Josephine Sessions

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Themis
_Emeritus
Posts: 13426
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 6:43 pm

Re: Josephine Sessions

Post by _Themis »

beastie wrote:Don Bradley:
Naturally, historical scholarship can have faith implications, as scholarship does for the question you raise. There is at minimum one child who came from Joseph Smith's polygamy: Josephine Lyon Fisher. (This stills awaits DNA confirmation, but the published historical evidence for it is good, and I know of a great deal that is unpublished.) And I believe, with reason, that there were a couple others. Perhaps in time this will all get sorted out satisfactorily.

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/504 ... ge__st__20

What's really funny about this is that when Don is proven right, bcspace and droopy will fall over themselves with new justifications.


I may be wrong, so may be someone can let me know. Around the time she got pregnant with Josephine(interesting she names her daughter after Joseph) was she not separated with her first husband who I thought I read was living at his business at the time.
42
_Bob Loblaw
_Emeritus
Posts: 3323
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2012 2:26 am

Re: Josephine Sessions

Post by _Bob Loblaw »

bcspace wrote:No DNA to see eh? I agree, then. There is nothing here. When oh when will you check the children? Surely you guys could fund a DNA project (might take some breakthroughs for female children I hear) with all the hours you waste here?


Last I checked, having sex does not automatically produce children. Did you skip your fifth-grade health class? One would think that, were the DNA results negative, Ugo Perego and the church would make a big deal out of it. So far, nothing, which suggests they either don't have an answer or they got an answer they didn't like.
"It doesn't seem fair, does it Norm--that I should have so much knowledge when there are people in the world that have to go to bed stupid every night." -- Clifford C. Clavin, USPS

"¡No contaban con mi astucia!" -- El Chapulin Colorado
_Arrakis
_Emeritus
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2013 4:54 pm

Re: Josephine Sessions

Post by _Arrakis »

bcspace wrote:No DNA to see eh? I agree, then. There is nothing here. When oh when will you check the children? Surely you guys could fund a DNA project (might take some breakthroughs for female children I hear) with all the hours you waste here?


Ugo Perego was doing exactly that when he was suddenly called to Italy for an extended period of time. Maybe he can resume his work and provide what you are asking for. I have a hunch the test results, if not faith promoting, will never see the light of day.....just as in the Spencer Lake Horse hoax.
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Josephine Sessions

Post by _Droopy »

beastie wrote:
Bazooka wrote:
Droopy, if I accept that Joseph did not even attempt to have sexual relations with anyone other than Emma, doesn't that mean Joseph flagrantly disregarded the whole reason why God allowed him to practice plural marriage in the first place? (To raise seed)


Good luck getting a straight answer to that question. He's dodged every time I've asked it. He apparently doesn't think God's will is relevant.



I've explained it to you clearly, Mrs. Scratch, and it just doesn't seem to penetrate.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Josephine Sessions

Post by _Droopy »

beastie wrote:Don Bradley:
Naturally, historical scholarship can have faith implications, as scholarship does for the question you raise. There is at minimum one child who came from Joseph Smith's polygamy: Josephine Lyon Fisher. (This stills awaits DNA confirmation, but the published historical evidence for it is good, and I know of a great deal that is unpublished.) And I believe, with reason, that there were a couple others. Perhaps in time this will all get sorted out satisfactorily.

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/504 ... ge__st__20

What's really funny about this is that when Don is proven right, bcspace and droopy will fall over themselves with new justifications.



"When" Don is proven right? And if Don is proven wrong, then...?
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Josephine Sessions

Post by _Droopy »

Bob Loblaw wrote:Last I checked, having sex does not automatically produce children.


Yes, especially in the 19th century, without the Pill, RU-486, IUDs, condoms etc.

Thin dishwater.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Bazooka
_Emeritus
Posts: 10719
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:36 am

Re: Josephine Sessions

Post by _Bazooka »

beastie wrote:
Bazooka wrote:
Droopy, if I accept that Joseph did not even attempt to have sexual relations with anyone other than Emma, doesn't that mean Joseph flagrantly disregarded the whole reason why God allowed him to practice plural marriage in the first place? (To raise seed)


Good luck getting a straight answer to that question. He's dodged every time I've asked it.


And now he's dodged again. Is it cowardice?
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
_Droopy
_Emeritus
Posts: 9826
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 4:06 pm

Re: Josephine Sessions

Post by _Droopy »

Bazooka wrote:
And now he's dodged again. Is it cowardice?



Already clearly explained it in another related thread.
Nothing is going to startle us more when we pass through the veil to the other side than to realize how well we know our Father [in Heaven] and how familiar his face is to us

- President Ezra Taft Benson


I am so old that I can remember when most of the people promoting race hate were white.

- Thomas Sowell
_Bazooka
_Emeritus
Posts: 10719
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2013 4:36 am

Re: Josephine Sessions

Post by _Bazooka »

Droopy wrote:
Bazooka wrote:
And now he's dodged again. Is it cowardice?



Already clearly explained it in another related thread.


You tease! Come on, give us the link....
That said, with the Book of Mormon, we are not dealing with a civilization with no written record. What we are dealing with is a written record with no civilization. (Runtu, Feb 2015)
_Hasa Diga Eebowai
_Emeritus
Posts: 2390
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 8:57 am

Post by _Hasa Diga Eebowai »

-
Last edited by Guest on Sat Sep 06, 2014 6:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply