God asks you to practice polygamy ????? what would you do?

[_LDS truthseeker]

subgenius said: "it seems that since "morality" comes from God, it would be an error to claim that His commands are criminal. arguably Joseph had the revelation in 1843, maybe 1831...lets stick with 1843.....
Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act - 1862
Poland Act - 1874
Reynolds v. United States 1878
Edmunds Act - 1882

me thinks the timeline is not so fishy. The "law of the land" was post-revelation."



It was illegal when Joseph practiced polygamy:

Most of Joseph Smith's polygamous marriages occurred in Illinois in the early 1840s. The Illinois Anti-bigamy Law enacted February 12th, 1833 clearly stated that polygamy was illegal. It reads:

"Sec 121. Bigamy consists in the having of two wives or two husbands at one and the same time, knowing that the former husband or wife is still alive. If any person or persons within this State, being married, or who shall hereafter marry, do at any time marry any person or persons, the former husband or wife being alive, the person so offending shall, on conviction thereof, be punished by a fine, not exceeding one thousand dollars, and imprisoned in the penitentiary, not exceeding two years. It shall not be necessary to prove either of the said marriages by the register or certificate thereof, or other record evidence; but the same may be proved by such evidence as is admissible to prove a marriage in other cases, and when such second marriage shall have taken place without this state, cohabitation in this state after such second marriage shall be deemed the commission of the crime of bigamy, and the trial in such case may take place in the county where such cohabitation shall have occurred."
Revised Laws of Illinois, 1833, p.198-99

http://www.mormonthink.com/joseph-smith ... tm#illegal

[_subgenius]

No, if it was voice in my head, then likely i would not have another voice which could override such a command. However, if God commanded it, then the voice in my head would have decide the course of action......and if it was in accordance with Moroni 7, then likely the child would die.

And how is killing a child in accordance with Moroni 7?

I never said it was in accordance. I said that Moroni 7 is how you can discern the question you asked.

If it is truly criminal and truly against the light of Christ, then it is not coming from God....just as it is impossible for God to lie.
With regards to polygamy, neither of these have been proven to have occurred at the time of revelation.

Then polygamy is not from God, since it was criminal, and for Joseph involved lying and manipulation.[/quote]
it was not "criminal" for at least 20 years after the revelation.
the presence of any lying and manipulation is argumentative and not relevant to the OP or the point.

[_Buffalo]

it was not "criminal" for at least 20 years after the revelation.
the presence of any lying and manipulation is argumentative and not relevant to the OP or the point.

It was against Illinois law. See two posts up.

[_subgenius]

it was not "criminal" for at least 20 years after the revelation.
the presence of any lying and manipulation is argumentative and not relevant to the OP or the point.

It was against Illinois law. See two posts up.

Yes, but it was not the "law of the land" per se, which was the inference made by the poster. Additionally, polygamy is still legal in many countries today, thus one is able to not be a "criminal" in the global sense.
Point being, no "fishy"

That being said, i am not sure what the difficulty is here.
After all in some countries "equal rights for women" is illegal, do we assume that equal rights for women is not ordained of God, thus not to be supported by the church because it contradicts a man-made law?

[_Buffalo]

[

Yes, but it was not the "law of the land" per se, which was the inference made by the poster. Additionally, polygamy is still legal in many countries today, thus one is able to not be a "criminal" in the global sense.
Point being, no "fishy"

That being said, i am not sure what the difficulty is here.
After all in some countries "equal rights for women" is illegal, do we assume that equal rights for women is not ordained of God, thus not to be supported by the church because it contradicts a man-made law?

Wow, that's your argument? It's okay to disobey state law? Seriously? That's a pretty desperate move. It makes it sound like you've lost but just can't admit it.

[_Themis]

I never said it was in accordance. I said that Moroni 7 is how you can discern the question you asked.

You said if it was in accordance with Moroni 7 then the child would die. I am asking how Moroni 7 could ever suggest that this is ok.

it was not "criminal" for at least 20 years after the revelation.

People have already shown that it was the LAW of the land. Show where Sate law is not in force but the federal laws are in regards to the church.

the presence of any lying and manipulation is argumentative and not relevant to the OP or the point.

The evidence for lying is clear, and most apologists admit such. It is relevant because it really goes toward trusting that Joseph was telling the truth that an angel commanded him.

[_Themis]

That being said, i am not sure what the difficulty is here.

Joseph stated that he and the church believed in honoring and obeying the law.

After all in some countries "equal rights for women" is illegal, do we assume that equal rights for women is not ordained of God, thus not to be supported by the church because it contradicts a man-made law?

Well the church still does not treat women as equals, and the church today actually does a decent job of honoring and sustaining the law even in these countries, even if they may not agree with them.

[_subgenius]

[

Yes, but it was not the "law of the land" per se, which was the inference made by the poster. Additionally, polygamy is still legal in many countries today, thus one is able to not be a "criminal" in the global sense.
Point being, no "fishy"

That being said, i am not sure what the difficulty is here.
After all in some countries "equal rights for women" is illegal, do we assume that equal rights for women is not ordained of God, thus not to be supported by the church because it contradicts a man-made law?

Wow, that's your argument? It's okay to disobey state law? Seriously? That's a pretty desperate move. It makes it sound like you've lost but just can't admit it.

aside from not being the issue, when one considers the context of what State laws meant at that time, the law of Illinois really has little to do with the law in any other states....especially prior to the the Civil War.
What is desperate is to hang your hat on the notion that since Illinois had bigamy outlawed, the Poster's argument of "it was illegal" is a strong one.
It can "sound" however you want it to, but one thing is true, no sound came from you on the point raised by equal rights for women - after-all, i can still claim that a woman's rights to vote is "illegal" with the same sensibility as the argument "bigamy was illegal then".

