| 5 years ago :: Jan 17, 2008 - 12:50AM #51 | |
|
[QUOTE=BackonTrack;218515]Gaia, I would have to quit my job and family to keep up with the volume of your posts!!!
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Jan 17, 2008 - 2:25PM #52 | |
|
Yes, but Smith also excommunicated a lot of apostles for teaching false doctrines.
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Jan 18, 2008 - 1:40PM #53 | |
|
[QUOTE=bytebear;220688]Yes, but Smith also excommunicated a lot of apostles for teaching false doctrines.[/QUOTE]
GAIA: I think if you check many of those incidents, it becomes clear that it was NOT so much "for teaching false doctrines" as it was for DOING things relative to those doctrines -- for example, practicing "spiritual Wifery". |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Jan 18, 2008 - 5:17PM #54 | |
|
Gaia, what is the difference between Spiritual Wifery and Polygamy?
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Jan 18, 2008 - 6:06PM #55 | |
|
[QUOTE=moksha8088;223645]Gaia, what is the difference between Spiritual Wifery and Polygamy?
[/QUOTE] GAIA: Mostly, the former was the UNapproved version, the latter was the "approved" version -- *g* |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Jan 18, 2008 - 6:37PM #56 | |
|
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Jan 18, 2008 - 6:56PM #57 | |
|
[QUOTE=bytebear;223838]That is putting it simply, but truth be told, plural marriage was a calling... I truly believe it was a calling from God...[/QUOTE]
I can only shake my head. But just so I'm certain that I've read you correctly, are you saying that - to them - it was a calling back then? Or are you saying that you (today) believe that it was a calling for them from the same God (the one in the Bible)? |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Jan 21, 2008 - 2:09PM #58 | |
|
[QUOTE=bytebear;223838]
That is putting it simply, but truth be told, plural marriage was a calling, just like Sunday School teacher. You didn't just decide to go out and get another wife. And yes, some early apostles did decide that the "principle" was a good excuse to have extra marrital affairs. They were soon excommunicated. But having read how both Smith and Young took this responsibility, I believe it was so much more than that. I truly believe it was a calling from God, and I also believe Emma knew about the calling from the start, but she was so mortified at the thought (even to her dying day) that she never publically acknowledged it. Finally, I don't believe Fanny Alger had anything to do with any of it, and the rumors of her "affair" with Joseph were just that. Rumors. And recent DNA backs up that claim. [/QUOTE] GAIA: I must respectfully disagree on two things: It wasn't just "mortification" that troubled Emma -- From the historial record, it's clear that she was downright BETRAYED several times, by her own husband and by women she had befriended or young girls she had taken under her "wing". Emma knew about the Principle itself, and vascillated wildly; one minute agreeing and even approving of some plural wives, the next minute, withdrawing her approval. Joseph frequently HID his plural activities from her -- eveything from "courting" women to marrying them -- behind her back (or under her nose), -- even going so far as to do so with women she thought of as her friends. Emma would befriend a woman or take a young girl under her "wing" to help her, and the next thing she knew, her husband would be making "private arrangements" for "private visits" with that girl or woman in the homes of his friends, or in a back room somewhere -- Such things would NOT sit well with the most liberal, trusting, and understanding of women. FAnny Alger is widely accepted by most historians as having been Jospeh Smith's first plural wife -- see http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/02-FannyAlger.htm |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|
| 5 years ago :: Jan 21, 2008 - 2:09PM #59 | |
|
[QUOTE=bytebear;223838]
That is putting it simply, but truth be told, plural marriage was a calling, just like Sunday School teacher. You didn't just decide to go out and get another wife. And yes, some early apostles did decide that the "principle" was a good excuse to have extra marrital affairs. They were soon excommunicated. But having read how both Smith and Young took this responsibility, I believe it was so much more than that. I truly believe it was a calling from God, and I also believe Emma knew about the calling from the start, but she was so mortified at the thought (even to her dying day) that she never publically acknowledged it. Finally, I don't believe Fanny Alger had anything to do with any of it, and the rumors of her "affair" with Joseph were just that. Rumors. And recent DNA backs up that claim. [/QUOTE] GAIA: I must respectfully disagree on two things: It wasn't just "mortification" that troubled Emma -- From the historial record, it's clear that she was downright BETRAYED several times, by her own husband and by women she had befriended or young girls she had taken under her "wing". Emma knew about the Principle itself, and vascillated wildly; one minute agreeing and even approving of some plural wives, the next minute, withdrawing her approval. Joseph frequently HID his plural activities from her -- eveything from "courting" women to marrying them -- behind her back (or under her nose), -- even going so far as to do so with women she thought of as her friends. Emma would befriend a woman or take a young girl under her "wing" to help her, and the next thing she knew, her husband would be making "private arrangements" for "private visits" with that girl or woman in the homes of his friends, or in a back room somewhere -- Such things would NOT sit well with the most liberal, trusting, and understanding of women. FAnny Alger is widely accepted by most historians as having been Jospeh Smith's first plural wife -- see http://www.wivesofjosephsmith.org/02-FannyAlger.htm |
|
|
Quick Reply
|
|