FLDS as true LDS

  • Thread starter Thread starter BartBurk
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BartBurk

Guest
The poor Mormons. They have to deal with the FLDS example of polygamy. I am willing to admit that FLDS polygamy is really an extreme example of “the principle” gone awry. But if anyone with just a little curiosity will dig into the history of Mormon polygamy they will find the seeds of the FLDS in the activities of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and many other early Mormon polygamists. If we are to believe the documents created by Brigham Young and other early Mormons, Joseph Smith married the wives of other men and several teenage girls (including a 14 year old). Brigham Young took a wife away from one Mormon man for his own. Several polygamists were involved with teenage girls. A Bishop Snow had a young man castrated because he wanted to marry the young man’s girlfriend. When Brigham Young heard about the Bishop’s action he said he would have done the same thing.

You can read all about it here:

[404 - File or directory not found.(name removed by moderator)olygamy.htm](http://www.watchman.org/lds/pa(name removed by moderator)olygamy.htm)

If this isn’t enough to convince people that Mormonism is false, God help you.
 
BartBurk said:
The poor Mormons. They have to deal with the FLDS example of polygamy. I am willing to admit that FLDS polygamy is really an extreme example of “the principle” gone awry. But if anyone with just a little curiosity will dig into the history of Mormon polygamy they will find the seeds of the FLDS in the activities of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and many other early Mormon polygamists. If we are to believe the documents created by Brigham Young and other early Mormons, Joseph Smith married the wives of other men and several teenage girls (including a 14 year old). Brigham Young took a wife away from one Mormon man for his own. Several polygamists were involved with teenage girls. A Bishop Snow had a young man castrated because he wanted to marry the young man’s girlfriend. When Brigham Young heard about the Bishop’s action he said he would have done the same thing.

You can read all about it here:

[404 - File or directory not found.(name removed by moderator)olygamy.htm](http://www.watchman.org/lds/pa(name removed by moderator)olygamy.htm)

If this isn’t enough to convince people that Mormonism is false, God help you.
Click to expand...
They have more problems than JS dancing naked in the woods around a beer keg than that

The struggle for control
As elders in the Church, both Brigham Young and Strang claimed to have been chosen by Smith to succeed him, and a power struggle ensued between the two, as they clamored for Church supremacy. The Mormon followers quickly chose sides as either “Brighamites” of “Strangites.”

Strang even produced a document that he claimed was written by Smith some time before his death, stating that Strang was to be Smith’s successor. While the document may have swayed a few fence-sitters into the “Strangite” camp, it was not sufficient to the beliefs of the majority. Thus, Young won the struggle and assumed leadership of the Church. Young immediately excommunicated Strang, and soon thereafter led his followers to Utah.

strangstudies.org/
 
dosdog said:
They have more problems than JS dancing naked in the woods around a beer keg than that

The struggle for control
As elders in the Church, both Brigham Young and Strang claimed to have been chosen by Smith to succeed him, and a power struggle ensued between the two, as they clamored for Church supremacy. The Mormon followers quickly chose sides as either “Brighamites” of “Strangites.”

Strang even produced a document that he claimed was written by Smith some time before his death, stating that Strang was to be Smith’s successor. While the document may have swayed a few fence-sitters into the “Strangite” camp, it was not sufficient to the beliefs of the majority. Thus, Young won the struggle and assumed leadership of the Church. Young immediately excommunicated Strang, and soon thereafter led his followers to Utah.

strangstudies.org/
Click to expand...
And of course Strang eventually began practicing polygamy himself even though many of his followers joined him specifically because they opposed Brigham’s practice! No matter what Mormons say, they still believe polygamy is the ideal way to practice marriage. They have not renounced section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants. They believe polygamy will be practiced in the next life if not restored again in this one. The possibility that polygamy could be reintroduced in this life is always present. Mormonism and polygamy are tied at the hip – they can’t get rid of it. The FLDS are just being faithful to the way they were taught by Brigham to live their religion. I still have several sons and a daughter in the LDS Church. They could be swayed to believe that practicing their religion faithfully requires them to practice plural marriage. It’s rotten to the core.
 
