Polygamy

[_mentalgymnast]

I'm not sure that you even read my post.

And you repeat this over and over as though it is clever.

Like I said, you have had nothing much of any worth to say in this conversation.

Regards,
MG

[_Maksutov]

MG throws everything at the wall he can. He can't pretty up the perversion and all the lies. He squirms like a worm on a hook and calls it gymnastics.

I'll let others determine whether you speak the truth or you are lying in describing my participation on this thread. I could throw that description right back at you, but I'd have to subtract the "throws everything" out of the description. You haven't thrown anything substantial at all into the conversation. You're simply deflecting and obfuscating.

Others will see it for what it is.

Regards,
MG

My, my. Didn't sacrament meeting go well?

For you, of all people, to accuse anyone else of "simply deflecting and obfuscating" is truly hilarious.

[_Maksutov]

And you repeat this over and over as though it is clever.

Like I said, you have had nothing much of any worth to say in this conversation.

Regards,
MG

Just the truth. Hurts, doesn't it? I guess the warm fuzzies wore off early today. Your opiate of the masses is losing its effectiveness.

[_Maksutov]

You haven't thrown anything substantial at all into the conversation.

So sexual coercion is not a substantial issue. That's why we are still seeing people like Sterling van Wagenen, Joseph Bishop, Stephen Murdoch in our present day. Because it isn't a "substantial issue"? It isn't a substantial issue FOR YOU. Because you really don't give half a sht about victims. If you did you would have a completely different attitude. Let's not forget that the couple who raped Elizabeth Smart had been temple workers. Perversion runs deep in Mormonism, just like racism does, and it begins at the source: Joseph Smith. It continues to be enabled thanks to members like yourself who won't see the misdeeds of their leaders as "substantial issues". Look at the statistics. But you won't.

So whine on. Huff and puff. Try to make me the baddie. I never issued revelations threatening my wife with destruction, demanding people give me a house, giving myself license to fck the daughters of my friends. Nope. And you won't have to pay me any tithing, either.

[_Maksutov]

-Finally, acceptance of polygamy in light of these objections forces one to distort one’s conscience and moral thinking.

The practice of polygamy in the early church comes to us through the filters of history. As such, and knowing that there were many detractors of the prophet, I am willing to give Joseph and others the benefit of a doubt that they believed that they were carrying out the will of the Lord. Why? Because I take it at face value that IF Joseph was a prophet that we would observe in the natural course of events strong positions taken by both those that support Joseph and his calling and those that were vehemently opposed to him.

So we have John C. Bennett at one time saying:

...the Arch Seducer, and his Apostles, were signally repulsed: but in hundreds of other cases, they succeeded to their hearts’ content in their black hearted work of deep degradation, corruption and sorrow.

He said this about Joseph and his apostles in response to Mrs. [Sarah Marinda Bates] Pratt, Miss [Nancy] Rigdon, and Miss Brotherton's statements that were given and then later published in Bennett's History of the Saints.

Yet earlier Bennett had said:

...my heart is filled with indignation, and my blood boils within me, when I contemplate the vast injustice and cruelty which Missouri has meted out to that great philanthropist and devout Christian, General Joseph Smith.

So what happened here? Were the women who Bennett used to defame Joseph Smith trustworthy? It depends on which side of the fence you live on.

TESTIMONY OF J. McILWRICK - I do know that the sister of my wife, Martha Brotherton, is a deliberate liar, and also a wilful inventor of lies; and that she has also to my certain knowledge at sundry times, circulated lies of a base kind, concerning those whom she knew to be innocent of what she alleged against them. She has also stooped to many actions which would be degrading to persons of common decency, such as lying on the top of a young man when he was in bed, and seeking Aristotle’s work from a young seaman’s box. And I further state that I am acquainted with Gen. Joseph Smith, President Brigham Young, and Elder Heber C. Kimball, having had the privilege of being intimate with the latter gentleman for several months in England. And I believe them to be men who lead holy and virtuous lives, and men who exhibit a philanthropic spirit to all the human family without respect of persons; and I also know for a truth that the forenamed Martha Brotherton has wickedly endeavored to injure the character of these gentlemen; and many besides myself can testify that the statements which she has reported in different places, are quite contrary to those she related here. JOHN McILWRICK.

We Elizabeth Brotherton, and Mary McIlwrick, sisters of the said Martha Brotherton, concur in the above sentiments.

ELIZABETH BROTHERTON. MARY McILWRICK.

Sworn to, and subscribed, before me, this 27th day of August A. D. 1842. E. ROBINSON, Justice of Peace, for Hancock Co. Ill.

So is Martha to be believed? Sarah? Nancy Rigdon?

My point is that we have almost what could be called a schizophrenic historical record that either demonizes and/or lionizes Joseph Smith and the early brethren. One can take a position for either. One can also find reasons to discard the principle of plurality of wives simply on principle. I get that. It all comes down to whether or not God is behind the restoration or not. In one of Joseph's three(?) recorded sermons in Nauvoo he as a matter of fact said that if he were to share all that God had revealed to him that there were those on the stand where they sat who would immediately rise up and destroy/kill him for preaching blasphemy.

If I revealed all that has been made known to me, scarcely a man on this stand would stay with me.' and 'Brethren, if I were to tell you all I know of the kingdom of God, I do know that you would rise up and kill me.

I think that we see the same today in a limited sense. The practice of polygamy was a hard doctrine. It produced both negative and positive results/consequences. No one is going to argue that. But the fact is, life is messy. There is opposition that results from contradictions and opposing forces within a system that is built on law/commandments. Personally, I believe that this is the reason that we observe, and always have, the multiplicity of various religions and systems of philosophical thought. There have been and will always be many religions or what have you that branch off of pure religion based upon what folks are willing/desirous to take with them and own.

Joseph Smith said that we would be amazed at the liberality of God and His way, methods, and means to bring about the happiness of His children. It's a lot BIGGER in scope than any of us can imagine. I see polygamy as part of restoration of all things and a doctrine/practice that under certain conditions and at different times is acceptable to Him. Others are not so willing and like those sitting on the stand when Joseph preached are only able to accept that which they can live with based upon their own understanding. That understanding may not encompass all that God understands.

Another thing that I try to keep in mind are these words that Joseph Smith gave us:

Although I do wrong, I do not the wrongs that I am charged with doing; the wrong that I do is through the frailty of human nature, like other men. No man lives without fault.

Going back to John C. Bennett. Much of what we have in regards to Nauvoo polygamy, on the negative side, filters through his writings. To be honest with ourselves we should consider whether Bennett and others are the perpetrators of those things that Joseph later claimed he was not guilty of. Again, from looking at many historical sources and trying to look at it from all sides, I am willing to cut some slack and give Joseph the benefit of a doubt that he believed/knew that he was doing the will of the Lord. But as he said, "No man lives without fault."

Regards,
MG

Why did you avoid most of thechair's post? Why didn't you attack him as someone who wants to sin, the way you did me? No. All you do is attack John C. Bennett. Tell us about the "filthy affair" with Fanny Alger. John C. Bennett was years away when that happened. And what are you trying to say about Sarah Pratt? You don't make any sense.

