DiscussMormonism.com

his point is key. BC wants to argue the minutia while ignoring the larger problem(s). A man that would marry another man's wife

That a "prophet of God" could claim that an angel came to him and threatened him with a sword forcing him to marry and sleep with other men's wives is repugnant.

bcspace wrote:

his point is key. BC wants to argue the minutia while ignoring the larger problem(s). A man that would marry another man's wife

That's a huge problem for you without evidence of an actual marriage and the concept of sealing for eternity only as well.

The minutia are indeed critical because they are what's used by those of you with an agenda to construct an underlying theme that's draws one into a false conclusion before the larger picture is even looked at.

bcspace wrote:

That a "prophet of God" could claim that an angel came to him and threatened him with a sword forcing him to marry and sleep with other men's wives is repugnant.

You have no evidence of this obviously.

Just prior to my mothers death in 1882 she called me to her bedside and told me that her days were numbered and before she passed away from mortality she desired to tell me something which she had kept as an entire secret from me and from all others but which she now desired to communicate to me. She then told me that I was the daughter of the Prophet Joseph Smith

Now reconcile it with D&C 132.

There's ample evidence that he was sleeping with many of these women as there are sworn affidavits attesting to it.

Marrying other men's wives was just the beginning of his depravity.

bcspace wrote:

Now reconcile it with D&C 132.

What's to reconcile?

There's ample evidence that he was sleeping with many of these women as there are sworn affidavits attesting to it.

You're changing the the subject which was other men's wives.

Marrying other men's wives was just the beginning of his depravity.

Again, no evidence.

Sylvia Sessions Lyon married to Windsor Lyon

Her daughter wrote :

Without the assistance of the affidavit books, other sources must be consulted. In a document undoubtedly used to write his 1887 Historical Record article on plural marriage, independent historian Andrew Jenson referred to Sylvia as a “formerly the wife of Windsor Lyons.”15 He also penned: “Sessions, Sylvia Porter, wife of Winsor [sic] Palmer Lyon, was born July 31, 1818. . . . [She] Became a convert to ‘Mormonism’ and was married to Mr. Lyons – When he left the Church she was sealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith.”16 A second corroboration is found in the 1915 statement from Josephine. She remembered her mother also “told me that I was the daughter of the Prophet Joseph Smith, she having been sealed to the Prophet at the time that her husband Mr. Lyon was out of fellowship with the Church.”17

Accordingly, these documents place the sealing after Windsor’s excommunication. Windsor had a falling out with Stake President William Marks over a financial negotiation in the fall of 1842. In the end, Windsor sued Marks in the civil courts—a violation of Church standards since such matters were to be resolved between members within the Church. In response, Marks brought Windsor up for a Church court. On 19 November 1842, Windsor was excommunicated and left Nauvoo for a few weeks.18 Currently, no documentation of a legal divorce between Windsor and Sylvia after his excommunication has been found. However, in the mid-nineteenth century, religious laws often trumped legal proceedings. Stanley B. Kimball observed: “Some church leaders at that time considered civil marriage by non-Mormon clergymen to be as unbinding as their baptisms. Some previous marriages . . . were annulled simply by ignoring them.”19 Todd Compton agreed, “Joseph regarded marriages performed without Mormon priesthood authority as invalid, just as he regarded baptisms performed without Mormon priesthood authority as invalid.”20 A review of Sylvia’s child-bearing chronology suggests that she and Windsor were not cohabiting during the period he was out of the Church.21 Three children were conceived during the four-and-a-half years prior to his excommunication and two during the first two years after his rebaptism. The only child conceived during the three-plus years of his Church estrangement was Josephine. Historian Kathryn Daynes has reasoned, “If Sessions knew that Fisher was Joseph Smith’s biological child . . . she could have been having sexual relations only with Smith, not with Windsor Lyon. . . . She could be certain of her child’s paternity only if she restricted her sexual relationship to one husband at a time.”22
http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/history-2/plural-wives-overview/sylvia-sessions/

Thanks for once again putting your innate ignorance on display. See my other post about Sylvia Sessions Lyon.

If he was sleeping with her, why shouldn't we assume he was sleeping with the other men's wives that he married?

bcspace wrote:

Without the assistance of the affidavit books, other sources must be consulted. In a document undoubtedly used to write his 1887 Historical Record article on plural marriage, independent historian Andrew Jenson referred to Sylvia as a “formerly the wife of Windsor Lyons.”15 He also penned: “Sessions, Sylvia Porter, wife of Winsor [sic] Palmer Lyon, was born July 31, 1818. . . . [She] Became a convert to ‘Mormonism’ and was married to Mr. Lyons – When he left the Church she was sealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith.”16 A second corroboration is found in the 1915 statement from Josephine. She remembered her mother also “told me that I was the daughter of the Prophet Joseph Smith, she having been sealed to the Prophet at the time that her husband Mr. Lyon was out of fellowship with the Church.”17

Accordingly, these documents place the sealing after Windsor’s excommunication. Windsor had a falling out with Stake President William Marks over a financial negotiation in the fall of 1842. In the end, Windsor sued Marks in the civil courts—a violation of Church standards since such matters were to be resolved between members within the Church. In response, Marks brought Windsor up for a Church court. On 19 November 1842, Windsor was excommunicated and left Nauvoo for a few weeks.18 Currently, no documentation of a legal divorce between Windsor and Sylvia after his excommunication has been found. However, in the mid-nineteenth century, religious laws often trumped legal proceedings. Stanley B. Kimball observed: “Some church leaders at that time considered civil marriage by non-Mormon clergymen to be as unbinding as their baptisms. Some previous marriages . . . were annulled simply by ignoring them.”19 Todd Compton agreed, “Joseph regarded marriages performed without Mormon priesthood authority as invalid, just as he regarded baptisms performed without Mormon priesthood authority as invalid.”20 A review of Sylvia’s child-bearing chronology suggests that she and Windsor were not cohabiting during the period he was out of the Church.21 Three children were conceived during the four-and-a-half years prior to his excommunication and two during the first two years after his rebaptism. The only child conceived during the three-plus years of his Church estrangement was Josephine. Historian Kathryn Daynes has reasoned, “If Sessions knew that Fisher was Joseph Smith’s biological child . . . she could have been having sexual relations only with Smith, not with Windsor Lyon. . . . She could be certain of her child’s paternity only if she restricted her sexual relationship to one husband at a time.”22
http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/history-2/plural-wives-overview/sylvia-sessions/

Once again, no evidence.

61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood—if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse aanother, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.

62 And if he have aten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.

63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to amultiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the work of my Father continued, that he may be bglorified.