BartBurk said:
And of course Strang eventually began practicing polygamy himself even though many of his followers joined him specifically because they opposed Brigham’s practice! No matter what Mormons say, they still believe polygamy is the ideal way to practice marriage. They have not renounced section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants. They believe polygamy will be practiced in the next life if not restored again in this one. The possibility that polygamy could be reintroduced in this life is always present. Mormonism and polygamy are tied at the hip – they can’t get rid of it. The FLDS are just being faithful to the way they were taught by Brigham to live their religion. I still have several sons and a daughter in the LDS Church. They could be swayed to believe that practicing their religion faithfully requires them to practice plural marriage. It’s rotten to the core.
Click to expand...
That is because JS and his followers were a bunch of 18th century Horndog Pedofiles mixed in with GreeK Mythology

Mythology
Hera:The hieros gamos (sacred marriage) was celebrated in Hera’s honor.
www-unix.oit.umass.edu/~****387/Worship.html
 
BartBurk said:
The poor Mormons. They have to deal with the FLDS example of polygamy. I am willing to admit that FLDS polygamy is really an extreme example of “the principle” gone awry. But if anyone with just a little curiosity will dig into the history of Mormon polygamy they will find the seeds of the FLDS in the activities of Joseph Smith, Brigham Young and many other early Mormon polygamists. If we are to believe the documents created by Brigham Young and other early Mormons, Joseph Smith married the wives of other men and several teenage girls (including a 14 year old). Brigham Young took a wife away from one Mormon man for his own. Several polygamists were involved with teenage girls. A Bishop Snow had a young man castrated because he wanted to marry the young man’s girlfriend. When Brigham Young heard about the Bishop’s action he said he would have done the same thing.

You can read all about it here:

[404 - File or directory not found.(name removed by moderator)olygamy.htm](http://www.watchman.org/lds/pa(name removed by moderator)olygamy.htm)

If this isn’t enough to convince people that Mormonism is false, God help you.
Click to expand...
Mormonism seems to be an ever-changing religion. The fact is that the relgion has rejected plural marriages, so the sects that encourage plural marriage aren’t in line with the LDS church.

It makes no difference that the church once promoted plural marriage, because it’s a churh of perpetual change. Unlike Catholicism, their faith changes with the times.

Saying that the factions that promote plural marriage are true LDS churches is like saying that the Southern Baptist church is a true Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church’s faith doesn’t change. The LDS church’s faith changes all the time.

You can’t judge one by the other. While preserving the faith iis a Catholic feature, changing the faith is a LDS feature. If a LDS branch doesn’t keep up with the changes, it isn’t a true LDS church. If a church changes the faith, it’s not a true Catholic Church.
 
BartBurk said:
And of course Strang eventually began practicing polygamy himself even though many of his followers joined him specifically because they opposed Brigham’s practice! No matter what Mormons say, they still believe polygamy is the ideal way to practice marriage. They have not renounced section 132 of the Doctrine and Covenants. They believe polygamy will be practiced in the next life if not restored again in this one. The possibility that polygamy could be reintroduced in this life is always present. Mormonism and polygamy are tied at the hip – they can’t get rid of it. The FLDS are just being faithful to the way they were taught by Brigham to live their religion. I still have several sons and a daughter in the LDS Church. They could be swayed to believe that practicing their religion faithfully requires them to practice plural marriage. It’s rotten to the core.
Click to expand...
The LDS people I know (in New England) don’t think like this. I know the women would be appalled if their husbands even mentioned bringing in a new wife.

Is NE LDS different from LDS in other areas? Maybe I have to change my earlier reponse.
 
kalt said:
The LDS people I know (in New England) don’t think like this. I know the women would be appalled if their husbands even mentioned bringing in a new wife.

