Free Republic 4th Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $69,645
81%  
Woo hoo!! And now less than $15.5k to go!! We can do this. Thank you all very much!!

Posts by Colofornian

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Bill Clinton Is an Alleged Rapist, Too. Why Arenít You Outraged About That?

    11/22/2014 9:13:37 AM PST · 36 of 37
    Colofornian to doug from upland; All
    From the oblivious authored piece: If a man rapes you and then invites you out on another date, say no. Just say no. Even if he’s famous. OK?

    #1 Most of these alleged rapes seemed to have occurred in the 70s & 80s before date-rape drugs came on the radar of women.

    #2 Not all of these occurrences were formal "date" arrangements. Especially with the 15 yo girl whom he saw when she was also an older teen.

    #3 In many of these cases, these women didn't remember ANYTHING beyond a certain point. And, it was only when OTHER women came forward to say similar druggings occurred and these OTHER women DID recall some "scenes" from what transpired, that these women LATER put 2 and 2 together.

    It's like a separated spouse who uncovers some strange occurrences with their spouse, yet keeps taking them back in, only to get later evidence allowing them to put 2 and 2 together & realizing that spouse was cheating on them all along. Was there early evidence there all along? Ya betcha. Did that spouse have all the conscious evidence at the time? No. Especially when some seemingly trustworthy person wormholes into your life.

    This author's reasoning comes from a local hellhole.

    Most of the time radical feminists' basis for being provoked is misguided; but when they read crap like this ya gotta wonder why some men keep handing them the ammo.

  • I Warned You About Bill Cosby in 2007

    11/22/2014 8:57:39 AM PST · 69 of 163
    Colofornian to Eva; All
    Some of the women claimed that he was a father figure to them but I don’t think that Cosby was capable of being a father figure to anyone, not unless he learned to pretend from playing the role on TV.

    And how many young men did he initiate such a "Father figure" role on behalf of?

    How many young men's careers did he take such a keen interest in that he would readily pay for their college tuition & fly to see only them in various cities while conveniently overnighting with them?

    24/7 class clownishness can be a sign that a person doesn't know how to relate to others at a serious emotional connective level.

    Hence...finding other ways to exploit women. There's a line from an old Rock band..."what you don't get from life you steal."

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/18/2014 7:31:16 PM PST · 75 of 76
    Colofornian to Rad_J
    You listed his wives and then say Bathsheba is the first polyandist in the Bible? Are you mental? Do you even bother to read the bible?

    Apparently you didn't understand my comment...'twas in response to you saying that even if it was a one-night stand 'tween Abram & Hagar, they were STILL husband-and-wife. And I then pointed out David's initial "one-night stand" with Bathsheba...and that if a one-night stand constituted "marriage," then Bathsheba would have to had been a polyandrist..."married" to Uriah & then "married" once upon sleeping with David.

    I am the one claiming that just as Bathsheba was NOT married to David upon sleeping with him when Uriah was still alive, neither was Hagar a "wife" to Abram except INITIALLY -- and ONLY initially when you read Gen. 21 -- in Sarai's eyes ALONE. Sarah is the ONLY one who ever once regarded Hagar as a "wife" -- your citation in early Gen. 16.

    By Gen. 21, she changed her mind about that.

    And, working backwards, the Apostle Paul regarded Hagar as a slave & not Abraham's wife (Gal. 4:22-24)
    Moses ... same thing (see Gen. 21)
    God Himself...same thing (Gen. 21:11-12)
    Angel of the Lord Himself...whom many regard as pre-incarnated Son of God...same thing (Gen. 21:8-9)
    Abraham (Gen. 16:6)
    Even Hagar in Gen. 16:7 doesn't say she is running away from her "husband" Abraham...instead she says she is running away from the one who owns her...her "mistress" (female word for "master")

    So Hagar knew (Gen. 16:7);
    Abraham knew it (Gen. 16:6);
    Angel of the Lord knew it (Gen. 16:8-9);
    God Himself knew it (Gen. 21:12);
    Moses knew it (Gen. 21);
    Paul knew it (Gal. 4:22-24);
    and even Sarah knew it ... albeit too late to change what she did (Gen. 21:9-10)

    (But I guess you remain in the dark, eh?)

    It is a fact that Solomon was married to multiple women at the same time.

    So what?

    Are you advocating that since you apparently think God instructed Solomon to take up 300 concubines & 700 wives, that others should? Or do you think that since you believe God somehow sanctioned concubinage, that 'tis OK for anybody here to do so, too? And hey...why not 300 of them? Nothing wrong with that, you imply?

    It is a fact that David was married to more than one wife at the same time.

    Again, so what? It's also a fact David committed adultery with Bathsheba...and since God placed David as king, are you attempting to convey that God somehow sanctions adultery as well?

    It's also a fact that Hosea married Gomer the Prostitute.

    It's also a fact that Gomer CONTINUED to prostitute herself post-marriage.

    And even beyond this -- unlike your polygamy & concubine scenarios -- in which we find no verses where God tells them to do that...we CAN see where God indeed told Hosea to marry a prostitute.

    Therefore, are you suggesting that God somehow sanctions prostitution within the marriage bed?

    I mean, exactly what is your goal in promoting polygamy as "Biblical."

    Tamar was raped. That, too, is "Biblical" by YOUR standards. Just because all kinds of sexual sin is in the Bible, doesn't make it sanctioned by God. (Has that ever dawned on you?)

  • BYU professors discover hidden recording device in classroom ['content inadvertently erased']

    11/17/2014 8:55:36 PM PST · 1 of 12
    Colofornian
    Please note: KSL.com is owned by the Mormon Church.

    From the article: PROVO — Police at Brigham Young University are investigating whether any laws were broken after professors discovered a voice-activated recording device stuck under a chair in a lecture hall on campus. Two professors were working on a PowerPoint presentation in the Joseph Smith Building two weeks ago when they discovered a digital recorder stuck to the bottom of a stool with Velcro, police said. After attempting to play back the recordings, they grew concerned and began searching other classrooms in the building. Upon discovering similar Velcro setups under chairs in other classrooms, the professors called police...The Joseph Smith Building houses most of the religion courses taught on campus.

    Hmm... Interesting... Why would somebody with access to all these religion classes at BYU be interested in learnin' boring stuff about Joseph Smith, baptizing the dead, peculiar Mormon ordinances, the Book of Mormon, etc. etc. etc?

    Unless, of course, it wasn't somebody external to the campus.

    Think about BYU's history & its "relationship" with the Mormon general-authorities-powers-that-be:

    1. BYU had one inquisition in the early 90s. Former byu history prof D. Michael Quinn was ex-communicated.
    That occurred a year after the 1992 BYU ..."clause in its faculty contracts requiring LDS faculty to 'accept the spiritual and temporal expectations of wholehearted Church membership'"
    Academic freedom at Brigham Young University

    2. And the same source added:
    "Soon after adopting their statement on academic freedom in 1992, BYU took actions which some have viewed as related to the implementation of the new academic freedom policy...the University has also dismissed, denied continuing status, or censured faculty members who have taken critical positions relating to official church policy or leadership as well as those who for personal reasons did not pay a tithe to the LDS Church....In 1996, BYU dismissed Gail T. Houston, an English professor, despite positive votes from her English Department and the College Committee.[8] One of the reasons for this action was her advocacy of prayer to Heavenly Mother.[13] Also in 1996, professor Brian Evenson resigned in protest after receiving a warning from BYU administration over some violent images in one of his short stories.'

    3. From the article: As for the content on the recordings — that remains a mystery. The professors inadvertently erased everything on the device when they tried to play it back. Attempts to recover the information were unsuccessful.

    Why, of course!! Those recordings were prolly still quite "intact" thru the police being called. Yet, once the investigation began to get kicked off, that content was simply "inadvertently erased."

    Wow! Such intrigue!

    (Not sure which Mormon reps that may have benefitted more? A few BYU profs? A BYU student or two? Or maybe even some Lds gen authorities who decided to "step in" & "memo-ize" the device erasures upon finding out their monitoring devices were discovered? What a Mormon mystery!)

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/17/2014 8:27:04 PM PST · 69 of 76
    Colofornian to Rad_J
    Why then did God choose David the polygamist to be a king of Israel?...God chose rophets who were polygamists and he chose kings of Israel who were polygamists. If God was against polygamy, why did he choose so many polygamists as his prophets and kings?

    I don't agree with everything said in this source...and could cherrypick many sources if I wanted to find MANY that would agree 100% with David's historical timeline...

    "David was married to Ahinoam, Abigail, Maacha, Haggith, Abital and Eglah during the 7-1/2 years he reigned in Hebron as king of Judah. After David moved his capital to Jerusalem, he married Bathsheba."
    http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/biblepeople/a/020811-CW-King-Davids-Wives.htm

    Did you catch the above? (And there's THOUSANDS more sources I could cite that would agree with this: David's sleeping around occurred after he assumed king status...which occurred circa 2 Sam. 5)

    It wasn't like he was some philanderer that God then said, "Great, you've got the bedroom makings for a king! Here's your crown!"

    Why did he choose wise Solomon the serial polygamist to be a king of Israel?...God chose rophets who were polygamists and he chose kings of Israel who were polygamists. If God was against polygamy, why did he choose so many polygamists as his prophets and kings?

    I've already quoted Deut. 17:17...but allow me to quote it again because of a key follow-up passage in 1 Kings 11:

    17 He MUST NOT take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold.

    So what happened then with Solomon? Did his heart go astray as the Bible warned? (Yup)

    3 He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray. 4 As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the Lord his God... (1 Kings 11:3-4)

    Hmmm...I guess Deut. 17:17 was right...

    Besides didn't you ... in the same posting say:

    Deut. 17:17 is referring to kings of Israel that God shall choose.

    So what? It applies to Solomon the king, but somehow not to David the king? (How do you twist out of that inconsistency?

    And THEN you wrote: 17 He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold. 18 When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the Levitical priests. (Moses, Deuteronomy 17:17-18) So, lots of horses(verse 16), lots of wives, and lots of gold and silver are bad for the king. It does not say he only gets one horse, one wife, one gold, and one silver.

    So...if let's say...we said David had 7 or 8 wives...(AND, btw, I don't think all of the women who bore David children were clearly delineated as "wives"...some were apparently concubines...and there IS a difference)...you're somehow now claiming that 7 or 8 isn't under your category of "LOTS" ... but... what? 9 is? 10 is? 11 is? Where's your arbitrary line you are arbitrarily drawing here reached to where that word "lots" kicks in?

    Answer?

    I don't believe there IS any line you can draw with the subjective arbitrary statements you've made!

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/17/2014 8:08:36 PM PST · 68 of 76
    Colofornian to Rad_J
    The bible says in Genesis 16 3 And Sarai Abram’s wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife.

