Deleted

[Zathura]

Interesting that you know that Joseph Smith had other wives when even he didn't know. I believe he had a name for the people saying he had other wives. "perjurers"? Take a second to realize that the prophet of the restoration is calling you a perjurer :ymhug:

I never said anything Joseph having other wives. You did.

Have you EVER considered that Joseph -- who DID practice plural marriage in word and deed -- was following a commandment?

Actually you have said that Joseph had multiple wives ^^^

[Finrock]

Why did Joseph Smith say this:

I had not been married scarcely five minutes, and made one proclamation of the Gospel, before it was reported that I had seven wives.... I am innocent of all these charges.... What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers.

What is the explanation?

Was he "lying for the Lord"?

Was he saying that he isn't married but to one woman, even though he has been "sealed" to many?

-Finrock

[Mark]

Not only are they saying that the church and those who serve in leadership today are lying but the denyers are also saying that all those who succeeded Joseph in the leadership positions after Josephs death from Brigham Young to John Taylor to Wilford Woodruff and all those who served in the councils of the church during their tenures are also lying about this. The ramifications would be endless. The church would be shown to have no integrity. How could one trust anything about the foundations if this was just thought to be a big scam set up to satisfy lustful desires?

In my view, the whole thing is based on a significant misunderstanding.
There may have been lustful men involved at various stages (Bennett and Higbee for example) but I believe most people who entered the practice did so with good intentions and really believed they were doing their duty.
They weren't, but they thought they were.

Joseph Smith denied, almost to his dying breath, that he was involved in polygamy and insisted that he had only one wife.
Do you believe Joseph was a liar?

So you are saying that Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball and all those Brethren who succeeded Joseph in the leadership of the church were just innocently deceived into thinking they were doing their duty? Go back and read their words. They solemnly testify that it was Joseph who taught them the principle of celestial marriage and they chose with great anguish to follow that principle as outlined by the Prophet after confirmation from God. These men had great spiritual manifestations given them. How in the world can you say that they were just innocently mistaken in adopting this principle? How do you KNOW this?

Like I have already said, "sealing" and "marriage" became conflated. They're not the same thing. Sealing is dynastical whereas marriage can and does exist without a sealing and includes other aspects. Even Helen Kimball, the 14 year old that Joseph supposedly "married", said that she understood it to be a sealing for dynastical purposes, with no question of it being a marriage in the common understanding of the word.

I fully understand the differences between dynastical sealings and celestial marriage. However you are ignoring historical information. Read the journals of those women Joseph were "sealed" to. Read Eliza R Snows journal entries. She referred to Joseph as her Husband many times. She fully considered herself as one of his wives. Joseph was fighting the enemies of the church like Bennett and Higbee who were accusing him of adultery and fornication. Joseph adamantly denied involvement in adulterous relationships or spiritual wivery for the purposes of lustful fulfillment. And he was innocent of all those charges. However the principle of Celestial marriage was taught by him to many of his closest confidants in the quorum of the 12 and those he most trusted. Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball 2 of his closest. To deny this would be to label these anointed servants of the Lord as liars and adulterers. They were neither. Those who do not understand the Lords purposes in bringing about Celestial Marriage at that time will never understand or comprehend the reasons behind why this was implemented by the Lord and taught by Joseph to his closest friends and supporters. Casting Pearls before swine would be an appropriate phraseology to invoke.

[Finrock]

I fully understand the differences between dynastical sealings and celestial marriage. However you are ignoring historical information. Read the journals of those women Joseph were "sealed" to. Read Eliza R Snows journal entries. She referred to Joseph as her Husband many times. She fully considered herself as one of his wives.

Well, if you believe this, then this takes away some of the justifications I listed in my earlier post. If what you say is true, then someone, at some point, was lying.

I had not been married scarcely five minutes, and made one proclamation of the Gospel, before it was reported that I had seven wives.... I am innocent of all these charges.... What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one. I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago; and I can prove them all perjurers.

Either Joseph Smith was lying or somebody else was lying, because Joseph Smith said that he had only one "wife".

-Finrock

[Robin Hood]

In my view, the whole thing is based on a significant misunderstanding.
There may have been lustful men involved at various stages (Bennett and Higbee for example) but I believe most people who entered the practice did so with good intentions and really believed they were doing their duty.
They weren't, but they thought they were.

Joseph Smith denied, almost to his dying breath, that he was involved in polygamy and insisted that he had only one wife.
Do you believe Joseph was a liar?