Is NE LDS different from LDS in other areas? Maybe I have to change my earlier reponse.
Click to expand...
A lot of Mormon women live in complete denial. They are unwilling to admit their church teaches that in the next life they will have to accept polygamy. Many of them are unaware of the true history of LDS polygamy. But Section 132 is right there for them to read. Van Wagoner’s book: Mormon Polygamy: a History gives the details of Mormon polygamy:

amazon.com/Mormon-Polygamy-Richard-Van-Wagoner/dp/0941214796
 
kalt said:
The LDS people I know (in New England) don’t think like this. I know the women would be appalled if their husbands even mentioned bringing in a new wife.

Is NE LDS different from LDS in other areas? Maybe I have to change my earlier reponse.
Click to expand...
Lying for the Lord refers to the practice of lying to protect the image of and belief in the Mormon religion, a practice which Mormonism itself fosters in various ways. From Joseph Smith’s denial of having more than one wife, to polygamous Mormon missionaries telling European investigators that reports about polygamy in Utah were lies put out by “anti-Mormons” and disgruntled ex-members, to Gordon B. Hinckley’s dishonest equivocation on national television over Mormon doctrine,
Lying for the Lord - MormonWiki.org
mormonwiki.org/index.php?title=Lying_for_the_Lord&
 
So the FLDS is a division of Mormonism that DOES believe in polygamy, or is overt about it? Is that correct?

The first Mormon I ever knew was a member of the Reformed LDS (RLDS). My understanding is that the RLDS was started by Joseph Smith’s wife and son after Smith’s death. The RLDS, I gathered, holds that Joseph Smith never had plural wives and didn’t believe in it, and that Brigham Young introduced it and took the LDS church in an aberrant direction.

I don’t know whether J. Smith had more than one wife or not, but I do know the Salt Lake LDS and the RLDS don’t get along.
 
Ridgerunner said:
So the FLDS is a division of Mormonism that DOES believe in polygamy, or is overt about it? Is that correct?

The first Mormon I ever knew was a member of the Reformed LDS (RLDS). My understanding is that the RLDS was started by Joseph Smith’s wife and son after Smith’s death. The RLDS, I gathered, holds that Joseph Smith never had plural wives and didn’t believe in it, and that Brigham Young introduced it and took the LDS church in an aberrant direction.

I don’t know whether J. Smith had more than one wife or not, but I do know the Salt Lake LDS and the RLDS don’t get along.
Click to expand...
The church under the leadership pf RLDS

Joseph Smith III (1860-1914)son of Joseph Smith JR
Frederick M. Smith (1915-1946)son of Joseph Smith III,
Israel A. Smith (1946-1958)Frederick M. Smith’s brother
W. Wallace Smith (1958-1978)third of Joseph Smith III’s sons
Wallace B. Smith (1978-1996)son of W. Wallace Smith
in 1995, Wallace B. indicated that W. Grant McMurray was to be his successor
W. Grant McMurray (1996-2004) He became the first non-Smith family member to preside over the church in its 170-year history.

cofchrist.org/history/intro.asp

Setting Apart of Joseph Smith III
Testimonies that Joseph Smith Jr. designated his son,
Joseph Smith III, to be the next leader of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succession_crisis_(Latter_Day_Saints
 
Ridgerunner said:
So the FLDS is a division of Mormonism that DOES believe in polygamy, or is overt about it? Is that correct?

The first Mormon I ever knew was a member of the Reformed LDS (RLDS). My understanding is that the RLDS was started by Joseph Smith’s wife and son after Smith’s death. The RLDS, I gathered, holds that Joseph Smith never had plural wives and didn’t believe in it, and that Brigham Young introduced it and took the LDS church in an aberrant direction.

