Joseph Smith and some of his wives by name
http://www.mindspring.com/~engineer_my_dna/mormon/menwives.htm
Hi, Pepperlandgirl!
How does Church of LDS feel about patriarchy? Sexual equality in the eyes of the law? Sex role nonconformity with regards to occupational choice? Sex role nonconformity with regards to behavioral norms, personality, and other elements of gender? Feminism per se? Sonia Johnson per se?
The LDS Church is most concerned with the sanctity of the family. And in an ideal household, the patriarch would make enough money to support the family, and his wife would stay at home and raise the children. Of course, the woman would NOT be a second class citizen to her husband. AND women are now expected to attend college and receive the best education they can. Keep in mind that in the LDS Church, the most important job and responsibility is raising children.
However, the Church knows that we do not live in a perfect world. And while it encourages women to stay home, it certainly doesn’t condemn women who have to work, or even choose to work.
Most devout women I knew tried to have it both ways. They would work part time, in order to be home when their kids got home, and to have weekends off. Some of course, were not this lucky. Life happens.
Please, remember, women are not asked to stay at home cuz there place is in the kitchen. Women are asked to stay at home to take on the biggest job one could have, raise children to be smart, successful, humble, and rightous. I’ve seen some mothers succeed at this admirably, and I’ve seen some mothers that left much to be desired, but there effort warranted respect.
I’ve never seen anything that would even imply that women are not equal to men in every way.
This is going to be my last post for awhile. Probably for the rest of today. And maybe even tomorrow and Wednesday, though I doubt I’ll be away that long.
If you have something that you REALLY need to have answered or point to be made, email me. I’ll probably still be checking my email.
Historical research on early Mormon granting of priesthood to women:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Some quotes on polygamy in the Mormon church:
The benefits derived from the righteous observance of this order of marriage do not accrue solely to the husband, but are shared equally by the wives; not only is this true upon the grounds of obedience to a divine law, but upon physiological and scientific principles. In the latter view, the wives are even more benefitted, (sp) if possible, than the husband physically. But, indeed, the benefits naturally accruing to both sexes, and particularly to their offspring, in time, say nothing of eternity, are immensely greater in the righteous practice of patriarchal marriage than in monogamy, even admitting the eternity of the monogamic marriage covenant.
… As before stated no man can obtain the benefits of one law by the observance of another, however faithful he may be in that which he does, nor can he secure to himself the fullness of any blessing without he fulfills the law upon which it is predicated, but he will receive the benefit of the law he obeys. … I understand the law of celestial
marriage to mean that every man in this Church, who has the ability to obey and practice it in righteousness and will not, shall be damned, I say I understand it to mean this
and nothing less, and I testify in the name of Jesus that it does mean that. …
Journal of Discourses, Vol.20, p.31, Joseph F. Smith, July 7, 1878
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Brigham Young, the second President of the Mormon Church made these statements:
Now if any of you will DENY THE PLURALITY OF WIVES and continue to do so, I promise that you will be DAMNED;
and I will go still further, and say that this revelation, or any other revelation that the Lord had given, and deny it in your feelings, and I promise that YOU WILL BE DAMNED.
Deseret News Nov. 14, 1855
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy. Others attain unto a glory and may even be permitted to come into the presence of the Father and the Son; but they cannot reign as kings in glory, because they had blessings offered unto them, and they refused to accept them.
Journal of Discourses, Vol.11, p.268 - p.269, Brigham Young, August 19, 1866
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
For more interesting quotes from Mormon leaders:
http://www.ldshistory.net/pc/required.htm
On the archaeological evidence of the Book of Mormon:
PREPARED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ANTHROPOLOGY
STATEMENT REGARDING THE BOOK OF MORMON
-
The Smithsonian Institution has never used the Book of Mormon in any way as a scientific guide. The Smithsonian
archaeologists see no direct connection between archeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book. -
The physical type of American Indian is basically Mongoloid, being most closely related to that of the peoples of eastern, central, and northeastern Asia. Archeological evidence indicates that the ancestors of the present Indians came into the New World – probably over a land bridge known to have existed in the Bering Strait region during the last Ice Age – in a continuing series of small migrations beginning from about 25,000 to 30,000 years ago.
-
Present evidence indicates that the fist people to reach this continent from the East were the Norsemen who briefly visited the northeastern part of North America around A.D. 1000 and then settled in Greenland. There is nothing to show that they reached Mexico or Central America.