So you are saying that Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball and all those Brethren who succeeded Joseph in the leadership of the church were just innocently deceived into thinking they were doing their duty? Go back and read their words. They solemnly testify that it was Joseph who taught them the principle of celestial marriage and they chose with great anguish to follow that principle as outlined by the Prophet after confirmation from God. These men had great spiritual manifestations given them. How in the world can you say that they were just innocently mistaken in adopting this principle? How do you KNOW this?

Like I have already said, "sealing" and "marriage" became conflated. They're not the same thing. Sealing is dynastical whereas marriage can and does exist without a sealing and includes other aspects. Even Helen Kimball, the 14 year old that Joseph supposedly "married", said that she understood it to be a sealing for dynastical purposes, with no question of it being a marriage in the common understanding of the word.

I fully understand the differences between dynastical sealings and celestial marriage. However you are ignoring historical information. Read the journals of those women Joseph were "sealed" to. Read Eliza R Snows journal entries. She referred to Joseph as her Husband many times. She fully considered herself as one of his wives. Joseph was fighting the enemies of the church like Bennett and Higbee who were accusing him of adultery and fornication. Joseph adamantly denied involvement in adulterous relationships or spiritual wivery for the purposes of lustful fulfillment. And he was innocent of all those charges. However the principle of Celestial marriage was taught by him to many of his closest confidants in the quorum of the 12 and those he most trusted. Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball 2 of his closest. To deny this would be to label these anointed servants of the Lord as liars and adulterers. They were neither. Those who do not understand the Lords purposes in bringing about Celestial Marriage at that time will never understand or comprehend the reasons behind why this was implemented by the Lord and taught by Joseph to his closest friends and supporters. Casting Pearls before swine would be an appropriate phraseology to invoke.

1. How many of those journals were contemporary with the events?
I'll make this easy for you......none! They were all written years, and in some cases decades after the event.
My goodness, even the affidavits presented in court during the Temple Lot case were found to be completely unreliable.

2. How much reliable contemporary evidence of Joseph's involvement in polygamy exists? That would be none again.

3. Joseph publicly proclaimed just 6 weeks before his death that he wasn't a polygamist, had never been a polygamist, and only had one wife.
Was he lying or telling the truth?

[passionflower]

When JS was was translating the Bible, he had many of the same feelings posted here. He wondered how God could justify such marraige relationships as he read about in the OT. Didn't seem right, of course. But he went to the Lord in prayer and got an answer. I suggest anyone troubled by the polygamy in church history do like he did instead of beat the the subject to death in debate and argument.

If you don't believe JS did any such thing, I would contend it would be amazing if he didn't. There he is translating the Bible and he sees all this OT polygamy and you think he wouldn't question it at all? So many of you are doing it, why not him?

[Robin Hood]

When JS was was translating the Bible, he had many of the same feelings posted here. He wondered how God could justify such marraige relationships as he read about in the OT. Didn't seem right, of course. But he went to the Lord in prayer and got an answer. I suggest anyone troubled by the polygamy in church history do like he did instead of beat the the subject to death in debate and argument.

If you don't believe JS did any such thing, I would contend it would be amazing if he didn't. There he is translating the Bible and he sees all this OT polygamy and you think he wouldn't question it at all? So many of you are doing it, why not him?

The problem with that position is that he had already translated the Book of Mormon prior to that. In the book of Jacob it clearly states polygamy is an abomination. Not only that, but it specifically states that what David and Solomon did was sinful. Yet D&C 132 has Joseph apparently asking God how he justified David and Solomon having many wives.
Why ask something he already had an unequivocal answer to?

It doesn't make sense. And as Judge Judy says, if it doesn't make sense it probably isn't true.

[passionflower]

When JS was was translating the Bible, he had many of the same feelings posted here. He wondered how God could justify such marraige relationships as he read about in the OT. Didn't seem right, of course. But he went to the Lord in prayer and got an answer. I suggest anyone troubled by the polygamy in church history do like he did instead of beat the the subject to death in debate and argument.

If you don't believe JS did any such thing, I would contend it would be amazing if he didn't. There he is translating the Bible and he sees all this OT polygamy and you think he wouldn't question it at all? So many of you are doing it, why not him?

The problem with that position is that he had already translated the Book of Mormon prior to that. In the book of Jacob it clearly states polygamy is an abomination. Not only that, but it specifically states that what David and Solomon did was sinful. Yet D&C 132 has Joseph apparently asking God how he justified David and Solomon having many wives.
Why ask something he already had an unequivocal answer to?