[_subgenius]

I never said it was in accordance. I said that Moroni 7 is how you can discern the question you asked.

You said if it was in accordance with Moroni 7 then the child would die. I am asking how Moroni 7 could ever suggest that this is ok.

it was not "criminal" for at least 20 years after the revelation.

People have already shown that it was the LAW of the land. Show where Sate law is not in force but the federal laws are in regards to the church.

the presence of any lying and manipulation is argumentative and not relevant to the OP or the point.

The evidence for lying is clear, and most apologists admit such. It is relevant because it really goes toward trusting that Joseph was telling the truth that an angel commanded him.

1. Read what i wrote again. Moroni 7 does not say what you conclude, and neither do i. I stated that the manner by which you discern is described in Moroni 7.
Ultimately if God has commanded action, then the choice is to be made between (a) I will contradict God's will, OR (b) I will conform to God's will. Now if you actually understand Moroni 7 and know that it was a commandment from God, what would you choose?
It would be completely irrational, unreasonable, and illogical to choose anything but compliance. To counter God's will would be arrogant, self-centered, and primitive.
Now, understand that you must receive confirmation, as described in Moroni 7.
The test is simple.....what is of greater value? That which is temporal or that which is spiritual? Do you consider your self or God to be the one that "knows better"?

2. People have only shown that it was the law of the land of Lincoln. In the context of the time ,i do not consider that a valid foundation for the broader applied statement of "it was illegal". Do you obey the most restrictive laws even though they are only enforced out of the jurisdiction you live, work, or play in? ( i think not).
i do not understand the second part of your response with regards to state/federal, please clarify.

3. As for Joseph's sincerity about the angel of polygamy - i do not see the relevance or application to life today. The facts seem to be arguable, historically obscure, ambiguous, and contrary. However, i would suggest that one look to Moroni 7 and allow the Spirit to clarify the issue. It may well be that he lied, that he succumbed to the frailties of being human, that he was "less than perfect". It would not surprise me to find flaws in any man or woman, both tragic and endearing. But i do not agree that it is an issue of condemnation, nor do i assume that it has any influence on the OP's question of "what would i do".

[_Corpsegrinder]

it seems that since "morality" comes from God, it would be an error to claim that His commands are criminal. To claim that He would have you commit a despicable crime would be putting your self, or rather natural man's law, before God's Law. If this were the case, then surely you would be hardly convinced that you were visited by an angel at all.
Surely Abraham and Isaac provide the simple answer to this simple question. If you "know" it is a commandment from God, you would be compelled to obey that command, especially in the light of the "struggle" it would present to your well-established habit of monogamy.

I am curious as to why one would "hope for the courage" to contradict God, seems like an altogether selfish and hopeless position to desire.

No, morality does not come from God. Morality is simply a system of principals concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad among individuals. Morality differs slightly from culture to culture and, indeed, from person to person. Many, if not most, persons in Joseph’s day considered his sexual promiscuity to be immoral; “plural marriage” was Joseph’s attempt to legitimize his sexual promiscuity. In other words, when he couldn’t play by the rules he tried to change them…much like the Cochranites before him and the Oneida Perfectionists after him.

For what it’s worth, the sexual behavior of two (or three, or four) consenting adults doesn’t bother me. What does bother me are Joseph’s lies and manipulation: “An angel with a drawn sword told me to do it.” Yeah, right. Equally objectionable are certain Mormon apologists who misuse the term “civil disobedience” in an attempt to legitimize Joseph’s obfuscation and sneaking around.

Yes, but it was not the "law of the land" per se, which was the inference made by the poster. Additionally, polygamy is still legal in many countries today, thus one is able to not be a "criminal" in the global sense.
Point being, no "fishy"

It was against the law of the land of Illinois. Therefore it was against the law of the land.

No, if it was voice in my head, then likely i would not have another voice which could override such a command. However, if God commanded it, then the voice in my head would have decide the course of action......and if it was in accordance with Moroni 7, then likely the child would die. Are you proposing that the supreme law is bio-genetically based? Are you proposing that no action can supersede biological impulses?

Interesting.

Ultimately if God has commanded action…

According to whom did the God command the action? Joseph? An untrustworthy individual with a history of deception for the purpose of personal gain and enrichment? (This assumes of course that this strange creature known as "God" (a) exists, and (b) behaves in a consistent and predictable manner.)

2. People have only shown that it was the law of the land of Lincoln.

Interesting.

3. As for Joseph's sincerity about the angel of polygamy - i do not see the relevance or application to life today. The facts seem to be arguable, historically obscure, ambiguous, and contrary. However, i would suggest that one look to Moroni 7 and allow the Spirit to clarify the issue.

Right, enquire of the Lord as per Moroni. Is this how J. Reuben Clack determined the truthfulness of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion? (Yeah, I know I talk about JRC an awful lot, but I can’t resist. He’s the gift that keeps on giving.)

It may well be that he lied, that he succumbed to the frailties of being human, that he was "less than perfect". It would not surprise me to find flaws in any man or woman, both tragic and endearing. But i do not agree that it is an issue of condemnation, nor do i assume that it has any influence on the OP's question of "what would i do".

You don’t agree that Joseph’s alleged sexual battery is an crime worthy of condemnation? Interesting.