-
One of the main lines of evidence supporting the scientific finding that contacts with Old World civilizations, if indeed they occurred at all, were of very little significance for the development of American Indian civilizations, is the fact that none of the principal Old World domesticated food plants or animals (except the dog) occurred in the New World in pre-Columbian times. American Indians had no wheat, barley, oats, millet, rice, cattle, pigs, chickens, horses, donkeys, camels before 1492. (camels and horses were in the Americas, along with the bison, mammoth, mastodon, but all these animals became extinct around 10,000 B.C. at the time the early big game hunters spread across the Americas.)
-
Iron, steel, glass, and silk were not used in the New World before 1492 (except for occasional use of unsmelted meteoric iron). Native copper was worked in various locations in pre-Columbian times, but true metallurgy was limited to southern Mexico and the Andean region, where its occurrence in late prehistoric times involved gold, silver, copper, and their alloys, but not iron.
-
There is a possibility that the spread of cultural traits across the Pacific to Mesoamerica and the northwestern coast of South America began several hundred years before the Christian era. However, any such inter-hemispheric contacts appear to have been the results of accidental voyages originating in eastern and southern Asia. It is by no means certain that even such contacts occurred with the ancient Egyptians, Hebrews, or other peoples of Western Asia and the Near East.
-
No reputable Egyptologist or other specialist on Old World archeology, and no expert on New World prehistory, has
discovered or confirmed any relationship between archeological remains in Mexico and archeological remains in Egypt. -
Reports of findings of ancient Egyptian, Hebrew, and other Old World writings in the New World in pre-Columbian
contexts have frequently appeared in newspapers, magazines and sensational books. None of these claims has stood up to
examination by reputable scholars. No inscriptions using Old World forms of writing have been shown to have occurred in
any part of the Americas before 1492 except for a few Norse rune stones which have been found in Greenland. -
There are copies of the Book of Mormon in the library of the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution.
Pepperland, way back when you wrote:
So the reason JS was “commanded” to marry more women so he could “raise seed unto” God, right? Well, how come he had 22 wives and yet no kids? Over and over again on this thread you repeat that family, and kids are so important to the Mormon church. And that it is such an important role in a woman’s life to bring more children into the world, and raise them to grow up strong and righteous. Yet, Joseph Smith, the Prophet, the Big Kahuna of the Mormon Church, obviously refused to father children by all these wives he was “commanded” to marry. (22 wives and no kids - he obviously refused to try.)
He denied all these supposed wives of his the grand opportunity to become mothers. Why? And since he felt he was commanded to marry multiple times (even though it “appalled” him) why did he balk at “raising seed” with all these wives? He married them even though he was “appalled” - why not go all the way and have kids too? He was supposedly doing it only because God “commanded” him, after all. Did he think that God would look the other way when he refused to sire children, and that as long as he (JS) went through the marriage ceremonies, that would suffice?
I really don’t get this. And alas, I’ll stubbornly keep on repeating the question!
What, exactly, does being gay have to do with thinking about sin? Or are you saying that Priests don’t sin? If you are, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).
My understaning of mainstream Christian doctrine is that they do belive that “thinking about sin is a sin”.
Regarding the nature of sin, I found this NT quote: “But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart”(Matthew 5:28). I’m pretty sure that there’s also a verse about “committing murder in your heart”, but I can’t find it.
So, yes. Gay, straight,or bi, priest or non-priest, my understanding is that if you looks at anyone you’re not married to and get hot-n-bothered, even a little, per JC himself (about as standard as Christian doctrine gets), you have commited the sin of adultery.
As far as I understand it (as a non-Christian myself), this is one of those basic, fundemental can’t-be-messed-with tenents of Christian doctrine since it’s apparently the reason that Jesus’s salvation is needed, because everyone sins all the time in their hearts (and otherwise) and only JC can redeem us.
I’d be interested in which specific Christian denominations don’t belive this.
Fenris
Except of course holding the Priesthood, serving in the Bishopric, or holding any other type of divine assignment. Women hold no authority to baptise, confirm, serve the sacrement, or give blessings for the sick.
Church meetings are segregated in that the men attend Priesthood Meeting while the women go off to Relief Society Meeting to do crafts, cooking lessons, sewing lessons and learn how to do all those other homey things good housewives must know in order to take care of their husband and kids.