    Again, who gives a woman authority to bestow a man with an extra wife? Show me ONCE in Scripture where God issues that kind of authority?

    (And especially...as in THIS case -- and Jacob's case -- where a slave-woman has no rights to say "no" to her mistress when she tells the slave-woman to go sleep with her hubby). Gen. 16:5 clearly shows Sarah wasn't trusting God with the promise to bear a child by saying "I put my slave in your arms... (not God; and not Abram)

    Show me where in Genesis 16 that Abram references her as his wife? You would think that if Abram thought of Hagar as his wife per verse 3, that he wouldn't be referencing Hagar in v. 6 as "your slave" when talking with Sarai.

    And then what about the angel of the Lord? Why in v. 8 is He still referencing Hagar as "slave" if she's graduating to wifehood? (You're not accusing the Angel of the Lord of either being mistaken about a former title of a person, are you?)

    And in verse 9, the Angel of the Lord tells Hagar to "go back to your mistress." He doesn't say "go back to your husband now does He?

    Then what about God, Himself? How does He reference Hagar in Gen. 21:12? Does He call Hagar Abraham's wife? Nope. You're off-base yet again (your norm track record). God references Hagar as "slave woman" in that verse? (Interesting title for a woman everybody is suppose to know is Abraham's "wife" eh?)

    Or now do you accuse God before the world of being in the dark about Hagar's true status?

    If so, you need to openly repent before the world and before God, lest your silence on this matter brings ultimate divine accountability for such an accusation!!!

    Finally, the apostle Paul could have referenced Hagar as Abraham's so-called "wife" well after the fact in Galatians 4. Instead, what do we find? Paul in three consecutive verses (22, 23, 24) labels her as a "slave woman"...

    According to the prophet Moses, the prophet Abraham was a polygamist even if just for one night

    (David eventually married Bathsheba. But that still didn't make Bathsheba David's wife the first night she slept with him...she was still the wife of Uriah the first night she slept with him...

    So...you're conveying that if somebody sleeps with somebody else minus divine authority or if some person minus authority deems it some kind of "wifehood" (I suppose you might "amen" fundamentalist Mormons declaring their women as part of various 'wifehood' clans as being divinely authorized, eh?) then "wifehood" it is, eh?

    Well, that would make Bathsheba your first Biblically sanctioned polyandrist, eh? (Per you, married to both Uriah and David at the same time?)

    100% ridiculous.

    Your ignorance slip isn't only showin', but embarrasingly so!

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/17/2014 7:50:39 PM PST · 67 of 76
    Colofornian to Rad_J
    Graph 2: ...therefore more likely...
    Graph 3: ...Maybe...
    Graph 3: ...Maybe...

    Wow! So "authoritative!" on your subjective, personal interpretations from the Scriptures!

    (Don't let that speculative door bang your butt as you over-frequent that establishment!)

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/17/2014 7:46:53 PM PST · 66 of 76
    Colofornian to Rad_J
    It is a fact that Jacob, grandson of Abraham and a Prophet of God, had 4 wives. Leah and Rachel, who were SISTERS, and their two handmaids Zilpah and Bilhah.

    Now please show me...
    (a) where God -- ANYWHERE in Scripture -- gives women authority to bestow a man with an extra wife??? (As in the cases of Jacob's household) Go ahead. Show us.
    (b) where Jacob himself ever officially betrothed himself to Leah (before sleeping with her & thereby feeling obligated to her afterwards)...Go ahead. Show us.
    and (c) where God is ever the author of deception as some kind of "means" to ensure Jacob would become a polygamist.

    Admit it. Jacob became a polygamist via deception. Deception is the exact opposite of what God ordains! It is the exact opposite of God's character.

    What's funny is that you elevate this as some kind God-ordained thing (re: Jacob's household).

  • The Strawman Cometh-Continuation of threads on Joseph Smith's wives

    11/13/2014 11:34:21 AM PST · 89 of 214
    Colofornian to ifinnegan; teppe; acad1228; All
    Whom do you think has defended Mormonism on this thread? I don’t see anyone defending Mormonism.

    Well, aside from Teppe directly doing so (post 56), you have acad1228 indirectly so...(post 61)

    ....you immediately jump in (post 3) to make the thread about the person writing the article...not polygamy...and Olag-hai (post 4) ensures we all get the implication that if any religion isn't as bad as radical Islam, it can't be that problematic.

    Hence, Mormonism's polygamy problem -- THE subject of the thread -- is no longer discussed.

    It's a common debate tactic...change the subject. "Look, over there!"

  • The Strawman Cometh-Continuation of threads on Joseph Smith's wives

    11/13/2014 11:24:46 AM PST · 85 of 214
    Colofornian to acad1228; greyfoxx39; All
    This guy needs to have a Coke and a smile and shut the Hell up. Yes, they believe differently than you do. They're allowed to. Get over it.

    Sounds to me like you need to have a coke.
    Maybe smile. :)
    (Oh, & to take your own recommended med dosage: 'shut the hell up,' while you're at it...but hey I'm saying it with a smile :) )
    Oh, and yes, this ex-Mormon writer on the ex-Mormon sites believes differently than you do. (So does Greyfoxx39; so do I).

    We're "allowed" to.

    (Get over it)

    Wow! Did I just write such an asenine post? (That really doesn't say anything except I am allowed to religiously pontificate but others' religious expressions are to be silenced?)

  • The Strawman Cometh-Continuation of threads on Joseph Smith's wives

    11/13/2014 11:16:19 AM PST · 74 of 214
    Colofornian to Lazamataz
    ALL: (This reveals the intellectual IQ of Lazamataz)

    Imagine being at a debate & hearing such a command of such rhetoric from his lips!!! ROTFL :)

  • The Strawman Cometh-Continuation of threads on Joseph Smith's wives

    11/13/2014 11:14:45 AM PST · 73 of 214
    Colofornian to teppe; freedomlover; All
    Since Christianity was agrguably started by polygamists, Abraham, Jacob (probably Isaac as well)...

    ALL: Note a few things that can be derived from this Mormon poster in just 13 words uttered:
    1. He says "probably Isaac as well" because he likely knows (it's been pointed out before to him on FR) that Isaac's alleged "polygamy" status is NOWHERE to be found in the Bible...and it's solely based upon Joseph Smith erroneously saying so in Lds "scripture" -- Doctrine & Covenants 132:37...which Joseph Smith singlely wrote to convince his first wife, Emma, that all these extra lovers was dictated to him by his Mormon gods. (And yes, Smith uses "gods" plural in that very "revelation"...see vv. 19-20)

    So what's QUITE telling here is that even Teppe the supposedly faithful Mormon doesn't take Joseph Smith at face value anymore! Here, D&C132:37 clearly tosses Isaac into the polygamy ring...and Teppe can only conclude it was a "probable" thing.

    You see, Joseph Smith did& said so many unbelievable/disbelievable things that even the faithful wain!

    2. The Book of Mormon uses anachronisms...for example, "church" is "ecclesia" ... Greek... and is found in the New Testament, written in Greek. Jesus first used that term in Matthew 18. But the Book of Mormon frequently uses the word in its alleged B.C. books.

    Well, likewise, Teppe uses "Christianity" -- which essentially assumes a New Testament-timed Christ who came incarnated...and then says its founders were all Old Testament figures. (Go figure)

    Then, if you take a look at the next 19 words by Teppe -- they too are of special interest: "You should probably find another religion. Obviously, God does not look at polygamy in the same way you do."

    Why?

    3. If you go to this thread, LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions] -- and click on the original link written by a Mormon apologist from FAIR...Lds' foremost apologetics group...you will find Brian Hales saying:

    "In lauding the Church’s effort to explain this difficult topic, some may assume that in defending the essay we are in fact defending polygamy. We are not. On earth, polygamy expands a man’s sexual and emotional opportunities as a husband as it simultaneously fragments a woman’s sexual and emotional opportunities as a wife. The practice is difficult to defend as anything but unfair and at times emotionally cruel...The essay explains that plural marriage was “an excruciating ordeal” for Emma...

    So here the Mormon apologists are out there conceding polygamy is...
    ..."an excruciating ordeal" (note the word "excruciating" is tied to the word "crucifix")
    ..."unfair"
    ..."emotionally cruel"
    ...and then...on top of that...
    ...Hale adds:

    "...some may assume that in defending the essay we are in fact defending polygamy. We are not."

    Well, Brian...when you have Mormons like Teppe making comments like he does in this & other threads (& he's far from being the ONLY Mormon doing that)...

    OF COURSE WE ASSUME MORMONS ARE DEFENDING POLYGAMY...BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TO 'ASSUME' ANYTHING...THEY CLEARLY ARE!!!

  • The Strawman Cometh-Continuation of threads on Joseph Smith's wives

    11/13/2014 10:49:39 AM PST · 59 of 214
    Colofornian to Sparklite; colorcountry; ifinnegan; greyfoxx39; All
    Given the choice of having a next door neighbor be Mormon, Islamic, or a Son of Obama, I’m taking Mormon every day of the week.

    Extend this parallel & you have "Given the choice of having a next door neighbor to be a liberal Democrat, Islamic, or a Son of Obama, I'm taking the liberal Democrat every day of the week."

    And the extended parallel would be, of course, in the very context of a thread where the attacks come aimed at a Freeper who posted a thread about Liberal Democrats...with another FREEPER claiming that the person is "obsessed" about liberal Democrats because he keeps posting threads about them.

    ALL: What you NEVER see on FR...is these same arguments used to go after people who post on liberal Dems (they are never called "obsessed" with them) or Islam (they are never called obsessed with Muslims if they post a few threads a month about Islam).

    Funny how only Mormonism is defended in this common fashion.

    Iow, either these posters are inconsistently religiously hypocritical...you don't find them going after others posting on Islam, Catholicism, or protestantism...or, their arguments readily breakdown because if you apply them to many other topics discussed here on FR forums, nobody takes that angle to go on the offensive against them.

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/13/2014 12:11:48 AM PST · 49 of 76
    Colofornian to Rad_J; Elsie; All
    Elsie, I said the first 5 books of the Bible were written by Moses who was a polygamist Prophet of God. You know, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy...Is Polygamy adultery or not or do God’s rules not apply to Moses?

    Well, then, if your argument from silence is right -- that Moses married women simultaneously -- then why did he write these two interesting verses? (I expect an answer):

    17 He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. (Moses, Deuteronomy 17:17)

    And then Leviticus 18:18 is quite interesting in light of Joseph Smith's "marriages" to the Partridge sisters and Koontz sisters:

    18 “‘Do not take your wife’s sister as a rival wife and have sexual relations with her while your wife is living." (Moses, Lev. 18:18)

    Smith married Eliza and Emily Partridge March 4, 1843; and others say he married Nellie Koontz, Susan Koontz, and Mary Koontz.