[Guest]

And here is the Brotherton Affair, which will show that she was not manipulated by Bennett and that the three men did lock her up in a room... but first, why did he do this?

Brotherton eventually returned to England, where she died in 1864. But on August 1, 1870, in Salt Lake City, Brigham Young achieved his romantic pursuit when he had Brotherton sealed to him for eternity. Her sister, Elizabeth Brotherton Pratt, plural wife of Apostle Parley Pratt, acted as proxy for the deceased. (George D. Smith, Nauvoo Polygamy, 271-2)

So what happened with Elizabeth? Here is the story, that many of you may not be familiar with... but I am because I researched it, I didn't go to apologetic websites to cherry pick quotes.

Yes, let's talk about Bennett for a minute here. Here is John Taylor from an unpublished sermon given on the ten year anniversary of Joseph and Hyrum's murders:

In relation to some of these events, [that led to Joseph Smith's death] I can relate some of the outlines of these things. There was a time, some time, little time before these persecutions commenced; there was a time that was particularly trying to the people—NEW DOCTRINE of what is called WHAT USED TO BE CALLED THEN “SPIRITUAL WIFERY” (and the doctrine was first introduced of men having more wives than one). IT WAS A NEW THING TO THE WHOLE OF US. Yet it was a thing that was substantiated by scripture and made manifest also by revelation, and IT ONLY NEEDED MEN TO HAVE THE SPIRIT OF GOD OR WOMEN TO KNOW AND TO UNDERSTAND THE PRINCIPLES THAT JOSEPH COMMUNICATED UNTO THEM. I remember being with President Young and Kimball and I think one or two others with Brother Joseph soon after we had returned from England. He talked with us on these principles and laid them before us. It tried our minds and feelings. We saw it was something going to be heavy upon us. IT WAS NOT THAT VERY NICE PLEASING THING some people thought about it. It is something that harried up our feelings. Did we believe it? Yes, we did. I did. The whole rest of the brethren did. But still we should have been glad to push it off a little further.
We [would have] been glad if it hadn’t come in our day; but that somebody else had something to do with it instead of us. But then at the same time, if we was called upon we felt to do what God required of us. I know what my feelings were and thought thought I understand what some of the rest of the brethren’s feelings were.
About this time John C. Bennett commenced some of his operations. HE MADE USE OF SOME OF THOSE PRINCIPLES to corrupt to destroy not only himself but others. And as it was impossible almost together to come out and teach correct principles before the public in those days, SOME OF THOSE MEN GOT AN INKLING of these things and corrupted themselves—were full of <lasciviousness> and abomination, and corrupted their own bodies—and sought to destroy others. And they succeeded in great measure with many. (John Taylor, June 27, 1854, unpublished discourse transcribed by LaJean Purcell Carruth, PhD, BYU Studies 50, no. 3 (2011), 43-44, my emphasis).

Hales tries to claim, 1) that it was never called "spiritual wifeism" by the "faithful". That's false, here is another (I have many) confirmation that it was. So Smith starts up his Spiritual Wifeism and Bennett learns about it and Taylor LATER CLAIMS that he perverted it. But did he? Or was he emulating what Joseph was doing with OTHER MEN'S WIVES? Why, yes he was. Bennett and Higbee and Joel Miles (Smith bodyguard) and Lyman O. Littlefield, and a few other Smith bodyguards and JOSEPH SMITH'S BROTHER WILLIAM, who told the women that Joseph was teaching what they were doing, only in secret (to other men's wives) and that it was all ok, and that he taught it wasn't ON THE STAND (lied) to keep it secret. This is the 1842 scandal folks, Both Smith's were up to their necks in it, along with Bennett and some of Smith's bodyguards and Francis Higbee. Also Smith bosom friend, J.B. Backenstos, who Smith uses to craft affidavits against Bennett, that were lies. Backenstos was right there with Bennett seducing those women! And Smith never outs him at all, but uses him to turn on Bennett who WAS THE FALL GUY!

Taylor tells us that Jo goes to his apostles right after they return from England, and tells them they too can do this stuff, and Brigham sets his sights on Martha Brotherton. (And lets not forget that Jo also tried to bed Taylor's wife Lenora)

What some don't seem to understand is that Joseph's teachings were continually evolving. He did not invent the concept of the sealing power until well after they started baptizing for the dead in 1840. And then it wasn't applied to marriage until 1842. Smith had some other justification for "marrying" other men's wives between 1838-1842. That is why Bennett knew nothing of eternal marriage, Smith did not begin teaching about it until 1842 after he abandoned the practice of "marrying" other men's wives. Everything that Joseph did in relation to marriage went against his stated revelations about how to document sealings. No records were kept. There may have been no witnesses to some of the early "marriages". Bennett and William Smith and Higbee and some of Joseph's bodyguards, etc. knew about what he was doing in relation to other men's wives and it wasn't eternal marriage. It may have been a form of concubinage. That is what I think and Grant Palmer wrote about. That is why John Taylor said that with Joseph's Spiritual Wifeism (the early stuff), all it took was a man with the spirit and the women to accept what they were taught. That's why it was called SPIRITUAL Wifeism. Bennett and William Smith took some of what Joseph was teaching (that some sin was not sin) and that he was justified to do whatever he pleased because he was the latter day DAVID, and there was really no adultery because it wasn't a crime only a superstition, and so one could have concubines. We don't know how those early "marriages" were set up. Bennett and Walmart. Smith did. and they used some of Joseph's arguments to have sex with women as Joseph was doing. That is why no one was really surprised when it came out about Joseph "frigging" Mary Heron. It was old news, water under the bridge and Joseph then claimed that no one could break up marriages as he was doing and one could only marry "virgins". He applies the sealing power to those unions starting with Louisa Beaman in April, 42.

This is important folks, so pay attention! You won't find no FAIRMORMON answers to this stuff:

From Joseph Smith's journal:

27 March 1842 • Sunday
Sunday 27[th] Baptized 107 individuals after speaking on baptism for the Dead and witnessed the landing of 150 English brethren from the Steam boat Ariel

Where were the recorders? Nowhere to be found. Did Smith speak about the necessity of having them? Nope. Why? Why would he baptize 107 people and be totally unprepared for it to be binding in HEAVEN. Why didn't the great Jehovah give Smith a heads up before doing all that? This is why there were no sealings being done before this time. Joseph was just fleshing out the concept of ETERNAL marriage and hadn't yet conceived of the recorders (a necessary component to sealing). Joseph even gives a heads up in SEPTEMBER:

I am about to restore many things to the earth pertaining to the Priesthood saith the Lord of Hosts... (in other words would be making it up as he went along, same as "eternal marriage")

Yet, why go ahead with baptisms and marriages that are not eternal, the whole reason for doing them? The baptisms were simply a waste of time and not valid, and the marriages were not eternal marriages, only for time, and what good is that if there was no sex as Brian Hales claims? The whole thing makes no sense, unless they were for time (including sex) and Joseph was evolving his ideas as he went along.

