Joseph Smith and adultery

  • Thread starter Thread starter Answersplease
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
SirThomasMore said:
The LDS Church continues to believe that plural marriage during this period was a true reflection of plural marriage practiced in the Old Testament. Were those men true prophets or were they false?

Another red herring. What happened thousands of years ago in the middle east cannot be compared to what happened in this country in the 1800s. Jesus was clear- one wife

Oh, so you are saying what God accepted thousands of years ago is now not acceptable. What, does God change? Is that what you are saying? Where did Jesus say one wife for each man? Please give us the verse in the Bible.

Lying is a unacceptable and is a sin. However, it is obvious that many of our greatest Christians were guilty of this.

Ah…so now it is ok to lie because others have done it? Nice.

Lying is never acceptable, but it is interesting how many prophets and apostles have been caught in the act.

I think of Peter who lied three times, denying the Christ each time. How does that lie compare to Joseph’s dodging the truth of plural marriage?

Let’s see…Peter denied Christ as Christ said he would and he lied about knowing Jesus due to the fact that Jesus had just been captured and was being tortured. Joseph lied about his sexual relationships. Seems to me you would be better off comparing Joseph to Bill Clienton that to Christ.
Click to expand...
So are you saying that because Jesus prophesied that Peter would deny him, that Peter’s lies are ok? Or are you saying Peter had no choice in the matter, he was forced to deny his God, his Savior, and his Lord. You equate the denial of the Son of God with lying about sealings? Let’s see…which is worse in the eyes of God? You know Jesus is the Christ and then you deny him, not once, but three times. No, Peter is exactly the example to compare even though it sticks in your craw. Men called of God are often weak, but God takes them and makes them strong.

Nice twisting though; you are at least consistent.
 
When Joseph Smith entered Nauvoo his reputation was intact. It is known that fanny was his first plural wife and that there was perhaps a second plural wife in 1838. Most of the plural marriages occured from 1841-1843. Why? We can draw two interpretations: First, he got frisky and decided to marry many women so he could do the dirty. Not likely. Why risk it all for a little extra. Second, he felt pressured to do so. This is more likely. I think that he was a man in a hurry because he felt that this is what god wanted him to do. Joseph did not like polygamy at all but he felt that god commanded him to take plural wives. He hestitated until an angel threatened him and then he began plural marriage again. This would make more sense.
 
My conversation with Barnes

The LDS Church continues to believe that plural marriage during this period was a true reflection of plural marriage practiced in the Old Testament. Were those men true prophets or were they false?

Another red herring. What happened thousands of years ago in the middle east cannot be compared to what happened in this country in the 1800s. Jesus was clear- one wife

Oh, so you are saying what God accepted thousands of years ago is now not acceptable.

Nope. Jesus did. Read the NT

Lying is a unacceptable and is a sin. However, it is obvious that many of our greatest Christians were guilty of this.

Ah…so now it is ok to lie because others have done it? Nice.

Lying is never acceptable, but it is interesting how many prophets and apostles have been caught in the act.

So, you believe that it was ok for Joseph to lie. You have found a way to justify it. Nice.

I think of Peter who lied three times, denying the Christ each time. How does that lie compare to Joseph’s dodging the truth of plural marriage?

Let’s see…Peter denied Christ as Christ said he would and he lied about knowing Jesus due to the fact that Jesus had just been captured and was being tortured. Joseph lied about his sexual relationships. Seems to me you would be better off comparing Joseph to Bill Clienton that to Christ.

So are you saying that because Jesus prophesied that Peter would deny him, that Peter’s lies are ok?

Nope. I simply said that Peter complied with the prophesy

You equate the denial of the Son of God with lying about sealings?

Nope. Peter did not deny Jesus. He denied being associated with Jesus. Big difference, and another of your red herrings. And yes, I believe lying about your adultry doubles the sin and is worse than Peter saying he was not associated with Christ

Let’s see…which is worse in the eyes of God?

Josephs adultry

Nice twisting though; you are at least consistent.

Did not twist. And it is easy to be consistent when I speak the truth
 
why_me said:
When Joseph Smith entered Nauvoo his reputation was intact.