Men are also allowed more than one eternal spouse, while the wife better be certain of her temple marriage since it will be her one and only shot. She will also not be allowed into the Celestial Kingdom unless her eternal spouse grants permission. My parents were married in the Mormon temple. Now that they are divorced, we jokingly sing “I hear ya knockin but’cha can’t come in” to my mom everytime the topic of Mormon marriages comes up.
A few years ago, church leaders announced that a woman’s place is in the home. That it is the duty of the man to go out and be the bread winner while the wife stays home and raises babies (they are encourged to have large families) and comfort her husband. They strongly discouraged woman from working outside the home, which put a lot of devout Mormon women who have no choice but to work, into a huge guilt trip.
I truly hate to make the comparison, but the perfect Mormon family closely resembles a family from Stepford.
I see you may be gone for a while, but I’ve just got questions that I’m looking for factual answers. There’s plenty of fuel for debate here already, so I’ll just ask, and if you feel like answering, cool.
I’ve only read a bit of the Book of Mormon, and noticeably the English is archaic. I know that only one translation exists, but has anyone put the existing version in more modern English (i.e., a paraphrase that doesn’t claim to be scripture but is more readable)?
Along the same lines… Does the LDS church accept newer translations of the Bible (I thought at one time they only accepted the KJV or some other kind). Actually, just list what versions of the Bible are accepted.
One more, a doctrinal question. I used to have a t-shirt that read, “Jesus Christ is God.” Some of my Mormon friends saw this, and this would lead to debates. It was a while ago, though, and I don’t remember if they objected to it specifically or just knew that I was game for debating. So is that claim something that goes counter to LDS doctrine?
Just wondering.
Admire your courage for putting yourself up here like this – it’s understandable you’ve gotten tired.
panama jack
My apologies if this posts twice; I was disconnected while sending it the first time.
I see you may be gone for a while, but I’ve just got questions that I’m looking for factual answers. There’s plenty of fuel for debate here already, so I’ll just ask, and if you feel like answering, cool.
I’ve only read a bit of the Book of Mormon, and noticeably the English is archaic. I know that only one translation exists, but has anyone put the existing version in more modern English (i.e., a paraphrase that doesn’t claim to be scripture but is more readable)?
Along the same lines… Does the LDS church accept newer translations of the Bible (I thought at one time they only accepted the KJV or some other kind). Actually, just list what versions of the Bible are accepted.
One more, a doctrinal question. I used to have a t-shirt that read, “Jesus Christ is God.” Some of my Mormon friends saw this, and this would lead to debates. It was a while ago, though, and I don’t remember if they objected to it specifically or just knew that I was game for debating. So is that claim something that goes counter to LDS doctrine?
Just wondering.
Admire your courage for putting yourself up here like this – it’s understandable you’ve gotten tired.
panama jack
pepper: you can start a thread if you want, but you wouldn’t answer my simple question.
Ya gotta study up on this stuff if ya want to be the self-professed mormon gal!
“Esprix, I am sorry your sexual orientation causes you pain.”
Well, if it does, he’s not using enough lubrication…
(straight lines. Love em.)
Hasn’t anyone figured out yet that Pepper has no intention of “studying up” on anything that flies in the face of her beliefs. She is not going to believe anything she hears or reads about her church that might put it in a bad light or call into question any of it’s practices.
She does not care if JS looks to many of us to be a charlatain and an old letch. She does not care that “The Book of Abraham” has been proven to be a complete fabrication. It makes no difference to her that the secret “Temple Rites” have been altered because they matched word for word the secret initiation rites of the Freemasons. She dismisses the fact that there is no archeological or antropological basis for most of the stories told in the Book of Mormon. And she obviously doesn’t care that she can’t get into Heaven unless she marries some guy in the temple and he brings her along with him.
She has stated that she opened this thread in order to debunk all the lies and misconceptions that abound concerning her church. A very brave thing to do especially since the Brethern don’t often do a good job of it themselves.
There’s just no point in any of this you know. She can explain all of the convoluted, complicated dogma that is the basis for her beliefs but she is never going to be in the position to address the fallacies. She won’t go there.