    So...how do you squirm out of the above verses?

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/13/2014 12:03:36 AM PST · 48 of 76
    Colofornian to Rad_J; All
    ...he was now a polygamist like Abraham and Jacob?

    Jacob got two wives via deception at the hands of his father-in-law. (Unless you think institutionalizing deception integrated into marriage is an "OK" deal.

    And who "authorized" two slaves to be a "wife" to Jacob?

    Women -- their mistress-masters, who really didn't have any authority to tell a slave what to do sexually with their bodies. Slaves cannot "consent" to sex "legally" any more than a minor can.

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/12/2014 11:59:55 PM PST · 47 of 76
    Colofornian to Rad_J; Elsie; All
    (See post #45)

    ALL: Rad_J cannot prove Moses was married to the any two of his wives simultaneously. It's an argument from silence.

    We simply don't know when his earlier wife died. There's no Biblical record of her death...some surmise she died around the time of Numbers 10...but even that is also conjecture built upon silence.

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/12/2014 11:56:15 PM PST · 46 of 76
    Colofornian to Rad_J
    Father Abraham Had seven sons, and four wives Had seven sons, and four wives Had father Abraham...

    Let's start with Sarah vs. Keturah: Sarah lived to be 127...died in Canaan...all recorded in Genesis 23:1-2, 19-20. When does Keturah enter the picture in recorded Scripture?

    We know Abraham took Keturah as a "wife" in Gen. 25:1 post Sarah's death...So, yet again, your monogamy timing is less than impeccable. As for Masek, indications from the Septuagint are that she was a maidservant...and some think perhaps Keturah's maidservant.

    Per from what I could research in a limited amount of time, I didn't see Masek ever referenced as Abraham's wife. If she indeed was Keturah's maidservant, then likewise she came along after Sarah's death.

    A possibility exists that Masek was a concubine...but even that isn't clearly delineated. And again, do you know how long Keturah lived? (I don't); so again, we don't know exact timing details of Abraham's matrimony, do we?

    What about Hagar?

    Did you know, Rad_J, that there's ONLY one person in the Bible who ever references Hagar as a "wife" to Abraham...and that this one person both didn't have the authority to do it...and, in fact, later regretted her actions.

    And why not? That was indeed a faithless action!

    Certainly the whole thing was an act of faithlessness. Sarai didn't trust God's promise. She resorted to earthly means. The result was the people group that led to the Muslim break-out upon the earth...and neither Moses (Gen. 21) nor the apostle Paul (Gal. 4) speak positively of the consequences.

    Other considerations

    A. Hagar was gone from the scene by Gen. 21:14ff...so she wasn't in any relationship with Abraham when Keturah came along.

    B. She was NEVER the maidservant of Abraham -- only Sarah (Sarai).

    C. Most importantly, follow the following eye-witness testimony trail from the Bible:

    (1) God never told Abraham to sleep with Hagar for a night. The Angel of the Lord--whom most commentators think is the pre-incarnated Son of God, told Hagar post sleepover to return to her mistress (mistress is a female master, in this case Sarai) and to submit to mistress Sarai. (He NEVER said to return to "your husband, Abram"...see Genesis 16).

    (2) Hagar, even after sleeping with Abram once (that's all that's mentioned) continues to be labeled as a servant/slave by none other than…
    …Abram,
    …Sarai,
    …the Angel of the Lord (who some say is the pre-incarnated Son of God),
    …Moses (Gen. 25),
    …even the apostle Paul (Gal. 4:21-31),
    …and Hagar herself.

    Sarai labels Hagar as a gift as a "wife" to Abram, but I question if a woman has the authority to "consent" on behalf of a slave.

    Hagar was considered a slave both "before" and "after" sleeping with Abram. Why does the "before" matter? Just as a minor cannot "consent" to sex, a slave is in no better situation to "consent" to--or deny--her master's commands for sex with her husband. And in this case, the command didn't come from her husband, Abram; it came from her mistress (female word for "master"), Sarai (Sarai is twice referenced as "mistress"--Gen. 16:4,8).

    Why does the "after" matter?

    Because it shows she didn't become a "transformed" person--from slave to wifely status! Gen. 16:6,8,9; 21:11; 25:12; and Gal. 4:21-31 all are still referencing her as either a "slave" (twice in 21:11), "servant," or one who was told by the Angel to submit to her mistress (female word for "master"). By Gen. 25, Abraham is married to Keturah with no mention of Hagar (25:1) and is then buried with Sarah (25:10).

    So, if we were to call all the key witnesses to the stand, and hear what they have to say:

    Q Hagar, after Sarai gave you to Abram and Ishmael was conceived, did you still acknowledge Sarai as your "mistress" in your conversation with the Angel of the Lord? [female master]
    A Yes. (Gen. 16:8)

    Q Sarai, when you were in your early nineties when Isaac was a toddler, how did you characterize Hagar?
    A I told Abraham, Get rid of thatslave woman and her son, for that slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son, Isaac. (Gen. 21:10)

    Q Abraham, after Sarah gave you Hagar and you slept with her, how did you characterize Hagar?

    A I told Sarah, as mistress (master) of her servant, Your servant is in your hands. Do with her whatever you think best. (Gen. 16:6)

    Q When Sarah began to mistreat her servant, Hagar, did you intervene like what we might expect a husband to do?
    A No. Hagar was Sarah's servant.

    Q Angel of the Lord, when you called to Hagar after she conceived Ishmael, how did you reference her?
    A Servant of Sarai (Gen. 16:8)

    Q And when you conversed with Hagar, did you, Angel of the Lord, acknowledge that she was released from her servant role to Sarai?
    A No. In fact, I told her Go back to your mistress and submit to her. (Gen. 16:9)

    Q Moses, since you wrote Genesis, how did you identify Hagar in her last reference of that book? Did you link her to Abraham?
    A No. I identified her as "Sarah's maidservant" (Gen. 25:12).

    Q So in that same passage, you link Ishmael to Abraham, but you link Hagar only to Sarah?
    A Yes.

    Q Apostle, Paul How did the Holy Spirit lead you to interpret the Old Covenant as expressed through Abraham?
    A
    For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman. His son by the slave woman was born in the ordinary way; but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a promise. These things may be taken figuratively, for the women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar. Now Hagar stands for Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present city of Jerusalem, because she is in slavery with her children. But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother...Now you brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise. At that time the son born in the ordinary way persecuted the son born by the power of the Spirit. It is the same now. But what does the Scripture say? 'Get rid of the slave woman and her son, for the slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with the free woman's son.' Therefore, brothers, we are not children of the slave woman, but of the free woman. (Gal. 4:21-31)

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/12/2014 11:31:07 PM PST · 45 of 76
    Colofornian to Rad_J
    Numbers 12:1 kjv (Written by Moses himself) “And Miriam and Aaron spake against Moses because of the Ethiopian woman whom he had married: for he had married an Ethiopian woman.” This isn’t His wife Zipporah the Midianite.

    So what?

    I can cite several current & recent Lds general authorities who have "recorded" more than one wife. Three such current ones would be Dallin Oaks, L. Tom Perry, and Russell M. Nelson. So what?

    Just because I say it still makes the issue of concurrent wives an argument from total silence. (Oh, sure, you might tell me they were married to these wives serially but I'll act like you: Unless you can show me the death certificates & wedding certificates of their wives, then to be consistent with your logic, I'll otherwise assume they were/are polygamists...No matter what, I'll be closer to what Mormons regard as "truth" -- because in Mormon eyes, these general authorites are eternal polygamists!)

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/12/2014 7:55:35 AM PST · 39 of 76
    Colofornian to Loyalist; All
    Why are the powers that be in the LDS suddenly so willing to discuss, without reservation, the whole sordid history of Joseph Smith’s polygamy? Could it be in preparation for another conveniently timed revelation that the practice is to be restored, as soon as some court somewhere gives the go-ahead?

    At least 4 reasons...but first allow me to address when the Mormon Church is supposed to restore polygamy.

    In the midsixties, Lds "apostle" Bruce McConkie released his book "Mormon Doctrine." The Lds Church eventually secured the rights to the book, and republished it in the 1980s under its Deseret Bookstore ownership.

    When it republished it, it left this statement (& basically just about everything else in the book) untouched:

    "Obviously the holy practice (of polygamy) will commence again after the Second Coming of the Son of Man and the ushering in of the millennium." (LDS "apostle" Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, 1966 edition, see pp. 577-579 for context)

    Now as to why the Mormon Church is opening up. Here, I'll give it an acronym for easier remembrance: T.O.D.D.:

    T T for Tolerance: The Mormon Church recognizes that our culture continues to accept samesex "marriage" ... and thereby are more "tolerant" of alternative bedroom arrangements...like polygamy. So it's a "good time" culturally-speaking to (finally) begin to come clean to the public-at-large

    O O for "Openness" In Russian, glasnost = "openness"...and the Russians entered into a glasnost governmental policy in the 1980s. Just as Russia was deemed "the iron curtain" in the 19sixties & seventies, Utah has been labeled "the spiritual iron curtain." So if God can move Russia to have a "glasnost" period, well, He can do that with the powers that be in Salt Lake City.

    Besides, the previous SLC emphasis -- more of an "anti-glasnost" -- just wasn't working.

    Four years ago late October was when the period of anti-glasnost returned... Oct 24 to be exact... the Lds faithful had gathered for one of their two key 'y'all" come meetings in Salt Lake City that year, which are fed via satellite around the world to Mormons who can't make the trek to SLC. You would have thought that if an earth-shaking announcement needed to be made, it would have been made there. It wasn't. Perhaps too much media glare was on the conference. Therefore, more quietly, Lds leadership sent a world-wide circular letter to all church members. Here's two sources for that:

    Source 1: Quit pestering us, church leaders tell membership in letter
    Source 2: Kirby: Wrestling with doctrine no match for me (Kirby as a Mormon columnist in Utah is oft' hilarious in his treatment of Mormon stuff; and he was good here, too)

    From the first source:
    On October 24th, the LDS First Presidency (led by Prophet Thomas S. Monson) wrote several letters that were to be read in Mormon Sunday services around the world. According to examiner.com, the first letter was “likely spurred by Boyd K. Packer’s most recent General Conference talk entitled ‘Cleansing the Inner Vessel.’ Church Headquarters has been receiving an increased amount of correspondence from its members about doctrinal issues. Because of this influx of correspondence, the First Presidency reminded and encouraged LDS church members to utilize their local church authorities – bishops, branch presidents, stake presidents, etc — before resorting to contacting Church Headquarters.” In other words, the Mormon laity was told to quit bothering their church leadership on issues related to doctrine. We can only wonder why the church is apparently receiving so many inquiries.