It doesn't make sense. And as Judge Judy says, if it doesn't make sense it probably isn't true.

If something doesn't make any sense, then you don't have all the information. Everything is simple and makes perfect sense when all the pieces are in place. Arguing and debating does not supply any new information. It just keeps hashing out the old.

Don't think I am not appreciateing your stance up there. You are asking a good question. But the question needs an answer, not an argument. Answers come by faith in an answer actually existing. We need to "light up" the subject instead of "fight up" the subject.

[shadow]

When JS was was translating the Bible, he had many of the same feelings posted here. He wondered how God could justify such marraige relationships as he read about in the OT. Didn't seem right, of course. But he went to the Lord in prayer and got an answer. I suggest anyone troubled by the polygamy in church history do like he did instead of beat the the subject to death in debate and argument.

If you don't believe JS did any such thing, I would contend it would be amazing if he didn't. There he is translating the Bible and he sees all this OT polygamy and you think he wouldn't question it at all? So many of you are doing it, why not him?

The problem with that position is that he had already translated the Book of Mormon prior to that. In the book of Jacob it clearly states polygamy is an abomination. Not only that, but it specifically states that what David and Solomon did was sinful. Yet D&C 132 has Joseph apparently asking God how he justified David and Solomon having many wives.
Why ask something he already had an unequivocal answer to?

It doesn't make sense. And as Judge Judy says, if it doesn't make sense it probably isn't true.

There's no problem if context is understood. It goes back to the OP question if polygamy is of God or Satan. My reply earlier is that it can be both. Solomon and David did it wrong, eventually. But notice how there was no mention in the BOM of other important prophets like Moses, Jacob, or Abraham? They were polygamists. They didn't do it incorrectly out of the greed of their hearts and minds UNLIKE David and Solomon. There is a difference.
"and his (Solomon) wives turned away his heart". Obviously not all 1000 wives and concubines (birthdays and anniversaries would be a pain #-o. Too bad JW's weren't around :)) ) turned his heart, just the foreign ones.
David lusted after Bathsheba and had her husband killed so he could marry her. He was fine up to that point. That was the moment he lost what he had.
Reading the context of Jacob in the BOM of why it was an abomination should make it clear.

[Kitkat]

I know by personal revelation that it was of God through Joseph Smith, and anciently as He had occasion to command. I likewise know it was by revelation that the practice ceased and yet has remained as a doctrine and practiced today in ways that the OP has observed.

The Lord intends for families to be exalted together. It was for this wise purpose that it was done. Those privileged to live in on this earth and those who are byproducts of such unions have much to be grateful for. The veil is very thin for those with ancestors who lived it. This I know VERY well.

I know by personal revelation Joseph was completely innocent of polygamy, and the church has lifted its heal against the Lords' anointed and Jacob 2 clearly as plain as a child is against it, God never commanded it, D&C 132 is Brigham's doing entirely.

[Kitkat]

Neither.

Polygamy has a Godly purpose.

Jacob 2:30

30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.

It seems that he recognizes it as a potentially legitimate strategy for fulfilling His purpose

Moses 1:39

39 For behold, this is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.

That does not mean that every instance of it's use comes from heaven.

An invite to ask God His perspective on Jacob 2, it actually says the exact opposite you speak of, and we were shocked to learn the same once you read it in context. I'd post a link but google search is no longer working on this forum.

[MMbelieve]

When JS was was translating the Bible, he had many of the same feelings posted here. He wondered how God could justify such marraige relationships as he read about in the OT. Didn't seem right, of course. But he went to the Lord in prayer and got an answer. I suggest anyone troubled by the polygamy in church history do like he did instead of beat the the subject to death in debate and argument.

If you don't believe JS did any such thing, I would contend it would be amazing if he didn't. There he is translating the Bible and he sees all this OT polygamy and you think he wouldn't question it at all? So many of you are doing it, why not him?

The problem with that position is that he had already translated the Book of Mormon prior to that. In the book of Jacob it clearly states polygamy is an abomination. Not only that, but it specifically states that what David and Solomon did was sinful. Yet D&C 132 has Joseph apparently asking God how he justified David and Solomon having many wives.
Why ask something he already had an unequivocal answer to?

It doesn't make sense. And as Judge Judy says, if it doesn't make sense it probably isn't true.

If something doesn't make any sense, then you don't have all the information. Everything is simple and makes perfect sense when all the pieces are in place. Arguing and debating does not supply any new information. It just keeps hashing out the old.

