph Smith. Sarah was the “woman in her fifties” listed above. She was also married to John Cleveland at the time (and had been since 1826). She remained with John throughout her life.
On the same day that Joseph Smith married Sarah Cleveland, he also married another woman who had been at the first Relief Society meeting: Eliza Snow. Unlike Sarah, Eliza had no other husband. The marriage was officiated by Brigham Young with Eliza’s Relief Society sister and soon-to-be sister wife, Sarah Cleveland, acting as witness. Eliza was 38 years old.
In August Joseph Smith married another woman who had been at the first Relief Society meeting, Martha Knight. Martha was not one of the widows mentioned in the list above, but she was a new widow (of one month) at the time that she married Joseph. She was 37 years old when she became Joseph’s 16th plural wife.
About a year later (June 1843) yet another original member of Relief Society married Joseph Smith. Elvira Holmes became Joseph’s 27th plural wife, just six months after she had married Jonathan Holmes. After Joseph Smith’s death, Jonathan stood in as proxy when his wife, Elvira, was married to Smith for eternity in the temple.
Desdemona Fullmer was another woman who had been at the first meeting of the Relief Society to later wed Joseph Smith. In July 1843, at the age of 34, Desdemona became Joseph’s 29th plural wife.
Within a year and a half of the initial Relief Society meeting, Joseph Smith had married five of the twenty women who were at that meeting. At the actual time of the meeting, he was already married to one of those women, Emma. So we see that Joseph Smith married 30% of the original Relief Society members.
On the same day that the Relief Society was organized, another group of women were presented and accepted for membership in the Relief Society. In that group of seven women was Miranda Hyde, wife of LDS Apostle Orson Hyde. Orson was away serving a mission overseas when Miranda became Joseph Smith’s 10th plural wife in April of 1842.
One more of Joseph Smith’s plural marriages had ties to that March 17th Relief Society meeting, though the young woman herself was not present. Elizabeth Ann Whitney was among the twenty initial members. Two months later Joseph Smith introduced Elizabeth and her husband Newel to the doctrine of plural marriage. After coming to embrace it, the couple gave their 17-year-old daughter, Sarah Ann, to the Prophet. Sarah became Joseph Smith’s 15th plural wife on July 27, 1842. Nine months later Sarah entered into a “pretend marriage” with Joseph Kingsbury; Joseph Smith performed the civil ceremony.
I doubt that this aspect of the history of the Female Relief Society will ever be included in the Mormon Church’s visiting teaching messages; but if, as Ms. Beck said, “understanding our history is not only important but essential,” it certainly ought to be.
(Historical information from Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith)
You’re right, I suppose history in context with all its warts should be examined in light of Gospel Principles. That is if one claims polygamy to be one of those nasty warts.
Time will tell whether this was a commandment of God or just something JS made up. Even the Book of Mormon claimed that plural marriage was something only God could command His people to raise up seed.
For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.”
Was JS a fraud? was the Book of Mormon Fiction? Maybe, but just maybe he got it right.
Solid LDS,
Where is the “seed” that Joseph Smith raised up? There are rumors that he fathered children with other women but the LDS church won’t admit it. So where is Joseph Smith’s seed from all of these women? This is one part of LDS history that has always made my stomach turn. I was never taught that Joseph Smith was a polygamist, I was taught at church and in my home that it began with Brigham Young and the move West because there were just so many darn widows. That is a lie. The doctrine of polygamy was to be practiced and according to D&C 132 no one can enter the Celestial Kingdom without practicing it in this life. The LDS do not openly practice polygamy. Why the doctrinal change? So Utah could become a State. It’s that simple. It is true that while Pres. Hinckley was busy stating on national television that polygamy is an abomination to God, he knew that it was being practiced in LDS temples daily. The deceit that abounds in Mormonism astonishes me.
Joseph Smith caused women to commit adultery. He married women who were already married to other men, what does the Bible say about this? Romans 7:1-3 1 Corinthians 7:2
Some LDS scripture even says a man should have one wife:
Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and none else.” (D&C 42:22.)
I will never be convinced that this atrocity came from God. God has never “commanded” polygamy. Men have taken it upon themselves to practice it (even in the Bible) and it has never worked out has it? That’s because it wasn’t from God.
Kate , you are not alone in being astonished at finding out about important aspects of
Mormon history, there have many like you no doubt that have experienced this same
thing. Perhaps one day we will see Mormon leaders open up all of their archives and
the First Presidencies vault to be forthright with the Mormon people. If I was a Mormon
I would demand such. False prophets love power and control over the “rank and file ” .
God help the Mormon people to walk away from these men .
Thanks for the research you have put into this, Sharon.
In 12 months (June 1842 to June ’43), he married 16 people? Julie Beck believes it is essential to understand the history of the Female Relief Society. Were she to examine its history in detail, would she like it?
From what I understand, during the Nauvoo days, a number of females were told eternal life could be attained by marrying their religion’s founder. This is untrue for the simple reason that eternal life is found not in a bed, but in a Cross:
“And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life” (John 3:14–15).
This is disgusting. To the point where I’m rendered speechless.
Kate, I love your posts. Thanks for your insights.
Solid, let’s say that Joseph “got it right” and polygamy is wonderful. Smith and the church still lied about it and continue to lie about it. Why all the denial over “eternal principles?” This is another case of Mormons being less that truthful. They say one thing to your face, but have another belief behind your back.
A verse in the Book of Mormon outright states that polygamy is an abomination to God. It then goes on to talk about “raising up a seed.” Apologists like Solid argue that the only way God could raise up a righteous seed was through polygamy. Are you kidding me???
