From a thread on another forum, some great questions are asked regarding the fact that Joseph was sealed to 25 plural wives prior to being sealed to Emma.
And, when he did finally decide to allow Emma to be sealed to him, it was described as a reward for her cooperation.
How do apologists spin this fact? Any thoughts as to why Joseph did this?
Post on NOM:
For me, this is evidence that Joseph believed the sealing ordinance was to be used for plural marriages and not as it's thought of today.
For more evidence that this was the case, let me add that there were 30 men who married plural wives prior to when Joseph Smith was killed. Out of those 30, only 4 of them were sealed to their civil wives before they were sealed to their plural wives. In other words....they were sealed to their non-legal wives before they were sealed for eternity to their legal wife.
That piqued a question. Today, if a man's wife to whom he was not married in the temple (not sealed) dies, and then the widower remarries, this time in the temple, does the LDS Church allow him to also be sealed to the first wife, with a proxy in the ceremony for the deceased wife?
Reverse the genders. Can the widow of a man to whom not sealed in a temple marriage be sealed to him (via a proxy in the ceremony) after she has temple married a new husband?
When and why did the LDS Church reject JSJr's teaching and practice of polyandrous sealings?
Thanks for bringing this to our attention Madision.
Madison54 wrote:Any thoughts as to why Joseph did this?
The most cynical answer is that you need these special sealings to sleep with women who are not your wife. You don't need them to sleep with your wife. While I don't believe they were purely libido driven, I believe it played a role.
Madison54 wrote:From a thread on another forum, some great questions are asked regarding the fact that Joseph was sealed to 25 plural wives prior to being sealed to Emma.
And, when he did finally decide to allow Emma to be sealed to him, it was described as a reward for her cooperation.
Is there a source for all the dates Mr. Smith sealed himself to his various partners?
- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.
Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
Sammy Jankins wrote:Thanks for bringing this to our attention Madision.
Madison54 wrote:Any thoughts as to why Joseph did this?
The most cynical answer is that you need these special sealings to sleep with women who are not your wife. You don't need them to sleep with your wife. While I don't believe they were purely libido driven, I believe it played a role.
Well, I'm not sure there really is any good answer and I tend to believe your thoughts are correct. I would love to see an apologetic spin attempt though.
Sammy Jankins wrote:Thanks for bringing this to our attention Madision.
The most cynical answer is that you need these special sealings to sleep with women who are not your wife. You don't need them to sleep with your wife. While I don't believe they were purely libido driven, I believe it played a role.
Well, I'm not sure there really is any good answer and I tend to believe your thoughts are correct. I would love to see an apologetic spin attempt though.
Don't hold your breath...
So far at MDDB we have:
ERayR wrote: I doubt if we can know for sure but it very well could have been Emma herself who refused.
He couldn't legally marry the other women so he made up a religious excuse to get them. Sealing Emma was a reaction to his earlier acts of passion. He probably felt it would justify what he'd already done.
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
Madison54 wrote:Well, I'm not sure there really is any good answer and I tend to believe your thoughts are correct. I would love to see an apologetic spin attempt though.
Don't hold your breath...
So far at MDDB we have:
ERayR wrote: I doubt if we can know for sure but it very well could have been Emma herself who refused.