Don't think I am not appreciateing your stance up there. You are asking a good question. But the question needs an answer, not an argument. Answers come by faith in an answer actually existing. We need to "light up" the subject instead of "fight up" the subject.

We don't have all the answers/ information and so things don't really make perfect sense. The apostles have openly admitted that we just don't know aspects of the early church history. If the apostles don't know then I suspect that we likely won't know either. It's probably a non issue in the long run.

[Mark]

So you are saying that Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball and all those Brethren who succeeded Joseph in the leadership of the church were just innocently deceived into thinking they were doing their duty? Go back and read their words. They solemnly testify that it was Joseph who taught them the principle of celestial marriage and they chose with great anguish to follow that principle as outlined by the Prophet after confirmation from God. These men had great spiritual manifestations given them. How in the world can you say that they were just innocently mistaken in adopting this principle? How do you KNOW this?

Like I have already said, "sealing" and "marriage" became conflated. They're not the same thing. Sealing is dynastical whereas marriage can and does exist without a sealing and includes other aspects. Even Helen Kimball, the 14 year old that Joseph supposedly "married", said that she understood it to be a sealing for dynastical purposes, with no question of it being a marriage in the common understanding of the word.

I fully understand the differences between dynastical sealings and celestial marriage. However you are ignoring historical information. Read the journals of those women Joseph were "sealed" to. Read Eliza R Snows journal entries. She referred to Joseph as her Husband many times. She fully considered herself as one of his wives. Joseph was fighting the enemies of the church like Bennett and Higbee who were accusing him of adultery and fornication. Joseph adamantly denied involvement in adulterous relationships or spiritual wivery for the purposes of lustful fulfillment. And he was innocent of all those charges. However the principle of Celestial marriage was taught by him to many of his closest confidants in the quorum of the 12 and those he most trusted. Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball 2 of his closest. To deny this would be to label these anointed servants of the Lord as liars and adulterers. They were neither. Those who do not understand the Lords purposes in bringing about Celestial Marriage at that time will never understand or comprehend the reasons behind why this was implemented by the Lord and taught by Joseph to his closest friends and supporters. Casting Pearls before swine would be an appropriate phraseology to invoke.

1. How many of those journals were contemporary with the events?
I'll make this easy for you......none! They were all written years, and in some cases decades after the event.
My goodness, even the affidavits presented in court during the Temple Lot case were found to be completely unreliable.

2. How much reliable contemporary evidence of Joseph's involvement in polygamy exists? That would be none again.

3. Joseph publicly proclaimed just 6 weeks before his death that he wasn't a polygamist, had never been a polygamist, and only had one wife.
Was he lying or telling the truth?

Are you forgetting the Saints had an extermination order issued against them? Goodness sakes they were driven and persecuted and driven some more. Why would Joseph publicly proclaim Celestial marriage so as to further bring down the hordes of hell in the form of more mobocracy on the Saints? You continue to ignore the writings of Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball and Parley Pratt and John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff and George Cannon and Lorenzo Snow and Eliza Snow and On and on who all stated and testified in no uncertain terms that Celestial Marriage had come to them directly from Joseph as a result of him receiving revelation from the most high God. Are you willing to call all these faithful Brethren and Sisters who remained true to the faith and served the Lord to the end just a bunch of deceived sheep who just "misunderstood" what Celestial marriage really meant? Go read their writings and tell me that they were just "ignorant" of this early doctrine. That is just plain ridiculous. These men and women were Prophets and Seers. They did not act out of some misunderstanding.

[Robin Hood]

Like I have already said, "sealing" and "marriage" became conflated. They're not the same thing. Sealing is dynastical whereas marriage can and does exist without a sealing and includes other aspects. Even Helen Kimball, the 14 year old that Joseph supposedly "married", said that she understood it to be a sealing for dynastical purposes, with no question of it being a marriage in the common understanding of the word.

I fully understand the differences between dynastical sealings and celestial marriage. However you are ignoring historical information. Read the journals of those women Joseph were "sealed" to. Read Eliza R Snows journal entries. She referred to Joseph as her Husband many times. She fully considered herself as one of his wives. Joseph was fighting the enemies of the church like Bennett and Higbee who were accusing him of adultery and fornication. Joseph adamantly denied involvement in adulterous relationships or spiritual wivery for the purposes of lustful fulfillment. And he was innocent of all those charges. However the principle of Celestial marriage was taught by him to many of his closest confidants in the quorum of the 12 and those he most trusted. Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball 2 of his closest. To deny this would be to label these anointed servants of the Lord as liars and adulterers. They were neither. Those who do not understand the Lords purposes in bringing about Celestial Marriage at that time will never understand or comprehend the reasons behind why this was implemented by the Lord and taught by Joseph to his closest friends and supporters. Casting Pearls before swine would be an appropriate phraseology to invoke.