The frustrating element is that apologists take two conflicting stances on the polygamy issue to trip people up. Many, like Solid, say that polygamy was God’s way of raising up a seed. If that’s true, Joseph Smith failed. Out of his 30 plus marriages, we have no conclusive proof that he bore children. Therefore, he did not “raise up a seed” which was the supposed purpose of polygamy.
Other LDS apologists say Smith didn’t have relations with all his wives and that polygamy was a sealing ordinance only, no relations involved. (This is supposedly less weird) Well, it can’t be both ways.
Also, LDS people always forget to mention that polgamy is still believed to be practiced in the after-life when one widower is sealed in a second marriage.
Mormons are fast to say “We don’t practice polygamy” but fail to admit that 1)They don’t think it’s bad and 2) They practice it spiritually in the temple right now or that 3) God could recommend it sometime soon. The prophet will let them know.
Solid, you said, ” Time will tell whether this was a commandment of God or just something
Joseph Smith made up. ”
Sounds like you’re not so sure this was a Mormon “gospel truth” or not . If Joseph Smith did
make it up then how does that not make him a false teacher ? What does that say about the
subsequent Mormon leaders who claimed he received it from God ? I guess what I’m saying
is that what you said seems very strange considering this was a major doctrine of Mormonism
for a long time .
Well we have those who claim JS committed adultery and then we have those here who claim he had no children and did not raise up seed, now the question is, did he consummate any of these Celestial Marriages? If he did, where are the children from some 30 marriages? any one want to take a crack at that? Meaning how does one accuse him of adultery if they can’t prove he slept with anyone. Now if JS did not have seed does not mean the commandment from God to institute the ancient practice of plural marriages, (Biblical Scripture) was not invalid. I don’t seem to see the point of this accusation by some that JS had no seed, plainly a invalid ploy to twist LDS Doctrine and The New and Everlasting Covenant.
I was accused of saying that polygamy was God’s way of raising up a seed. I never said such a thing, but if you want to find it in the Book of Mormon its easy to find. Now I plainly believe this, because I also have a testimony given to me by the HG that the BOM is true.
When God created he did not give multiple wives to Adam. Who was the first person in the Bible to practice polygamy? It was Lamech, who boasted about how he was much more violent than Cain (Genesis 4:23-24). I find that revealing of the nature of polygamy.
What’s going on here?
Mar.1842 = the Relief Society formed. Emma Smith ,Joseph Smith’s wife, presides.
July 1842 = faced with rumors of Joseph Smith’s connection with other women , the Relief
Society respond to defending their spiritual leader by drawing up a petition affirming Smith’s
virtue . There was a big problem though , as Joseph Smith at this very time had already secretly
wed other women .
” the women who defended Smith against charges of moral laxity were most often his own wives,
many of them Emma’s friends. As Emma presided over the Relief Society in the spring of 1842,
she may not have realized the extent to which her colleagues were secretly marrying her
husband. ” [ Nauvoo Polygamy, by George D. Smith, p. 115 ]
Oh, and the official Church law on marriage at this time ? it was clear: one man , one woman.
Is this the restored Church of Jesus Christ ? A Mormon authority declares , ” ….we preach the
same Gospel in all it’s simplicity and plainness that Jesus preached…..” [ Wilford Woodruff,
JofD. v.23,p.130 ].
2 John 9 is appropriate here.
Solid LDS,
I need some help with your last post:
1) “Now if JS did not have seed does not mean the commandment from God to institute the ancient practice of plural marriages, (Biblical Scripture) was not invalid.”
– I get lost in all the negations- I think I know what you are trying to say here but I wanted to double check.
2) “I was accused of saying that polygamy was God’s way of raising up a seed. I never said such a thing, but if you want to find it in the Book of Mormon its easy to find. Now I plainly believe this, because I also have a testimony given to me by the HG that the BOM is true.”
-I have no idea what the purpose of what you are saying here is.
“I’m accused of saying x. I never said x, but if you want to find x in the BoM x is easy to find. Now I playinly believe x, etc.” = I was accused of something I plainly believe but I never said but is in the BoM (verse you quoted/said).
also you only addressed one LDS position that Dale used to make a point thus not addressing the point. as your treatment of the position only bulsters the conflict of positions represented by Dale as the inconsistency among various LDS then you are at least not addressing Dale’s point, if not supporting it.
spartacus gets lost, “I was accused of saying that polygamy was God’s way of raising up a seed. I never said such a thing, but if you want to find it in the Book of Mormon its easy to find.
Quite simply its a clarification. I never stated something as my own, but if you want to see the source of what I do believe its plainly stated in the Book of Mormon. The accusation was a claim by another that — ” Many, like Solid, say that polygamy was God’s way of raising up a seed.” What I did say was that a BOM Prophet stated, “For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.” Since I’m not a Prophet, did not receive revelation from God about Polygamy I have to base my belief on the Book of Mormon and the testimony I received of its truthfulness.
Dale claims you can’t have it both ways, why not? God is the one who gives commandments, if JS did not raise up seed how is that suppose to be relevant? A prophets is passing down to Gods people His commandments and one of those was the New and Everlasting Covenant of marriage. This Principle is still in affect since the Temple still seals people together for time and eternity. If I was to loose my wife to death and was sealed to her for time and eternity and remarried, the new wife could be sealed to me for time and eternity, would not that be a plural relationship in the Celestial Kingdom?
I like the King James version, its clarity and simplicity are in the details regarding transgression, this being said I argue that it is appropriate to point out that Orthodox Christians have plainly transgressed God Commandments and twisted His Gospel into something unrecognizable. Of course those who claim a triune God have to show how one God can both be the Father and the Son. Apostate teachings like this are exactly the transgression of God Doctrine as expressed in these verses.