    From the second source (Kirby): With only partial tongue in cheek, Kirby said: "According to the First Presidency’s letter, members with real doctrinal concerns were to seek the counsel of our local leaders — stake president, bishop, Scoutmaster, building custodian, etc."

    Why? Well, per Kirby: "The letter...told/counseled rank-and-file Mormons to stop pestering church headquarters for clarification of church doctrine. Apparently some members get so stressed about the finer points of doctrine that they’ll fire off a letter asking for the final word. Church HQ can’t handle the demand...

    There ya go. Note the Wall Street Journal writer said: "placing sharp limits on doctrinal questioning" [Many an Lds historian has commented on this as well...do your own Google search with the words "faith promoting" in quotations...add the words "historian" and "Lds" to the search for better specific results]

    D D for Disaffected Mormons It's a traumatic experience for many Mormons to finally be exposed to its detailed history - and not just the "faith building" stuff the Mormon Church curricula office dishes out year in, year out. Mormons just don't cover this stuff in either Sunday School classes or home priesthood or relief society curricula, or even their indepth courses for their institutes & seminary classes geared for students. This is an attempt to both ease members into the trauma ... by degree...as well as stave off the onslaught of queries it receives on subjects like these.

    Ya gotta know it's easier to have an FAQ on hand than to try to handle individual queries numbering 5 to 6 digits (see "O" commentary above to realize how inundated the Lds general authorities were getting in our internet era)

    D D for Defecting Mormons Well, for many Disaffected Mormons, it then leads to Defecting Mormons. And that's not good for the Lds overall budget. If they can pretend to be giving an answer, perhaps the Mormon Church can hold on to some of these Disaffected Mormons...or at least stall their exit so they can still rake in 10% of their income until the inevitable happens.

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/12/2014 7:16:06 AM PST · 176 of 186
    Colofornian to Elsie
    ..doing what I can to show some facts that have been retained by MormonISM, that today's Mormons may have no idea that they exist. (I've NO idea why today's Mormons that DO know they exist, are so upset by them.)

    (It's called the same thing our nation's capital is...in fact, Washington D.C. isn't the District of Columbia at all...originally it was Washington Damage Control...Under the Obama admin, it's Washington D.o.D. ... DamageonDemand...)

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 11:37:00 PM PST · 22 of 76
    Colofornian to Maudeen; All
    Can we have a Romney comment?

    (Here, I'll be your google voice response):

    "Romney acknowledges that voters may have a problem with his religion's history of polygamy. 'That's part of the history of the church's past that I understand is troubling to people,' he says. The practice, outlawed before 1900, is equally troubling to him. 'I have a great-great grandfather...he took additional wives as he was told to do. And I must admit, I can't image anything more awful than polygamy,' he tells Wallace."
    Source: ROMNEY: I CAN'T IMAGINE ANYTHING MORE AWFUL THAN POLYGAMY'"

    Oh, and btw, see post #2...that directly contradicts this quote above -- similar to what Mormons have claimed for generations -- and now admitted by the Lds Church in their polygamy essays to be an outright lie: That polygamy was "outlawed before 1900."

    (It wasn't. Oh, sure, there was a clampdown. But at least 260 additional plural unions were done from the latter part of 1890 thru 1910.)

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 8:34:11 PM PST · 19 of 76
    Colofornian to razorback-bert; All
    Just think what their wife swapping parties were like.

    Well at age 37, Heber C. Kimball -- one of the top three ranking Mormons behind Brigham Young & the other counselor, l traded still childless Nancy Winchester to yet another arranged marriage with Amos Arnold -- so that she could indeed have a child...

    The separation with Kimball occurred in 1865.
    See the chart, wife #8 from Kimball's 45 wives: Polygamy and Mormon Church Leaders

    Kimball once said:

    “I think no more of taking another wife than I do of buying a cow, and if you want to build up the kingdom you must take more wives.” (Lds “apostle”/then first President Heber C. Kimball, quoted in Jennie Anderson Froiseth, ed., The Women of Mormonism: or the Story of Polygamy As Told by the Victims Themselves, 1886; see Abanes, One Nation Under Gods, p. 295)

    And hey...these women were traded because some were bought (like cattle) by the Mormons in Scandinavia (Denmark):

    In Scandinavia,[279] in ca. 1850s–1870s,[280] where there were many critics of the Mormon religion, "ballad mongers hawked 'the latest new verse about the Copenhagen apprentice masons' who sold their wives to the Mormons for two thousand kroner and riotously drowned their sorrows in the taverns".[281][ax]{{Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark}}{{Kroner, Danish currency}}
    Wife selling

    These women were largely reduced by these Mormon leaders to breeding purposes:

    At a stake conference, LDS leader George Q. Cannon of the First Presidency [Mormonism's HIGHEST hiearchy] said:

    "The people of the world do not believe in breeding, but we do. So the people of the world will die out and we will fill the whole earth. I admit those raising children by plural wives are not complying with man-made laws, but in the sight of God they are not sinning, as there is no sin in it. (George Q. Cannon, Sanpete Stake conference, Sept., 1899. Smoot Investigation, Vol. 1, p. 9.) [BTW, the fundamentalist (fLDS) still cite this LDS source]

    So...reducing wives to breeding cattle is, unfortunately, a long-term Mormon male tradition!

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 8:18:23 PM PST · 164 of 186
    Colofornian to B4Ranch
    Instead you feel so glorious that you can stomp on the Mormon Church and the People who believe in their faith. I think you are disgusting.

    Well, hey, if it makes you feel better to...
    ...stomp on me...
    ...and tell me I am "disgusting"...
    ...and sarcastically bite into whatever sense of glory I have or don't have...
    ...then, hey, go for it!

    (I just think if you're going to do that, your message might come across with a tad bit more of consistency if you don't engage in the above behavior while simultaneously -- as in the same breath --
    --as attempting to preach, lecture, and scold us about your personal standards & convictions re that we shouldn't be engaging in what you perceive to be "stomping" on people of "faith"...)

    I mean now what?

    Are we to take you at your pulpit word?
    (or your actions?)

    Ah...can be sooo confusing!

    And, btw...where do we pick up those "religious expression licenses" that allows us to stomp on others' religious expressions...all as we go about scolding others with the message: "thou shalt not stomp on others' religious expressions"???

    (I guess I'm always in the wrong line :) )

    Have a good evening.

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 8:10:40 PM PST · 162 of 186
    Colofornian to B4Ranch; MHGinTN; All
    You are pretty good at putting false statements out for all to see. I never defended Joseph Smith’s character. You say I did. Showe me where I did.

    In #123, you said to MHGinTN: "What religion are you that is so perfect that you feel no shame in judging Smith’s character?"

    IoW, the clear implication is that unless you have a perfect religion, you CANNOT be in ANY position to...
    ...critique Joseph Smith...
    ...discern anything negative about him or his belief system...
    ...perhaps not even frown upon him...

    (Last time I looked, 2 Corinthians 10:4-5 was still intact as part of the Scriptures):

    4 The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 8:05:18 PM PST · 160 of 186
    Colofornian to B4Ranch; MHGinTN
    Then you refuse to answer my question, see #143.

    (143 was written by MHGinTN)

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 7:44:43 PM PST · 158 of 186
    Colofornian to B4Ranch; MHGinTN; All
    So, IoW...first you defend Joseph Smith's character...
    ...and then you extrapolate from that people auditioning for godhood are "fine people" (and 'YEAH!' YA BETTER BE!' if you're auditioning for divine competition!)
    ...and then when I address your question about "perfection" ... focusing not even on "perfection" but simple criminality...
    ...ya wanna change the subject & talk about Jews now?

    Well, I'm sure you've met many "fine (Jewish) people," too right?

    So, hey...go ahead & generalize away on every tribe, be it ethnic, religious, or socio-political (like I've met several "fine people" liberals...or several "fine people" Democrats).

    (Now what point does any of the above make again?)

    *****************

    So...let me talk about a specific group of Jews from Jesus' incarnational days...perhaps including one or some who "bought" out Judas to commit betrayal vs. Christ.

    Question for you: Did Jesus ever overtly compliment the Pharisees?

    Answer? Yes!

    Per Matthew 5:20, we see Jesus giving a great compliment to the outward "assets" of legalistic Pharisees...telling people that unless their righteousness exceeded that of the Pharisees & the teachers of the law, "you will certainly NOT enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matt. 5:20).

    Now that was a tremendous compliment. But you see, it wasn't meant to be a complete profile of them.

    We find Jesus' words in Matthew 23...giving an internal assessment of the Pharisees:

    25"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean. 27"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of dead men's bones and everything unclean. 28In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.

    You see the parallel I am presenting here?

    Here you wanted to focus only on the externals of the legalistic group of the day.

    But what does Christ do? He acknowledges those fine externals; but He isn't fooled by them.

    You see, anybody -- Mormon or non-Mormon, Jew or non-Jew, Pharisee or non-Pharisee -- seeking to try to change God's mind about who they are inwardly by doing good works in order to get to heaven has a message from Jesus they need to be aware of:

    “Very truly I tell you Pharisees, anyone who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber. 2 The one who enters by the gate is the shepherd of the sheep. 3 The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice… 7 Therefore Jesus said again, “Very truly I tell you, I am the gate for the sheep. 8 All who have come before me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep have not listened to them. 9 I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. They will come in and go out, and find pasture. (John 10:1-3, 7-9)

    Jesus Himself is the Way (John 14:6); and only knowing the true Jesus is eternal life (John 17:3)

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 7:13:17 PM PST · 156 of 186
    Colofornian to B4Ranch; MHGinTN; Elsie; All
    The Mormons I have met seemed to be very fine people. What religion are you that is so perfect that you feel no shame in judging Smith’s character?

    Well, here's an interesting thought:

    If Joseph Smith committed banking fraud...and if Joseph Smith committed massive spiritual fraud...then we would expect that seed to be planted within the Mormon church...and to germinate widely.

    Joseph Smith's banking scam: Joseph Smith's Mormon Banking Scam

    Let's simply review affinity fraud by Mormons for ONLY a 40-month window of March '09-->Mid-summer 2012

    Lds members have fleeced over 1 & 1/2 billion from fellow Mormons the past few years alone! Guess what? They initially didn't regret "doing business" with them, either!!!
    (2010 Source puts it at over $1.4 billion...and MORE has been uncovered since then!) : Mormons Now Losing Billions to Affinity Fraud

    Can you fill me in any other religious sect that has less than 2% of the overall population (1.7%) -- that has launched at least $1.4 billion worth of fraud schemes vs. fellow sect members the past two or three years?