Not true. He had a horrible rep. He had just cheated a lot of people and cause them to lose their money in two bank scandals. He had marched people from Ohio to Missouri to have a war. He had tried to take over a part of Missouri. No, his rep was not a good one

It is known that fanny was his first plural wife and that there was perhaps a second plural wife in 1838. Most of the plural marriages occured from 1841-1843. Why? We can draw two interpretations: First, he got frisky and decided to marry many women so he could do the dirty.

He only did this after being caught with Fanny

And don;t talk about risk. Bill Clinton risked a lot, be did not care about the risk either
Click to expand...
 
why_me said:
When Joseph Smith entered Nauvoo his reputation was intact. It is known that fanny was his first plural wife and that there was perhaps a second plural wife in 1838. Most of the plural marriages occured from 1841-1843. Why? We can draw two interpretations: First, he got frisky and decided to marry many women so he could do the dirty. Not likely. Why risk it all for a little extra. Second, he felt pressured to do so. This is more likely. I think that he was a man in a hurry because he felt that this is what god wanted him to do. Joseph did not like polygamy at all but he felt that god commanded him to take plural wives. He hestitated until an angel threatened him and then he began plural marriage again. This would make more sense.
Click to expand...
Ask Tiger Woods why he would risk it all just for a little extra?

Men don’t make the best decisions especially when certain priorities aren’t in order.
Quite a few men Great and not so Great risk it all for a little “Extra.”

This very well could’ve been his reasoning however I agree with you that it more than likely wasn’t.
 
why_me said:
I don’t know. But I do know the ‘great’ christians were not perfect and so they could have lied.
Click to expand...
Hi whyme - I am not sure if you read my entire post and are just responding to this comment?

Anyway, barnes wrote:

Lying is a unacceptable and is a sin. However it is obvious that many of our greatest Christians were guilty of this.

This is very different from what you are saying so I am not sure who/how to answer?
Either way, whether or not we “think” some of the great Christians were liars is irrelevant. If lying is a sin, it doesn’t matter who is doing it. Period.
 
lax16 said:
Other than Peter, what great Christians were guilty of lying?
Click to expand...
Just focusing on recent history:


  1. *]The very unfortunate history of the Father Marcial Maciel of the Legion of Christ
    *]Cardinal Ratzinger is reported to have problems with the truth about the actions of priests and the Church’s reaction to the discovery of abuse.
    *]Archbishop Jozef Kowalczyk and a host of Polish priests that lied about their loyalty and commitments to be spies for the communist government as they served the church.

    It is strange to be so quick to condemn another, when imperfection abounds in the world. I am reminded a hymn:

    “Once I said unto another, ‘In thine eye there is a mote; If thou art a friend, a brother, Hold, and let me pull it out.’ But I could not see it fairly, for my sight was very dim. When I came to search more clearly, in mine eye there was a beam”

    “If I love my brother dearer, and his mote I would erase, then the light should shine the clearer, For the eye’s a tender place. Others I have oft reproved, for an object like a mote, Now I wish the beam removed, Oh, that tears would wash it out!”

    “Charity and love are healing; these will give the clearest sight; When I say my brother’s failing, I was not exactly right. Now I’ll take no further trouble; Jesus’ love is all my theme; Little motes are but a bubble when I think upon the beam.”

    If we are so ready to judge another, we have to accept to be judged by the exact same standard. Joseph Smith never claimed to be a perfect man. I think you will also find the same for Pope Benedict XVI, Father Marcial Maciel, or the many priests in Poland. Should these men be condemned for lying or should they be forgiven? I quickly come to Father Maciel’s side. He accomplished so much that was good, but he was also imperfect.
 
barnesms said:
Just focusing on recent history:


  1. *]The very unfortunate history of the Father Marcial Maciel of the Legion of Christ

    Red Herring. Not a prophet

    *]Cardinal Ratzinger is reported to have problems with the truth about the actions of priests and the Church’s reaction to the discovery of abuse.

    Red herring “is reported” is not fact. We know for a fact Joseph was a liar.

    *]Archbishop Jozef Kowalczyk and a host of Polish priests that lied about their loyalty and commitments to be spies for the communist government as they served the church.

    Another red herring. Not a prophet. And frankly, unless you have served under communist rule and the constant fear of death, you truly have no standing to make comments on this one

    It is strange to be so quick to condemn another, when imperfection abounds in the world.