2 John 1:9-11
King James Version (KJV)
9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.
Wow 2John1 9-11 quoted by a Mormon.Just the very scripture I use when the missionaries come round.
Just show me the plates Solid.
” Apostate doctrine like this are exactly the transgression of doctrine as expressed in these
verses.” 2 John1:9-11
Apostate doctrine like teaching polygamy is part of the gospel of Jesus Christ is exactly the
transgression as expressed in these verses, 2John 1:9-11.
beware of a false gospel preached by false apostles— Rev2:2
Dear Solid LDS,
When we have LDS visitors to this forum, it is a fine thing. Thanks for participating here.
You’ve spoken with us at length about Sharon’s topic, with candor. Thanks! I noticed in your comments that you find it difficult to understand the Trinity:
“… Those who claim a triune God have to show how one God can both be the Father and the Son.”
I know I am not on topic (sorry, Sharon!), but I thought I’d write a brief note, Solid LDS.
“And Jesus cried out and said, ‘Whoever believes in me, believes not in me but in him who sent me. And whoever sees me sees him who sent me. I have come into the world as light, so that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness’” (John 12:44-46; emphasis added).
What does this mean to you, Solid LDS? If I saw Jesus, would I see the One who sent him? And who sent Jesus? God. So when one looks at Jesus, one sees … God.
Don’t feel like you have to write back. Just wanted to offer this for your consideration.
Solid, I find it hilarious that you say the prophet handed down polygamy to God’s people. Joseph Smith COVERED UP most of his polygamous relations. There are so many problems with this topic that I can’t believe anyone rational could defend it. It’s also interesting to note that Smith’s children with Emma denied that polygamy was ever practiced.
Regardless, here’s my favorite quote from a Mormon authority on the subject. This sounds like a mouthpiece of God, right?
“Brethren, I want you to understand that it is not to be as it has been heretofore. The brother missionaries have been in the habit of picking out the prettiest women for themselves before they get here, and bringing on the ugly ones for us; hereafter you have to bring them all here before taking any of them, and let us all have a fair shake.”
– Apostle Heber C. Kimball, First Counselor to Brigham Young, The Lion of the Lord, New York, 1969, pp 129-130.
Too bad this quote isn’t used in any of those warm and fuzzy LDS commercials.
Dale, don’t hold your breath about Apostle Kimball”s statement appearing in any Mormon
commercial. If Church curriculum does’nt use statements like this , then it would not be
allowed to the general public . In a public notice placed in the Church’s publication,
Times and Seasons, [vol.3.10-1-1842] where a dozen prominent Mormon men testified that
they knew of no other rule or system of marriage in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day
Saints other than the one in Book of Doctrine and Covenants [ 1835 , one man / one woman].
This public testimony was followed by testimony from 19 ladies of the Relief Society who said
the same thing . Among the men who signed his name to this public notice was Newel K. Whitney,
and among the women was his wife Elizabeth Ann Whitney [ Joseph Smith’s wife Emma also
signed it ] . This notice came in Oct . but 3 MONTHS EARLIER Mr. and Mrs. Whitney had
given their daughter , Sarah , to Joseph Smith as a plural wife.
Solid LDS – As to whether “time will tell” if polygamy was something Joseph Smith made up or not? Well, time has told. It is no longer practed by the mainstream LDS Church. In addition, the Fundamentalist LDS Churches who took their prophets at their word when they said polygamy was an eternal deal – well, we see the fruits of polygamy in the lives of those who pracetice it – it is sad and destructive. So, time has told in more ways than one. The doctrines of the Mormon Church (polygamy, Adam God, is deification next??) seem to fall away quite easily. While the Church founded on the rock of Jesus Christ, the Church which God promised would never fall away, continues on through Christ’s mercy and grace despite our many individual and corporate failing. We are always in need of a redeemer, a savior – and He is always there to forgive and call sinners to eternal life by His Word.
Interesting that Polygamy based on Spiritual Law is seen as false since Constitutional Law as dictated by its interpretation takes personal freedom out of the hands of the Religious and replaces it with secular handcuffs.
Beware of your own Government, not only will God be taken out of of the Pledge of Allegiance, but the Ten Commandment will be crucified in the Court of Civil commonality.
Beware of what you wish for, you most likely will feel its affects on your own person freedom of religion and how one should worship. Don’t forget Obama is a Christian, but not the type of Christian most Orthodox Christians believe in, Social Christianity is not dead, but lives in the White House. How can a “secular humanist” proclaim they follow Christ? I think one should be more alarmed with Controversial Black Liberation Theology Doctrine then Mormons practicing polygamy.
I’m suggesting that Dale is not quoting Apostle Heber C. Kimball accurately.
The byline on the article is simply “From Our Own Correspondents”.
This is the source period.
So we see that again some one is quoting from a source that is questionable, since this has been refuted so many time already its always interesting that there are those who will continue to be useful tools when quoting unknown sources.
Here is what Kimball dis say:
Heber C. Kimball did make a somewhat similar reference upon one occasion,
“Let truth and righteousness be your motto; and do not go into the world for anything else but to preach the Gospel, build up the kingdom of God, and gather the sheep into the fold. You are sent out as shepherds to gather the sheep together; and remember that they are not your sheep: they belong to Him that sends you. Then do not make a choice of any of those sheep; do not make selections before they are brought home and put into the fold. You understand that. Amen.”
Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses 6:256.