    If you only have time to click on one article link below...read this one: JOHN L. SMITH: Thieves in the temple: How 'affinity fraud' hurts LDS church members
    Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal, Sept. 12, 2010 Be sure to read the comments of FBI special agent Cameron Saxey (who is Lds)...the article mentions how the Utah jurisdictional Securities Fraud Task Force was working on 100+ cases...meaning that $1.4 billion total doesn't tell it all!

    The sad individual accounts [Indeed: Pray for the victims, most Lds]:

    * All in the Mormon Family Mortgage Fraud [Re: Idaho fraud]
    Source: Conservative Babylon.com, June 27, 2012

    * Episode Detail: The Mormon Madoff - American Greed: Scams, Scoundrels and Scandals
    Source: TV Guide.com re: series American Greed: Scams, Scoundrels, and Scandals, June 20, 2012

    * Former LDS bishop gets jail, probation for massive fraud
    Source: Provo Herald, June 7, 2012

    * LDS Bishop Pleads Guilty To Fraud
    Source: Kutv.com, June 7, 2012

    * Utah investors caught up in alleged $170M fraud: SEC says 2 men committed fraud as they raised $170M to build Caribbean resorts, and that 250 of the 1,700 alleged victims are from Utah
    Source: Salt Lake Tribune, May 31, 2012

    * Beware of affinity fraud ‘predators’ who exploit trust, LDS spokesman warns
    Source: Fraud College.org, April 2, 2012

    * Former LDS bishop charged with fraud, pleads not guilty
    Connecticut Criminal Defense Blog, March 29, 2012

    * Former Mormon Bishop In Trumbull Charged With Investor Fraud
    Source: Hartford Courant, March 27, 2012

    * The LDS Church Issues a Strong Position on Affinity Fraud
    Source: Utah Securities Fraud.com, March 7, 2012

    * Affinity Fraud Called a Destructive Crime at Conference
    Source: Lds.org, Feb. 20, 2012

    * Church Representative to Address Fraud College [From the official Lds Web site]
    Source: Lds.org, Feb. 15, 2012

    * Affinity Fraud statement
    Source: Official Mormon Newsroom.org, Undated (Early 2012)

    * Father, son used Mormon connections to commit $220M Ponzi scheme (Utah case)
    Source: Mormon church-owned KSL.com, Dec. 16, 2011

    * Former LDS bishop cons elderly man out of life savings, police say
    Source: Provo Daily Herald, Oct. 19, 2011

    * Tag archives @Utahsecuritiesfraud.com: LDS Church

    * Provo councilman Steve Turley charged with felonies [LDS High Council Member]
    Source: Provo Herald, July 27, 2011

    * Feds arrest St. George business man, philanthropist for mail fraud
    Source: Mormon-church owned KSL.com, June 11, 2011

    * Former LDS leader charged in fraud against Ute football coach, others
    Source: Salt Lake Tribune, June 8, 2011

    * Suspected Mormon Con Artist Pleading Guilty to $78M Scam
    Source: Streetsweeper.org, May 31, 2011

    * Mormon Madoff? Source: Financial Fraud Law.com, May 27, 2011

    * A Fraud Played Out on Family and Friends
    Source: New York Times, May 26, 2011

    * St. George investor ordered to jail [ex-Lds bishop]
    Source: MidUtahRadio.com, April 15, 2011

    * Using trust to steal (Utah affinity fraud)
    Source: Ogden (UT) Standard Examiner, Feb. 3, 2011

    * JOHN L. SMITH: Thieves in the temple: How 'affinity fraud' hurts LDS church members
    Source: Las Vegas Review-Journal, Sept. 12, 2010

    * Local political gadfly arrested for exploiting elderly woman
    Source: Provo Daily Herald, May 4, 2010

    * Preying on the faithful: Though Mormons often victims, LDS church skips fraud-prevention event
    Source: Salt Lake Tribune, May 2, 2010

    * Kaneohe swindler is sentenced
    Source: Honolulu Star-Bulletin, April 6, 2010

    * Investors with troubled firm have Mormon ties
    Source: Austin American Statesman, Jan. 16, 2010

    * Man Who Defrauded Fellow Church Goer Pleads Guilty
    Source: www.connect2utah.com (KUTV) Jan. 7, 2010

    * Lindon Man Accused of Trying to Kill Witnesses to Alleged Scam
    Source: MidUtahRadio.com, Nov. 19, 2009

    * KSL 5 News investigates affinity fraud
    Source: KSL.com Nov. 9, 2009

    * Mormon victims are caught up in $50M scam to sell gold bullion
    Salt Lake Tribune, Sept. 18, 2009

    * LDS Church returned $200K in Southwick Tithing
    Source: AP, Sept. 14, 2009

    * Merriman's church donations may be tained [Momon Ponzi schemer's tithe monies ill-gotten?]
    Source: Denver Post, April 24, 2009

    * Man Who Defrauded Fellow Church Goer Pleads Guilty
    Source: Fox News, April 8, 2009

    * Calif. Man Charged with $40 million Ponzi scheme
    Source: AP, March 20, 2009

    The bottom line here is that you would expect a church that has 2% of the nation's population to have about 2% of affinity fraud cases -- even if they were as criminal as the atheists and agnostics! [You would expect them to have less than 2% if there was a true higher moral standard at operation here]. You don't expect cases involving $one and a half BILLION!

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 7:06:56 PM PST · 155 of 186
    Colofornian to B4Ranch
    Just because Smith was a sinner that doesn’t make all Mormons unworthy.

    "Unworthy" of what? godhood? ('Cause isn't that what at least married temple Mormons are pursuing?)

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 7:05:02 PM PST · 154 of 186
    Colofornian to Zakeet; All
    Thread Just posted: LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    I allowed this lds apologist's blog to have his own voice...and then I offered an in-depth point by point commentary ... on the whole thing...

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 6:59:25 PM PST · 11 of 76
    Colofornian to All

    Smith took at least 29 wives within 23 months!

    10. Here's the Bottom line in all of this, upon a review of Smith's "marriage history" in the early 1840s alone:

    Smith wasn't into big families...there's even a passage in the Lds Doctrine & Covenants -- a "revelation" Joseph Smith said he rec'd in 1833: "Let your families be small..." (D&C 90:25)

    Actually, Smith was into accumulating bed partners. This reality stares the careful historian right in the face: Imagine you want to take on almost 30 wives in 23 months. What kind of time do you need to exhibit with each one to develop a proper approach to even asking them to marry? What kind of honeymoon time do you need? What kind of first-year commitment time do you need to develop that relationship? Smith's pace was 29 additional partners between Dec. 1841 and Nov. 1843. And just because things were less "culturally so" than what is now, doesn't mean romance or marital focus was totally AWOL in the 1840s.

    Smith's pace alone for accumulating partners shows abuse of power, not concern for these women. Not concern for their future motherhood; just how they could serve his "bedhoood."

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 6:58:38 PM PST · 10 of 76
    Colofornian to All

    Smith taught celestial marriage participants they would pass by...the gods [plural], thereby teaching polyTHEISM in the same breath as polyGAMY

    9. From the article: "...Joseph Smith taught that couples who are sealed in eternal marriage...“shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths…and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods...(D&C 132:19-20)

    Well, there it is. Joseph Smith's primary "revelation" on polygamy -- D&C 132 -- written primarily for his first wife's Emma Smith is finally accept all of these additional wives...is not only polygamous but polytheistic! Gods plural??? (No wonder this "revelation" was tucked away until a book published in the 1850s exposed the Utah-based practice, forcing Brigham Young to dust off this "revelation" from Smith and finally publish it!)

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 6:57:58 PM PST · 9 of 76
    Colofornian to All; Tennessee Nana

    Lds church stutters and shutters to utter 'age 14' – can't bring itself to do it...uses euphemism

    8. Young wives (paragraph 19). Exposing itself to criticism, the essay euphemistically refers to Helen Mar Kimball’s sealing as occurring “several months before her 15th birthday” rather than at age 14...

    Boy, just look at how the Lds stutters and shutters having to concede that Joey went after a 14-year-old. Allow me to explain what transpired...citing an excerpt relayed by FReeper Tennessee Nana:

    In his book Mormon Portraits (pp.70-72), Dr. Wyl presents some revealing information: Joseph Smith finally demanded the wives of all the twelve Apostles that were at home then in Nauvoo....Vilate Kimball, the first wife of Heber C. Kimball, ...loved her husband, and he, ... loved her, hence a reluctance to comply with the Lord’s demand that Vilate should be consecrated...They thought the command of the Lord must be obeyed in some way, and a “proxy” way suggested itself to their minds. They had a young daughter only getting out of girlhood; and the father apologizing to the prophet for his wife’s reluctance to comply with his desires, stating, however, that the act must be right or it would not be counselled ... asked Joe if his daughter wouldn’t do as well as his wife. Joe replied that she would do just as well, and the Lord would accept her instead. The half-ripe bud of womanhood was delivered over to the Prophet. The fact that Joseph Smith asked for Heber C. Kimball’s wife but actually married his daughter is verified in the book The Life of Heber C. Kimball, written by Apostle Orson F. Whitney: Before he would trust even Heber with the full secret, however, he put him to a test which few men would have been able to bear. It was no less than a requirement for him to surrender his wife, his beloved Vilate, and give her to Joseph in marriage! The astounding revelation well-nigh paraly[z]ed him. He could hardly believe he had heard aright. Yet Joseph was solemnly in earnest.... He knew Joseph too well ... to doubt his truth or the divine origin of the behest he had made...Three days he fasted and wept and prayed. Then, with a broken and a bleeding heart, but with soul self-mastered for the sacrifice, he led his darling wife to the Prophet’s house and presented her to Joseph. It was enough—the heavens accepted the sacrifice. The will for the deed was taken, and ‘accounted unto him for righteousness.’ Joseph wept at this proof of devotion, and embracing Heber told him that was all the Lord required...The Prophet joined the hands of the heroic and devoted pair, and then and there, ... Heber and Vilate Kimball were made husband and wife for all eternity (Life of Heber C. Kimball, pp.333-35).
    Secondary Digital Source: Nov. 17, 2010 post #20 (Tennessee Nana)

    Let it also be known that Joseph Smith's preying upon 16-year-old Fanny Alger from the get-go only emboldened Smith's predator role upon other teens (note...not necessarily a comprehensive listing):
    Fanny Alger 16
    Sarah Ann Whitney 17
    Lucy Walker 17
    Flora Ann Woodworth 16
    Emily Dow Partridge 19
    Sarah Lawrence 17
    Maria Lawrence 19
    Helen Mar Kimball 14
    Melissa Lott 19
    Nancy M. Winchester [14?]

