Brian Hales Polygamy: His Continued Misuse of Sources

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_grindael
_Emeritus
Posts: 6791
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 8:15 am

Brian Hales Polygamy: His Continued Misuse of Sources

Post by _grindael »

Riding on a speeding train; trapped inside a revolving door;
Lost in the riddle of a quatrain; Stuck in an elevator between floors.
One focal point in a random world can change your direction:
One step where events converge may alter your perception.
_SteelHead
_Emeritus
Posts: 8261
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 1:40 am

Re: Brian Hales Polygamy: His Continued Misuse of Sources

Post by _SteelHead »

More "meat commerce"?
It is better to be a warrior in a garden, than a gardener at war.

Some of us, on the other hand, actually prefer a religion that includes some type of correlation with reality.
~Bill Hamblin
_Stem
_Emeritus
Posts: 1234
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:21 pm

Re: Brian Hales Polygamy: His Continued Misuse of Sources

Post by _Stem »

Thanks for the post. That was interesting.
_Dr. Shades
_Emeritus
Posts: 14118
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 9:07 pm

Re: Brian Hales Polygamy: His Continued Misuse of Sources

Post by _Dr. Shades »

Thank you, grindael. You are truly a gem.
"Finally, for your rather strange idea that miracles are somehow linked to the amount of gay sexual gratification that is taking place would require that primitive Christianity was launched by gay sex, would it not?"

--Louis Midgley
_grindael
_Emeritus
Posts: 6791
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 8:15 am

Re: Brian Hales Polygamy: His Continued Misuse of Sources

Post by _grindael »

Hales is simply irrational. He compares the polygamy "revelation" to the Word of Wisdom "revelation" in this manner:

However, the possibility that Joseph’s question elicited a broader response from God, one that included plural marriage but was not limited to it, is not considered. This situation occurred in 1833 when Joseph Smith asked God concerning the use of tobacco during Church meetings.23 The Lord responded by giving the Saints a general health code we now call the “Word of Wisdom” (D&C 89). God’s answer to Joseph’s question included a discussion of tobacco use, but that topic comprised just one verse (v. 8) in a much broader explanation of health issues.


Hales is claiming here, that Joseph inquired about polygamy, but that God included a whole bunch of things that really had nothing to do with it, and that polygamy was hardly ever referred to as a "law". But D&C 132 makes it clear that it was:

“Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines—“

“Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter.

“Therefore, prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.”


Hales claims that because Joseph doesn't mention polygamy again until later in the "revelation", and goes into the sealing power and eternal marriage, that the "revelation" isn't really about polygamy! Yet, Smith taught that without the sealing power, one could not have a spiritual wife.

Of course he had to explain it the way that he did. Interestingly, he did so with the Baptism for the Dead "revelation". Joseph opens 128 in this way:

As I stated to you in my letter before I left my place, that I would write to you from time to time and give you information in relation to many subjects, I now resume the subject of the baptism for the dead, as that subject seems to occupy my mind, and press itself upon my feelings the strongest, since I have been pursued by my enemies.


But what does Joseph do? He starts talking about recorders! He then speaks about salvation for the dead generally, then gets back to Baptism for the Dead in verse 12. He then mentions baptism for the dead again in only three more verses (16-18) and then doesn't mention it again at all (19-25).

This is the same format as the polygamy "revelation". Joseph had to explain the mechanics (if you will) of it, to justify it. To claim that the "revelation" is all about eternal marriage with polygamy being a side issue is ludicrous. The two are intimately entwined. You can't have one without the other. I would ask Hales to try and explain Nauvoo polygamy without mentioning eternal marriage.

This was Joseph's gimmick to get men to follow him into taking spiritual wives. As I quoted in the blog piece, it was a crucial part of getting Hyrum on board with it:

The idea of marrying for eternity is the seal of the covenant, and is easily understood; and as to speaking of it, I could make all the world believe it, for it is noble and grand; it is necessary in consequence of the broken covenants in the world. I never saw any scripture but what was written by Prophet to instruct and prepare mankind for eternity. I read that what God joins together, let no man put asunder. I see magistrates and Priests in the world, but not one who is empowered to join together by the authority of God. Nor yet have I seen any priest that dare say that he has the authority of God; there is not a sectarian Priest in Christendom that dare say he has the authority by direct revelation from God. When I look at the seal of the new Covenant and reflect that all the covenants made by the authority of man are only made to be in force during the natural life and end there, I rejoice that what is the consideration of the Almighty God, everything rightfully and lawfully belongs to man if he fulfills the stipulated conditions; and if a thing belongs to me legally, it cannot belong to any one else.

