Can we have a "real" discussion about Joseph Smith and Polygamy?

[Trinity]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

So your theory is that if you went out and slaughtered some kids whom you suspected of being disrespectful to their parents, you'd go to jail for breaking MAN's laws, but what you did would be cool with God because He has never forbidden it? And here I was tempted to believe that the antis were right when they said the LDS were the dangerous cult with weird ideas!

That reflects the same discourse presented time after time by the atheists to discredit the Bible.

Trinity

[nrajeff]

Uh, I guess it needs to be pointed out that my remarks were addressed to FATHER JD. Unless you really are the Trinity, and are truly a multi-person being, and Father JD is one of your personae, how about letting him respond? Or are manners--like humility--things you somehow think are beneath your self-exalted station?

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Libby

This subject was one that was especially bothersome to me and one of the main reasons I ended up leaving the church.

Why did Joseph have himself sealed to girls as young as 14?

Why did he marry women that were already married?

Why were these girls/women coerced by telling them that their families' spiritual lives depended on whether or not they married Joseph?

Do you believe there really was a "destroying angel" that would have taken Joseph's life, if certain of these women had not married him?

Libby do your history and research of the times, not so much in comparing what is standard today and what was maybe at times essential than. Then ask if what Joseph Smith did was immoral, and if so how can you show proof that he was immoral.

Sincerely, Priest, HankSaint and Richard.

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

Originally Posted by Trinity

That reflects the same discourse presented time after time by the atheists to discredit the Bible.

Trinity

Trinity, I have to interject here with an observation, and say that enemies of my faith often use the Bible to discredit my faith, but when that same discourse is applied to their own faith, they are not pleased to see that it has discredited their own.

[Fig-bearing Thistle]

Originally Posted by Richard

Libby do your history and research of the times, not so much in comparing what is standard today and what was maybe at times essential than. Then ask if what Joseph Smith did was immoral, and if so how can you show proof that he was immoral.

Sincerely, Priest, HankSaint and Richard.

Welcome. Can we just call you Pre-HankSaint-Richard?
Kind of like Anti-Nephi-Lehi. NO?

Glad to have you here.

[Father_JD]

Shoulda known it was YOU with your favored green-colored font!! Were you banished from CARM??

Cheers, Mate.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

So your theory is that if you went out and slaughtered some kids whom you suspected of being disrespectful to their parents, you'd go to jail for breaking MAN's laws, but what you did would be cool with God because He has never forbidden it? And here I was tempted to believe that the antis were right when they said the LDS were the dangerous cult with weird ideas!

No, didn't say that. And I didn't say it'd be "cool with God" to do so because NO ONE HAS THAT RIGHT to do so. The whole argument is regardlessly moot, since there is NO theocracy in Israel, NO Sanhedren, NO AUTHORITY FROM GOD to follow through with capital punishment for these types of offenses.

What authority CIVIL government does have from God is the putting to death of MURDERERS.

Why not address that as if that's been FORBIDDEN, jeff?

[Father_JD]

Now play nice, jeff.

[Father_JD]

And just what do you think has been discredited here, figmeister? So far, both you and jeff are completely misunderstanding the nature of the argument:

Does God once COMMAND something and then FORBID it later?

[Heart2Heart]

Originally Posted by Richard

Libby do your history and research of the times, not so much in comparing what is standard today and what was maybe at times essential than. Then ask if what Joseph Smith did was immoral, and if so how can you show proof that he was immoral.

Sincerely, Priest, HankSaint and Richard.

Welcome to Walter Martin Forum. Are there three of you (Priest, HankSaint, and Richard) or one person with three ***les?

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Shoulda known it was YOU with your favored green-colored font!! Were you banished from CARM??

Cheers, Mate.

Yep, got banned because I posted a quote by Brian H. who called me a liar.
So because he calls me a liar I get banned, get it Father? Then good buddy I get banned again for complaining to the holier than I Administrator. Go figure, that's CARM for you. Fair and balanced, unless your Mormon.

Richard.

[Heart2Heart]

Originally Posted by Richard

Yep, got banned because I posted a quote by Brian H. who called me a liar.
So because he calls me a liar I get banned, get it Father? Then good buddy I get banned again for complaining to the holier than I Administrator. Go figure, that's CARM for you. Fair and balanced, unless your Mormon.

Richard.

Why do you guys keep going back to CARM, if they treat you guys in this manner?

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Heart2Heart

Welcome to Walter Martin Forum. Are there three of you (Priest, HankSaint, and Richard) or one person with three ***les?

Thanks for the welcome, on CARM it is Priest, it once was HankSaint, and on CC it was Richard, where I just got banned.

Richard.

[Heart2Heart]

Originally Posted by Richard

Thanks for the welcome, on CARM it is Priest, it once was HankSaint, and on CC it was Richard, where I just got banned.

Richard.

What is CC?

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Heart2Heart

What is CC?

Well if you want to waste some extra time, go to Concerned Christians the FAIR and BALANCED Forum.

Richard.

[Heart2Heart]

Originally Posted by Richard

Libby do your history and research of the times, not so much in comparing what is standard today and what was maybe at times essential than. Then ask if what Joseph Smith did was immoral, and if so how can you show proof that he was immoral.