However, it should also be noted that Heber also said the following,
The principle of plurality of wives never will be done away. Some sisters have had revelations that when this time passes away and they go through the veil every woman will have a husband to herself. I wish more of our young men would take to themselves wives of the daughters of Zion and not wait for us old men to take them all; go-ahead upon the right principle young gentlemen and God bless you forever and ever and make you fruitful, that we may fill the mountains and then the earth with righteous inhabitants. Deseret News Vol. V, No. 35
I just love how Mormons pick and choose what to believe. If a past leader has said something that doesn’t look good well then it’s either from an unreliable source or that’s not what they meant or that was just his opinion, or he may have said it but it doesn’t count because new prophet trumps old one, or those darn aunt tye’s are making it up again! Polygamy is and was disgusting. If it was so wonderful then why did Joseph Smith lie about it and sneak around? If it was a commandment from God and had to be practiced in this life so one could be exalted, then as God’s mouthpiece why wasn’t he preaching it from the pulpit? Shouting it out to the world so everyone could be Saved? He lied to his own legal wife Emma. He did this disgusting thing behind her back. In the end she was the one who convinced people Joseph never practiced it. She convinced their children that their father never practiced it. I don’t know if she ever really knew the full extent of it. Did she know he had over 30 wives? I highly doubt it. Can you imagine being a secret plural wife of Joseph Smith and sitting in relief society right next to your friend Emma and she has no clue that you were with her husband the night before? As a woman I cannot even imagine doing something like that to my friend. Polygamy most certainly messed with the minds of these women. Too bad Joseph Smith and the men who put these women through this had no conscience. Polygamy was and is one thing…perversion. I know I’m being harsh, but I’m not sorry. This is one subject that really bothers me.
Solid you said,
” I think one should be more alarmed with controversial Black Liberation Theology Doctrine
than Mormons practicing polygamy. ”
Are you trying to divert this topic over to something else ? Can I remind you how serious this
doctrine of Mormon polygamy is , in the light of 2 John 9, ?
Let’s briefly lay aside how Mormon authorities have been less than forthright in dealing with this
part of their history, the question to address concerns the authority of Mormon apostles to
be trustworthy in promoting the gospel of Jesus Christ .
Mormon apostles claim: the gospel they have to offer is the same one that Jesus gave His
apostles spread to the world after His resurrection.
Mormon apostles claim : that the gospel was restored , hence polygamy was part of that gospel.
Jesus’ apostles were obedient to His warning about false teachers/gospels and thus passed on
that warning —2 John 9 ; 1John 4:1 .
So where then does Jesus’ original apostles teach polygamy is part of His gospel ?
Can we trust those spiritual leaders who preach “another gospel ” ?
Kate says:
I just love how Mormons pick and choose what to believe. If a past leader has said something that doesn’t look good well then it’s either from an unreliable source or that’s not what they meant or that was just his opinion,
Well Kate, you have every opportunity to show that this quote came directly from Kimball. The source does not reveal anything other then someone assumption or guess.
Dealing in hard evidence is not some noteworthy of those who copy and past their quotes from questionable sources, at least I quoted a couple of direct paragraphs of what he did say. Knock yourself out in proving me wrong, I am always willing to see truth revealed, not some quote that states only “From Our Own Correspondents”.
Nice comment Mike, but you have to explain by the scriptures and not just speculation why the OT Patriarchs practiced plural marriage. All I have ever seen is what is speculated not doctrine proving it was not Gods commandment to His chosen spokesmen in the OT.
You can refute it all you want, but the Bible is still a witness that Plural Marriage was well and alive and God did not condemn it. If I’m wrong then surely you will find the verses that prove me wrong.
Solid, oh sorry, I forgot that any unsavory quote from LDS leaders has obviously been written incorrectly. I’ve brought up similar quotes to Mormon friends, and they simply say “The quote must have been recorded wrong.” That way, you see, if you took the time to look it up, you can still say it’s not true.
Here’s more that must have been written in error:
“Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned.” (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 3, p. 266).
“If we were to do away with polygamy, it would only be one feather in the bird, one ordinance in the Church and kingdom. Do away with that, then we must do away with prophets and Apostles, with revelation and the gifts and graces of the Gospel, and finally give up our religion altogether and turn sectarians and do as the world does, then all would be right. We just can’t do that, for God has commanded us to build up His kingdom and to bear our testimony to the nations of the earth, and we are going to do it, come life or come death. He has told us to do thus, and we shall obey Him in days to come as we have in days past” (Journal of Discourses 13:165 – p.166).
Another LDS Book “The History of the Church States”
“We declare that we believe that one man, should have one wife, and one woman but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again.” -History of the Church, vol. 5, pg. 30 (May 1836)
“For the information of those who might be assailed by those foolish tales about two wives, we would say that no such principle ever existed among the Latter-Day Saints, and ever will; this is well known to all who are acquainted with our books and actions.” Millenial Star (an LDS magazine) August 1, 1842
Now does anyone else notice how the LDS sources conflict? They keep changing the story, and then they accuse other people of “not understanding” the history because it was all written down wrong. How convenient. Why not just admit that this position can’t be defended? Why not admit that these stories don’t jive?
Kate –November 10, 2011 at 8:27 am–[Where is the “seed” that Joseph Smith raised up? There are rumors that he fathered children with other women but the LDS church won’t admit it. So where is Joseph Smith’s seed from all of these women? ]
If just a small part of the rumors I hear here about Joseph Smith were true there would be many genealogical groups claiming to be his great-great-something or other. Just look at the groups for Brigham Young and the other Prophets.
Mormons are very interested in who there ancestors are, and many outside the Church do the same. There is even a group dedicated to saying bad things about the Church because they trace there ancestry to the very few children who lived through Mountain Meadows.
If Joseph Smith truly acted like is taught here, someone would have created a “Sons of Joseph” group, or maybe because the article started out about the Relief Society, “Daughters of Joseph”.
fred
Dale said, “Solid, oh sorry, I forgot that any unsavory quote from LDS leaders has obviously been written incorrectly.”