I don’t know whether J. Smith had more than one wife or not, but I do know the Salt Lake LDS and the RLDS don’t get along.
Click to expand...
The RLDS, now known as the Community of Christ, used to deny that Joseph Smith taught polygamy. They now take the position they don’t know whether he did or not. They understand there is historical evidence he did. The Community of Christ and LDS actually cooperate fairly well compared to the past. For the old RLDS spin on polygamy you can read this:

restorationbookstore.org/jsfp-index.htm

I believe there is at least the possibility that Brigham Young framed Joseph Smith by creating documents and testimony after Joseph died that implicated him in polygamy. I don’t think that possibility is very strong.
 
dosdog said:
The church under the leadership pf RLDS

Joseph Smith III (1860-1914)son of Joseph Smith JR
Frederick M. Smith (1915-1946)son of Joseph Smith III,
Israel A. Smith (1946-1958)Frederick M. Smith’s brother
W. Wallace Smith (1958-1978)third of Joseph Smith III’s sons
Wallace B. Smith (1978-1996)son of W. Wallace Smith
in 1995, Wallace B. indicated that W. Grant McMurray was to be his successor
W. Grant McMurray (1996-2004) He became the first non-Smith family member to preside over the church in its 170-year history.

cofchrist.org/history/intro.asp

Setting Apart of Joseph Smith III
Testimonies that Joseph Smith Jr. designated his son,
Joseph Smith III, to be the next leader of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succession_crisis_(Latter_Day_Saints
Click to expand...
What you have to understand about Mormons is they will Lie.steal and cheaT TO PROTECT thier image

I was in a debate about failed Prophecies of Smith about treasure in Salem Mass - and He actully said it was geneology that was the treasure not the Gold - This history of the RLDS church blows that Mormon Apologist theory to HELL!

The church under the leadership of RLDS

Joseph Smith III (1860-1914)son of Joseph Smith JR
Frederick M. Smith (1915-1946)son of Joseph Smith III,
Israel A. Smith (1946-1958)Frederick M. Smith’s brother
W. Wallace Smith (1958-1978)third of Joseph Smith III’s sons
Wallace B. Smith (1978-1996)son of W. Wallace Smith
in 1995, Wallace B. indicated that W. Grant McMurray was to be his successor
W. Grant McMurray (1996-2004) He became the first non-Smith family member to preside over the church in its 170-year history.

cofchrist.org/history/intro.asp

Setting Apart of Joseph Smith III
Testimonies that Joseph Smith Jr. designated his son,
Joseph Smith III, to be the next leader of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Success…ter_Day_Saints)
 
kalt said:
The LDS people I know (in New England) don’t think like this. I know the women would be appalled if their husbands even mentioned bringing in a new wife.

Is NE LDS different from LDS in other areas? Maybe I have to change my earlier reponse.
Click to expand...
Regular LDS Churches nationwide believe that polygamy will be practiced in the “Celestial Kingdom” ~ Heaven. The women where you live are certainly aware of this belief/doctrine. Polygamy was taken from the Earth merely as a political move, so that Utah could become a state. It was politically expedient. But Mormons believe that it will be practiced again in the Celestial Kingdom.
 
Ridgerunner said:
So the FLDS is a division of Mormonism that DOES believe in polygamy, or is overt about it? Is that correct?
Click to expand...
FLDS is very overt about it. Haven’t you been reading about the raid of their temple in Texas which came about because young girls were being given in marriage to 50 year old men? Many were pregnant and had been forced into these marriages – in essence, raped. Their leader, Warren Jeffs, is in prison for enabling child abuse and forced marriages.

sltrib.com/ci_8887273
 
When polygamy is of god, it is good. When it is not of god, it is bad. Thus the flds problem. It was not of god.

In the Old Testament, polygamy was practiced and it was from god. It was the same god then, as we have now. He is capable of instituting polygamy if he so desires. Polygamy worked well for many mormons when it was practiced. Many women had the practice confirmed by the holy spirit and some even had a heavenly visitation.

When I lived in Utah, I had a visit by polygamous missionaries. It was very informal but I had only one conversation with them. After watching Big Love I have often thought that polygamy would have been quite nice.

Here is an interview with a polygamous family. They are not the compound types but independent polygamous (mormons):

166.70.44.68/multimedia/pluralfamily/

It is quite nice, really. Sometimes I wonder what if??
 
why_me said:
When polygamy is of god, it is good. When it is not of god, it is bad. Thus the flds problem. It was not of god.

