The unbelieving Fifth Column

[_Gazelam]

Coggins,

Please retrieve your copy of Rough Stone Rolling and read pages 323-327, 437, and 441.

Gaz

[_Mercury]

Same old same old Harmony. There isn't a shred of documentary historical evidence he ever "took Fanny to bed" at all. That is pure assumption and bad faith on the part of people like you. When you have some evidence to back up your slander, let us all know.

Loran

Ask any reputable LDS historian on this. They all agree that Joseph and Fanny were sexually involved and that fanny was his first plural wife. Why do you think a number of years ago the intro to D&C 132 says Joseph Smith knew the doctrine as early as 1831.

Jason,

how do you reconcile this fact?

[_Coggins7]

Jason,

how do you reconcile this fact?

He doesn't have to. In a cafeteria, one picks up some things that look tasty, and leaves others that appear unpalatable.

Jason, like Harmony, wants THE church to be HIS church; he wants it to be palatable and amenable to his own tastes.

What I see in the scriptures, however, is the law of obedience, the first law of Heaven, and a requirement to conform oneself to the requirements of the Gospel, whatever they may be. The Church never leaves us, we always leave it.

As it ever was.

[_Runtu]

He doesn't have to. In a cafeteria, one picks up some things that look tasty, and leaves others that appear unpalatable.

Jason, like Harmony, wants THE church to be HIS church; he wants it to be palatable and amenable to his own tastes.

What I see in the scriptures, however, is the law of obedience, the first law of Heaven, and a requirement to conform oneself to the requirements of the Gospel, whatever they may be. The Church never leaves us, we always leave it.

As it ever was.

Do you have any evidence that Joseph's relationship with Fanny Alger had anything to do with obedience? Can you tell us what commandment was being obeyed in this instance? Did Joseph Smith claim that he was commanded to take Fanny as his wife? If so, why was he commanded to do this before the sealing power was restored?

[_Jason Bourne]

family search lists Joseph Smith as a husband of Fanny Alger.

http://www.familysearch.org/Eng/search/ ... esults.asp

Fanny Alger Pedigree
Female Family

Event(s):
Birth:
30 SEP 1816 Rehoboth, Bristol, Massachusetts
Christening:
Death:
Burial:

Parents:
Father: Samuel Alger Family
Mother: Clarissa Hancock

Marriages:
Spouse: Joseph JR Smith Family
Marriage:
1835 Kirtland, , , Ohio

It is a damn lie! There is no historical evidence! Bah!

[_Jason Bourne]

Same old same old Harmony. There isn't a shred of documentary historical evidence he ever "took Fanny to bed" at all. That is pure assumption and bad faith on the part of people like you. When you have some evidence to back up your slander, let us all know.

Loran

Ask any reputable LDS historian on this. They all agree that Joseph and Fanny were sexually involved and that fanny was his first plural wife. Why do you think a number of years ago the intro to D&C 132 says Joseph Smith knew the doctrine as early as 1831.

Jason,

how do you reconcile this fact?

There are two options. 1: Joseph Smith really did have a revelation on plural marriage in 1831 and thus the marriage to Fanny was sanctioned. 2: Joseph Smith committed adultery and used the doctrine of plural marriage to cover it up.

[_Runtu]

Jason,

how do you reconcile this fact?

There are two options. 1: Joseph Smith really did have a revelation on plural marriage in 1831 and thus the marriage to Fanny was sanctioned. 2: Joseph Smith committed adultery and used the doctrine of plural marriage to cover it up.[/quote]

If I recall correctly, the 1831 reference is an uncanonized revelation wherein those who are sent on a mission to the Lamanites are told to "take ye wives of the daughters of the Lamanites," or something akin to that. Given that the missionaries were already married, this is seen as implicit approval of polygamy. I think it represents the church's backdating polygamy to allow for the Fanny Alger incident.

[_Jason Bourne]

how do you reconcile this fact?

He doesn't have to. In a cafeteria, one picks up some things that look tasty, and leaves others that appear unpalatable.

At least I try to address it rather then making believe that it never happened. You see Coggy, you do two things. Deny that facts of history. And deny that strange and odd doctrines like Adam God were ever taught. Be so doing you pretend that all is well is Zion. There was never a filthy affair with Fanny. If there was there are some real difficulties that conflict with your testimony. How do you reconcile the two then? It is difficult. Better to pretend.

Jason, like Harmony, wants THE church to be HIS church; he wants it to be palatable and amenable to his own tastes.

While there are many things that I would love to see different I understand I do not run the show. So I whine in hypocritical anonymity and continue to participate for the things I enjoy. It works for me. Would you rather I chuck it all?

What I see in the scriptures, however, is the law of obedience, the first law of Heaven, and a requirement to conform oneself to the requirements of the Gospel, whatever they may be. The Church never leaves us, we always leave it.

Conforming oneself to the truth is quite fine. Conforming oneself to distortions or distorting truth to meet a false paradigm is another. There are a number of things in your LDS life that you do this with Coggins. Check out the bean in your own eye before you jump on me.

[_Jason Bourne]

Has Coggins abandoned another thread? Does this mean he has conceded these points??? Nah!

[_Coggins7]

It is a damn lie! There is no historical evidence! Bah!

Now, what you have to do, is provide the documentary evidence--not innuendo, not assumption--that Joseph had sex with her, either before the sealing, or, for that matter, afterwords (which, of course, being sealed to her, he could have done).

Good luck.