Some Questions about Polygamy

[_Runtu]

I've gotten almost no response over on MAD, so I'll throw this out here:

I'm not meaning to beat a dead horse, but I've been thinking about a few things, so I thought I'd throw out some questions.

I know how people explain Joseph Smith's denial of polygamy to the public, but how do you justify his hiding his marriages from Emma? Was she that awful a woman that he was afraid she'd bring him down, or what? I'm really trying to find a good reason why he would keep it from her.

Somewhat related, we know that he approached John Taylor and Heber C. Kimball and asked for their wives, but with others, notably Orson Hyde and Orson Pratt, he approached the wives without the knowledge or consent of the husbands. Joseph sent Orson Hyde to Jerusalem and while Orson was away, married Marinda. Todd Compton suggests that Orson may never have been aware that his wife had married Joseph. Again, why the secrecy? Why not be open about it?

Finally, something that I've wondered. I know many of you have resolved these issues to your satisfaction, and I respect that. I'm wondering, though, if anyone here can say they weren't troubled at all when they learned about the details of how Joseph practiced polygyny and polyandry. I find the issues troubling, but I'm interested in learning why some of you might not have ever found it so.

[_barrelomonkeys]

I was disappointed you received few responses... and the one you did receive actually seemed as if he didn't understand the history? Or even knew that much of the history was not in dispute.

This was my reply to your thread over there:

Just as an outsider looking in I'd be very interested in reading replies to John's question.

It appears to me that current members of LDS are very family oriented. Pride themselves on honesty, integrity, and upholding vigorous ethical standards when dealing with their spouse and family.

I too have wondered how they combine their current upstanding morality (and some condemnation of those that fall short of the ideal) with some of the things known about Joseph Smith.

[_Livingstone22]

I think the avoidance of telling people is simple: people would not be able to accept it. They would be angry, sad, and confused. From an apologetic point of view, perhaps it is because those like Emma and other men in the church weren't ready for that kind of meat...perhaps it's like when I did something bad, it took a while for me to tell my parents.....little by little, so it wouldn't be a bomb on them. From a more critical point of view, perhaps Joseph was just wanting to have his pleasure and not get in trouble. Perhaps since Emma was a woman (and required to obey her husband), she didn't need to know (didn't need permission).

I don't ever remember what I thought when I first found out about polygamy. I was a convert to the church, and began reading many books on the church before I ever spoke to a Mormon....many books were less than favorable as I picked them up from Christian bookstores. I think I just shrugged it off as something that people did....for themselves...it really didn't have anything to do with the church. I grew up with a liberal Protestant worldview, and faith and love were emphasised, whereas personal lives and sexuality weren't an issue at all for the church to get involved in (for after all, it is people's [i]personal[/i] lives). Honestly, I have no issue with polygamy if that's what people choose to do (I would [i]never [/i]decide that for myself, though). I don't think it's immoral per se, but I do think that lying and adultery is. I do remember when I found out that Joseph was reported to have lied about it, and I was upset, but by that time, I already had the notion by that point that the church (and the people in it) were highly imperfect (just like everyone in the world). After all, I never saw it as God's [i]one and only[/i] true church.[/i]

[_Sethbag]

There's a conflict here; a choice between two requirements, and we can see which choice apologists find more compelling.

From an apologist's point of view, there's the requirement that Joseph had to institute polygamy, and to practice it. Then there's the requirement to be honest and forthright with his own wife, Emma, and with the husbands of some of these other women he "married". It's a simple choice, and apparently he couldn't have both. Emma would have flipped her lid if Joseph told her some of the things he was doing. So, should he just not do it? No! He should do it anyway, and just not tell her, duh. How moral is that? Whatever happened to the New Testament teaching that if thy meat offend thy brother, abstain from the meat for his sake, so that you don't set up a stumbling block for him.