Either it was or you surly would be pleased to reveal the quote as spoken by the first person and not some assumed second or third party witness that is unnamed.
I don’t doubt the accuracy of your source, I doubt the sources accuracy.
Also your copy and paste website, http://www.mormonhandbook.com/home/polygamy.html
seem to be afoul of copyright laws. I would be interested in how this site can use the Mormon Handbook title and not be censured for fraud committed in copying a licensed trademark.
The LDS Church sued the Tanners for alleged copyright infringement.
Solid, not sure why you dragged O.T. patriarchs into this issue since we’re evaluating the
teachings of Mormon apostles being consistent with the gospel that Jesus’ apostles preached.
You might want to consider, Luke 24:25-27 ; Matt 28:19 ; 1Cor 15:1-4. Jesus the God of the
patriarchs came to earth and thru His Atonement and resurrection opened up a NEW way ,
[ Heb.10:20; John 14:6 ] . This new arrangement was God’s will for how men would be right
with Him. This way was the truth, and this truth would make man free, it was truely good news,
the gospel. This gospel was what Jesus gave to His apostles to spread to mankind it contained
the truths necessary to enable man to be made right with God and receive eternal life. We can
embrace this gospel because God allowed Jesus’ apostles to record it for all to have .
Unfortunately, there would come those who felt deeply that God was speaking to them to
change vital aspects of this gospel , they would claim God told them to do so . Jesus knew this
would happen so He had His apostles also preach warnings about these men — Matt.24:11; 1 John
4:1; 2 John 9. Today we see this transpire as these false messengers would even use the same
titles and preach the same moral code as Jesus’ original apostles , however they would introduce
inaccurate teachings about who Jesus was and how a person could receive eternal life with God
[ 2 Cor.11:3-4 ; 13-15 ]. Who are these prophets and apostles today ? Since 1830, the Mormon
religion advertises itself as having prophets and apostles who alone have been endorsed
by Jesus to preach His gospel .cont
cont.
The claims of Mormon apostles to deliver trustworthy spiritual guidance is clear because they
say they’re directed by Jesus to preach His gospel , this gospel was faithfully preached 2000 yrs
ago but had become lost. It was now restored, and the message of how to be made right with
God was available again : ” … Thus the Church of Jesus Christ was again in existence on the
earth to bless mankind with the doctrines and teachings of the Savior…” [ Ensign May.2007, p88].
and ” through Joseph, the gospel that Jesus established in the New Testament times was brought
back. It had been lost with the death of the Apostles of old…” [ Ensign July, 2008. Apostle
Ballard ]. These men were only stating what an earlier Mormon apostle had taught:
” …..we preach the same gospel in all it’s simplicity and plainness that Jesus taught….”
[ Wilford Woodruff, ] . But what was Wilford Woodruff preaching? He was preaching and
practicing the gospel of Jesus Christ—-polygamy. He felt he was being faithful to what Jesus
had directed him to do . In fact when we peruse testimony of prominent Mormons on what they
thought of this “gospel truth” we see that it was called the following: an ordinance, a principle,
a law, and a essential part of the gospel as important as baptism . To oppose it as being a part of
Jesus’ gospel was to cause the Spirit of God to depart from you , and you end up in hell, unless
you repent.
2 John 9 is a powerful witness against this ” gospel” of Mormon apostles .
I have a choice : Jesus’ original apostles/gospel or Mormon apostles /gospel .
Solid, I actually didn’t use the site you mentioned, but I find it interesting that your main defense against this stuff is that the sourceS are wrong.
I clearly used quotes from numerous sources, but you will complain about all of them since they ALL make the church look bad.
The worst thing here is that the church is caught in LIES, and yet you will NEVER admit it. Instead, you keep saying “it was written down wrong.” What a lousy defense, but it’s also ingenious because it stops you from ever having to consider the truth.
Kate answered you perfectly when she summarizes the LDS defenses:
If a past leader has said something that doesn’t look good:
1)It’s either from an unreliable source
2)That’s not what they meant
3)That was just his opinion
4)The prophet may have said it but it doesn’t count because new prophet trumps old one
5)Those darn anti’s are making it up again
Take your pick, but so far you keep choosing #1. Then you turn around and shout that the LDS prophets are the voice of clarity. I guess you think the “Journal of Discourses and “History of the Church” are unreliable as well.
“Some quietly listen to those who speak AGAINST the plurality of WIVES, and against almost every principle that God has revealed. Such persons have half-a-dozen devils with them all the time. YOU MIGHT AS WELL DENY ‘MORMONISM’ and turn away from it, as to oppose the plurality of wives. Let the Presidency of this Church, and the Twelve Apostles, and all the authorities unite and say with one voice that they will oppose the doctrine, and the whole of them will be damned.”
– Apostle Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, p. 203
Kate answered you perfectly when she summarizes the LDS defenses:
If a past leader has said something that doesn’t look good:
1)It’s either from an unreliable source
LOL, not even close. For one I have no problem with most of the publications and quotes. I find the Journal of Discourse a great place to go to and find inspiration. I agree with the Journal of Discourse even though mistakes were made in recording talks and sermons.
But what is this?
“Brethren, I want you to understand that it is not to be as it has been heretofore. The brother missionaries have been in the habit of picking out the prettiest women for themselves before they get here, and bringing on the ugly ones for us; hereafter you have to bring them all here before taking any of them, and let us all have a fair shake.”
I love how you skip over the more important point I was making, the above snippet has no source other then Apostle Heber C. Kimball, First Counselor to Brigham Young, The Lion of the Lord, New York, 1969, pp 129-130.
