Documentation does not a truth make.

There is so much "documentation" regarding the wives of Joseph Smith that it is hard to know for sure how credible any of it is. Having said that, it may very well be true, but we can't know for sure.

tooBlue,

Number one, I don't care if you believe my story about the bishop. I didn't post it for you to believe or disbelieve it. Believe what you want.

Number two, my understanding of polygamy is likely vastly more comprehensive than your own (especially if you're previously unfamiliar with Compton's work). I site Compton’s book because it is far and away the most intellectually accessible means of getting the information (I didn’t mean for my last post to be an all encompassing and fully referenced report on the subject). These marriages are a matter of church record. I stumbled into all of this while comparing genealogies with a good friend.

This site also provides some very basic info on the subject. Enjoy.

http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/home.htm

In reality he himself undercuts the factuality of his report on history through his arguments against the Tanners by pointing to the fact that he himself is not CERTAIN of his --albeit in one particular instance concerning one particular person-- facts in general.

A researcher and historian CANNOT be objective -it is not possible. He/she invariably will be governed by his/her ideologies that are themselves a byproduct of dominant ideologies that permeate his/her social existence.

You know you are not speaking the truth; why pretend now, once challenged, to you hide behind others truths. Truth is subjective, what is your truth, is it your own or does it float like chaff on a breeze?

Non Sequitur,


It's true, much of what Compton has written is taken out of context and used against the church. What can't be disputed, however, is that these marriages did occur. Some find it disturbing, others don't. Still others like to pretend that it didn't happen.

FWIW

TooBlue,

I have no Idea what you just wrote, so I have no idea how to answer. I'm not picking a fight...I'm a mormon, man! I'm in a young men's presidency for crying out loud.

That said, I think that the church has some ghosts in it's past. Ghosts that would scare the ruddy hell out of alot of members.

I don't dispute it at all. Church historians concede that polyandry took place. Their rebuttal is that there is no proof that those marriages were consumated. While there may not be proof, there is evidence. It ultimately comes down to faith. If someone's testimony is based on the notion that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were infallible, then they are on shaky ground.

Let's all remember the story of Heber C. Kimball (i'm just going off of memory now). Wasn't he asked to give up his wife to Joseph?

and what happened? I'm not saying it didn't happen, but if the prophet asked me to, and I pray and got the confirmation....guess what? I'm going to.

Do you think Abraham had a difficult time when God asked him to sacrifice his only son, the son who was supposed to be the answer to the Lord's prophecy.

We'll all go through this kind of sacrifice weather it is with money or polygamy.

Non Sequitur,

I'll ask you this. Would you submit to such an arrangement?

I'll answer this as well.

If the prophet asked me too and the Lord confirmed.....I would. (My wife might not on the other hand, but that's for her to come to agreement with).

It all comes down to my testimony in His church, prophet and the Spirit. We will all be faced with a sacrifice that would trouble and try us. It will come.