I married me a wife, and I am the only one who had any right to her. We had five children, the covenant was made four our lives. She fell into the grave before God showed us his order. God has shown me that the covenant is dead, and had no force, neither could I have her in the resurrection, but we should be as the angels–it troubled me. President Joseph said you can have her sealed to you upon the same principles as you can be baptized for the dead. I enquired what can I do for any second wife? You can also make a covenant with her for eternity and have her sealed to you by the authority of the priesthood.

I named the subject to my present wife, and she said, “I will act as proxy for your wife that is dead, and I will be sealed to you for eternity myself for I never had any other husband. I love you and I do not want to be separate from you nor be forever alone in the world to come.” If there is any man that has no more sense, and will make a base story of such a fact, his name shall be published. What honest man or woman can find fault with such a doctrine as this? None. It is a doctrine not to be preached to the world; but to the Saints who have obeyed the gospel and gathered to Zion. It is glad tiding of great joy.

The Lord has given Joseph the power to seal on earth and in heaven [for] those who are found worthy; having the Spirit of Elijah and Elias, he has power to seal with a seal that shall never be broken, and it shall be in force in the morn of the resurrection. Talk about spiritual wives! One that is dead and gone is spiritual. We will come up in the morn of the resurrection; and every soul that is saved will receive an eternal increase of glory. Will you believe this, (loud shouts of aye).

Every great and good principle should be taught to the Saints, but some must not be taught to the world; until they are prepared to receive them; it would be like casting pearls before swine. No man must attempt to preach them.

I believe every good man should have one wife in this life, and I know if I had two I should not know what to do with them; they might quarrel about me, and I might get a whipping. One is enough, and I warn all of you not to attempt it; if a man should begin to find out, you would get into some cell in Alton. (Hyrum Smith, Conference Address, April 8. 1844).


Yet Hyrum had more than one wife "in this life" at the time of this sermon so he was lying. But you see how Joseph converted him to spiritual wifeism. And Hyrum explains it exactly as Joseph did, by way of "eternal marriage". In his explanation about baptism for the dead, Joseph does the same thing:

Now, the nature of this ordinance consists in the power of the priesthood, by the revelation of Jesus Christ, wherein it is granted that whatsoever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Or, in other words, taking a different view of the translation, whatsoever you record on earth shall be recorded in heaven, and whatsoever you do not record on earth shall not be recorded in heaven; for out of the books shall your dead be judged, according to their own works, whether they themselves have attended to the ordinances in their own propria persona, or by the means of their own agents, according to the ordinance which God has prepared for their salvation from before the foundation of the world, according to the records which they have kept concerning their dead. (verse 8)


The nature of spiritual wifeism is exactly the same, based on "the power of the priesthood" and what is bound on earth will be bound in heaven. But what is interesting, is that Smith alone controlled who would be married, while he did not care about who was baptized for who. Notice that Joseph doesn't limit who can use the sealing power in relation to baptism for the dead:

It may seem to some to be a very bold doctrine that we talk of—a power which records or binds on earth and binds in heaven. Nevertheless, in all ages of the world, whenever the Lord has given a dispensation of the priesthood to any man by actual revelation, or any set of men, this power has always been given. Hence, whatsoever those men did in authority, in the name of the Lord, and did it truly and faithfully, and kept a proper and faithful record of the same, it became a law on earth and in heaven, and could not be annulled, according to the decrees of the great Jehovah. This is a faithful saying. Who can hear it? (verse 9)


This verse also destroys Hales argument that "plural marriage" is not a LAW. It states specifically that whatever is "sealed" on earth with "authority" becomes A LAW on earth and in heaven. This applies to every spiritual marriage performed. Hales writes,

TPMR’s approach to the teachings of sealing authority found in verses 7?20 seems to assume it was needed in order to establish plural marriage. But Joseph could have easily restored one without the other. He could have said, “Abraham had plural wives and I’m restoring that practice,” without mentioning eternity. He also could have said, “I’ve received authority to seal marriages,” without referring to polygamy as a commandment.


This is ludicrous. Joseph had already laid the groundwork with baptism for the dead. It was then that he applied the same principle to the marriage contract. Why then, is the Alger relationship called by some a "sealing"? Because if it was not, it was ADULTERY. Here is Orson Pratt,

In the early rise of this Church, February, 1831, God gave a commandment to its members, recorded in the Book of Covenants, wherein He says, “Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and to none else;” and then He gives a strict law against adultery. This you have, no doubt, all read; but let me ask whether the Lord had the privilege and the right to vary from this law. It was given in 1831, when the one-wife system alone prevailed among this people. I will tell you what the Prophet Joseph said in relation to this matter in 1831, also in 1832, the year in which the law commanding the members of this Church to cleave to one wife only was given. Joseph was then living in Portage County, in the town of Hiram, at the house of Father John Johnson. Joseph was very intimate with that family, and they were good people at that time, and enjoyed much of the Spirit of the Lord. In the forepart of the year 1832, Joseph told individuals, then in the Church, that he had inquired of the Lord concerning the principle of plurality of wives, and he received for answer that the principle of taking more wives than one is a true principle, but the time had not yet come for it to be practiced. That was before the Church was two years old. The Lord has His own time to do all things pertaining to His purposes in the last dispensation; His own time for restoring all things that have been predicted by the ancient prophets. If they have predicted that the day would come when seven women would take hold of one man, saying, “We will eat our own bread and wear our own apparel, only let us be called by thy name to take away our reproach;” and that, in that day the branch of the Lord should be beautiful and glorious and the fruits of the earth should be excellent and comely, the Lord has the right to say when that time shall be.