In the Times & Seasons in Dec. 1841 there appeared an article by the Twelve about Baptism for the Dead.... nothing about recording the baptisms, but there was about recording something else...

All money and other property designed for tythings and consecrations to the building of the Temple must hereafter be presented to the trustee in trust, President Joseph Smith, and entered at the Recorder's office in the book before referred to; [The Book of the Law of the Lord] and all receipts now holden by individuals, which they have received of the building committee for property delivered to them, must also be forwarded to the Recorder's office for entry, to secure the appropiation [appropriation] of said property according to the original design.

There was also this bit of extortion...

In the same revelation the command is to "all the saints from afar," as well as those already gathered to this place; to arise with one consent and build the Temple; to prepare a place where the Most High may manifest himself to his people. No one is excepted who hath ought in his possession, for what have ye that ye have not received? and I require mine own with usury saith the Lord; so that those who live thousands of miles from this place, come under the same law, and are entitled to the same blessings and privileges as those who have already gathered. But some may say how can this be, I am not there, therefore I cannot meet in the Temple; cannot be baptized in the Font? The command of heaven is to you, to all, gather: and when you arrive here, if it is found that you have previously sent up of your gold or your silver, or your substance, the tythings [tithing] and consecrations which are required of you, for this building, you will find your names, tithings, and consecrations written in the Book of the Law of the Lord, to be kept in the Temple, as a witness in your favor, showing that you are a proprietor in that building, and are entitled to your share of the privileges thereunto belonging.

Joseph gives this long "revelation" in Jan. 1841 about baptism for the dead (but mentions no recorders or binding and loosing in relation to baptism for the dead) and writes,

For I deign to reveal unto my church things which have been kept hid from before the foundation of the world, things that pertain to the dispensation of the fulness of times.

But in his September letters, he claims all of this was known to every dispensation! He quotes from the New Testament about Peter binding and loosing, etc. He was not revealing anything that he would later claim had not been revealed. Joseph radically evolved what he taught. It's plain as day. Why is this so important? Because Hales and others claim that Bennett knew nothing about Eternal Marriage! He didn't because Smith wasn't teaching about "sealings" until right when Bennett was being exposed for his own shenanigans. The other men's wives that Jo had relationships all claimed to be "sealed", but none ever remembered any kind of ceremony! They could hardly remember the dates! And why, if they had to be recorded to be VALID! Why would Smith not do that? It makes no sense if we believe what Hales tells us, that sealings were all in place from 1836. It's a BIG LIE. This evidence DESTROYS the "faithful narrative" about sealing being restored in 1836. That was the BIG LIE.

And then, we have poor Martha who had arrived from England in December of 1841...

Oh man, this is stuff you will never learn from Mental or FAIRMORMON! So what happened with Martha? Did she complain about the incident long before Bennett met with her? YES SHE DID! She wrote to her family in ENGLAND! And it was published in the MILLENNIAL STAR! Did Bennett also manipulate her to do that, months earlier? Here is what Hyrum Smith said during the conference:

He then spoke in contradiction of a report in circulation about Elder Kimball, B. Young, himself, and others of the Twelve, alledging [alleging] that a sister had been SHUT UP IN A ROOM FOR SEVERAL DAYS, and that they had endeavored to induce her to believe in having two wives. - (-Hyrum Smith who was not privy to Spiritual Wifeism back then, so of course he didn't know what was really going on).

This is quite clear that she was shut up in a room for several days and that they induced her to believe in having two wives. That's it. It specifically says shut up in a room for several days. This is wrong, so it is most likely a garbled account. This was on April 7th, and Brotherton did not write up her affidavit until months later, but she and members of her family did write to England and accuse not Hyrum, but Joseph of being the one who was there. This is confirmed by the Millennial Star. Hyrum is not admitting that he was involved, he is stating that a "report" was in circulation that accused him of being involved. Hyrum was adamantly opposed to polygamy at this time. He was actively trying to stop what Joseph was doing in secret and this worried Joseph. He even asked Brigham Young if it was true that his brother had a "revelation" on it. Hyrum is commenting on an anonymous report, not admitting that he was there. If one believes that this is Hyrum admitting it, then one also has to believe that they locked her up for SEVERAL DAYS. That's simply ridiculous. There are some who believe that Hyrum was somehow involved, to spare Joseph. THat is also ridiculous.

And Joseph knew what William and Bennett were doing and admitted to covering it up for a time. He continued to do so with his brother after he came out against Bennett. Joseph was up to his neck in Spiritual Wifery. What he was doing before the summer of 1842 is pretty much shrouded in mystery, but Joseph Johnson likened what Smith was doing to his own adultery in 1850. Now let's get to that testimony of Elizabeth's sister Mary's husband:

TESTIMONY OF J. MCILWRICK.

I do know that the sister of my wife, Martha Brotherton, is a deliberate liar, and also a wilful inventor of lies; and that she has also to my certain knowledge at sundry times, circulated lies of a base kind, concerning those whom she knew to be innocent of what she alleged against them. She has also stooped to many actions which would be degrading to persons of common decency, such as lying on the top of a young man when he was in bed, and seeking Aristotle’s work from a young seaman’s box.

And I further state that I am acquainted with GEN. JOSEPH SMITH, President Brigham Young, and Elder Heber C. Kimball, having had the privilege of being intimate with the latter gentleman for several months in England. And I believe them to be men who lead holy and virtuous lives, and men who exhibit a philanthropic spirit to all the human family without respect of persons: and I also know for a truth that the forenamed Martha Brotherton has wickedly endeavored to injure the character of these gentlemen; and besides myself can testify that the statements which she has reported in different places, are quite contrary to those she related here.
JOHN. MCILWRICK.

We Elizabeth Brotherton, and Mary McIlwrick, sisters of the said Martha Brotherton, concur in the above sentiments.

ELIZABETH BROTHERTON.
MARY MCILWRICK.
Sworn to, and subscribed, before me, this 27th day of August A. D. 1842.
E. ROBINSON,
Justice of Peace, for Hancock Co. Ill.

If it was true that Martha was also accusing Hyrum Smith, or that he was involved, why is it always Joseph? Why don't they include Hyrum here? They don't. Notice that Mcilwrick is claiming that Martha was telling her story "at sundry [various] times" and he is trying to impeach her by claiming that the stories didn't match up! So we know that she told the story BEFORE what "she related here" (the July affidavit)!!! It's right there, but Mental didn't notice.

Brotherton wrote,

"Well, but," said he, [Brigham Young] "brother Joseph has had a revelation from God that it is lawful and right for a man to have two wives; for as it was in the days of Abraham, so it shall be in these last days, and whoever is the first that is willing to take up the cross will receive the greatest blessings; and if you will accept of me, I will take you straight to the celestial kingdom; and if you will have me in this world, I will have you in that which is to come, and brother Joseph will marry us here to-day, and you can go home this evening, and your parents will not know any thing about it."

