Question for Dr. Peterson Regarding Joseph Smith/Polygamy

[_Inconceivable]

Odd?

We spent an entire year studying from the "Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Brigham Young" (in Elders quorem and Relief Society), the current men "at the helm" felt particularly inspired to change all references from "wives" to "wife". In fact, there is not one reference to polygamy in all 370 pages. Not one. Revision out of fear? Misunderstanding? Misunderstanding what? That Young did not mean one wife?

This is rhetorical, but, would the Mormon church be living polygamy today in 2007 if Utah had dodged becoming a US territory (perhaps if the civil war had ended badly)? I would offer an emphatic "NO". But not for reasons a TBM would postulate.

I do believe the church would have imploded upon itself many years ago for the same reason Warren Jeffs church is doing so at the moment (keep in mind, Jeffs has a testimony of the prophet Joseph Smith and D&C 132). I have two idiot uncles that followed him and have "wives" - they consider themselves Mormons that live the celestial or higher law.

[_Inconceivable]

The Mormon leaders only rescinded this lifestyle out of fear - not faith. Righteous Christians of all denominations denounced it and demanded it's termination - all those that believed in the traditional Christian family (referring to the verse in the previous post).

It was fear of stiff prison sentences for males that practiced it as well as confiscation of church and personal property (including temples) and a wholesale destruction of the Mormon society that pressured them to suspend the doctrine. Their fear was that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob would not "prepare a way to escape" or otherwise come to their aid - and HE DID NOT. Polygamists were hunted by lawmen for the rest of their lives.

This suspension of plural marriages did not particularly solve the problem of those already practicing it. It fostered what we now term "situational ethics" among the bastard (legal term) children/descendants. Children were taught to lie to lawmen that were tracking their parents. Some may parallel the lieing by Christians to protect the Jews during Hitler's cursed reign, but by their shortsightedness, Mormon leaders brought this mountain upon themselves - it was inevitable. If they had the presence of character, they would have turned themselves in or annulled their marriages - which some did. Men like Jacob Hamblin did not, and he is diefied by many of his descendants even today.

Here is one last sobering thought: IF/When the United States becomes so entirely decadent and enacts laws destroying the marriage union, poligamy will be back on the table for many fundamentalist Mormons. At that point, the leaders will not necessarily have to counsel with diety. Smith's God never rescinded the practice, he just suspended it till a loophole could be found in that "Heavenly Banner" - the sacred law of the land.

rant off.

[_Jason Bourne]

Here is one last sobering thought: IF/When the United States becomes so entirely decadent and enacts laws destroying the marriage union, poligamy will be back on the table for many fundamentalist Mormons. At that point, the leaders will not necessarily have to counsel with diety. Smith's God never rescinded the practice, he just suspended it till a loophole could be found in that "Heavenly Banner" - the sacred law of the land.

True but the LDS Church will never put it back for this life anyway. They really do not like it in mortality. If it is legalized the LDS leaders will state that God has not told it to put it back into play at this time.

[_Inconceivable]

True but the LDS Church will never put it back for this life anyway. They really do not like it in mortality. If it is legalized the LDS leaders will state that God has not told it to put it back into play at this time.

Not necessarily.

It may be discovered at that time that the leaders (and members with beautiful young daughters) have been practicing it for a few years before the church puts their arm to the square in unanimity.

If a member believes that church leaders would hold themselves to some higher standard - well, they would be those surprised at the revelation in 1852. And there were many that did not know until they entered the Salt Lake Valley.

I do agree that in some ways, the world may be a different place now. I for one have already begun my exodus from the church.

[_Jason Bourne]

Is Dr Peterson bakc?

I am interested in knowing his view about D&C 132 and celestial marriage. Does the term celestial marriage=polygamy?

[_Yoda]

Is Dr Peterson bakc?

I am interested in knowing his view about D&C 132 and celestial marriage. Does the term celestial marriage=polygamy?

I think he came back and is traveling again.

I PM'd him, and my PM is still in the Outbox. He didn't pick it up.

[_Seven]

Daniel has been posting in some threads recently and here is one comment:

Tarski wrote:
Is that the only topic your interested in? That topic has been going in circles forever with no new converts on either side.

Come on! Give us something else to argue about.

Show the critics (with wit and logic) how we are so foolishly wrong.

You could take it to the Celestial forum.

Daniel Petersen:
I could. But, you see, I don't really want to engage in time-consuming serious discussions on message boards. Not on this one, and not on any other.

I amuse myself on message boards. I do quickie answers when I think quickie answers are enough. I pick up questions and issues that I want to address.

I don't do prolonged, meaty discussions on message boards. Never have.

My truly serious writing goes elsewhere. (I've got three substantial book manuscripts underway at the moment, and need to revise a previously published book for a third edition. Plus some articles that I'm working on. In addition to a book that I'm editing and my twice-annual FARMS Review.)

I am not very hopeful he will address the clear contradictions of 132 and Jacob 2 or the requirement of plural marriage for exaltation. Those are the meaty issues that can't be explained with one liners. I have never seen his writings or opinions on this topic before and would have liked to.