Does the D&C authorize polyandry?

[_beastie]

I don't see what else it could possibly mean.

[_moksha]

So was this to keep Emma or the other wives from initiating their own liaisons?

[_Scottie]

I'll post here what I posted on MAD...

We all know and accept that BY had sexual relations with his plural wives, right? 50+ wives, If I recall correctly with 100's of children. I know of at least one polyandrous marriage with Zina Huntington, who bore BY's children. There may be more, I'm not sure, but obviously more than a platonic sealings.

Can someone point out for me exactly where the doctrine changed between Joseph Smith and BY?

Why should we believe that BY wasn't practicing polygamy the exact same way that Joseph Smith was? At what point did BY say, "The Lord has now okayed me to start re-populating the earth"? The Lord okayed it when He sent the angel with the flaming sword and section 132.

In my humble appraisal, there was no difference. BY learned polygamy and polyandry from Joseph Smith and practiced it exactly the same way Joseph Smith did.

[_JAK]

I'll post here what I posted on MAD...

We all know and accept that BY had sexual relations with his plural wives, right? 50+ wives, If I recall correctly with 100's of children. I know of at least one polyandrous marriage with Zina Huntington, who bore BY's children. There may be more, I'm not sure, but obviously more than a platonic sealings.

Can someone point out for me exactly where the doctrine changed between Joseph Smith and BY?

Why should we believe that BY wasn't practicing polygamy the exact same way that Joseph Smith was? At what point did BY say, "The Lord has now okayed me to start re-populating the earth"? The Lord okayed it when He sent the angel with the flaming sword and section 132.

In my humble appraisal, there was no difference. BY learned polygamy and polyandry from Joseph Smith and practiced it exactly the same way Joseph Smith did.

See This

JAK

[_ludwigm]

It's interesting to me that the author mixes and matches his ye and thy around all higgledy piggledy.

"Ye" is the plural of "thou", ie: "you all" in modern English.

"Thy" is the possessive of "thou", ie: "your" in modern English.

When the verse says "I am the Lord thy God, and ye shall obey my voice" it's switching from the singular "thy" to the plural "ye" in mid sentence. The author does this multiple times throughout the section. Kind of funny how inept Jesus Christ is at emulating King James English, isn't it?

If one want to use any rule, he/she should know that rule (grammatical rules inclusive).
Don't You know that Jesus Christ (I'm sorry it may have been a freudian slip) ...
Don't You know that Joseph Smith was an uneducated farmboy? JC has said something, Joseph Smith has interpreted his words.

[_Sethbag]

Kind of reminds me of that Catherine Tate skit with David Tennant where she lapses into faux Olde English with "amest I bover-ed?"

[_truth dancer]

Scottie, you are correct.

The reason given for a man having sleeping with many women is "to raise up seed."

Apologists claim that even in the Book of Mormon the "raise up seed" is the only reason God would allow this abomination.

I'm still waiting to hear how back in the day, a man could "raise up seed," without sex. ;-)

Personally, I do not understand why Joseph Smith's affairs are a big deal to believers since they accept polygamy so readiily. (Other than the fact that of polyandry, girls as young as fourteen, the manipulation and coercion, and the bedding of his teenage household help.)

~dancer~

[_Blixa]

There are other parts of this in which the language is interesting:

51 Verily, I say unto you: A commandment I give unto mine handmaid, Emma Smith, your wife, whom I have given unto you, that she stay herself and partake not of that which I commanded you to offer unto her; for I did it, saith the Lord, to prove you all, as I did Abraham, and that I might require an offering at your hand, by covenant and sacrifice.
52 And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, receive all those that have been given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed, saith the Lord God.
53 For I am the Lord thy God, and ye shall obey my voice; and I give unto my servant Joseph that he shall be made ruler over many things; for he hath been faithful over a few things, and from henceforth I will strengthen him.
54 And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.

The sense of verse 52 is that Emma should accept those "given" to JS---here "receive" means accept. Yet isn't this the same verb used elsewhere to describe how Joseph Smith should act towards those given, i.e., receive them? The first part sounds disturbingly quasi-sexual to my ear at the same time it sounds like a Victorian visiting ritual: "Here is my calling card. Will the lady of the house receive me?"

Further, why is the bit about the unpure ones who lied and said they were pure being destroyed glued onto the end of the Emma-should-receive sentence? To mollify Emma that she won't have to socially "receive" any visits from hardened trollops?

The second bolded part always make me laugh: Joseph is going to get many things because he's been faithful in a few things. God sounds so lax!

[_beastie]

Part of the history of this verse is that Joseph Smith agreed to allow Emma to take a spiritual husband of her own, William Law. (I personally doubt Law knew about this or would have agreed, and I also doubt Emma was serious and was just trying to get Joseph to stop by threatening to get some of her own) But obviously he couldn't bring himself to go through with it in the end.

I quoted cinepro's response on the "not right" thread, and I think he has an excellent point. Emma certainly knew whether or not these relationships were sexual or platonic, and her reaction clearly tells us they were sexual.

I struggled to understand the justifications for polygamy for a long time, and finally arrived at the only explanation that I think explains EVERYTHING about how it was practiced. In early LDS theology, the idea of "royal bloodlines" was emphasized. The leaders of the church were of this royal bloodline, the leaders of the pre-existence who had already been set apart to lead on this earth, too. When "God" talked about "raising up seed", he wasn't talking about simply increasing the overall number of children born in LDS families. Polygamy doesn't do that unless there is a severe deficit of men because polygamous women tend to have less children than monogamous women. "God" was talking about increasing the number of offspring for one group of people only - the royal bloodline, the leaders of the church. This was why they felt free to marry young, attractive women who were already being courted by worthy LDS single men. This was why a woman could leave a man with a lesser calling for one with a higher calling. It could ALSO be why the men of royal bloodline mated with women who already had husbands - it increased the chance of a child with "royal bloodline". I doesn't even appear to matter if the children were RAISED by the male with the royal bloodline - it mattered that the child, BIOLOGICALLY, was of that bloodline.

This idea is pretty foreign to modern LDS, and I think that's why they struggle to grasp the underlying justification for polygamy and polyandry.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Beastie,

I think you are correct about the Royal Bloodline idea... there are still those of this chosen lineage who are convinced there is something about the blood that makes them special/better/elite or something.

Still, I think this came later.

I think Joseph Smith needed to justify his affair with Fanny, his womanizing, his inability to control his sexual desires.

As some suggest, he was making it up as he went along... the blood line thing seems to have come after the affair?

I don't know the time lines, but it seems to me, the royal blood line idea evolved right along with his "needs"? I'm wondering when the teaching that Joseph Smith was a descendant of Christ first was taught?

Anyone know when the royal blood line teaching came into existence?

~dancer~