And what is there source —– “From Our Own Correspondents”. Wow, amazing.
Why don’t you answer my question and comment? I don’t doubt the accuracy of your source, I doubt the sources accuracy. This snippet has no foundation, you know it because you can’t find out where it originated.
So all the smoke about Kate answering me correctly is bogus since I have no issue with most of the correctly quoted excerpts from sources that are mentioned, Journal of Discourse etc.
Here is a quote by the Author of “The Lion of the Lord”: A Biography of Brigham Young
Author: Stanley P. Hirshson
“At the Mormon Church Historian’s Office in Salt Lake. . . . I received no help or encouragement.” Actually, there is on file in “the Mormon Church Historian’s Office in Salt Lake” a document personally signed on May 17, 1966, by Mr. Hirshson and A. William Lund, the Assistant Church Historian, which specifically grants permission to Mr. Hirshson to use (among other things) manuscript histories and the Journal History of the Church. The records in the Church Historian’s Office reveal that Mr. Hirshson was in the Church Historian’s Library less than one day. Since dozens of scholars, both Mormon and non-Mormon, have used these materials day after day, week after week, and month after month.
So Dale, here is information about your wonderful source, his inability nor any desire to seek after information that gives the reader a accurate account. If he wants to take liberty in judging others with alleged made up snippets then why the failure to mention his source for that snippet? You tell me why? I said alleged since I’m giving you every chance to save your quote by revealing where the actual source can be found, otherwise it would be best for you to retract the snippet which is a very revealing lack of honest research on someones part.
Dale’s most likely incorrect sourced effort at honest journalism. I could be wrong, all he needs to do is provide the actual quote where we can all go to verify.
“Brethren, I want you to understand that it is not to be as it has been heretofore. The brother missionaries have been in the habit of picking out the prettiest women for themselves before they get here, and bringing on the ugly ones for us; hereafter you have to bring them all here before taking any of them, and let us all have a fair shake.”
The actual and most reliable of these two quotes, any one notice a huge difference?
“I wish more of our young men would take to themselves wives of the daughters of Zion and not wait for us old men to take them all; go-ahead upon the right principle young gentlemen and God bless you forever and ever and make you fruitful, that we may fill the mountains and then the earth with righteous inhabitants.”
I am more inclined to believe the words of private correspondence because they felt it was just that, private. Just because the church doesn’t have it’s “official” stamp on this quote by Heber C. Kimball doesn’t make it unreliable. The church had it’s “official” stamp on the Journal of Discourses at one time, but now it is also seen as an unreliable source because darn it, it was written down wrong. Oh unless it’s something faith promoting, then it was written down correctly. I’m almost embarrassed for the LDS . Where’s the honesty and integrity? Why not just stick with the words of Jesus himself? Why not follow Him and leave all of this squabble behind? Jesus cannot be found in any of this. Jesus says that He is the way the truth and the life John 14:6 not polygamy or a bunch of rules or who said what. Why not take Him at His word and put your faith and trust in Him? Why is that so hard for some people? LDS prophet Gorden B. Hinckley said in public that polygamy is an abomination to God, so why do the LDS members still defend it to the bitter end?
Kate, care to source this, “LDS prophet Gorden B. Hinckley said in public that polygamy is an abomination to God”.
Or are we going to see the standard shake and twist non reply?
Dale/Solid LDS
FACT CHECK
Unless I’ve missed something, this info seems not to be in this thread anywhere. All I’ve gathered from your posts is “Lion of the Lord” and “From Our Own Correspondents”. Considering that Solid LDS is continuing to speak about the author of Lion of the Lord (the secondary source) instead of the publisher of the article (the primary source), I thought it might still be useful to interject that the “our” is the New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/1860/04/17/news/utah-polygamy-its-fruits-missionaries-pony-express-more-pugnacious-preaching.html
Apparently Solid has read the article since he talks of the Correspondents, so I thought the source disputed would simply be who the correspondents were, but I didn’t catch any talk about NYTimes or a discussion of that organization’s integrity and its input into the integrity of the Correspondents. So I post this.
If you did read the whole article Solid, then you know that it is critical of the Practice. If so, and you haven’t accused it of bias to the extent of dishonesty, then it appears that your only option for discounting this primary source is an accusation of corruption of the correspondents w/ or w/o the NYTimes complicity.
If not the content being labeled dishonestly biased (which would be circular w/o evidence), or the inspecific nature of “correspondents” used as an out and/or then NYTimes’ integrity must be shown wanting, otherwise, the quote would stand.
Solid, sometimes I think we’re reading two different exchanges because what Kate said to you is dead on, but you deny it. You continuous point is “The source(s) is unreliable,” and then you balk when I say that’s your whole argument.
Now to more fully address your problem with “The Lion and the Lord.” For a minute, let’s give you a benefit of the doubt. Let’s say that source is dubious.
It still doesn’t explain the other equally disturbing quotations. It doesn’t explain the lies surrounding the church’s public vs private stance on polygamy– complete opposites. That was one of MY main points, which you conveniently ignore.
But let’s face facts, you have NOT proven that source to be incorrect. You didn’t even give an attribute for YOUR own source ( a critique from BYU, right?), nor did you mention the author earned the Guggenheim Fellowship during his career. (They give those out to anybody)
You’re merely guessing that Kimball’s quote MAY BE wrong based on a critique from BYU. When put in context with passages from the Journal of Discourses, the quote tends to ring true. Look at what Kimball said in the Journal of Discourse.
On your best day, “The Lion of the Lord” is mistaken, and I doubt that is the case. It’s far more likely a true quote. But how can we ever know since the LDS Millenial Star and other sources say Polygamy NEVER EXISTED.