Two wives, two wives a consistent two wives. Brigham was not sealed to Lucy Ann Decker until June. He had sealed/married Agnes Smith to Joseph in January 42. He was privy to what Joseph was doing at this time, and Brotherton was his first choice for a Spiritual Wife. (March). And he never forgot and as soon as she died had her sealed to him! WTF is that? How do the apologists explain that? This lying, low down apostate... Young seals her to himself? (Performed by Joseph F. Smith by the way).

Brigham tells Clayton about "the priesthood" in March,

[March 7, 1843. Tuesday.] A.M. at the office. Afterwards went to President Josephs and commenced settlement with those who have claims on city Lots. Elder Brigham Young called me on one side and said he wants to give me some instructions on the priesthood the first opportunity. He said the prophet had told him to do so and give me a favor which I have long desired. For this again I feel grateful to God and his servant, and the desire of my heart is to do right and be saved.

Hyrum doesn't admit anything. He is repeating a RUMOR and DENYING IT. I've never said that particular rumor that Hyrum mentions didn't involve him. I'm open to that, or that Hyrum was taking a "hit" for Joseph. It's possible, because of Emma's perceived reaction to such rumors. Remember, by April, the rumors of Joseph and Agnes Smith had already gone before the Relief Society. And I do now recall one bit of evidence that Brigham may have been involved in something that bothered Joseph for he told Clayton in June that,

Also B[righam] Y[oung] had transgressed his covenant and he pled with the Lord to spare him this end and he did so, otherwise he would have died.

B[righam] denied having transgressed.

How Brigham "transgressed his covenant" is a mystery. Perhaps with Augusta Cobb. (Having sex with her before Holy Jo approved it) But Joseph still approved her as a wife for Young. But we really don't know when this event happened or what it was. It certainly doesn't sound like Brigham was sealing people behind Joseph's back.

Still, Hyrum doesn't admit to anything in April, only that there were rumors that involved him and some others. But there was a truth to the rumors. And there is a very good reason for Hyrum to put himself in the rumor, to take some of the heat off of Joseph because of Emma's probable negative reaction to another incident involving Joseph in Spiritual Wifeism. Hyrum was adamantly against this at that time, it makes no sense that he would have been involved, but perfect sense that Joseph would be, as he had already revealed to Brigham that he was practicing it. Hyrum would have thought Joseph innocent of any wrongdoing, because he surely believed that Joseph was innocent and that he could take the brunt of the "false charge".

And why wouldn't Hyrum do the same to protect Joseph? He actually lied on April 8th about the practice of Spiritual Wifeism by himself and others...

I wish the Elders of Israel to understand it is lawful for a man to marry a wife, but it is unlawful to have more, and God has not commanded any of you to have more; and if any of you dare to presume to do any such things, it will spoil your fun, for you will never have the spirit to preach the gospel. I despise a man who teaches a pack of stuff that will disgrace himself so; for a man to go into the world and talk of this spiritual wife system he is as empty as an open sepulcher. If the coat suits anyone, let him put it on. I would call the devil my brother before such a man. ...

The Lord has given Joseph the power to seal on earth and in heaven [for] those who are found worthy; having the Spirit of Elijah and Elias, he has power to seal with a seal that shall never be broken, and it shall be in force in the morn of the resurrection. Talk about spiritual wives! One that is dead and gone is spiritual. We will come up in the morn of the resurrection; and every soul that is saved will receive an eternal increase of glory. Will you believe this, (loud shouts of aye).

Every great and good principle should be taught to the Saints, but some must not be taught to the world; until they are prepared to receive them; it would be like casting pearls before swine. No man must attempt to preach them.

I believe every good man should have one wife in this life, and I know if I had two I should not know what to do with them; they might quarrel about me, and I might get a whipping. One is enough, and I warn all of you not to attempt it; if a man should begin to find out, you would get into some cell in Alton. _Hyrum Smith, Conference Report, Apr. 8, 1844)

Hyrum had more than one living wife on April 8th 1844, so he was LYING!

Young specifically calls it Joseph Smith's Spiritual Wife System sayings. Joseph himself links Spiritual Wifery to keeping secrets at a city council meeting. Then his own Spiritual Wives call themselves that and claim in Nauvoo they were known as such. And Hyrum absolutely was lying on April 8th. He specifically said that no one could have another wife and denied he had any plural wives when he did. It's in black and white. You can attempt to play word games here, but it doesn't work.

I wish the Elders of Israel to understand it is lawful for a man to marry a wife, but it is unlawful to have more...

Hyrum doesn't caveat this. It is lying. It (according to Hyrum) in 1843 was "lawful" to have more. And Joseph deceived the City Council meeting claiming that the revelation was all about former times:

[The mayor said] Joseph H. Jackson has been proved a murderer before this Council [that's another lie] and [the mayor] declared the paper a nuisance, a greater nuisance greater than a dead carcass. — They make [it] a criminality of for a man to have a wife on the earth while he has one in heaven — according to the keys of the holy priesthood, and [the mayor] read the statement of W[illia]m Law in the Expositor, where the truth of God was transformed into a lie. [He] read [the] statements of Austin Cowles — & said he had never had any private conversation with Austin Cowles on these subjects, that he preached on the stand from the Bible showing the order in ancient days[,] having nothing to do with the present time.

Hyrum backs him up and turns it into a flat out lie:

C[ouncillor] H[yrum] Smith — spoke to show the falsehood of Austin Cowles in relation to the revelation referred to — that it referred to former days [and] not the present time as stated by Cowles. [The] Mayor said he had never preached the revelation in private as he had in public — had not taught it to the highest anointed in the Church ^in private^ which many confirmed.

NO BECAUSE HYRUM DID! Just so Joseph could have deniability! This is how a REVELATION FROM GOD is dispensed to the world? The prophet denies teaching it to the High Council? And this is the guy we give the "benefit of the doubt to"? Really? What a damned joke, MG.

It was under Joseph's direction that the "revelation" went to the High Council. These are slick lies. What did Austin Cowles say?

In the latter part of the summer, 1843, the Patriarch, Hyrum Smith, did in the High Council, of which I was a member, introduce what he said was a revelation given through the Prophet; that the said Hyrum Smith did essay to read the said revelation in the said Council, that according to his reading there was contained the following doctrines; 1st, the sealing up of persons to eternal life, against all sins, save that of sheding innocent blood or of consenting thereto; 2nd, the doctrine of a plurality of wives, or marrying virgins; that "David and Solomon had many wives, yet in this they sinned not save in the matter of Uriah. This revelation with other evidence, that the aforesaid heresies were taught and practiced in the Church; determined me to leave the office of first counsellor to the president of the Church at Nauvoo, inasmuch as I dared not to teach or administer such laws. And further deponent saith not.

AUSTIN COWLES.

They are calling this false. It is not. It absolutely referred to "the present time". And this was a continuation of Hyrum's speech in April. This is the tack they were taking. Deny and obfuscate. It didn't work. William Law saw to that. Notice though that ol Jo and his corrupted brother gets into more trouble with this:

[The] Mayor said he had never preached the revelation in private as he had in public

Joseph did preach the "revelation" in private. Or are Benjamin Johnson and Clayton just making crap up? Are all the Twelve that Joseph taught it to making crap up?