Sincerely, Priest, HankSaint and Richard.

Richard, are you a Mormon?

[Trinity]

Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle

Trinity, I have to interject here with an observation, and say that enemies of my faith often use the Bible to discredit my faith, but when that same discourse is applied to their own faith, they are not pleased to see that it has discredited their own.

I can understand that it is not pleasant. The problem exists also when the sacred texts are confronted betwen Christians and Jews, or Christians and Muslims. Vice-versa.

I agree with you that the Bible is not a scientific book, neither a historical book like any modern historical book. However, it was the revelation of God for the Jews, the Christians and the Muslims, for around fifteen hundred years. Almost the same lenght of time taken by the variety of authors to write this book. According to the geopolitical perspective and the anthropology the book has many virtues. Before Christmas, archeologists have found the tomb of Pontius Pilate. Before, some had this pretexte that Pilate has never existed. This is why the Christians cherish the Bible. Several historical cer***udes bring them security and a confort zone.

Perhaps the Book of Mormon could also have some very inspired elements, but this is also true with the philosophy inside the tale of the Lord of the Rings. In our modern world, believers need parameters. Some good reasons to beleive. This is why they find safety in the old tradition. Tradition who was re***essed so many times throughout the centuries or during the Christian era.

Trinity

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Richard

Libby do your history and research of the times, not so much in comparing what is standard today and what was maybe at times essential than. Then ask if what Joseph Smith did was immoral, and if so how can you show proof that he was immoral.

Sincerely, Priest, HankSaint and Richard.

Hi Richard.

I did that. I don't think it's ever been socially acceptable to marry other men's wives (at least, not while they are still married and their husband's still living).

I've also seen evidence that the average age for marriage in the 1800's was around age 20-21.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by Richard

Yep, got banned because I posted a quote by Brian H. who called me a liar.
So because he calls me a liar I get banned, get it Father? Then good buddy I get banned again for complaining to the holier than I Administrator. Go figure, that's CARM for you. Fair and balanced, unless your Mormon.

Richard.

There's a fine line at CARM...a line I have crossed several times which earned me warnings, but fell short of being actually banned. I think it depends on how one is calling another a "liar"!

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Libby

Hi Richard.

I did that. I don't think it's ever been socially acceptable to marry other men's wives (at least, not while they are still married and their husband's still living).

I've also seen evidence that the average age for marriage in the 1800's was around age 20-21.

That would indicate that many younger women married earlier to keep that average as low as it is. I added this link for you to read, it is very interesting and deserves your attention.


http://mi.byu.edu/publications/revie...0&num=2&id=291

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Richard

That would indicate that many younger women married earlier to keep that average as low as it is. I added this link for you to read, it is very interesting and deserves your attention.


http://mi.byu.edu/publications/revie...0&num=2&id=291

Well, I read about halfway through that link, Richard. Pretty confusing. What did you get out of it that you would want me to know about?

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Libby

Well, I read about halfway through that link, Richard. Pretty confusing. What did you get out of it that you would want me to know about?

Just some observations, history, witnesses, and some reality all mixed in to show a much less harsh version than those who had a agenda of hate towards Joseph. Facts and evidence are only as good as the one wanting to write and research some non bias reporting, and that is never going to be easy to find in anyone.

Whereas you have doubts, I have conviction. So we end up with 13 million members, some kids and some new, but in general very accepting of the problem of polygamy.

Richard.

[Libby]

Originally Posted by Richard

Just some observations, history, witnesses, and some reality all mixed in to show a much less harsh version than those who had a agenda of hate towards Joseph. Facts and evidence are only as good as the one wanting to write and research some non bias reporting, and that is never going to be easy to find in anyone.

Whereas you have doubts, I have conviction. So we end up with 13 million members, some kids and some new, but in general very accepting of the problem of polygamy.

Richard.

Most are accepting (I suppose?) or perhaps don't even know that much about it. I had a discussion about this with my Home Teacher and he knew very little about Joseph's early wives. He said, he "wasn't sure that Joseph married other men's wives". I have also talked to several women who have had their problems with polygamy (even TBM's) to some degree or another.

I understand your point about "agenda" and bias, though. I agree information can always be slanted and heaven knows there are all kinds of "slants" out there on Joseph.

Thanks for the link. I have been kind of tired today (not enough sleep), so I will look at it again when I'm more rested.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Libby

Well, I read about halfway through that link, Richard. Pretty confusing. What did you get out of it that you would want me to know about?

Me too... and agreed that it's confusing.

P.S. As I'm sure you noticed, Richard also stepped around Joseph marrying other men's wives. I wonder if the silence is indicative of Richard's agreement and support of such practices?

[Richard]

Originally Posted by Russ

Me too... and agreed that it's confusing.

P.S. As I'm sure you noticed, Richard also stepped around Joseph marrying other men's wives. I wonder if the silence is indicative of Richard's agreement and support of such practices?

Russ before you go around shooting off your mouth, read the URL. It addresses that also. What is nice about this FORUM so far, versus CC and CARM, is that I have not been deleted yet for posting a URL from a Apologist site.

Interesting Russ.

Richard.