1. How many of those journals were contemporary with the events?
I'll make this easy for you......none! They were all written years, and in some cases decades after the event.
My goodness, even the affidavits presented in court during the Temple Lot case were found to be completely unreliable.

2. How much reliable contemporary evidence of Joseph's involvement in polygamy exists? That would be none again.

3. Joseph publicly proclaimed just 6 weeks before his death that he wasn't a polygamist, had never been a polygamist, and only had one wife.
Was he lying or telling the truth?

Are you forgetting the Saints had an extermination order issued against them? Goodness sakes they were driven and persecuted and driven some more. Why would Joseph publicly proclaim Celestial marriage so as to further bring down the hordes of hell in the form of more mobocracy on the Saints? You continue to ignore the writings of Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball and Parley Pratt and John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff and George Cannon and Lorenzo Snow and Eliza Snow and On and on who all stated and testified in no uncertain terms that Celestial Marriage had come to them directly from Joseph as a result of him receiving revelation from the most high God. Are you willing to call all these faithful Brethren and Sisters who remained true to the faith and served the Lord to the end just a bunch of deceived sheep who just "misunderstood" what Celestial marriage really meant? Go read their writings and tell me that they were just "ignorant" of this early doctrine. That is just plain ridiculous. These men and women were Prophets and Seers. They did not act out of some misunderstanding.

So you're saying he publicly proclaimed a lie?
Even though he didn't have to publicly proclaim anything?
You obviously have a lower opinion of Joseph Smith than I do.

I don't ignore the writings of anyone. But I do place far more weight on contemporary records than on those written later..... often many years later.
Show me a contemporary record from the Nauvoo period where Brigham Young, Heber Kimball, Parley Pratt, John Taylor or any of the people you mention even hint at polygamy in the church or that Joseph approved or practiced it. You won't be able to because such records do not exist. They just don't.
The records produced later in Utah need to be understood in the context of the circumstances in which they were written.

This is fairly elementary stuff. I think you need to study this subject a little deeper.

[MMbelieve]

Like I have already said, "sealing" and "marriage" became conflated. They're not the same thing. Sealing is dynastical whereas marriage can and does exist without a sealing and includes other aspects. Even Helen Kimball, the 14 year old that Joseph supposedly "married", said that she understood it to be a sealing for dynastical purposes, with no question of it being a marriage in the common understanding of the word.

I fully understand the differences between dynastical sealings and celestial marriage. However you are ignoring historical information. Read the journals of those women Joseph were "sealed" to. Read Eliza R Snows journal entries. She referred to Joseph as her Husband many times. She fully considered herself as one of his wives. Joseph was fighting the enemies of the church like Bennett and Higbee who were accusing him of adultery and fornication. Joseph adamantly denied involvement in adulterous relationships or spiritual wivery for the purposes of lustful fulfillment. And he was innocent of all those charges. However the principle of Celestial marriage was taught by him to many of his closest confidants in the quorum of the 12 and those he most trusted. Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball 2 of his closest. To deny this would be to label these anointed servants of the Lord as liars and adulterers. They were neither. Those who do not understand the Lords purposes in bringing about Celestial Marriage at that time will never understand or comprehend the reasons behind why this was implemented by the Lord and taught by Joseph to his closest friends and supporters. Casting Pearls before swine would be an appropriate phraseology to invoke.

1. How many of those journals were contemporary with the events?
I'll make this easy for you......none! They were all written years, and in some cases decades after the event.
My goodness, even the affidavits presented in court during the Temple Lot case were found to be completely unreliable.

2. How much reliable contemporary evidence of Joseph's involvement in polygamy exists? That would be none again.

3. Joseph publicly proclaimed just 6 weeks before his death that he wasn't a polygamist, had never been a polygamist, and only had one wife.
Was he lying or telling the truth?

