The Irrational World of Brian Hales' Polygamy (I & II & III)

[_Maksutov]

Only faithful members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints can understand Joseph Smith's polygamy. The world cannot comprehend it. ~Brian Hales

Y'know, these guys said something similar.





https://www.newsweek.com/knights-crysta ... ld-1000335

[_Shulem]

There began to be lyings sent forth among the people, by Satan through Jeremy Runnells, to harden their hearts, to the intent that they might not believe that Joseph Smith's polygamy was justified.

I wonder if they can use the same logic and accusations against me?

There began to be lyings sent forth among the people, by Satan through Mormon Discussion's Shulem, to harden their hearts, to the intent that they might not believe the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3.

Yep, it works.

[_Philo Sofee]

Philo,

And you haven't got to the good parts yet! This long, tediously researched essay is packed full of stuff. And the last part has more of what Hales was up to in trying to vilify those who do not agree with him. There was actually an article he wrote about John Dehlin being a wolf in sheeps clothing and and "anti-mormon". He took it down, but we have the archive. All that because John would not use or refer to Hales' research in one of his podcasts. And going after the dead Richard Van Wagoner and calling my friend Grant Palmer a plagiarist. Thing is, Hales and Gregory Smith both plagiarized Van Wagoner and I show how they did it, using the same stuff they accused Grant of using. (And they blocked me from commenting on the Interpreter when I did so) The hypocrisy, double standards, it is all par for the course. We put a lot of original documents in the essay (coming in later installments), along with lots of other good stuff.

Looking VERY forward to seeing it.

[_Philo Sofee]

There began to be lyings sent forth among the people, by Satan through Jeremy Runnells, to harden their hearts, to the intent that they might not believe that Joseph Smith's polygamy was justified.

I wonder if they can use the same logic and accusations against me?

There began to be lyings sent forth among the people, by Satan through Mormon Discussion's Shulem, to harden their hearts, to the intent that they might not believe the Explanations of Facsimile No. 3.

Yep, it works.

You have actually convinced me to go to Fac 3 more often than I used to without question!

[_Shulem]

You have actually convinced me to go to Fac 3 more often than I used to without question!

Think about the expression on Jeffrey Holland's face had BBC reporter John Sweeney asked him the following question:

Isn't it true that Mr. Joseph Smith married a 14 year old girl and that the church today should apologize for slandering a god of another religion by calling him a slave as in Facsimile No. 3?

[_Markk]

It appears that plural marriage is gospel meat that can only be understood by those who have sufficiently prepared themselves in faith and knowledge. ~Brian Hales

I am going to try to be objective here.

I believe he is correct in that statement, from a strict LDS construct. I don't believe the average person whether LDS or not understands the roots behind plural marriage.

The baseline or as Brian calls it "gospel meat," is The Law of the Priesthood, The Order, The Everlasting Covenant (ELC), The Celestial Law, and in the end the future section 132 of the D&C. Most Mormons, non-Mormons, or ex-Mormons do not understand the role of the ELC in plural marriage, especially in the Navuoo Era. It took me years to understand how deep it went and it took reading Clayton's journals, Jensen, and the TLC... to understand the fuel, other than testosterone, behind plural marriage.

Depending on what side of the fence one is on, the ELC is either the commandment that must be upheld, or it is the bait that Joseph used to exploit his perspective brides and their families (my view).

I am pretty sure, even without seeing the full context of his statement, that Brian has section 132 in mind. Brian admits that section 132 was written for plural marriage, which many Mormons will deny. He also admits he had sex with a dozen or so wives, which Salomon all Mormons deny. Given that, he understands that if the ELC is not about plural marriage, and not a direct revelation from God...then Joseph is not only a fallen prophet, but a fallen man, and that in my opinion scares the wax off his testimony. He really has no other choice as a well read faithful saint.

In other words, I honestly believe that becasue Brian has accepted Joseph consummating his marriages, along with his belief that it was a commandment from God, even if secretly and for a chosen group, that he is correct in saying what he did. I see that and agree with it from that perspective.