    The whole Lucy Walker episode was especially appalling:

    See Joseph Smith as sexual predator and Sacred Marriage or Secret Affair? Joseph Smith and the Beginning of Mormon Polygamy

    In the first link above I cite also the second link as the source for the following:

    Over 5:00 clip of Sandra Tanner describing how Joseph Smith was an obvious sexual predator.
    She particularly focuses on how Joseph Smith seduced 16 yo Lucy Walker to become his plural "wife."

    Lucy Walker's mother had died and left 10 children, Lucy Walker being one of them. (One of the 10 children also died). So what did Joseph Smith do? He promptly sent this father of 9 on a mission to the East Coast, and split up the 9 children...conveniently arranging for 16 yo Lucy Walker to come to his house. Smith waited til Lucy Walker's brother accompanied Emma Smith on a trip to St. Louis, and approached her, per Sandra Tanner:
    Joseph now approached young Lucy Walker, who would become his twenty-second plural wife. Todd Compton relates: Lucy was another young wife of Smith—he proposed to her when she was fifteen or sixteen. In her story we find the familiar pattern of the teenage girl living in the Mormon leader's house, whom Joseph then approaches and marries.5858 Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, p. 458.
    The Walker family had converted to Mormonism several years before moving to Nauvoo. In the summer of 1841 the mother, Lydia, contracted malaria due to the swampy conditions in Nauvoo and finally died on January 18, 1842. Lucy recalled, "When at length we were forced to believe she would not speak to us again we were in the depths of despair. Ten motherless children!"5959 Ibid., p. 461. Joseph soon came up with a solution. The father was sent on a mission to the east, the younger children were sent to other families and at least two of the older siblings, Lorin and Lucy, were taken in by the Smith's. Shortly after this division of the family one of the younger children died.
    In the midst of all this sorrow and loneliness, Joseph approached sixteen-year-old Lucy Walker in late 1842 about plural marriage. Todd Compton outlines Lucy's resistance: When Smith sensed resistance, as has been seen, he generally continued teaching—asking the prospective wife to pray about the principle, . . . So it happened here. "He said, 'If you will pray sincerely for light and understanding in relation thereto, you Shall receive a testimony of the correctness of this principle.' " Lucy was horrified by polygamy and by his proposal and did not quickly gain the promised testimony. She prayed, she wrote, but not with faith. She was nearly suicidal: "tempted and tortured beyond endureance until life was not desirable. Oh that the grave would kindly receive me that I might find rest on the bosom of my dear mother." Lucy now felt intensely the absence of her parents: "Why—Why Should I be chosen from among thy daughters, Father, I am only a child in years and experience. No mother to council; no father near to tell me what to do, in this trying hour. Oh let this bitter cup pass. And thus I prayed in the agony of my soul."6060 Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, p. 464. Then in the spring of 1843, while Lucy's brother and Emma were in St. Louis, Joseph pressed the issue again.61 61 Newell and Avery, Mormon Enigma, p. 132; Smith, Nauvoo Polygamy, p. 193. 62 Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, p. 465.
    Lucy took the matter to God in prayer and finally felt she had received divine approval. Todd Compton relates: On May 1 [1843] Lucy, who had turned seventeen the day before, married Smith at his home, with William Clayton officiating and Eliza Partridge standing witness.62
    Source: Sacred Marriage or Secret Affair? Joseph Smith and the Beginning of Mormon Polygamy 

    Then there were the Partridge girls:

    Emma’s suspicions were confirmed when she caught Joseph and 19-year-old Eliza Partridge locked in a room upstairs together. Emma had hired Eliza to take care of their newborn. 2 Joseph admitted to his personal secretary, William Clayton, that if he took Eliza and Emily Partridge (twin sisters) as wives, he knew that Emma “would pitch on him and obtain a divorce and leave him.”3 But, Joseph added that “he would not relinquish anything.”4 And he didn’t. He would eventually marry the sisters in March, 1843 (without Emma’s knowledge). In the meantime, Smith shared to his friend John Bennett his dilemma and the trouble he was having with Emma. He wondered what he should do, and Bennett replied, “This is very simple. Get a revelation that polygamy is right, and all your troubles will be at an end.”
    Secondary digital source: Was Polygamy, in the Nineteenth Century, Started by the FLDS Church, or the LDS Church?  

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 6:56:06 PM PST · 8 of 76
    Colofornian to All

    Lds church confesses polygamy was 'an excruciating ordeal' for Joseph Smith's wife, Emma

    7. Emma Smith's involvement...The essay explains that plural marriage was "an excruciating ordeal" for Emma...

    Yup. And keep in mind "excruciating" is no average word...linked to the word "crucifix!" As the descendant of a Mormon polygamists -- with a relative who wrote about Lds polygamy -- I can attest to that! This Mormon blogger-apologist concedes within the article: "Polygamy...is difficult to defend as anything but unfair and at times emotionally cruel." Amen!

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 6:55:34 PM PST · 7 of 76
    Colofornian to All

    Lds Church concedes Smith had 30-40 wives...by age 38...yet ignores them – other than original wife Emma – in most bios of Smith!

    6. Number of plural wives From the Lds essays: “Careful estimates put the number between 30 and 40.”

    What's quite interesting is how many publications and articles written by the Ldschurch that includes a bio about Joseph Smith yet ALWAYS seem to somehow forget all those wives...as if they were mere "sex toys" to be hidden in the secret Mormon closet.

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 6:55:05 PM PST · 6 of 76
    Colofornian to All

    OK, which is it? Did Smith engage in polygamy to 'raise up seed' – or other reasons? Smith, 1833: 'Let your families be small...' yet Smith's great-nephew, a later Mormon 'prophet,' claimed 'seed-raising' was purpose for early Mormon polygamy...even when the average child per mom in these relationships was greatly lower than monogamous unions!

    5. Children With Plural Wives

    Ya know, the fact that Smith had very few children from his plural wives seems to be some "feather" in the Mormon cap...as the Mormon Church seems to want to imply that few children = little sexual activity with them.

    However...

    a. Joseph Smith, based upon a "revelation" Joseph Smith said he rec'd in 1833, actually touted "small" families (in sharp contrast to today's Mormon families)...and there's no reason why the noted fertility cycles of his various wives would not have been intergrated into that "revelation" he received: "Let your families be small..." (D&C 90:25)

    b. The low # of children then actually works against the very reason why Smith accumulated wives, per Smith's great nephew, Joseph Fielding Smith, who became the 10th "prophet" of the church.

    Now ya gotta follow the "details" on this one:

    Lds 'prophet' Joseph Fielding Smith defends his great-uncle's [Joseph Smith's] polygamy

    Joseph Fielding Smith was a "prophet" of the Mormon Church...in the late 1950s into the early 60s, he wrote a 5-volume question-and-answer style series entitled Answers to Gospel Questions.

    I've read all 5 volumes. In Volume 4, it went thru its 7th printing in 1979...and was originally published by the Deseret Book Co. in 1963 -- a company DIRECTLY owned by THE Official Mormon Church.

    In chapter 42, Joseph Fielding Smith takes on THIS question related to the earliest polygamy practiced by Joseph Smith and the earliest Mormons:

    Representatives of Jehovah's Witnesses called at my home and endeavored to disprove statements in the Book of Mormon. Among other things they claimed there was a discrepancy between Jacob 2:24-27 and Doctrine and Covenants 132:39. It was also their contention that the doctrine of plural marriage was condemned in the Book of Jacob and that the practice of this principle IN THE EARLY DAYS OF THE CHURCH was not only a contradiction of Bible doctrine of also of the Book of Mormon. Will you please give answer to this problem? (p. 212)

    At the bottom of the next page (p. 213), Joseph Fielding Smith has a heading, "There is No Contradiction" -- and on p. 214, Joseph Fielding Smith cites Jacob 2:30 from the Book of Mormon as "proof" of "no contradiction":

    For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up SEED unto me, I will command my people...

    So...claims this Mormon "prophet"...This -- seed-raising -- was THE so-called "purpose" for these (mainly) EARLY Mormon LEADERS practicing polygamy from...
    ...the early 1830s...when Joseph Smith started fooling around with young teen Fanny Alger...
    ...to the early 1840s when a few OTHER Mormon leaders began following Joseph Smith's plural-wife taking lead...
    ...[And I note: Based upon Joseph Fielding Smith's response, the Utah polygamy years -- 1846 thru the rest of the 19th century -- would be quite "debateable" to toss in here as "relevant" to the question the Mormon "prophet" was answering...see more on this below]

    So. Since Joseph Smith was told to be practically THE ONLY Mormon to practice polygamy for that first decade (1831-1841 or so)...here's the $Million question behind this post:

    How much "seed" (posterity) did Joseph Smith "raise" among these "extra wives?"

    ANSWER: NONE, despite taking on an additional 26 wives or so...MOST of whom were taken on 1841 thru early 1844.

    It's likely at least one Smith child was miscarried when first-wife Emma Smith booted a pregnant plural wife down some stairs...beyond that...

    "Though there were allegations of paternity in some of these polygamous marriages, no children have ever been proven to be Smith's. There is ongoing genetic research to determine if any descendants of alleged children have Smith's genetic markers, and so far all tests have been negative." [Source: Children of Joseph Smith]

    WELL, a Mormon might counter...perhaps the Mormon god was talking more about the seed to be raised by Mormons over a 40-year period (roughly 1850s to early 1890s)?

    Well, for those who might contemplate that, there's two HUGE problems to that "theory"...

    HUGE PROBLEM A

    The direct response Joseph Fielding Smith gave thru the OFFICIAL Mormon Church publishing house in 1963 related to a specific Jehovah's Witness challenge re: "the practice of this principle IN THE EARLY DAYS OF THE CHURCH..."

    Those "early days" in the church were the upstate NY, the Kirtland, Ohio, the Missouri, and the Nauvoo, IL years -- when polygamy was being introduced ...[NOT the Utah years]

    HUGE PROBLEM B

    And besides, even for those who would like to include the first, say couple dozen Utah years into this "early mix" of the POLY Church of Mormon...those controversial Brigham Young-led years...please note this 2011 Indiana University article.

    While I disagree with this study's evolutionary crap injected by this university that "sainted" pedophile champ Kinsey, indeed the simple math involved from this study is born out:

    Polygamy practiced by some 19th century Mormon men had the curious effect of suppressing the overall offspring numbers of Mormon women in plural marriages, say scientists from Indiana University Bloomington and three other institutions...Simply put, the more sister-wives a Mormon woman had, the fewer children she was likely to produce...."the number each wife produced goes down by one child or so..."

    What's so curious about that? Brigham Young had 55 wives & 57 children...figure the averages...Joseph Smith, Jr. had children in single-figures -- perhaps ALL from his FIRST wife...30-40 wives...12-14 of them he stole from other men by marrying them when they were already married! (Not only was he a counterfeit "prophet," but a counterfeit husband and counterfeit "seed-raiser" as well!)