What is informative are what Clayton and Johnson write, that Joseph went to them beforehand, claimed legality for his Spiritual Wifeism, and then said he would preach them a coded message in public that would justify it. So Joseph didn't use certain words. But he DID preach it, but to those who knew what he was talking about. To claim that he never did is a lie. He did. That was the way he played it. We can be honest here and admit to this game, or we can continue to play word games and flush the spirit of what Smith was doing down the toilet. Clayton:

President Joseph and I went to B[enjamin] F. Johnsons to sleep. Before we retired the President gave Brother Johnson and wife some instructions on the priesthood. He put his hand on my knee and says "your life is hid with Christ in God, and so is many others." Addressing Benjamin says he "nothing but the unpardonable sin can prevent him (me) from inheriting eternal glory for he is sealed up by the power of the priesthood unto eternal life having taken the step which is necessary for that purpose." He said that except a man and his wife enter into an everlasting covenant and be married for eternity while in this probation by the power and authority of the Holy priesthood they will cease to increase when they die (i.e. they will not have any children in the resurrection), but those who are married by the power and authority of the priesthood in this life and continue without committing the sin against the Holy Ghost will continue to increase and have children in the celestial glory. THE UNPARDONABLE SIN IS TO SHED INNOCENT BLOOD or be accessory thereto. All other sins will be visited with judgement in the flesh and the spirit being delivered to the buffetings of satan untill the day of the Lord Jesus." I feel desirous to be united in an everlasting convenant to my wife and pray that it may soon be. President J[oseph] said that the way he knew in whom to confide, God told him in whom he might place confidence. He also said that in the celestial glory there was three heavens or degrees, and in order to obtain the highest a man must enter into this order of the priesthood and if he don't he can't obtain it. He may enter into the other but that is the end of his kingdom he cannot have increase.

Well, God was wrong about John C. Bennett it seems, in whom Joseph placed extreme confidence. Exactly what Austin Cowles said in the Expositor. Johnson:

About the first of April, 1843, the Prophet with some of the Twelve and others came to Macedonia to hold a meeting, which was to convene in a large cabinet shop owned by Brother Joseph E. [Johnson] and myself, and as usual he put up at my house. Early on Sunday morning he said, "Come Brother Bennie, let us have a walk." I took his arm and he led the way into a by-place in the edge of the woods surrounded by tall brush and trees. Here, as we sat down upon a log he began to tell me that the Lord had revealed to him that plural or patriarchal marriage was according to His law; and that the Lord had not only revealed it to him but had commanded him to obey it; that he was required to take other wives; and that he wanted my Sister Almira for one of them ... And he said, "At this morning's meeting, I will preach you a sermon that no one but you will understand. And furthermore, I will promise you that when you open your mouth to your sister, it shall be filled."

At the meeting he read the parable of the Talents, and showed plainly that to him that hath shall be given more, and from him that had but one should be taken that he seemed to have, and given to him who had ten... (My Life's Review) More wives = celestial kingdom and one wife = eternal slavery as an angel, one wife man's wife is given to more wives guy, therefore polygamy required to become a god

Preached in private and in public. Joseph and Hyrum were LIARS.

But we should give them the benefit of the doubt!

MORE LYING:

The saints of the last days have witnessed the outgoings and incomings of so many apostates that nothing but truth has any effect upon them. In the present instance, after the sham quotations of Sidney [Rigdon] and his clique, from the Bible, Book of Mormon, and Doctrine and Covenants, to skulk off, under the “dreadful splendor” of “spiritual wifery,” which is brought into the account as graciously as if the law of the land allowed a man a plurality of wives, is fiendish, and like the rest of Sidney’s revelation, just because he wanted “to go to Pittsburg [Pittsburgh] and live.” Wo to the man or men who will thus wilfully [willfully] lie to injure an innocent people! The law of the land and the rules of the church do not allow one man to have more than one wife alive at once, but if any man’s wife die, he has a right to marry another, and to be sealed to both for eternity; to the living and the dead! there is no law of God or man against it! This is all the spiritual wife system that ever was tolerated in the church, and they know it. (Times and Seasons, Vol. 5, Nov. 15, 1844, 715, emphasis mine)

But we should give them (John Taylor who wrote the above) and Brigham Young, who stood behind it, along with Smith the "benefit of the doubt"?

Lie after lie after lie coming from the men who locked up Brotherton! And here are their testimonies, (Hales gave me this):

Brigham Young, Heber C. Kimball, and John Taylor, arrived in Nauvoo July 1, 1841. George A. Smith joined them on July 13 with Orson Pratt following a couple of days later. Willard Richards on August 16, with Wilford Woodruff following on October 6.

Brigham Young recalled his experience:

We came to Nauvoo, and the Twelve went to England. While we were in England, I think, the Lord manifested to me by visions and his spirit, things that I did not then understand. I never opened my mouth to any persons concerning them, until I returned to Nauvoo. Joseph had never mentioned this, there had never been a thought of it in the Church that I knew anything about at that time. But I had this for myself, and I kept it to myself, and when I returned home and Joseph revealed these things to me, I then understood the reflections that were upon my mind while in England. But this was not until after I had told him what I understood. I saw that he was after something by his conversation, leading my mind along, and others, to see how we could bear this. This was in 1841; the revelation was given in 1843, but the doctrine was revealed before this, and when I told Joseph what I understood which was right in front of my house in the street, as he was shaking hands and leaving me, he turned round and looked me in the eyes, and says he--"Brother Brigham, are you speaking what you understand,--are you in earnest?" Says I--"I speak just as the Spirit manifests to me." Says he--"God bless you, the Lord has opened your mind," and he turned and went off.

Years later, Heber C. Kimball’s daughter, Helen, vividly recalled his homecoming: “The Prophet and many more were there ready to greet and welcome them home again, Joseph would have them go home with him to dinner. . . . We thought this almost an unkindness for it seemed so long a time to us who were waiting and watching with impatience to see him. . . . My mother felt the presence of others at such a time almost an intrusion, but Brother Joseph seemed unwilling to part with my father; and from that time kept the Twelve in council early and late, and she sometimes felt nearly jealous of him.”

Wilford Woodruff recounted similarly:

"Joseph Smith of course taught that principle while in Nauvoo, and he not only taught it, but practiced it too… He taught it to the twelve apostles and to some other individuals. I mean to some other individuals who were not members of the quorum of twelve… I heard him teach it, - he taught it to the quorum of twelve apostles, and he taught it to other individuals as they bear testimony. I know he taught it to us… he taught me and others… In his addresses to the quorum of twelve apostles, when he visited us, he would teach that… We were with him, - I don’t know how many months, - but probably as much as six months… it was nearly six months, and he spoke of it frequently… He taught it to us as a principle amongst other things."