The truth is that in the 1800s, the LDS denied polygamy in public while practicing it in private. In 2011, you cry foul over POSSIBLE technicalities that don’t even TOUCH the main argument. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.
P.S. Solid, I also get a kick out of how you refer to the more gentlemanly quote from Kimball as likely true. Talk about rose-colored glasses.
I’m sure that Young and Kimball and Smith all aid PLENTY of nice things. It doesn’t invalidate their atrocities. I think you’re failing to see these people as fallible men.
Now why don’t you tell us why this quote from Kimball is wrong too:
“Some quietly listen to those who speak AGAINST the plurality of WIVES, and against almost every principle that God has revealed. Such persons have half-a-dozen devils with them all the time. YOU MIGHT AS WELL DENY ‘MORMONISM’ and turn away from it, AS TO OPPOSE THE PLURALITY OF WIVES. LET THE PRESIDENCY OF THE CHURCH, and the Twelve Apostles, and all the authorities UNITE and say with one voice that they will oppose the doctrine, and the whole of them WILL BE DAMNED.”
– Apostle Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, p. 203
Let me guess. Someone wrote that down wrong?
Dale’s refuting the facts, “If not the content being labeled dishonestly biased (which would be circular w/o evidence), or the inspecific nature of “correspondents” used as an out and/or then NYTimes’ integrity must be shown wanting, otherwise, the quote would stand.”
What are the facts, Dale quotes NYTimes? now if they are correct which I haven’t in the slightest disagreed with, then it shouldn’t be a problem for the perpetrator (accuser), in this case NYT to have at least attributed the quote to something other then, “From Our Own Correspondents”.
Since Dale seems to agree with this quote and it’s reliability, he is free to quote the article.
So, what we have here is the FACT, the NYT is quoting as its source Stanley P. Hirshson, the author who attributes this quote to Apostle Heber C. Kimball. It plainly is something that is either true or false, I believe I have provided enough evidence to show that Dale is only being a useful tool to something he did not research himself, but loves to copy and post just about anything negative regarding Mormonism without any due diligence on his part.
Actually, Solid, I love to post parts of the “Journal of Discourses” that true-believing men like you refuse to comment on and hide from your own investigators.
I love how you’re concentrating on one thing that I did INDEED research myself.
Still nothing to say about?
“Some quietly listen to those who speak AGAINST the plurality of WIVES, and against almost every principle that God has revealed. Such persons have half-a-dozen devils with them all the time. YOU MIGHT AS WELL DENY ‘MORMONISM’ and turn away from it, AS TO OPPOSE THE PLURALITY OF WIVES. LET THE PRESIDENCY OF THE CHURCH, and the Twelve Apostles, and all the authorities UNITE and say with one voice that they will oppose the doctrine, and the whole of them WILL BE DAMNED.”
– Apostle Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, p. 203
especially when paired with:
“For the information of those who might be assailed by those foolish tales about two wives, we would say that NO SUCH PRINCIPLE EVER EXISTED existed among the Latter-Day Saints, and ever will; this is well known to all who are acquainted with our books and actions.” Millenial Star (an LDS magazine) August 1, 1842
Just be honest, Solid, it doesn’t matter how much information is posted, you’ll keep hiding behind the dubious argument that “The Lion and the Lord” isn’t accurate. You’re here to defend Mormonism and nothing else matters to you. You’ll convert people by lying to them like the Millenial Star did.
You’re just like a magician, you keep telling potential converts to “look over here” at all the good stuff. Don’t see the man behind the curtain. He’s unimportant.
Oh, I had a few more things to share. Here’s Brigham Young belittle monogamy:
Monogamy, or restrictions by law to ONE WIFE, is NO PART OF THE ECONOMY OF HEAVEN AMONG MEN. Such a system was commenced by the founders of the Roman empire….Rome became the mistress of the world, and introduced this order of monogamy wherever her sway was acknowledged. Thus this monogamic order of marriage, so esteemed by modern Christians as a holy sacrament and divine institution, is nothing but a system established by a set of robbers…. Why DO WE BELIEVE IN AND PRACTICE POLYGAMY? Because the Lord introduced it to his servants in a revelation given to JOSEPH SMITH, and THE LORD”S SERVANTS HAVE ALWAYS practiced it.
– Prophet Brigham Young, The Deseret News, August 6, 1862
Another from Young which would make current LDS people in an apostasy.
“The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy. Others attain unto a glory and may even be permitted to come into the presence of the Father and the Son; but they cannot reign as kings in glory, because they had blessings offered unto them, and they refused to accept them.”
– The Prophet Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, Vol 11, p. 269, August 19, 1866.
I understand your love for the JoD. I love it also, but for me I look for the positive and spiritual, wherein the enemies of Mormonism are not aware of the Pearls therein. To deny the truth a person must first understand the truth, so in your case its easy to deny what you don’t wish to understand, the truth.
I guess you’re not aware that in my previous post I adamantly stated I agree with the JoD, even for all its warts. Its easy to cherry pick anything apart and your copy and paste is proof that you have enough to pick from to at least convince yourself and for what ever agenda you uphold.
Apostle Heber C. Kimball, Journal of Discourses, vol. 5, p. 203 what is there to say except I find this amusing and very typical of sermons given both by Mormons and Christian pastors in the early eighteen hundreds.
The principle is what I agree with, so my comments would be a affirmative to Plurality of wives, and to deny the Doctrine would be just as reckless todays as it was then.
We still practice plurality of wives, not in practice but spiritually we do, why would I not accept that a man can be married for eternity to another women if his first wife was to die.