    I am still amazed that you justify Joseph, an alleged prophet and compare him to people who were not prophets. One must presume that you do not believe Joseph was a prophet

    If we are so ready to judge another, we have to accept to be judged by the exact same standard. Joseph Smith never claimed to be a perfect man. I think you will also find the same for Pope Benedict XVI, Father Marcial Maciel, or the many priests in Poland. Should these men be condemned for lying or should they be forgiven? I quickly come to Father Maciel’s side. He accomplished so much that was good, but he was also imperfect.

    So then Joseph was on the same level as a Priest? That is all I needed to know. Thank you
Click to expand...
 
SirThomasMore said:
why me;6671208:
When Joseph Smith entered Nauvoo his reputation was intact.

Not true. He had a horrible rep. He had just cheated a lot of people and cause them to lose their money in two bank scandals. He had marched people from Ohio to Missouri to have a war. He had tried to take over a part of Missouri. No, his rep was not a good one
Click to expand...
It is known that fanny was his first plural wife and that there was perhaps a second plural wife in 1838. Most of the plural marriages occured from 1841-1843. Why? We can draw two interpretations: First, he got frisky and decided to marry many women so he could do the dirty.

He only did this after being caught with Fanny

And don;t talk about risk. Bill Clinton risked a lot, be did not care about the risk either

Actually it is true. His reputation was intact. Even William Law had only good things to say about him when they entered the Nauvoo period. One can’t blame Joseph Smith for the kirkland bank crisis since it was a national crisis comparable to just what recently happened. And Joseph lost money also. You will need to see why the mormons needed to start a bank and what happened during the crisis. It was not an easy situation for all concerned. But it was a national bank crisis. So how did he cheat people?

And again with fanny…he was not caught with fanny. She agreed to marry him and had her parents and brother’s support for doing so. And so, what is the problem? Fanny had no problem, and neither did her parents. Also, have you looked into the experiences of Joseph’s plural wives? Many after praying about the doctrine received powerful witnesses that the principle was true. In fact, without that witness, many would not have consented.

By 1838, fanny was married to someone else and having babies. 🙂 You really need to get your story straight. Joseph began the practice of plural marriage again in Nauvoo and married several women. Not because of fanny but because he felt that this is what god wanted.

He did not march people from Ohio to Missouri to have a war. In fact, he marched away from Ohio because of persecution. And in missouri, the people began to attack the mormons too. Eventually, they had to defend themselves.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
barnesms:
Yes. I have verses where God said only one wife. I have verses where it was instructed to only have one wife. I have verses where it is clear that we are to only have one wife.

I am more than willing to have a study with you on this topic since it is clear you are unfamiliar with the Bible.

But in the meantime, do a search and see how many times Jesus refers to a person’s “wives”.
 
Kdesiel said:
Ask Tiger Woods why he would risk it all just for a little extra?

Men don’t make the best decisions especially when certain priorities aren’t in order.
Quite a few men Great and not so Great risk it all for a little “Extra.”

This very well could’ve been his reasoning however I agree with you that it more than likely wasn’t.
Click to expand...
Well let me put it this way. There we have Joseph marrying many women in a short period of time, quite often with relatives permission. Why? For sex? This poor guy could not be spending too much time with women since he was busy running a church, fighting mobs, running for president etc. He seems like a man in a hurry and he must have had a reason for his hurry. Now I know that it is easy comparing someone to someone else…but it really doesn’t work in this case.

Why? because these women didn’t play kiss and tell. In fact, I haven’t read a single testimony from these women that said Joseph was a lustful man. Why?
 
SirThomasMore said:
Yes. I have verses where God said only one wife. I have verses where it was instructed to only have one wife. I have verses where it is clear that we are to only have one wife.

I am more than willing to have a study with you on this topic since it is clear you are unfamiliar with the Bible.

But in the meantime, do a search and see how many times Jesus refers to a person’s “wives”.
Click to expand...
And what does that prove? Jesus lived for 33 years and we have only a handful of what he said. We certainly do not have all that he said in his 33 years. Think about how much has been lost because like us, he talked almost everyday of his life. And yet, we have a handful of sentences.