Apostle George A. Smith also remembered:

“At one of the first interviews thereafter [returning from his mission to England] with him [Joseph Smith] I was greatly astonished at hearing from his lips that doctrine of Patriarchal marriage, which he continued to preach to me from time to time. My last conversation with him on this subject occurred just previous to my departure from Nauvoo (May 9, 1844) in company with Elder Wilford Woodruff, to attend Conference in Michigan… He testified to me and to my father that the Lord had given him the keys of this sealing ordinance, and that he felt as liberal to others as he did to himself.”

John Taylor recalled:

When this principle was first made known to us by Joseph Smith, it was in Nauvoo, and many of you will remember the place very well. We were assembled in the little office over the brick store, there being present Brs B. Young Heber C Kimball, Orson Hyde & myself. Br Willard Richards may have been present too, but I am not positive. Upon that ocassion [sic], Joseph Smith laid before us the whole principle pertaining to that doctrine, and we believed it. Having done this, Joseph felt, as he said, that he had got a big burden rolled off his shoulders. He felt the responsibility of that matter resting heavily upon him. Notwithstanding, however, that we received the principle & believed it, yet we were in no great hurry to enter into it.

And a few more from Young, (you will not believe what he did to Lorenzo Snow here, make sure you read carefully to get it):

Brigham Young said this in 1849: While on a mission to England, the following came
forcibly to my mind—“As God was, so are we now; as he now is, so we shall be.” Our Father was once born of parents, having a father and mother the same as we have. He is the very eternal Father, because of the creation of God. He is the Savior of the world, the root of spirit and the offspring of flesh, the Only Begotten of the Father in the flesh. The Father came down and
begat him, the same as we do now, and Jesus was the only one. Moses was as God to the children of Israel, so was Joseph to us, and no man could love God without loving Joseph. In him centered the revelations of God. The Spirit went right to him and told him. The spiritual wife doctrine came upon me while abroad, in such a manner that I never forget. Particular things belong to one blood, but, after all, we are of one blood and one flesh, all the nations of the earth. Joseph said to me—“I command you to go and get another wife.” I felt as if the grave was better for me than anything, but I was filled with the Holy Ghost, so that my wife and Brother Kimball’s wife would upbraid me for lightness in those days. I could jump up and hollow. My blood was as
clear as West India rum, and my flesh was clear. I said to Joseph, “Suppose I should apostatize, after taking another wife, would not my family be worse off?” Joseph answered—“There are certain bounds set to men, and if a man is faithful and pure to these bounds, God will take him out of the world; if he sees him falter, he will take him to himself. You are past these bounds, Brigham, and you have this consolation.” But I never had any fears of not being saved. Then I said to Joseph, I was ready to go ahead. He passed certain bounds before certain revelations were given. (end)

President Young said while conversing upon Eternal improvement that He knew by revelation
while in England that there would be an Eternal increase in knowledge & as we now are God once was & as he now is we shall be if we continue faithful. I told this to Br Lorenzo Snow. While Conversing with Brother Willard Richards upon the things of God it came to me that the Priesthood is a perfect system of Government. (1856)

In the spring of 1840 he [Snow] was called to serve a mission in the British Isles. Before his departure he was in the home of a Church member who was preaching a sermon on the parable of the laborers in the vineyard. (See Matt. 20:1–16.) According to Elder Snow, “While attentively listening to his explanation, the Spirit of the Lord rested mightily upon me—the eyes of my understanding were opened, and I saw as clear as the sun at noonday, with wonder and astonishment, the pathway of God and man. I formed the following couplet which expresses the revelation, as it was shown me, and explains Father Smith’s dark saying to me at a blessing meeting in the Kirtland Temple, prior to my baptism. …

“As man now is, God once was:”
“As God now is, man may be.”

“I felt this to be a sacred communication, which I related to no one except my sister Eliza, until I reached England, when in a confidential private conversation with President Brigham Young, in Manchester, I related to him this extraordinary manifestation.”

So who do we believe, those liars? They even LIE about receiving revelations! I'm believe Martha. Oh yeah, Martha's story.... I'm getting to that... From the Expositor:

It is a notorious fact, that many females in foreign climes, and in countries to us unknown, even in the most distant regions of the Eastern hemisphere, have been induced, by the sound of the gospel, to forsake friends, and embark upon a voyage across waters that lie stretched over the greater portion of the globe, as they supposed, to glorify God, that they might thereby stand acquitted in the great day of God Almighty. But what is taught them on their arrival at this place?-
It goes on,

in return for the great sacrifice of father of mother, of gold and silver, which they gladly left far behind, that they might be gathered into the fold...

This is simply a tenant of the gospel. Forsake all for the "gospel" and for it's spokesman, Joseph Smith. (See below how they tell her that her parents will know nothing about it)

And what did the choice that Brotherton get her? Estrangement from her family. It goes on,
They are requested to meet brother Joseph, or some of the Twelve, at some insulated point, or at some particularly described place on the bank of the Mississippi, or at some room, which wears upon its front--Positively NO Admittance. (The Red Brick Store)

This absolutely happened to Martha. Expositor:

The harmless, inoffensive, and unsuspecting creatures, are so devoted to the Prophet, and the cause of Jesus Christ, that they do not dream of the deep laid and fatal scheme which prostrates happiness, and renders death itself desirable; but they meet him, expecting to receive through him a blessing, and learn the will of the Lord concerning them, and what awaits the faithful follower of Joseph, the Apostle and Prophet of God, When in the stead thereof, they are told, after having been sworn in one of the most solemn manners, to never divulge what is revealed to them, with a penalty of death attached that God Almighty has revealed it to him, that she should be his (Joseph's) Spiritual wife; for it was right anciently,and God will tolerate it again: but we must keep those pleasures and blessings form the world, for until there is a change in the government, we will endanger ourselves by practicing it-but we can enjoy the blessings of Jacob, David, and others, as well as to be deprived of them, if we do not expose ourselves to the law of the land. She is thunder-struck, faints recovers, and refuses. The Prophet damns her if she rejects.