The typical Mormon will not admit that Joseph was "nest hiding" with 42 women, even if married. But one that has studied and read, and done their or homework really has no other option than to buy into the Celestial order if they hold him as a holy prophet. Brian states that Joseph did not want anything to do with plural marriage, but reluctantly entered into the ELC as a commandment. Brian would say that..."because Joseph was so faithful, he really had no other choice."

You have to remember that in all reality, section 132 is about plural marriage. It is the only way a man and woman can enter into eternal life and partake of the continuation of seeds, and become gods. How many Mormons, faithful members, would agree with that or even know the context of 132? Many may know it as a talking point, but never understand the demands it puts on making it all the way up the ladder to eternal life. Most Mormon's would never see it as gospel meat, even though eternal life is impossible without it.

Ok. There you have it. If you don’t have sufficient “faith and knowledge” it appears that you are doomed to misunderstand everything about Joseph Smith and his practice of polygamy according to Brian Hales. So for all of you that are not members of the Mormon Church—it appears that you’re just out of luck. No matter what you read or no matter what your comprehension skills; it won’t do you any good because this is “gospel meat” and not meant to be understood by the unworthy. You know, the whole ”pearls before swine” thing.

I am not sure that is a fair statement at all. I guess I would have to see the full context of his statement, but his quote was specifically about plural marriage...and certainly not about everything about Joseph Smith.

[_Rosebud]

That is very thorough. A good writeup.

Hales is fun to take on in writing because his thinking doesn't hold up and he slides all over the place. He loses one argument then pretends it was another argument and tells you how he's found a new way to win. I tend to feel embarrassed for him even while I've enjoyed taking him down (or seeing him taken down). It's sad and almost pathetic. I get that this sounds condescending, but he's so condescending in so much of what he writes that the condescension seems justified.

Hales hales hales. It's too bad he spends his life defending perpetrators and actions that are so hurtful to so many people. How he does that while feeling righteous is hard for me to wrap my head around. Mormons are pretty messed up.

[_Sanctorian]

I like guys like Hales and Peterson. Their arguments for faith in the most asinine parts of Mormonism are so easily destroyed with simple reason that any normal sane person can smell the horse poop a mile away. I can't wait to read more. Keep up the good work.

[_Rosebud]

And not to detract from all the steady rational and slippery rational arguments made by men on this subject, but this is just plain creepy:

Brigham Young Said Joseph taught that when a womans affections was entirly weaned from her husband that was Adultery in spirit. Her Affections were [p.56] Adulterated from his. He also said that there was No law in Heaven or on Earth that would Compel a woman to stay with a man either in time or Eternity. This I think is true (but I do not know) that if a man that is a High priest takes a woman & she leaves him & goes to one of a lesser office say the Lesser priesthood or member I think in the resurrection that that High Priest Can Claim her. “Joseph. What if she should not want to go with him? I should not want a woman under those Circumstances.

Brigham. I will tell you what you will find. That all those evil traditions & affections or passions that Haunt the mind in this life will all be done away in the resurrection. You will find then that any man who gets a glory & exaltation will be so beautiful that any woman will be willing to have him if it was right & wharever it is right for the woman to go there she will be willing to go for all those evils will vanish to which we are subject in this life.

I have told the people the truth Just as it is but others will at times get up & tell the people that they will get no heaven ownly what they make in this life and that it will be in the next world as it is in this. Now they do not mean what they say. They do not explain themselves. Hence the people will not understand what is said to them.

Joseph said I wish I knew what my limits were Brigham Your limits are endless & you have not got half way to the [end?] of it yet. Now when I was an Elder I was as willing to Correct an Error in the Brethren as I am now. But the people do not see it so. Now if you should be with the 12 or any body you would have a right to correct an Error as well as with a member but you could not Correct them by cutting them off from the Church because they are over you in the priesthood. Many other remarks were made at the time. (Wilford Woodruff’s Journal, Vol. 5, 54-56, June 1, 1857. The Woodruff Journals are now online here, at the CHL).

[_grindael]

You have it wrong. Brian states that 132 is about "eternal marriage" or MONOGAMY, and that plural marriage is a minor point of it and unnecesary. I have the quotes.