Dr. Shades wrote:Why rationalize anything? Any mopologist will tell you that prophets aren't infallible.
Why not just assume the obvious--that the whole polygamy thing was nothing more than an example of Joseph Smith's fallibility?
Because to do so condemns every single person who followed in his footsteps. All our venerated ancestors, all our leaders, all our sacred ordinances... everything is wrong, if we accept that Joseph was wrong about plural marriage. Not to mention, it's canonized.
Jason Bourne wrote:I think the struggle is realizing that polygamy may not have been of God and the fellow we thought was really getting all his direction from God introduced a really bad thing.
For me I always figured polygamy was really commanded by God so it was A OK back then. But as A.I. dug deeper one day I found that at least based on what I could gather from the history I read, this did not really seem all the Godly, at least as far as I understood what godly meant. Then I concluded that it was most likely not from God. A lot of things started to unravel after that.
So do I struggle with it? Not really anymore. Unless something else comes to me I pretty much have concluded that this was not a good thing.
Thanks for sharing that Jason.
However, I wonder how you weigh out the other things that Joseph Smith came up with(in my opinion).
Much of the temple ceremony, temple marriage, and the whole eternal family doctrines come from Smith's revelation on polygamy.
Do you not ask yourself, "If Joseph Smith made up the polygamy, what other things did he pull out of his hat?". Especially given his track record.
In my experience while observing members discuss this and use such phrases when discussing polygamy, I conclude that believing members are are torn over how they feel and how they are supposed to feel.
Most feel that polygamy is an abombination. An abhorrent practice that relegates women BELOW men to nothing more than another field in for the polygamist man to plant his seed.
Where is the love? Where is the commitment? The bonding? The respect?
Yet on the other hand, Mormons who "struggle with polygamy" also fear that god will smite them for harboring ill feelings towards the beloved Brother Joseph.
Dr. Shades wrote:Why rationalize anything? Any mopologist will tell you that prophets aren't infallible.
Why not just assume the obvious--that the whole polygamy thing was nothing more than an example of Joseph Smith's fallibility?
Because to do so condemns every single person who followed in his footsteps. All our venerated ancestors, all our leaders, all our sacred ordinances... everything is wrong, if we accept that Joseph was wrong about plural marriage. Not to mention, it's canonized.
The real danger with this is that if Joseph Smith could make mistakes (big, huge, ugly ones like polygamy) then that implies that the current crop of leaders could be capable of making mistakes. The leaders know that if the rank and file starting believing that, then their power base would start to erode. Less power = less control.
This is why you very rarely, if ever, here an apologist say that a current leader has made a mistake.
I struggle with polygamy because finding a woman I want monogamy with it hard enough. Trying to find two seems impossible.
"Surely he knows that DCP, The Nehor, Lamanite, and other key apologists..." -Scratch clarifying my status in apologetics "I admit it; I'm a petty, petty man." -Some Schmo
bcspace wrote:I honestly don't see why anyone would struggle with plural marriage. I don't.
Excuse me. Never-Mo lady here has a question or two.
Allegations regarding Joseph Smith aside, what is the purpose of eternal polygamy? Let's say that eternal marriage is possible including procreation. Why would a man need more than one wife to populate worlds/planets when he has eternity to do so?
I can't be nice about this. Do you not see this for the powerful draw to gullible wishful thinking wage earning/tithe paying men to nourish the self feeding organism that the church is in order to retain his membership and his tithing?
bcspace wrote:I honestly don't see why anyone would struggle with plural marriage. I don't.
You are either lying or you haven't a clue about a woman's worth in regards to how she feels.
Or what a woman's inherent needs are in a relationship. The entire plural marriage concept is based on male needs and nothing more. No surprises there, I'm afraid.
bcspace wrote:I honestly don't see why anyone would struggle with plural marriage. I don't.
You are either lying or you haven't a clue about a woman's worth in regards to how she feels.
Or what a woman's inherent needs are in a relationship. The entire plural marriage concept is based on male needs and nothing more. No surprises there, I'm afraid.
Yeah, I feel sorry for BC's wife. God, what a horrible relationship to be in.