Nancy Rigdon and Brotherton. Here is what Martha wrote, notice the similarities,

"Well, but," said he, [Brigham Young] "brother Joseph has had a revelation from God that it is lawful and right for a man to have two wives; for as it was in the days of Abraham, so it shall be in these last days and whoever is the first that is willing to take up the cross will receive the greatest blessings; and if you will accept of me I will take you straight to the celestial kingdom; and if you will have me in this world, I will have you in that which is to come, and brother Joseph will marry us here to-day, and you can go home this evening, AND YOUR PARENTS WILL NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT" "Sir," said I, "I should not like to do any thing of the kind without the permission of my parents." "Well, but," said he, "you are of age, are you not?" "No, sir," said I, "I shall not be until the 24th of May." "Well," said he, "that does not make any difference. You will be of age before they know, and you need not fear. If you will take my counsel it will be well with you, for I know it to be right before God, and if there is any sin in it, I will answer for it. But brother Joseph wishes to have some talk with you on the subject -- he will explain things -- will you hear him?" "I do not mind," said I. "Well, but I want you to say something," said he. "I want time to think about it," said I. "Well," said he, "I will have a kiss, any how," and then rose and said he would bring Joseph. -- He then unlocked the door, and took the key and locked me up alone. He was absent about ten minutes and then returned with Joseph. "Well," said Young, "sister Martha would be willing if she knew if was lawful and right before God." "Well, Martha," said Joseph, "it is lawful and right before God -- I know it is. Look here, sis; don't you believe in me?" I did not answer. -- "Well Martha," said Joseph, "just go ahead, and do as Brigham wants you to -- he is the best man in the world except me." "Oh!" said Brigham, "then you are as good." "Yes," said Joseph. "Well," said Young, "we believe Joseph to be a Prophet. -- I have known him near eight years, and always found him the same." "Yes," said Joseph, "and I know that this is lawful and right before God, and if there is any sin in it, I will answer for it before God; and I have the keys of the kingdom, and whatever I bind on earth is bound in heaven, and whatever I loose on earth is loosed in heaven; and if you will accept of Brigham, you shall be blessed -- God shall bless you, and my blessing shall rest upon you, and if you will be led by him, you will do well; for I know Brigham will take care of you, and if he don't do his duty to you, come to me and I will make him; and if you do not like it in a month or two, come to me, and I will make you free again; and if he turns you off, I will take you on." -- "Sir," said I, rather warmly, "it will be too late to think in a month or two after. I want time to think first." "Well, but," said he, "the old proverb is, 'nothing ventured, nothing gained;' and it would be the greatest blessing that was ever bestowed upon you." -- "Yes," said Young, "and you will never have reason to repent it -- that is, if I do not turn from righteousness, and that I trust I never shall, for I believe God, who has kept me so long, will continue to keep me faithful. Did you ever see me act in any way wrong in England, Martha?" "No, sir," said I. "No," said he; "neither can any one else lay any thing to my charge." "Well, then," said Joseph, "what are you afraid of, sis? -- come, let me do the business for you." "Sir," said I, "do let me have a little time to think about it, and I will promise not to mention it to any one." "Well, but look here," said he, "you know a fellow will never be damned for doing the best he knows how." "Well, then," said I, "the best way I know of, is to go home and think and pray about it." -- "Well," said Young, "I shall leave it with brother Joseph, whether it would be best for you to have time or not." "Well," said Joseph, "I see no harm in her having time to think, if she will not fall into temptation." "O, sir," said I, "there is no fear of my falling into temptation." "Well, but," said Brigham, "you must promise me you will never mention it to any one." "I do promise it," said I. "Well," said Joseph, "you must promise me the same." I promised him the same. "Upon your honor," said he, "you will not tell." "NO SIR, I WOULD LOSE MY LIFE FIRST" said I. "WELL THAT WILL DO," said he; THAT IS THE PRINCIPLE WE GO ON. I think I can trust you, Martha," said he. -- "Yes," said I, "I think you ought." Joseph said, "she looks as if she could keep a secret." I then rose to go, when Joseph commenced to beg of me again -- he said it was the best opportunity they might have for months, for the room was often engaged. I, however, had determined what to do. http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/MO ... htm#071642

Brotherton,
From a foreign country - yes
Embarked on voyage across waters - yes
Visited by "strikers" - yes
Sacrifice of father and mother - proposed, so yes
Requested to meet Brother Joseph/Twelve - yes
Told never to divulge - yes
Penalty of death/give life - yes, Joseph said "that is the principle we go on"
She should be Joseph's spiritual wife - yes if not Brigham
Enjoy the blessings of Jacob, David, etc. - yes
Door to room had "positively no admittance" - Yes in Brotherton's affidavit
Refused - yes she did
As for the sent away for a time, Brotherton went to St. Louis, and that is mentioned in the Expositor also:
A departed spirit, once the resident of St. Louis, shall yet cry aloud for vengeance.
How many similarities must one list to see that it was taken from her story? I mean, they claim there was a sign on the door "positively no admittance" the same exact words from Brotherton's affidavit!

The Brotherton Family arrives in Nauvoo, per Thomas B.:

December 7, 1841. Dear Edward, ... We are 20 miles from Nauvoo. We arrived here on the 25th of November ... I INSTANTLY TOOK A HOUSE on a rising ground within 20 yards of the Mississippi, but great numbers of people are GONE TO NAUVOO. John and Mary [McIlwrick] went off there yesterday. I have not been there yet but intend to go AND VISIT soon... I THINK OF VISITING NAUVOO next week TO SEE THE PLACE and friends... [end]

They were still in Warsaw on Dec. 7th, and had "took a house on a rising ground" by the Mississippi. Others "had gone to Nauvoo", but they stayed in Warsaw. So they did not move to Nauvoo until 1842.

Martha received a Patriarchal Blessing from Hyrum Smith on Feb. 23, 1842. (So she had met him by then)

Elizabeth Brotherton writes to England,

Nauvoo, April 20, 1842

WE ARRIVED HERE THREE WEEKS AGO; I thought I would not write until I had seen the Prophet, AND ATTENDED THE MEETINGS IN NAUVOO. I have now been at the meetings THREE SABBATHS and have had the pleasure of attending the conference which continued for three days and I have had the pleasure of hearing Brother Joseph speak ...[end]

This confirms that she was only in Nauvoo three weeks before the April Conference. (There was no conference in December) She says so. She says she went to meetings IN NAUVOO for three Sabbaths. She also claims that she thought she would not write "until she had seen the prophet" and that was at the April Conference.

Here is the Millennial Star from 1842 (Quoting the letter from Elizabeth Brotherton)

She [Martha B] accordingly selected president J. SMITH, and elder B. Young for her victims, and wrote to England that these men had been trying to seduce her, by making her believe that God had given a revelation that men might have two wives; by these disreputable means she thought to overthrow the Saints here, or at least to bring a storm of persecution on them; but in this thing she was completely deceived by Satan.

This (the letter that Martha wrote to England that Elizabeth describes above) was sent BEFORE Martha met with Bennett and wrote down her story! It (Elizabeth's letter) was published in the August Issue of the Star, but would have had to arrive by mail so it was written well before Martha's July Statement. And Martha wrote to England about being propositioned BEFORE Elizabeth did! MARTHA was NOT manipulated by Bennett.

Case Closed, MG.

