why me wrote:Your use of words shows utter bias. I think that the women did just fine. Was it difficult. Sure. But they knew that it was from god and felt the pressence of the spirit. You should be proud of your relative.
Um, yeah. We are all biased, including you. I disagree that the women did "just fine". Would you care to elaborate what, precisely, that means to you? As to what (all) these women knew and felt, you are making assumptions. I've read many diaries of polygamous wives in the early Utah Territory years and they were a long way from "fine", regardless of their belief that polygamy was required by their god. I believe it was required by Mormon leaders only. It was a mistake and the LDS Church should cowboy up and say so.
In terms of my "pride", I am neither proud nor embarrassed by my ancestors. It's simply stating facts for me. I'm not tied to it emotionally in the least. I am fascinated by history, including the history of my own family. But neither pride nor embarrassment enters into it for me.
Seven wrote: What I find interesting about Ann Eliza Webb is how apologists discredit her autobiography as gossip and anti Mormon lies, but use her testimony to prove Joseph didn't have an affair with Fanny. Which is it?
I think it is both. I don't think her entire book should be considered "anti-Mormon lies." However, some aspects probably should be. On the other hand, not everything she says should be considered trued. For example, I think that the evidence is pretty good that she was telling the truth about Fanny, but I she also claims that Oliver was having an affair at the same time, which I am less certain about.
I think Ann's explanation of Section 132 is fascinating because much of it seems to make sense, although it is presented in a very critical light.
The most problematic part of Joseph's "marriage" to Fanny is that entering plural marriage required the very strict law of using the Priesthood sealing keys. Section 132 makes that clear.
Joseph didn't receive the keys to practice the New and Everlasting covenant of marriage until 1836.
The roll in the hay with Fanny Alger happened in 1833, years before he was given the sealing keys.
why me wrote:Your use of words shows utter bias. I think that the women did just fine. Was it difficult. Sure. But they knew that it was from god and felt the pressence of the spirit. You should be proud of your relative.
Just out of curiosity, have you read many (any?) books on polygamy? You mentioned earlier, I think, that you're an academic, so I presume you would have?
why me wrote:Your use of words shows utter bias. I think that the women did just fine. Was it difficult. Sure. But they knew that it was from god and felt the pressence of the spirit. You should be proud of your relative.
Um, yeah. We are all biased, including you. I disagree that the women did "just fine". Would you care to elaborate what, precisely, that means to you? As to what (all) these women knew and felt, you are making assumptions. I've read many diaries of polygamous wives in the early Utah Territory years and they were a long way from "fine"
I never said that their lives were easy. But then again, wives in general had tough lives back then. By doing fine, I refer to women who were living their faith and believed that they were following the will of god through his prophets.
Now I think that it is great that there are many disgruntled Mormons that use this as an excuse to say something negative about the LDS church. But I think that we would all be pleasantly surprised if these women would come back from the dead and have a talk with us. Some critics just may be enlightened.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
Seven wrote: What I find interesting about Ann Eliza Webb is how apologists discredit her autobiography as gossip and anti Mormon lies, but use her testimony to prove Joseph didn't have an affair with Fanny. Which is it?
What I find interesting is that you don't see the value of quoting an opponent's words against them, as such is the highest of quality of evidence. I find it also interesting that you think that one must adopt the entirety of an opponent's argument and position before quoting them. Very interesting. And limiting, of course.
why me wrote:Your use of words shows utter bias. I think that the women did just fine. Was it difficult. Sure. But they knew that it was from god and felt the pressence of the spirit. You should be proud of your relative.
Just out of curiosity, have you read many (any?) books on polygamy? You mentioned earlier, I think, that you're an academic, so I presume you would have?
Under the Banner of Heaven. But that was a while ago.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
why me wrote:Now I think that it is great that there are many disgruntled Mormons that use this as an excuse to say something negative about the LDS church. But I think that we would all be pleasantly surprised if these women would come back from the dead and have a talk with us. Some critics just may be enlightened.
My question to why me again:
Just out of curiosity, have you read many (any?) books on polygamy?
why me wrote:I dealt with fanny already. That is your interpretation and it would be the wrong one. Joseph Smith was not ugly. He could have gotten sex anytime he wanted. He did not need to invent plural marriage to get some action. Also, there would be no logic to risk his reputation and power base by inventing plural marriage to have sex.
I think the question you should ask yourself is how would a infallible religious leader viewed as second to Christ be able save his reputation and power base if he engages in unlawful adulterous intercourse with another woman and is caught?
Do you have any evidence that Joseph Smith was pained over breaking his marital vows with Emma and causing her anguish when he had sexual relations with his other wives? He seemed to be very passionate about ending traditional monogamous marriage in his teachings and practice. Taking 33 wives in a few years time doesn't sound like someone who is troubled by the pain it was causing his first wife.
Any writings that express Joseph Smith's reluctance to accept this command? (besides the ridiculous angel with the sword story he used to coerce married women)
"Happiness is the object and design of our existence... That which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another." Joseph Smith