Need2know
pepperlandgirl wrote:
Why do you think I waited a while and reluctantly started the Gay Guy thread? I know how much work it is, but really, if you started this, you have to relax, try to keep up, and not take anything that’s said personally. You put yourself out there, you gotta be able to take it. (I think you’re doing a fine job so far, as long as you keep it cool. I think people should ease up on ya, like vanilla and especially Needs2Know, who seems to have some kind of anti-Mormon agenda.)
The Ryan, I think there’s been some confusion about what I posted. Originally pepperlandgirl wrote:
This surprised me because my understanding has always been, at least in the case of homosexuality, that the mainstream Christian churches (notably Catholics) teach it’s ok to be gay, but not ok to have gay sex. That is why I asked:
Fenris, I think answering the question in general (and not about homosexuality specifically), responded:
I clarified by saying:
Obviously, as others have pointed out, that I was wrong about the “thinking about it isn’t a sin” part, which is news to me. Again, I was originally asking only about the issue of homosexuality.
You then asked:
I think you might have misread my statement. I was saying that openly gay men can be priests, so, yes, sexual orientation is irrelevant to the priesthood, as long as that celibacy vow is honored. I was using this as an example of how some Christian denominations view homosexuality (thinking but not doing).
pepperlandgirl wrote:
No, as I said, I was again just referring to the issue of sexuality vs. having sex, not bisexual-specific. Again, I was unaware that stray sinful thoughts were sins in and of themselves.
jodih asked:
Funny, this was exactly the topic of a Pit rant by Otto a few months ago, about a gay man who committed suicide because of his Mormon upbringing, and the family had him baptized after death despite the fact that he expressly forbid them to do so. Most of us seemed to have a problem with that. You might want to look it up for some further insights by Snark.
Fenris asked:
No, no. I hope my clarification above suffices. I wasn’t aware, as you so ably pointed out, that thoughts could be sinful - I thought it was only actions (or at least in the case of homosexuality).
Esprix
I do not have an anti Mormon adgenda…look back at her posts she does not answer any of the tough questions regarding the controversies of her church with anything but… she takes it on FAITH. Anything that contradicts the dogma of her church is viewed as anti mormon by Pepper herself.
Esprix do you have any idea what a hot subject this is for many people? Are you aware of the scope and reach of this church? Do you have any idea of political and financial clout this church holds?
I am not anti Mormon, but I did get really interested when I saw how widespread polygamy was in Utah and the surrounding states. So I started reading up. Not only is the history of the church facinating from a religious standpoint it is facinating from a secular standpoint. To learn about the history of this church is to also study the history of the American West.
As far as a religion goes IMHO it’s just too damned hard to follow, to convoluted and full of ritual for me. Figuratively speaking you have to stand on your head, pat your tummy, and tug your earlobe to get into heaven! As far as I can see strict dogma and complicated ritual in Christianity is nothing more than a control method designed by MAN. The only ritual I can find that Jesus ever bothered to participate in was Baptism. Yes he was a Jew and more than likely practiced the same as most Jews during his day. But then the only other ceremony we have read about that he participated in was the celebration of Passover. And what happened to him then? He showed up at the temple and caused a ruckus that got him killed! Looks to me like he made a few statements during his ministry that were intended to be taken by his fellow Jews as a hint that they should SIMPLIFY their ritual practices. His death was intended to do away with sacrifice and offerings just to name one. So just from a purely WWJD standpoint…I can’t see him coming back and giving the Catholic church or some other guy like Joe Smith a whole new set of rules and rituals that make salvation even harder to obtain! But that is just my opinion.
So if you want to debate with her go right ahead. It’s just plainly obvious to me that she isn’t able or willing to address any of the controversies in her church. She can tell you how a Mormon gets into heaven, but all she can tell you is that Smith was a true prophet and that’s how it’s done.
Needs2know…I’m not anti-Mormon just interested in how someone with obviously a fair amount of intellegence can not be burning with questions about the truth.
ease up? I was just asking a question I wanted the answer to!
Nevermind, peppi, I already got it.
Pepperlandgirl said:
Hey, if someone wants to take over this thread, they are more than welcome to. But no other Mormon on this board has stepped up to the myths and stereotypes that surround the Church and what it believes. Aren’t we all here to fight ignorance? If you, or Snark, or anybody feels that they are more qualified to answer these questions, then by all means, go for it!
