If Richard Bushman had written Rough Stone Rolling in 1992

[_ldsfaqs]

Outside of the testimomy of some of the women involved what more evidence would exist?

History and other testimony's.
I've actually read all the available history on these issues. That's why I don't condemn Polygamy any more, and have my views.

Faqs are you married? What hard evidence exists that you and your wife (if married) have ever had sex and that your relationship is not strictly platonic as you describe Joseph's plural marriages?

Why do you accept the testimomy of the 3 and 8 witnesses to the Book of Mormon and yet reject the sworn affidavits of women who claim to have had relations with Joseph?

First, there's only three affidavits.....
Second, there's contradictory history and testimony.
Third, the testimony's in question are suspect in the testimony's in question and in the fact that famous people often have foolish followers, which will say anything.

The 3 & 8 Witnesses have solid history and background to them, no agenda, no special circumstances, etc., thus you're comparing apples and oranges.

But again, I'm not a afraid of the "possibility" Joseph might have done something with someone or a couple, but unlike anti-mormons, I'm not going to CLAIM either way without actual good evidence.

I base my judgments on good solid evidence, with only a "touch" of faith.....
I've already been an anti-mormon, so I have no interest in anything other than absolute truth.

[_Runtu]

Those are the rules for Polygamy..... Joseph wasn't practicing Polygamy, but only the Sealing Ordinance.

That's not what the wives said.

Further, if Joseph did consummate some of the marriages, Emma did at certain points give her consent to the practice.

So, why are you trying so hard to prove (without evidence) something you don't care about? I honestly don't get it.

Further, I'm not afraid of the fact that Joseph might have sinned some, in maybe not being as honest with his wife. Maybe that was his cross..... However, we don't know either way of anything. I'm not going to judge, and the anti-mormon shouldn't be judging either, but that doesn't stop you all from doing so.

Not all judgment is unrighteous. I believe we have our conscience for a reason.

[_SteelHead]

Outside of the testimomy of some of the women involved what more evidence would exist?

History and other testimony's.
I've actually read all the available history on these issues. That's why I don't condemn Polygamy any more, and have my views.

Faqs are you married? What hard evidence exists that you and your wife (if married) have ever had sex and that your relationship is not strictly platonic as you describe Joseph's plural marriages?

Why do you accept the testimomy of the 3 and 8 witnesses to the Book of Mormon and yet reject the sworn affidavits of women who claim to have had relations with Joseph?

First, there's only three affidavits.....
Second, there's contradictory history and testimony.
Third, the testimony's in question are suspect in the testimony's in question and in the fact that famous people often have foolish followers, which will say anything.

The 3 & 8 Witnesses have solid history and background to them, no agenda, no special circumstances, etc., thus you're comparing apples and oranges.

Seriously? The witnesses had no agenda..... Wow. Their backgrounds are no better than those of the women in question. In fact most of the witnesses apostitized at one point or the other.

But again, I'm not a afraid of the "possibility" Joseph might have done something with someone or a couple, but unlike anti-mormons, I'm not going to CLAIM either way without actual good evidence.

I base my judgments on good solid evidence, with only a "touch" of faith.....
I've already been an anti-mormon, so I have no interest in anything other than absolute truth.

If by absolute truth you mean whatever the church says is true, then yeah you are interested. Otherwise you seem to have no interest in the truth.

True or false: Joseph Smith was tried as a glass looker.

Dang autocorrect.

[_moksha]

Ldsfaqs, was Brigham Young as equally chaste with his polygamous wives? If this was not an after-the-fact requirement for Brigham Young, then why should it be for the Prophet Joseph Smith?

[_sock puppet]

First, I do disagree with some LDS "assumptions", such as this one.

Second, I just looked at that site, and it says little to nothing.
It lists 9 PROBABLE sexual encounters.

Mormons--people who eschew the probable but embrace the improbable stories of JSJr.

[_Darth J]

Doctrine and Covenants 132 gives specific parameters for when plural marriage is acceptable to the Lord:

*The consent of the previous wife must be sought
*The plural wives must be virgins
*The plural wives must be vowed to no one else
*A man's plural wives "are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth"

D&C 132:61-63

In practicing plural marriage, Joseph Smith:

*Frequently did not seek Emma's consent/hid his plural marriages from Emma
*On January 17, 1842, married Mary Elizabeth Rollins, who was several months pregnant (obviously not a virgin)
*Entered polyandrous marriages with the wives of other men
*Had no known children with his plural wives

We also learn from the Doctrine and Covenants that the powers of the priesthood can only be exercised in righteousness.

34 Behold, there are many called, but few are chosen. And why are they not chosen?
35 Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to the honors of men, that they do not learn this one lesson—
36 That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.
37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.

D&C 121

How did Joseph Smith continue to be "the Prophet of the Restoration" if he "did consummate a couple of his marriages, not overt but certainly covert, likely keeping such from Emma"?

Those are the rules for Polygamy..... Joseph wasn't practicing Polygamy, but only the Sealing Ordinance.

That's strange, since the Lord is specifically telling Joseph Smith what to do in Section 132. I would like to read more about this sealing ordinance that involves platonic marriages. Where in the scriptures can I find it?

Further, if Joseph did consummate some of the marriages, Emma did at certain points give her consent to the practice.

Did Joseph Smith ever enter take any plural wives without Emma's knowledge or prior consent? ___Yes ___No

Further, I'm not afraid of the fact that Joseph might have sinned some, in maybe not being as honest with his wife. Maybe that was his cross..... However, we don't know either way of anything.

D&C 3:9

Behold, thou art Joseph, and thou wast chosen to do the work of the Lord, but because of transgression, if thou art not aware thou wilt fall.

What does the Doctrine and Covenants say will happen to Joseph Smith if he continues in his sins?

I'm not going to judge, and the anti-mormon shouldn't be judging either, but that doesn't stop you all from doing so.

1. Are there any instances in Church history where Joseph Smith lost his prophetic gifts because of his sins?
2. What does D&C 121 say will happen to a man's priesthood authority if he attempts to exercise the priesthood in unrighteousness?
3. Is there anything you are willing to concede Joseph Smith could have done that would have made him cease to be a prophet?
4. Since the LDS Church invites us to accept Joseph Smith as a prophet, how is it that his conduct as a prophet none of our business?