Some points about the Brothertons:

1) Elizabeth mentions arriving in Nauvoo three weeks before April 20. Martha would claim that the incident with Young occurred near three weeks after her arrival. If Martha and Elizabeth were to have arrived in Nauvoo at the same time, this would mean Martha's experience would have had to occur mere days before Elizabeth wrote her letter, after Hyrum's address refuting the rumor. That means that Martha wrote her letter to England immediately after the incident.
2) The rumor that Hyrum refuted would have needed time to become sufficiently noised about to warrant refutation.
3) Elizabeth's letter mentions that Thomas Brotherton had refused to consider her or Mary as part of the family unless they renounce Mormonism (paraphrased as I don't have the text in front of me at the moment). It would seem some space of time would be required after Martha's experience to warrant such extreme rejection of two beloved daughters.
4) The Red Brick Store was complete but did not open to the public until early January 1842. By the end of March the large upstairs room in which one might imagine the incident occurring was constantly in use. (The two smaller rooms upstairs had almost no ability to effectively isolate sound, particularly as one of those rooms was reportedly being used by Clayton and others.) The content of Martha's report suggests the Red Brick Store had not yet been opened to the public.
5) The Relief Society minutes do not mention Martha Brotherton, though they are full of discussion of investigation into other situations where morality and rumor are of issue. The 3/24 meeting specifically discusses the rumors attributed to Clarissa Marvel. Later meetings would involve rejecting those wishing admittance to Relief Society, whether before becoming members or in at least one case after the woman had been admitted (Lucy Munjar). The age of those ministered to by Relief Society would have included Martha.
6) There is the census and the patriarchal blessing, both of which put Martha in Nauvoo in February. Given that we do not know what was said in the patriarchal blessing, we cannot judge what Hyrum knew when he gave her that blessing.

This is what Elizabeth claims about the incident. She was in Nauvoo about three weeks before she wrote her letter. That was why she was writing. Who was she including with herself then?

Nauvoo, April 20, 1842
***WE*** ARRIVED HERE THREE WEEKS AGO; I thought I would not write until I had seen the Prophet, AND ATTENDED THE MEETINGS IN NAUVOO. I have now been at the meetings THREE SABBATHS and have had the pleasure of attending the conference which continued for three days and I have had the pleasure of hearing Brother Joseph speak ...[end]

What prompted this letter? The fact that she hadn't seen the prophet yet, and the apostasy of her family. That didn't happen until the end of March according to this evidence. It was because of what was done to Martha! And we have Martha writing some interesting things, she wrote,

The next day being Sunday, I sat down, instead of going to meeting, and wrote the conversation, and GAVE IT TO MY SISTER, who was not a little surprised, but she said it would be best to go to meeting in the afternoon...

We know that Elizabeth accepted polygamy, she was married to Parley Pratt. Martha writes that it was a "small room" that she was admitted to in her letter, not a large room.

Elizabeth mentions the "evil reports" that were not in circulation until March, which Hyrum addressed at the Conference that Elizabeth attended. They were circulating in Nauvoo. Martha writes down the conversation she had and gives it to her sister. This happened in Nauvoo, and Elizabeth didn't move there until March. Elizabeth also writes in her autobiography,

After my father and our family apostatized and went away I felt very sorrowful. One evening when going to bed. I was feeling cast down and my sister who had been dead a number of years came to me and called by my name and said, "be comforted you are all right. You have a work to do for me." I wished to inquire what she meant, but she was gone. IN TWO DAYS AFTER THIS, the Prophet preached on the baptism for the dead.

She places their apostasy to around the time Joseph was preaching Baptism for the Dead. Joseph was going to speak specifically on this subject on March 20th but a death caused him to change his remarks so he preached on this subject a week later on March 27th. On the 27th Joseph himself went and baptized many in the Mississippi River. This would have been a memorable event for Elizabeth.

And as to the language about taking on the sin himself, Martha writes that Joseph said:

"Yes,"

said Joseph, "and I know that this is lawful and right before God, and if there is any sin in it, I will answer for it before God...

This is what William Smith was telling the women he was bedding.

Compared to Bennett, Martha's letter is extremely low key. If he influenced her as some think he did Sarah Pratt, why not have Joseph or Brigham make a pass at her? Try to kiss her? Why claim that Joseph/Brigham wanted to marry her, and not just say he wanted to have sex with her? They could have gotten a lot more lurid if it was fake, but it was not.

Nov. 25 Brotherton’s arrive in Warsaw and Thomas immediately rents a house

December 7, 1842 Thomas writes to England, claims he has not been to Nauvoo yet, but that John and Mary have moved there the day before.

Jan – Joseph Fielding writes letter and complains about some of the Brotherton Family’s attitude on the voyage.

Feb –March Members of Thomas’ family move to Nauvoo

Feb Possible that some of the Brotherton’s have moved to Nauvoo (census)

Feb 23 Martha gets blessing, may have moved to Nauvoo at this time.

March 25 Elizabeth moves to Nauvoo, claims to have a spiritual experience of seeing her dead sister

March 26 The incident occurs

March 27 Elizabeth and Martha attend meeting where Joseph speaks on Baptism for the Dead.

April 7 Hyrum denies rumor about girl in room

April - Apostate Brotherton's leave Nauvoo and move back to Warsaw

April 20 Elizabeth writes to England

That's the Brotherton Story and how Bennett did not use her, she already had told her story, she was simply repeating it in an affidavit for Bennett.

My job is simply bringing up evidence that contradicts certain conjectures. I certainly don't have all the "answers". I am just trying to put it all together as others have done. I'm concerned that there has been too much reliance on late recollections for the current narrative. The religious aspects behind Joseph's foray into polygamy/Spiritual Wifeism go way back, in that he thought of himself as a later day "David" and therefore justified what he did on that basis. "Sealing" was an evolving term in his theology. There is nothing there in Kirtland that backs up the narrative that he taught about "eternal marriage" at that time. The "keys" of Elijah had nothing to do with "sealing" in 1836. Elijah's mission to turn the hearts of the fathers had to do with the preaching of the gospel. Joseph originally pegged John the Baptist as Elijah, and it was him he identified with Moses on the Mount with Jesus, not Elijah the Prophet. The "sealing" of people to each other did not come about until Joseph applied it to Baptism for the Dead, and then it was afterwards applied to the marriage covenant. What Joseph did before 1842 were not "sealings", but something else, justified by Joseph as an Old Testament "restoration" that he as a latter day "David" and had the authority on that basis. He speaks of three branches of Priesthood, (Abrahamic, Melchizedek & Aaronic) and later said that Elijah must come, not to the Kirtland Temple, but to the Nauvoo Temple when it was completed to restore the "fullness of the priesthood". I lay it all out in my book, "Spiritual Wives".

[_grindael]

Can you explain for us who E & E. P. refers to?

Ready? Emily and Eliza Partridge.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Jesus Christ, Grindael, that was amazeballs. I don’t don’t know how you organize your thoughts and content so consistently well. It’s daunting for someone like me to even wrap my mind around. Perhaps Mr. Peterson should reach out to you for some tips and tricks regarding his notes and manuscripts...

- Doc

[_Maksutov]

Jesus Christ, Grindael, that was amazeballs. I don’t don’t know how you organize your thoughts and content so consistently well. It’s daunting for someone like me to even wrap my mind around. Perhaps Mr. Peterson should reach out to you for some tips and tricks regarding his notes and manuscripts...

- Doc

Yep. It's beautiful.

[_grindael]

Why, thank you. As I was writing that up I was taking it from various pieces of research and really just strung it together and I was actually worried that it was a little disorganized. I know I can do better, but I just kept thinking of things to add and just put them in there and then kept going back to Brotherton. It's a fascinating story and I'll have a better telling of it in my book. I've got a whole chapter on that episode and its ramifications planned out. (Not there yet, I'm still in Ohio).