    How interesting.

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 6:54:17 PM PST · 5 of 76
    Colofornian to All

    Smith plural wife (& later Mormon hymn-writer) on Joseph's sexual prowess: 'I thought you knew Joseph Smith better than that.'

    4. Sexuality Allow me to quote -- second-hand, mind you -- one of Joseph Smith's wives...the one who was allegedly pregnant when Emma Smith kicked her down the stairs, reportedly causing her to miscarry her baby:

    President Angus Cannon also told Joseph Smith's son: 'Brother Heber C. Kimball, I am informed, asked [Eliza R. Snow] the question if she was not a virgin although married to Joseph Smith and afterwards to Brigham Young, when she replied in a private gathering, "I thought you knew Joseph Smith better than that."' (Stake President Angus M. Cannon, statement of interview with Joseph III, 23, LDS archives.)
    Secondary digital source: polygamy

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 6:53:43 PM PST · 4 of 76
    Colofornian to All

    Fanny Alger, Smith household housekeeper...'adopted daughter'; the first 'plural wife' at about age 16

    3. Fanny Alger For previous FR threads on her, see: Remembering the Wives of Joseph Smith: FANNY ALGER ( Joseph Smith Does a Woody Allen? ) and Alger History and Ancestry: Fanny W. Alger 1817-1879 [Mormon – Open]

    Chauncey Webb recounts Emma’s later discovery of the relationship: “Emma was furious, and drove the girl, who was unable to conceal the consequences of her celestial relation with the prophet, out of her house”. Ann Eliza again recalls: “...it was felt that [Emma] certainly must have had some very good reason for her action. By degrees it became whispered about that Joseph’s love for his adopted daughter was by no means a paternal affection, and his wife, discovering the fact, at once took measures to place the girl beyond his reach...Since Emma refused decidedly to allow her to remain in her house...my mother offered to take her until she could be sent to her relatives...” Secondary source: Remembering the Wives of Joseph Smith: FANNY ALGER ( Joseph Smith Does a Woody Allen? )

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 6:52:39 PM PST · 3 of 76
    Colofornian to All

    Smith converted 12-14 women into becoming polyandrous wives – women with multiple (two) husbands

    2.The essay acknowledges that “Joseph Smith was sealed to a number of women who were already married,” estimating the number of these sealings at 12–14 (endnote 29)...

    a. Joseph's wife, Emma, never even knew about his "sealings" to 9-11 already-married women 1841-1843 (their ages were 20, 23, 23, 27, 29, 31, 35 or 36, 47, etc...hmmm...for some reason he wasn't picking more married women his own age)

    b. According to LDS historian Todd Compton, "Eighteen of Joseph's wives (55 percent) were single when he married them and had never been married previously. Another four (12 percent) were widows…However, the remaining eleven women (33 percent) were married to other husbands and cohabitating with them when Smith married them…If one superimposes a chronological perspective, one sees that of Smith's first twelve wives, nine were polyandrous" (In Sacred Loneliness, p.15).
    Secondary digital source: The Polygamy Dilemma - Is Plural Marriage a Dead Issue in Mormonism?

    My commentary: Well, this is sure an interesting admission by the Mormon Church.

    c. Smith came on to perhaps dozens of others' wives – sometimes directly thru their husbands!

    How would ANY of you like it a "prophet" approached your wife and offered to take her off your hands? And, btw, what the essay doesn't mention is how many of these wives spurned Joseph Smith's "offers." But let's just look at two of those "already married" wives -- the wives Lds "apostles" who were both named "Orson"...

    One (Orson Hyde's wife) accepted Smith's advancements; the other (Orson Pratt, ancestor of Mitt Romney), rejected them:

    "A postscript to the Joseph and Nancy allegations: In 1834 Nancy married LDS Church member Orson Hyde. Six years later, in the spring of 1840, Church authorities sent Orson on a three-year mission to Jerusalem. Two years into the mission, while he was away, Joseph Smith was sealed to Orson Hyde’s wife, Nancy Marinda. Nancy thus became Joseph’s 10th plural wife, though she remained married to Orson as well. In 1870 Nancy divorced Orson after 34 years of marriage, leaving him to his five remaining plural wives. [Source: Tarred & Feathered [Real Mormon Founder Expose']

    Orson Pratt's Wife, Sarah:
    "Sometime in late 1840 or early 1841, Joseph Smith confided to his friend that he was smitten by the "amiable and accomplished" Sarah Pratt and wanted her for "one of his spiritual wives, for the Lord had given her to him as a special favor for his faithfulness" (emphasis in original). Shortly afterward, the two men took some of Bennett's sewing to Sarah's house. During the visit, as Bennett describes it, Joseph said, "Sister Pratt, the Lord has given you to me as one of my spiritual wives. I have the blessings of Jacob granted me, as God granted holy men of old, and as I have long looked upon you with favor, and an earnest desire of connubial bliss, I hope you will not repulse or deny me." "And is that the great secret that I am not to utter," Sarah replied. "Am I called upon to break the marriage covenant, and prove recreant to my lawful husband! I never will." She added, "I care not for the blessings of Jacob. I have one good husband, and that is enough for me." But according to Bennett, the Prophet was persistent. Finally Sarah angrily told him on a subsequent visit, "Joseph, if you ever attempt any thing of the kind with me again, I will make a full disclosure to Mr. Pratt on his return home. Depend upon it, I will certainly do it." "Sister Pratt," the Prophet responded, "I hope you will not expose me, for if I suffer, all must suffer; so do not expose me. Will you promise me that you will not do it?" "If you will never insult me again," Sarah replied, "I will not expose you unless strong circumstances should require it." "If you should tell," the Prophet added, "I will ruin your reputation, remember that." (Article "Sarah M. Pratt" by Richard A. Van Wagoner, Dialogue, Vol.19, No.2, p.72. Also see: http://www.xmission.com/~country/reason/spratt.htm)
    [Digital Source: Would you share your spouse with the Prophet?]

  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 6:51:18 PM PST · 2 of 76
    Colofornian to All

    Lds Church concedes plural unions still sanctioned in church one to 14 years beyond its 'manifesto' supposedly putting the brakes on it in 1890

    1. and 1904 Mormon apologists and grassroots Mormons have typically tried to pull one over on others by consistently claiming that Lds polygamy "ended" in 1890. Well it didn't. And from a # of distinct angles:
    a. The Mormon Church, in most cases, didn't ask Lds families to break up existing plural unions;
    b. Even more telling -- and not elucidated within these Ldschurch essays, is that at least 260 plural unions were sanctioned by the Mormon Church between late 1890 and 1910. These are listed in the appendix of the book A Solemn Covenant by B. Carmon Hardy, Univ. of IL Press...Most of these were indeed done by 1904...as by 1906-07, the Mormon church dumped a few "apostles" who were still sanctioning these plural unions.
  • LDS.ORG Essay on Nauvoo Polygamy: What did Readers Expect? [LDS apologist on church admissions]

    11/11/2014 6:50:40 PM PST · 1 of 76
    Colofornian
    Please Note: FairMormon is an Lds apologetics organization/Web site. (So, I'm letting the Lds apologists speak for themselves here -- as well as offering a little more commentary)

    So, let's follow the apologist trail, prompted by what the Lds Church itself has (finally) conceded in these essays:

    Here, I've summarized them within a chart...

    I'll comment on each of these 10 'concessions' in a separate post.

    TEN CONCESSIONS OF MORMONISM'S HISTORICAL POLYGAMY LDS CAN NO LONGER DENY

    TEN CONCESSIONS

    SUMMARY OF POLYGAMY'S REALITY

    OTHER NOTES

    1. Lds Church concedes plural unions still sanctioned in church one to 14 years beyond its 'manifesto' supposedly putting the brakes on it in 1890 One book documents 260 sanctioned post-manifesto plural unons 1890-->1910
    2. Smith converted 12-14 women into polyandrous wives – women with multiple (two) husbands Smith could have added more such wives...but was spurned by some of them
    3. Fanny Alger, Smith household housekeeper; the first 'plural wife' at about age 16 Chauncey Webb recounts Emma’s later discovery of the relationship: “Emma was furious, and drove the girl, who was unable to conceal the consequences of her celestial relation with the prophet, out of her house”. Ann Eliza again recalls: “...it was felt that [Emma] certainly must have had some very good reason for her action. By degrees it became whispered about that Joseph’s love for his adopted daughter was by no means a paternal affection, and his wife, discovering the fact, at once took measures to place the girl beyond his reach...Since Emma refused decidedly to allow her to remain in her house...my mother offered to take her until she could be sent to her relatives...” Secondary source: Remembering the Wives of Joseph Smith: FANNY ALGER ( Joseph Smith Does a Woody Allen? ) 
    4. Smith plural wife (& later Mormon hymn-writer) on Joseph's sexual prowess: 'I thought you knew Joseph Smith better than that.' (Second-hand quote from Eliza Snow)
    5. OK, which is it? Did Smith engage in polygamy to 'raise up seed' – or other reasons? Smith, 1833: 'Let your families be small...' yet Smith's great-nephew, a later Mormon 'prophet,' claimed 'seed-raising' was purpose for early Mormon polygamy...even when the average child per mom in these relationships was greatly lower than monogamous unions! Interesting factoids: Smith advocated 'small...families' in Lds “scriptures” he created + 19th century lds polygamy actually REDUCED the number of children per mom by one in their lifetime!
    6. Lds Church concedes Smith had 30-40 wives...by age 38...yet ignores them – other than original wife Emma – in most bios of Smith! (The very fact that the Lds Church has hidden this reality from both its own members & the public-at-large shows it isn't very forthcoming on its history & has been an untrustworthy source for generations!)
    7. Lds church confesses polygamy was "an excruciating ordeal" for Joseph Smith's wife, Emma (Imagine your husband sleeping with 30-40 women...and him telling you, 'God told me to')
    8. Lds church stutters and shutters to utter 'age 14' – can't bring itself to do it...uses euphemism (And not just 14 yo Helen Mar Kimball as a 'wife' to predator Joseph Smith, but live-in 'adopted daughter'/housekeeper Fanny Alger, age 16; Sarah Ann Whitney, age 17; Lucy Walker, age 17 (a sickening account on this one as Smith sent Lucy's only remaining parent abroad on a mission to get access to her); Flora Ann Woodworth, age 16; Emily Dow Partridge, age 19; Sarah Lawrence, age 17; Maria Lawrence, age 19; Melissa Lott, age 19; and unsure of Nancy M. Winchester's age...some historians say age 14
    9. Smith taught celestial marriage participants they would pass by...the gods [plural], thereby teaching polyTHEISM in the same breath as polyGAMY See Lds “scriptures” Doctrine & Covenants 132:19-20
    10. Smith took at least 29 wives within 23 months! Smith's pace alone for accumulating partners shows abuse of power, not concern for these women. Not concern for their future motherhood; just how they could serve his "bedhoood."
  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 2:37:46 PM PST · 117 of 186
    Colofornian to ravenwolf; All
    ...if you do not approve of Abraham or Jacob having more than one wife that is not my problem.