In the Old Testament, polygamy was practiced and it was from god. It was the same god then, as we have now. He is capable of instituting polygamy if he so desires. Polygamy worked well for many mormons when it was practiced. Many women had the practice confirmed by the holy spirit and some even had a heavenly visitation.

When I lived in Utah, I had a visit by polygamous missionaries. It was very informal but I had only one conversation with them. After watching Big Love I have often thought that polygamy would have been quite nice.

Here is an interview with a polygamous family. They are not the compound types but independent polygamous (mormons):

166.70.44.68/multimedia/pluralfamily/

It is quite nice, really. Sometimes I wonder what if??
Click to expand...
Read Van Wagoner’s book. You might come away with a different perspective. Of course many men certainly would love to marry a younger woman once their wife gets a bit too old. If that requires claiming that an angel with a sword forced them to do it, so be it. That was the claim of ol’ Joe Smith. Pretty convenient. I don’t imagine very many women would agree with you that polygamy would have been quite nice.
 
why_me said:
When polygamy is of god, it is good. When it is not of god, it is bad. Thus the flds problem. It was not of god.

In the Old Testament, polygamy was practiced and it was from god. It was the same god then, as we have now. He is capable of instituting polygamy if he so desires. Polygamy worked well for many mormons when it was practiced. Many women had the practice confirmed by the holy spirit and some even had a heavenly visitation.

When I lived in Utah, I had a visit by polygamous missionaries. It was very informal but I had only one conversation with them. After watching Big Love I have often thought that polygamy would have been quite nice.

Here is an interview with a polygamous family. They are not the compound types but independent polygamous (mormons):

166.70.44.68/multimedia/pluralfamily/

It is quite nice, really. Sometimes I wonder what if??
Click to expand...
why do you believe OT polygamy was “from God”? where do you think it was good?

I don’t believe God commanded OT polygamy. I also see evidence in the Bible that it was bad. for example, Abraham had to send his firstborn son away. Jacob had multiple disasters from practicing it. David? even worse. Solomon? disaster. so where do you see divinely inspired polygamy occurring and being good?

Even if you restrict this to LDS polygamy I think Joseph Smith is a good example polygamy not being good. it doesn’t seem to have been good for Emma or Joseph in the end. his descendants? well they seem to have abandoned it pretty quickly and started their own church that teaches against it.
 
why_me said:
When polygamy is of god, it is good. When it is not of god, it is bad. Thus the flds problem. It was not of god.

In the Old Testament, polygamy was practiced and it was from god. It was the same god then, as we have now. He is capable of instituting polygamy if he so desires. Polygamy worked well for many mormons when it was practiced. Many women had the practice confirmed by the holy spirit and some even had a heavenly visitation.

When I lived in Utah, I had a visit by polygamous missionaries. It was very informal but I had only one conversation with them. After watching Big Love I have often thought that polygamy would have been quite nice.

Here is an interview with a polygamous family. They are not the compound types but independent polygamous (mormons):

166.70.44.68/multimedia/pluralfamily/

It is quite nice, really. Sometimes I wonder what if??
Click to expand...
You are wrong why me. I don’t know where you are from, but judging from the geography in the video, I would say these are the Mona, Ut polygamists. You can see Mount Timpanogas in the background and they certainly DO live in a compound. I used to live less than 20 miles from there. Their homes are on the side of a mountain across the freeway from Mt. Nebo.

in Christ
Steph
 
BartBurk said:
Read Van Wagoner’s book. You might come away with a different perspective. Of course many men certainly would love to marry a younger woman once their wife gets a bit too old. If that requires claiming that an angel with a sword forced them to do it, so be it. That was the claim of ol’ Joe Smith. Pretty convenient. I don’t imagine very many women would agree with you that polygamy would have been quite nice.
Click to expand...
Please listen to the link that I posted of the polygamous family. They seem normal to me. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top