I don’t agree with critics that JS was a lustful guy. And there is no proof that he was. He acted like a man in a hurry driven not by lust but by what he thought was the will of god.
 
lax16 said:
Other than Peter, what great Christians were guilty of lying?
Click to expand...
A more equivalent question would be: What Christian Prophets are guilty of sin? Or What Christian leaders were caught sinning and then had a revelation that it wasn’t a sin anymore?
 
Stephen168 said:
A more equivalent question would be: What Christian Prophets are guilty of sin? Or What Christian leaders were caught sinning and then had a revelation that it wasn’t a sin anymore?
Click to expand...
All of them have been guilty of sin. And they were guilty of sin throughout their lives…along with catholic church fathers of yesteryear. No one is perfect.

Even saint therese, the little flower, knew that she was a sinner and had to repent. And saint faustina too. 🙂
 
why_me said:
SirThomasMore;6671240:
Actually it is true. His reputation was intact.

Actually, it isn’t. He had a horrible rep.
Click to expand...
Even William Law had only good things to say about him when they entered the Nauvoo period.

I suppose we could do some research to make a list of all the people who had bad things to say about Joseph…would that prove my point?

One can’t blame Joseph Smith for the kirkland bank crisis since it was a national crisis comparable to just what recently happened.

Actually, one can. It was a get rich scheme that backfired. And it matters not that it was a national crisis, none of the other bank owners had a hotline directly to God.

And again with fanny…he was not caught with fanny.

Yes he was. At least, according to Martin Harris and OC.

He did not march people from Ohio to Missouri to have a war. In fact, he marched away from Utah because of persecution.

You need to read LDS History

Zion’s Camp was a paramilitary expedition of Latter Day Saints, led by Joseph Smith, Jr., from Kirtland, Ohio to Clay County, Missouri during May and June 1834 (Wikipedia)

And in missouri, the people began to attack the mormons too. Eventually, they had to defend themselves.

Really? I have seen sworn statements from people who testified that Mormons threatened him in Missouri if he would not sign a document promising not to bother Mormons. I have also seen where Danites (Mormons) were trying to get Indians to wipe people out in Missouri (where else have we seen this? MMM!) And other such documents. Bet that builds a good reputation

sos.mo.gov/archives/resources/findingaids/rg005-01.asp
Click to expand...
 
why_me said:
And what does that prove? Jesus lived for 33 years and we have only a handful of what he said. We certainly do not have all that he said in his 33 years. Think about how much has been lost because like us, he talked almost everyday of his life. And yet, we have a handful of sentences.

lol. Funny how to disprove what I say, you resrot to statements there are no records of. I can live with that

I don’t agree with critics that JS was a lustful guy. And there is no proof that he was. He acted like a man in a hurry driven not by lust but by what he thought was the will of god.

Yeah, getting caught with Fanny and having a lot women as wives is not a sign at all of lust.
Click to expand...
 
why_me said:
All of them have been guilty of sin. And they were guilty of sin throughout their lives…along with catholic church fathers of yesteryear. No one is perfect.

Even saint therese, the little flower, knew that she was a sinner and had to repent. And saint faustina too. 🙂
Click to expand...
St. Terese was a Prophet? She was Catholic and we don’t have Prophets. So the answer to the first question would be zero. Do you have an answer for the second: What Christian leaders were caught sinning and then had a revelation that it wasn’t a sin anymore?
 
SirThomasMore said:
Yes. I have verses where God said only one wife. I have verses where it was instructed to only have one wife. I have verses where it is clear that we are to only have one wife.

I am more than willing to have a study with you on this topic since it is clear you are unfamiliar with the Bible.

But in the meantime, do a search and see how many times Jesus refers to a person’s “wives”.
Click to expand...
Just provide a single verse where Jesus, the Son of God, directed men to have a single wife. Answer the question and quit stalling. You have said repeatedly you have them, but refuse to prove it. The reason is that they do not exist. There is not a single scripture in the Gospels where Jesus says any such thing.

If you would like to retract your statement and say that it was actually Paul’s words in Titus and I Timothy then you would be correct as long as one is speaking about Bishops and Deacons; however that is not what you have trumpted. What was that statement of yours about reading your NT?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top