Are you forgetting the Saints had an extermination order issued against them? Goodness sakes they were driven and persecuted and driven some more. Why would Joseph publicly proclaim Celestial marriage so as to further bring down the hordes of hell in the form of more mobocracy on the Saints? You continue to ignore the writings of Brigham Young and Heber C Kimball and Parley Pratt and John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff and George Cannon and Lorenzo Snow and Eliza Snow and On and on who all stated and testified in no uncertain terms that Celestial Marriage had come to them directly from Joseph as a result of him receiving revelation from the most high God. Are you willing to call all these faithful Brethren and Sisters who remained true to the faith and served the Lord to the end just a bunch of deceived sheep who just "misunderstood" what Celestial marriage really meant? Go read their writings and tell me that they were just "ignorant" of this early doctrine. That is just plain ridiculous. These men and women were Prophets and Seers. They did not act out of some misunderstanding.

I'm not sure anyone is calling the early saints ignorant sheep. If there was any misunderstanding it wouldn't be in the every day saint, it would have been in the leadership, the priesthood. Now, I'm not calling anyone wrong or ignorant just pointing a fact out. If someday polygamy is known to have been practiced or operated in ANY way contrary to what God had in mind, the everyday follower of the faith would not carry that burden, no need to repent of anything...IMO. just saying no one is calling the followers out here.

We can honor our ancestors of the early church without condoning the practice of polygamy as well. Because we understand they were doing what they believed to be correct. And if you hear the words spoken to them about polygamy, I'm sure they all felt a very heavy burden to participate in it or be damned.

Also, your last statement of these men and women were prophets and seers...who exactly were you referencing here? The average saint? Cause we didn't have any women prophets that I'm aware of.

[brlenox]

I'll ask again...can you have an atonement without plural marriage?

[MMbelieve]

I'll ask this here unless someone wants to make another thread. Does anyone think polygamy will ever be reinstated like during the millennium or are there no new polygamy sealings ever and we are done with it forever?

No one knows the future, impossible question to answer. Only will breed contention.

[MMbelieve]

I'll ask again...can you have an atonement without plural marriage?

Wrong thread?

[shadow]

I'll ask again...can you have an atonement without plural marriage?

As far as this creation- nope.

[Robin Hood]

Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but the atonement and plural marriage are connected how?

[braingrunt]

So you're saying he publicly proclaimed a lie?
Even though he didn't have to publicly proclaim anything?
You obviously have a lower opinion of Joseph Smith than I do.

I don't respect him a great deal more than Abraham, who on multiple occasions proclaimed "She is my sister", in order to spare himself some serious danger.
And hey, both had a similar technical "out".

But I do respect both to have a pretty good handles on their dispensations.

[brlenox]

Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but the atonement and plural marriage are connected how?

Think it through. You and your wife resurrect and with your celestial, eternal bodies start preparing your first creation. You two are clam happy cause all these children of yours are going to have a chance to grow up and be just like you. Your wife is thrilled to death cause you know how wives are about the children - want to do whatever is needed for their advantage.

Planets are all done, galaxy all built, you send the first couple of kids down - they fall - skin their knees a little but it looks like this fall thing is going to be permanent - unless you and the wife do something about it. Maybe a Savior?

How do two eternal beings create a Savior who can have all of the requirements to be able to fulfill the needs of an atonement?

[brlenox]

So you're saying he publicly proclaimed a lie?
Even though he didn't have to publicly proclaim anything?
You obviously have a lower opinion of Joseph Smith than I do.

I don't respect him a great deal more than Abraham, who on multiple occasions proclaimed "She is my sister", in order to spare himself some serious danger.
And hey, both had a similar technical "out".

But I do respect both to have a pretty good handles on their dispensations.

Please, study some of this material out. Maybe she was his sister? Have you ever tried to really understand these inferences or are you just repeating over and over what you heard in a primary class somewhere? I do think this is important. If you are going to place yourself in the position of judge - at least you should know what the evidence is.

[braingrunt]

Please, study some of this material out. Maybe she was his sister? Have you ever tried to really understand these inferences or are you just repeating over and over what you heard in a primary class somewhere? I do think this is important. If you are going to place yourself in the position of judge - at least you should know what the evidence is.

I think you misunderstood me. If Joseph lied, well so did Abraham.
But I give credit to each to not be stupid or incompetent, which is what Robin Hood's position does to Joseph.

[Robin Hood]

So you're saying he publicly proclaimed a lie?
Even though he didn't have to publicly proclaim anything?
You obviously have a lower opinion of Joseph Smith than I do.

I don't respect him a great deal more than Abraham, who on multiple occasions proclaimed "She is my sister", in order to spare himself some serious danger.
And hey, both had a similar technical "out".

But I do respect both to have a pretty good handles on their dispensations.

But Abraham and Sarah shared the same father.
Technically she was his sister!