Now you ask about the paring of the Millenial Star. Why should this bother me. You first of all only quoted the source, Millenial Star, but not the person stating this. Read the full context, for it adds quiet a bit more to your cherry picking snippet. The statement was in answer to some one who was lying about JS and B. Young, accusing them of trying to seduce her, by making her believe that God had given a revelation that men might have two wives. It wasn’t until 1852 that the Church Publicly announced plural marriage so its not a big surprise to me that many of the Saints were not aware of the Doctrine. That does not mean that some were not practicing it, but for whatever reason is was not public knowledge until after the death of JS.
http://sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/UK/miscUK01.htm
Millennial Star. No. 4. Liverpool, August 1842
God said,
“When thou art come unto the land which the Eternal thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me. . . . Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away” (Deut. 17:14-17).
In verse 18 and on, it says that this is GOD’S LAW:
18 When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the Levitical priests. 19 It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the LORD his God AND FOLLOW CAREFULLY ALL THE WORDS OF THIS LAW and these decrees 20 and not consider himself better than his fellow Israelites AND TURN FROM THE LAW to the right or to the left.
Here we read that God calls this a law, and that the kings of Israel should not consider themselves better than anyone else, and break this law, hence this law is for everyone. Here is God commanding against polygamy. If one reads through the Old Testament, one finds in every case problems with men who “multiplied wives” to themselves. Jesus himself said that marriage was between A man and A woman, The husband and wife “are no longer two, but one,” Jesus said, and he added, “What God has joined together, let man not separate” (Matt. 19:6). This is impossible with polygamy. There is no way polygamy can be justified as a law of God from the Bible, no way, no how. _johnny
Solid said, “I understand your love for the JoD. I love it also, but for me I look for the positive and spiritual, wherein the enemies of Mormonism are not aware of the Pearls therein. To deny the truth a person must first understand the truth, so in your case its easy to deny what you don’t wish to understand, the truth.”
Solid, I pray God will open your eyes to the painful realities recorded in the JoD and how they expose the very fruits that Joseph Smith tried to hide from his own people. It must be very hard to see all the times the church professed and then denied the doctrine of polygamy. If not for the brave men who published the Nauvoo Expositor, who knows how long Smith would have hidden behind false revelations?
Frankly, if you can’t look at these quotes which show how the church praised polygamy while at other times denied its very existence and see the black mask of deception, I think you’re beyond changing your mind. This only proves why you’re here: not for truth, but because you feel the need to prevent others from sharing the truth.
Beginning in 1841, Joseph Smith took as plural wives several married women, as if exercising a variant of the feudal droit du seigneur: a king’s right to the brides in his domain. This option was presented to the married woman as a favor to her. A woman who wanted higher status in the celestial kingdom could choose to leave a husband with lower status in the church, even if she had been sealed to him, and become sealed to a man higher in authority.
Brigham Young repeated the same practice, most notably with Zina Diantha Huntington Jacobs, who Smith had married while she was still married to Henry Jacobs, and who Young considered his property. Though never divorced from Henry Jacobs, Zina lived with Young, and had children by him in an adulterous arrangement. Young gave this justification:
“Brother Jacobs, the woman you claim for a wife does not belong to you. She is the spiritual wife of brother Joseph, sealed up to him. I am his proxy, and she, in this behalf, with her children, are my property. You can go where you please, and get another, but be sure to get one of your own kindred spirit” (Hall 1853, 43-44).
Amasa Lyman’s wife, after his apostasy, chose not to stay sealed to him, instead opting for “trading up” and being sealed to Joseph Smith, even though Lyman had his wives and priesthood offices given back to him by proxy after his death, being promised by Joseph F. Smith, that he would inherit them all in the Celestial Kingdom, regardless of his apostasy, and belief that Jesus was “just a man”.
Polygamy encourages men to commit adultery, abuse of women, child rape, exploitation of women, and a host of other evils. _johnny
Heber C. Kimball also said:
“You are sent out as shepherds to gather the sheep together; and remember that they are not your sheep: they belong to Him that sends you. Then do not make a choice of any of those sheep; do not make selections before they are brought home and put into the fold. You understand that. Amen. “(J.O.D. Vol. 6, page 256)
Though he didn’t mention the “uglies” and the “pretties” here, the quote is much the same. He is also reported as saying “I think no more of taking another wife than I do of buying a cow.” Considering other quotes by these men, and their penchant for seeing women as nothing more than baby makers because of their self-aggrandizing “priesthood”, it’s not surprising that men like Warren Jeffs are still operating today, and doing the same things. Young even approved the castration of one man, who dared to set his eyes on a women that a higher priesthood holder, desired for himself._johnny
I then went into the president office & spent the evening. Bishop Blackburn was present. The subject Came up of some persons leaving Provo who had Apostitized. Some thought that Bishop Blackburn & President Snow was to blame. Brother Joseph Young presented the thing to presidet Young. But When the Circumstances were told Presidet Brigham Young sustained the Brethren who presided at Provo. He said they had done right.
The subjects of Eunuchs came up & Joseph said that He would rather die than to be made a Eunuch. Brigham Said the day would Come when thousands would be made Eunochs in order for them to be saved in the kingdom of God.
The subject of women & Adulterry Came up. Joseph Asked if a woman & man who were married Could Commit Adultery. Brigham said that Joseph said they Could not yet He was satisfied they Could do wrong.
President Young said we Cannot Cleanse the Platter because the people will not bear it. Joseph.[Young] I am willing to have the people Clens the platter if they Can do it in righteousness & Judge righteous Judgment. Brigham[Young]. This people never was half as well prepared to execute righteousness as Now. I will tell you that when a man is trying to do right & do[es] some thing that is not exactly in order I feel to sustain him & we all should.” (Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, Vol. 5, p. 55, June 2, 1857)