Urgent! Questions for Brian Hales

[_mormonstories]

Help! I am scheduled to interview Mormon polygamy historian/expert Brian Hales tomorrow for Mormon Stories Podcast -- and need your help in assembling a good, strong list of questions. Brian is a devout, believing LDS church member and is probably among the top 5 historians alive in terms of 1830/40 LDS polygamy knowledge.

http://mormonstories.org/reconciling-jo ... ian-hales/

The purpose of the interview is twofold:

1) Brian wants to respond directly to Grant Palmer’s allegations of repeated sexual impropriety by Joseph Smith as communicated by Grant in the article and podcast referenced at the link above. If you want to review Brian’s arguments in advance, you can reference the article linked to at the link above -- so please help me respond to his responses to Grant.

2) We’re hopeful that in a part 2 of the interview we can address something like, “Top 10 Myths and Truths about Joseph Smith’s Polygamy”…..or “How to get less uncomfortable with Joseph Smith’s Polygamy.” We hope that this can be helpful for those trying to "make the church work" in their lives (though we acknowledge that not all will have this desire).

PLEASE POST ALL QUESTIONS TO THE LINK ABOVE, AND NOT HERE.

Thanks in advance!

John

[_Darth J]

Here's my question: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14539&hilit=paging+simon+belmont

[_lostindc]

Why did Joseph Smith seek to marry the wives of other men? Why did Smith sometimes approach the female, he sought to marry, without discussing his desire with the female's husband? In other words, why did Smith operate behind the back of the husband?

Why are you seeking to make folks "less uncomfortable" with the facts of Joseph Smith's polygamy? I understand you/others/mormonstories are attempting to assist those troubled with the many troubling aspects of Joseph Smith's polygamy, but this does not make this form of assistance very ethical if you/others/mormonstories are attempting to deliver a more pallatable/apologetic version of Joseph Smith's polygamy.

[_Yoda]

Thanks, John!

I just posted the following to your link:

Additionally want to understand how in the early church it was taught that polygamy was necessary to get into CK and now it is taught that only Temple marrieag is necessary. Also why Brigham young seemed to flip flop on that issue.

I would like to hear more about this as well. I would also like to know about several points of conflicting scripture in section 132. According to the revelation in D&C 132, the Lord states that He commanded Abraham to take Hagar as a second wife. In the Biblical account, this is clearly not the case. Sarah offers Hagar as a wife for Abraham because she sees that as the only way the seed of Abraham will be continued.

There is also conflict between D&C 132 and The Book of Mormon (the most correct book of scripture on the earth today). According to 132, Solomon’s wives were given to him by the Lord. In Jacob of the Book of Mormon, it states that the act of Solomon taking many wives was an abomination, and that the Lord had heard the cries of his fair daughters.

Again, why the “flip flop”?

[_cinepro]

Here's what I would ask:

What are the key issues with polygamy in the 1840s that LDS Church members and leaders tend to have the biggest problem accepting?

[_Kishkumen]

My question, which might seem impertinent but is entirely sincere, is why historians feel it to be necessary to minimize the weaknesses and flaws of the Prophet Joseph, when Biblical precedents demonstrate quite clearly that God is able to work with deeply flawed human beings to bring about His purposes. The whitewashing of Joseph Smith's life stands in stark contrast with these Biblical examples, and is arguably not historically accurate. The whitewashing of Joseph Smith's history regarding the sins he confessed on more than one occasion to have committed is evident in the Joseph Smith History, where his own words regarding his failings were later edited to mitigate the seriousness of his sins.

Joseph Smith said, "I am not a righteous man." Why should faithful historians contribute to the idolatry of the saints by ensuring that he appear as righteous as possible?

[_DrW]

My question, which might seem impertinent but is entirely sincere, is why historians feel it to be necessary to minimize the weaknesses and flaws of the Prophet Joseph, when Biblical precedents demonstrate quite clearly that God is able to work with deeply flawed human beings to bring about His purposes. The whitewashing of Joseph Smith's life stands in stark contrast with these Biblical examples, and is arguably not historically accurate. The whitewashing of Joseph Smith's history regarding the sins he confessed on more than one occasion to have committed is evident in the Joseph Smith History, where his own words regarding his failings were later edited to mitigate the seriousness of his sins.

Joseph Smith said, "I am not a righteous man." Why should faithful historians contribute to the idolatry of the saints by ensuring that he appear as righteous as possible?

Kish,

We have had our disagreements, but not on this issue - yet.

Best question so far (IMHO).

[_Sammy Jankins]

Here's my question: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=14539&hilit=paging+simon+belmont

Looks like someone posted this question on the page. I think it's a important question and deserves to be asked.

[_Phaedrus Ut]

I posted this question

"In June, 1841, Joseph had been appointed guardian for Maria and Sarah Lawrence and trustee for their estate. In 1842 both girls began living with Joseph and Emma in their home. In May 1843 Joseph took both sisters as his plural wives. Joseph was their husband, guardian, prophet, mayor, and trustee of the family estate.

Modern ethics suggest that relationships between someone in a position of authority, like a foster parent, and a teenager are improper due to the undue influence the adult may have. Would this have been viewed differently with a 19th century morality? "


Phaedrus

[_consiglieri]

The question I would ask has to do with sexual relations between Joseph Smith and his plural wives.

Does not the manner in which Brigham Young continued to teach the doctrine of polygamy in territorial Utah indicate that the entire purpose of plural marriage is to have as many descendants as possible?

If this is so (and it is), and if Joseph Smith taught the same thing (which is not clear to me), would not the entire purpose of plural marriages necessarily involve sexual relations?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri