Should Joseph Smith's "Polygamy" be mentioned:

[_karl61]

Should Joseph Smith's "Polygamy" be mentioned in the missionary discussions. Do new members have a right to know. Do you think that a divorced man should withhold the fact that he was married to his new wife. Should he give her the milk before the meat.

[_Who Knows]

The new Joseph Smith manual gives this as a reason for not discussing polygamy in the manual:

This book deals with teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith that have application to our day. For example, this book does not discuss such topics as the Prophet’s teachings regarding the law of consecration as applied to stewardship of property. The Lord withdrew this law from the Church because the Saints were not prepared to live it (see D&C 119, section heading). This book also does not discuss plural marriage. The doctrines and principles relating to plural marriage were revealed to Joseph Smith as early as 1831. The Prophet taught the doctrine of plural marriage, and a number of such marriages were performed during his lifetime. Over the next several decades, under the direction of the Church Presidents who succeeded Joseph Smith, a significant number of Church members entered into plural marriages. In 1890, President Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto, which discontinued plural marriage in the Church (see Official Declaration 1). The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints no longer practices plural marriage.

So I guess it's not important. Heh. Nevermind that it still goes on in the temple.

I'm assuming a similar reason would be given for not mentioning it during discussions (not that i agree with it...)

[_karl61]

The new Joseph Smith manual gives this as a reason for not discussing polygamy in the manual:

This book deals with teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith that have application to our day. For example, this book does not discuss such topics as the Prophet’s teachings regarding the law of consecration as applied to stewardship of property. The Lord withdrew this law from the Church because the Saints were not prepared to live it (see D&C 119, section heading). This book also does not discuss plural marriage. The doctrines and principles relating to plural marriage were revealed to Joseph Smith as early as 1831. The Prophet taught the doctrine of plural marriage, and a number of such marriages were performed during his lifetime. Over the next several decades, under the direction of the Church Presidents who succeeded Joseph Smith, a significant number of Church members entered into plural marriages. In 1890, President Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto, which discontinued plural marriage in the Church (see Official Declaration 1). The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints no longer practices plural marriage.

So I guess it's not important. Heh. Nevermind that it still goes on in the temple.

I'm assuming a similar reason would be given for not mentioning it during discussions (not that I agree with it...)

I'm going to study this further in 2008 but I don't think you can enter into a plural marriage. You can enter into marriage and then adultery but it's not another marriage. Plural marriage was illegal in Utah. If marriage is a sort of contract you can't enter into an illegal contract because it is void from the beginning. I need to study further. That is why they prosecuted people for adultery in Utah.

[_harmony]

The new Joseph Smith manual gives this as a reason for not discussing polygamy in the manual:

This book deals with teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith that have application to our day. For example, this book does not discuss such topics as the Prophet’s teachings regarding the law of consecration as applied to stewardship of property. The Lord withdrew this law from the Church because the Saints were not prepared to live it (see D&C 119, section heading). This book also does not discuss plural marriage. The doctrines and principles relating to plural marriage were revealed to Joseph Smith as early as 1831. The Prophet taught the doctrine of plural marriage, and a number of such marriages were performed during his lifetime. Over the next several decades, under the direction of the Church Presidents who succeeded Joseph Smith, a significant number of Church members entered into plural marriages. In 1890, President Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto, which discontinued plural marriage in the Church (see Official Declaration 1). The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints no longer practices plural marriage.

So I guess it's not important. Heh. Nevermind that it still goes on in the temple.

I'm assuming a similar reason would be given for not mentioning it during discussions (not that I agree with it...)

I'm going to study this further in 2008 but I don't think you can enter into a plural marriage. You can enter into marriage and then adultery but it's not another marriage. Plural marriage was illegal in Utah. If marriage is a sort of contract you can't enter into an illegal contract because it is void from the beginning. I need to study further. That is why they prosecuted people for adultery in Utah.

A man can have multiple sealings. That's as close to plural marriage as we get nowadays.

[_Gadianton]

Fascinating. You'd think the Q of 12 themselves are reading anti forums like this one and trying to think up excuses.

For any apologist who supports this book, it's quite a double standard they hold. For the longest time, probably since Joseph Smith, Mormons have complained that EV's proof-text the Bible. That Ev's superficially read scriptures, out of historical context, and extract teachings. One favorite hobby-horse of FARMS is the "scholarly" exploration of the Bible in order to extract Mormon teachings. For instance, David Bokovoy scours the landscape of Bible studies in order to properly contextualize ancient God myths and demonstrate their true doctrinal nature --- the true doctrinal nature dependent on understanding the historical and cultural backdrop. (are the apologists, especially the dishonest ones, getting it?)

[_MishMagnet]

It should absolutely be mentioned. If it's God's will and the Gospel of that time there should not be any shame in it.

I see a lot of shame, though. Those poor women he took as spiritual wives. They are nameless and faceless in the history of the church. I was spoonfed this BS from childhood up. Polygamy isn't bad. Polygamy is a higher order. In the next life we will understand more, we will not have our feelings of jealousness, it will all be okay. Personally I see no higher insult to a woman than to give her a single chance at a marriage and have to endure it and then be ignored by your posterity for the rest of history. Those women should be held in just as high regard as Emma Hale Smith. We should see their pictures. We should see accurate portrayals of them in Nauvoo. When I've been to Nauvoo I've seen the dramatizations there. There is one wife portrayed only. This is such an insult to these other women and so much more proof to me that there was never any revelation at all. Just Joseph Smith's MO of how to bed his followers.

[_truth dancer]

This book deals with teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith that have application to our day. For example, this book does not discuss such topics as the Prophet’s teachings regarding the law of consecration as applied to stewardship of property. The Lord withdrew this law from the Church because the Saints were not prepared to live it (see D&C 119, section heading). This book also does not discuss plural marriage. The doctrines and principles relating to plural marriage were revealed to Joseph Smith as early as 1831. The Prophet taught the doctrine of plural marriage, and a number of such marriages were performed during his lifetime. Over the next several decades, under the direction of the Church Presidents who succeeded Joseph Smith, a significant number of Church members entered into plural marriages. In 1890, President Wilford Woodruff issued the Manifesto, which discontinued plural marriage in the Church (see Official Declaration 1). The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints no longer practices plural marriage.

Personally, at minimum, I think the honest truth should be discussed in terms of what is believed to be official doctrine and how it applies to members today.

Saying the church no longer practices plural marriage is completely disengenous. Of course it does. It may be limited but it is CERTAINLY a practice going on right now! Just ask Oaks how many wives he has?

Honesty would suggest a more truthful statement. Something like:

While the CoJCoLDS does not currently allow men to have multiple wives simultaneously on the earth, we do indeed believe, and our doctrine states, the celestial kingdom (HL), practices the higher law of marriage which is one of polygamy. We do allow men to be sealed to multiple women on earth for the future practice of polygamy. Men who make it to the CKHL will indeed have multiple wives as it is the highest law of God. God the father has multiple wives and if members make it to the CKHL they will be living a polygamous lifestyle.

(sigh)

~dancer~

[_John Larsen]

In the days of instant information via the internet, the Church can no longer cover it up. They will have to mention it to inoculate potential converts. At least in plugged in countries. The can say whatever they want to the illiterate.

John