Part of my obversation of your answers to questions here is that you appear to be “shooting from the hip” and giving your opinion about what you’ve experienced and learned. I have also studied a lot about Mormonism, and know that there’s an awful lot of propoganda, lies, and stereotypical reactions on the LDS side of the aisle too. There are many practicing, loyal Mormons who are basically clueless when it comes to the intracacies of the doctrines of their church. Of course, the same is true of a lot of folks within any belief system.
A long time ago, Polycarp started a thread asking Bill/snarkberry to be the point man in a discussion similar to this one, which was basically “Let’s ask the Mormon guy any questions we have about Mormonism.” There were problems at two levels. First, there were folks who entered the fray like this thread, and basically took shots at LDS theology, history and such. Sometimes the attacks got personal. There was a lot of bigoted reaction, playing up those very stereotypes and lies you complain of. Nothing was really accomplished, except the “Mormon guys” (at that time Bill/Snark and Monty) getting offended, and a lot of others looking stupid. Even attempts at humor fell flat.
But even worse, any attempts at logical debate failed. This was because some of the folks on the Mormon side of the coin took offense to the suggestion of looking at evidence from non-church approved sources, or mis-interpreted these attempts as ad hominum attacks. On the anti-mormon side, people continued to make asses of themselves, even where logical debate was attempted.
Therefore, I would recommend this exercise cease, as it will only result in the same thing.
One thing I’ll give Bill/Snark, he always tried to use original sources to back up his LDS defenses. Thus, it wasn’t just his memory or opinion about the LDS church that came across, but the authentic “company line.” Whether you buy it or not, or whether it makes sense, I find it much more acceptable and intellectually honest to point us to chapter and verse, and reliable history. You’ve done more of that as the discussion has gone on, but not nearly enough. Some of us need more than Book of Mormon quotes. For example, Bill got me into the FARMS website, which is BYU’s effort at making the study of the BOM scholarly. Its very interesting.
You won’t hear any more from me. Best wishes, and I pray that you may come to know the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God (Romans 11:33), and that you will come to worship the Lord in spirit and in truth (John 4:24).
The peace of Christ to you,
SoxFan59
I posted earlier that I won’t be back for awhile. Well, I wasn’t kidding. I got on to check my email and gave this thread a kind of curious glance to see how many people are actually posting.
I can’t take the time to answer the things on this thread (Or any thread for that matter) and I probably won’t be back on for the rest of the week, or longer. I neglected my household duties and projects, summer school work, and most importantly my family and my BF. I had REALLY bad timing when I started this thread, but I didn’t realize the shit would hit the fan so quickly over on my side of things. Everybody is fed up with the time I spend on this MB, and I don’t blame them.
Soxfan has a point. I didn’t think all the possible problems out when I started. However, I figured since I wasn’t starting a debate, or trying to convince anybody of the veracity of the Church, I wouldn’t need a lot of sites and evidence. However, this like, N2K said, is a very hot-button issue. When I started this thread I wanted to answer questions like “How is the Church set up?” “Do Mormons STILL practice Polygamy?” “Why were they forced out of Missouri?” Stuff like that. I didn’t want to get involved into propaganda spewing, or debating about why we were all going to hell. I’ve already said that I’ve had all kinds of Mormon and Anti-Mormon crap crammed down my throat all my life. Believe it or not, I used my own reasoning skills to come to the conclusion that the LDS Church was right for me, and if I leave the Church, then I will abandon Christ all together.
Again, I’m sorry for the bad-timing involving this thread. I’m actually interested in keeping it up. Unfortunately, life is what happens to us when we are busy making other plans.
If someone REALLY wants to talk to me, I’ll still check my email, and my ICQ is on, like all day long, unless someone else is on the comp.
Needs2Know wrote:
And this differs from any other Christian denomination (or any religion, for that matter)… how, exactly? :rolleyes:
Blah blah blah. Take it up with the Catholics, and I don’t like them, either.
Which you take on faith. Now either ask questions or stop lambasting the poor girl. She never said she was an expert, just a Mormon. Sheesh.
Esprix
I didn’t lambast her, as a matter of fact if you’ll look back I asked that everyone ease off a bit and be respectful of her. You are the one that came in and made some snide comment about her sexual leanings that she confessed too in another thread. Even though she didn’t take offense I thought the post was asinine. I have asked every time that the non-Mormons stop badgering her about the fallacies we have heard about in her church. I certainly won’t be asking her anymore questions. She takes it on faith. That’s what we’re all told to do. I just can’t.
Need2know