Of course, this is all from the apologists' point of view. From Joseph's point of view it was a lot simpler. I don't think an angel ever appeared to Joseph. Nor do I think God told him to do it. It all came down to his own wants and desires, and he found a way to fulfill them, and Emma's own happiness and tranquility be damned. Joseph was in this area of his life a very selfish man. It was all about Joseph, and Emma could just go to hell. And then, of course, Joseph loved her so much that he'd go down into hell to retrieve her. Uhuh. What an asshole.

Joseph Smith was a charlatan, a mountebank, a religious fraud, but in his personal life, in many ways Joseph Smith was the world's biggest asshole.

This is really not that hard to comprehend.

[_karl61]

you would think that when an angel with a flaming sword appeared Joseph would have directed it to go talk to Emma. He likely responded to the angel. Hey, you are preaching to the choir. Convince her!

[_Jason Bourne]

I know how people explain Joseph Smith's denial of polygamy to the public,

Actually, part of this was understandable. I thought a paper that I read from FAIR made some compelling arguments on this issue.

but how do you justify his hiding his marriages from Emma? Was she that awful a woman that he was afraid she'd bring him down, or what? I'm really trying to find a good reason why he would keep it from her.

I do not. This was one of the troubling aspects. It was sneaky and ungodly. If this was really from God why act so ungodly. Heber Kimball's wfe got a testimony of it. He did not hide it. But Joseph committed a lot of subterfuge on this issue.

Somewhat related, we know that he approached John Taylor and Heber C. Kimball and asked for their wives, but with others, notably Orson Hyde and Orson Pratt, he approached the wives without the knowledge or consent of the husbands. Joseph sent Orson Hyde to Jerusalem and while Orson was away, married Marinda. Todd Compton suggests that Orson may never have been aware that his wife had married Joseph. Again, why the secrecy? Why not be open about it?

Joseph argues he was testing I believe Hyde's wife to see if she was faithful to Orson. But again, this was all ungodly. Sneaky. And as for the test issue, who was Joseph to test in such a way?

Finally, something that I've wondered. I know many of you have resolved these issues to your satisfaction, and I respect that. I'm wondering, though, if anyone here can say they weren't troubled at all when they learned about the details of how Joseph practiced polygyny and polyandry. I find the issues troubling, but I'm interested in learning why some of you might not have ever found it so.

It is the most troubling issue for me in all Church history.

[_truth dancer]

I know how people explain Joseph Smith's denial of polygamy to the public, but how do you justify his hiding his marriages from Emma? Was she that awful a woman that he was afraid she'd bring him down, or what? I'm really trying to find a good reason why he would keep it from her.

Ummm Runtu, my friend....

Joseph Smith denied his sexual involvement with other girls and women from his wife for the VERY SAME REASON MOST MEN HIDE THEIR AFFAIRS!

:-)

~dancer~

[_Runtu]

Ummm Runtu, my friend....

Joseph Smith denied his sexual involvement with other girls and women from his wife for the VERY SAME REASON MOST MEN HIDE THEIR AFFAIRS!

:-)

~dancer~

At this point, that's my conclusion as well, but I was trying to see how church members make sense of what for me (and apparently a lot of others) is a very difficult thing to swallow.

[_Sethbag]

Kinda funny how LDS Prophets are completely and totally different from normal men when comparing and trying to explain something like Joseph Smith's marital infidelities and the sheer volume of women and girls he seduced and bedded, but they're exactly like normal men when trying to excuse the things they've gotten demonstrably wrong, like moon men, prejudice against blacks, and bad science regarding Creation and the Flood, and so forth.

I guess it's because inappropriate sex is considered so powerful in LDS thought that they cannot admit Joseph Smith was guilty of it, whereas intellectual beliefs and such things as prejudice aren't so bad that the Prophets, Seers, and Revelators can't be just as wrong as the community from which they sprang.

My bottom line about Joseph Smith and his polygamous and polyandrous adventures is that they provide powerful evidence of his not being a true prophet of a God who actually exists. They aren't the reason he wasn't a true prophet; he already wasn't a true prophet before he ever did any of these things. But they are good symptoms showing it.