Now supposing the members of this Church had undertaken to vary from that law given in 1831, to love their one wife with all their hearts and to cleave to none other, they would have come under the curse and condemnation of God's holy law. Some twelve years after that time the revelation on Celestial Marriage was revealed. This is just republished at the Deseret News office, in a pamphlet entitled, “Answers to Questions,” by President George A. Smith, and heretofore has been published in pamphlet form and in the Millennial Star, and sent throughout the length and breadth of our country, being included in our works and published in the works of our enemies. Then came the Lord's time for this holy and ennobling principle to be practiced again among His people. (Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, Vol. 13, 192-3, October 7, 1869).


Hales claiming that Joseph could have "restored" polygamy without the sealing power goes against everything taught by Mormon "Authorities". Hales himself wrote,

“It is necessary to know who holds the keys of power, and who does not, or we may be likely to be deceived,” taught Joseph Smith. The “one” man regulates the sealing of both monogamist and polygamist marriages because both types of marriages utilize the very same keys. There are no specific keys of sealing for monogamist marriages and no separate set of sealing keys for plural marriages. Both types of marriages involve the very same authority. Plural marriage requires the repeated use of that authority, in each instance, sealing one woman to one man in eternal matrimony. http://www.mormonfundamentalism.com/his ... -marriage/


Daniel Bachman wrote in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism,

The Book of Mormon makes clear that, though the Lord will command men through his prophets to live the law of plural marriage at special times for his purposes, monogamy is the general standard (Jacob 2:28-30); unauthorized polygamy was and is viewed as adultery. Another safeguard was that authorized plural marriages could be performed only through the sealing power controlled by the presiding authority of the Church (D&C 132:19).


Hales again,

In other words, the Lord placed certain restrictions upon the practice of plural marriage, restrictions which David, Solomon and a host of others did not obey. Apparently they assumed that polygamy was indiscriminately righteous; they therefore married women who had not been given them by the Lord. It is plain from the standard works and Church history that polygamy in and of itself is not a holy principle -- it must in every case be plural marriage as authorized by the Lord through the "one man" who holds the sealing authority (D&C 132: 7, 18, 19), irrespective of any previous authorizations. http://www.mormonfundamentalism.com/arc ... 3-test.htm


Now, Hales has changed his tune and claims that the "marriage" of Fanny Alger did not need the "sealing authority". With all the evidence pointing to the Alger affair as taking place before the claimed "sealing power" was restored, it became necessary for Hales to claim that it wasn't necessary after all.
Riding on a speeding train; trapped inside a revolving door;
Lost in the riddle of a quatrain; Stuck in an elevator between floors.
One focal point in a random world can change your direction:
One step where events converge may alter your perception.
_Shulem
_Emeritus
Posts: 12072
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:48 am

Re: Brian Hales Polygamy: His Continued Misuse of Sources

Post by _Shulem »

I know you don't want to hear this but the site is too hard on the eyes. The dark background with white letters with a font that makes them practically vibrate is painful on my eyes. I wonder if perhaps you might consider trying something different that is more relaxing to view? Perhaps you might consider less jarring fonts and colors. Also, have a sidebar with some treats (Twinkies, cupcakes, and fruit pies) to reward those who read along and feel for a snack.

Anyway. I'm sure Brian Hales is scum. He's just another Mormon liar.

:wink:
_Rosebud
_Emeritus
Posts: 1088
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 6:04 pm

Re: Brian Hales Polygamy: His Continued Misuse of Sources

Post by _Rosebud »

I don't know how you can get yourself to read all of this. It's drivel and my eyes start going cross-eyed. Good work grindael. I'm glad somebody is taking it on.
Chronological List of Relevant Documents, Media Reports and Occurrences with Links regarding the lawsuit alleging President Nelson's daughter and son-in-law are sexual predators.

By our own Mary (with maybe some input from me when I can help). Thank you Mary!

Thread about the lawsuit

Thread about Mary's chronological document
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 1922
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: Brian Hales Polygamy: His Continued Misuse of Sources

Post by Philo Sofee »

Bump. Again, one never gets tired of reading THE MASTER... Gawd Grindael, you were stellar!!! THANK YOU once again for your astounding work and working through the apologetics ruses and misguidings.
Post Reply