    (Hey, with all the rivalries that arose with Jacob's household, I'm sure most of the time Jacob didn't "approve" of his 2-wife, 2-sleeping-with-servants arrangement)

    Which, btw, strikes me (for the first time): I've had NUMEROUS convos with Mormons on FR thru the years...and some non-Mormons...re Jacob's household arrangements.

    The tenor has been (if I was to generic-ize these convos...) that since God worked thru Jacob to establish the tribes of Israel...and since they can't imagine God would sanction that unless He in some way approved of polygamy...that it was somehow God-ordained...and by some extrapolation...so was Mormon polygamy.

    So...what now strikes me is that IF polygamy is so...
    ..."Biblical"...
    ..."God-ordained" (by implication -- not by any divine mandate in Scripture)...
    ...and that we can base polygamy as an "institution" upon the foundation of Jacob...
    ...then, hey...why stop at polygamy based upon Genesis 29?

    ...I mean, by this logic...
    ...since Biblical female servants were closer to slaves than mere "household help" {IoW, they had no real rights -- such as the ability to say "no" if their mistress (mistress as in a female "master") told them to sleep with the head of the household}...
    ...then, hey, you're basically also conveying that the Bilhah and Zilpah accounts in Genesis 30 made it "Biblical" for 19th and 18th-century white American slaveowners to sleep with their black slaves...is that what you're sayin'?

    Slaves have no rights as to who they sleep with. God "worked with" Jacob's slave-sleeping arrangements...wallah! (from French viola). The institution of slave bedroom arrangements is now allegedly confirmed by you citing the Bible that it happened!

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 1:45:56 PM PST · 112 of 186
    Colofornian to ravenwolf; All
    Have you got something against just accepting what the Bible says with out trying to rule something out just because it does not meet with your approval?

    The Bible says even more directly that God had Hosea marry Gomer, a flesh trafficker (namely her own flesh). And Gomer cont'd such a "cottage industry" postmarriage.

    By analogy, you would then have us believe that just because God directed Hosea to marry a prostitute who remained one postmarriage that if some sect rose up directing its members to marry active (continuing) prostitutes that, "Hey since the Bible sanctions it...it's AOK?" Really?

    The Bible talks about rape in Genesis; David sleeping with Bathsheba; so...due to these precedents does that mean we are to "go thou & do likewise?"

    Ravenwolf...you're startin' to provide some humor for the rest of us :)

  • If Mormon missionaries were straightforward about MormonismÖ[Best 4-minute video on topic]

    11/11/2014 1:39:19 PM PST · 97 of 111
    Colofornian to trebb; Elsie; All
    (to elsie) And you still have the obsession...

    Since I believe Mormons are now zeroing in on a literal one BILLION endowments for the dead, you be sure to let us know when you might have time to comment upon a group people performing HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of religious rituals on behalf of the dead as "obsessive"...

    ...Versus you taking the time to comment on a single poster's few flips on the digital radar...

    (And then...when we DON'T hear that commentary forthcoming from you...we'll see that certain religious expressions are sanctioned by you by your very silence, eh?)

  • Mormon Bishop: Harry Reid ďIsnít a Man of Serious FaithĒ Because Heís Pro-Abortion

    11/11/2014 1:34:03 PM PST · 20 of 34
    Colofornian to txrefugee
    If the Mormons aren’t voting for him, who is? SEIU doesn’t have enough legal members to elect a senator.

    Nevada is about 8 percent Mormon. And Lds tend to be more likely to be registered than the avg Mormon voter...turnout not sure...but Nevada Lds Republicans turned out enmasse to vote for Romney.

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 12:55:23 PM PST · 101 of 186
    Colofornian to ravenwolf; ansel12
    Moses, Abraham, Jacob.

    Moses' second wife was a Kushite...and There's NOTHIN' in the OT sayin' that Moses' two wives were simultaneous. (What? Ya got somethin' against serial monogamy?)

    As for Abraham...we've had this discussion before Ravenwolf...I showed it all to you then and you couldn't counter it then...as only Sarai referenced Hagar as a "wife"...and she had no authority to do so...Hagar herself didn't...the Angel of the Lord didn't...Abram didn't...Moses the author and/or editor of Genesis didn't...the apostle Paul didn't in his reference to her in Galatians 4... July 13 2013 thread

    And, yes, we know Abraham took Keturah as a "wife" in Gen. 25:1 post Sarah's death...tho it is possible that Keturah may have been a "concubine" while Sarah was still alive. But we can't make accusations based upon possibles, can we?

    As for Jacob, his polygamy was ushered in by pure deception. Since when is deception to be honored as some cultural redefinition of marriage, which God defined in Genesis 2 and Jesus reiterated in matthew 19?

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 12:44:19 PM PST · 96 of 186
    Colofornian to greyfoxx39; AnglePark; All
    Yes, GF...and look at the history of FR when we've seen similar kinds of accusations...

    A Mormon once blamed FREEPERs when a Mormon bishop was shot in Visalia several years back. 'Twas just a knee-jerk reaction...and before the Mormon poster realized that the shooter was tied to Mormonism!

    So what happened to the Mormon poster for wading into these kinds of groundless accusations? (He got zotted)

    When you get a FR poster beginning to accuse Christians & Christian FREEPERS that THEY are the reasons for murders, this is a poster to start watching for zottability!

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 12:38:12 PM PST · 95 of 186
    Colofornian to AnglePark
    ...how does persecution start? Does it jump to violence, or begin with words?

    By this insinuation, when Jesus called the Pharisees "sons" of the devil (John 8), then you think Jesus was the sparkplug of later "persecution" versus Jewish leaders?

    (Give me a break...You need to watch who you wind up accusing by parallel examples)

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 12:35:43 PM PST · 94 of 186
    Colofornian to AnglePark
    When religious persecution rears its ugly head in America — it’s a matter of when, not if — how many FReepers will willingly participate, how many will be silent because they agree, and how many more will be silent because they are afraid?

    Religious oppression in this country already at work...bakers who get forced out of business because they won't succumb to marital redefinition...

    Prolifers who get assaulted at abortion clinics because of their stances for the preborn.

    People who either lose their jobs or won't get promoted because they won't tow the line re: the "diversity" agenda.

    Even in history, much of the 1960s Civil Rights movement was rooted in church-based leaders. And some of the KKK actions were against Catholicism as well as black Christians.

    And the first 9/11 attack in America occurred in 1857 when the Mormons attacked the Fancher-Baker party moving thru Utah...had that party been Mormon...they would have had safe passsage. But because they weren't 120 girls, boys, their moms & dads were killed by mormons at point blank range; their horses & property stolen; their clothes ripped off the dead bodies, wash & reworn by Mormons in Southern Utah; and several small children -- the ones too young to testify against the Mormon murderers...kidnapped for a few years.

    But I guess you've turned a blind eye to history & the present, eh?

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 10:44:01 AM PST · 81 of 186
    Colofornian to Ouchthatonehurt; All
    In my experience the Mormon tree has produced good fruit. Harry Reid notwithstanding.

    Sexual abuse rates very high in Utah. Affinity fraud just from 2009-2012 among Mormons in the billions...(have exact links if you want 'em)

    As for perceived "good fruit"...God looks at the motivation. And, if the motivation is auditioning for godhood, I have it on good authority that an anti-idolatrous God doesn't appreciate "competition."

  • Itís Official: Mormon Founder Had Up to 40 Wives

    11/11/2014 10:39:16 AM PST · 79 of 186
    Colofornian to AnglePark; backwoods-engineer; All
    He only wants to spread the gospel, and never talks ill of others. Ever. He wants to BUILD something good, not tear things down. See the difference, FRiend?

    Question...then...do you accuse Jesus of "tearing down"? (And was some of Jesus' tearing down necessary?)

    For specifics see:

    Key example #1: Referenced legalistic Pharisees as sons of Satan

    42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. 43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46 Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47 Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.”

    2. Other passages where Jesus took on the legalists

    (And Note: Mormonism is the most prominent legalism of our era.)

    Verse consideration #1: Jesus called the Pharisees "blind guides" (Matt. 15:13). Somebody who is a guide is more involved with others than people who simply have a bad heart condition. The fact is these teachers of the law were the spiritual surgeons of their day. Would you want such a blind surgeon operating on you? The issue we're talking about here is not simply that the Pharisees' own heart condition was poor -- but that they were involved in teaching, guiding many others! We need to understand the cultural dimension of this in light of Luke 11:52 -- that the Pharisees took away the key to knowledge.

    Verse consideration #2: [Yet another example of exported legalism] Matt. 23:4: They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on OTHER PEOPLE'S shoulders..."

    Verse consideration #3: You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to. (Matt 23:13)

    The Pharisees consistently rejected the Lord's teaching of truth; and Jesus, much to your apparent chagrin, criticized them rather openly for it. Here's yet another example:

    Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46 Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don’t you believe me? 47 Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.” (John 8:46-47)

    You need to even look @ the broader context of the last part of John 8 -- where Jesus references the Pharisees as "children of the devil."

    I don't think somebody can be more "harsh" in speaking the truth than to say to a group of religious people:
    (a) "You don't belong to God"
    (b) And the reason you don't belong to God is because you don't hear the truth He speaks ("hears what God says")
    (c) And you reject the truth I'm telling you right now ("you do not believe me...why don't you believe me?")
    (d) And on top of that (the broader context of John 8), you are of your father, the devil, whose native language is lies!

    How did the apostle Paul deal with the legalistically-minded Galatians? Paul referenced the legalistic Galatians twice as "foolish" and once as "bewitched" a gentle exhortation?

    Vitriolic?

    More Jesus on the legalists:

    Matt. 15:9: But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
    Matt. 16:12: ...guard against the yeast...against the TEACHING of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
    Luke 11:52: ... you have taken away the key to knowledge.
    John 8:44,47: You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies…The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.
    Matthew 23:2-4: 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4 They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them.

    Mark 7:6-8,13: He replied, “Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written: “‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. 7 They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.’ 8 You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to human traditions.” …13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”

    Matthew 23:2-7, 13-34 : 2 “The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses’ seat. 3 So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach. 4 They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them. 5 “Everything they do is done for people to see: They make their phylacteries wide and the tassels on their garments long; 6 they love the place of honor at banquets and the most important seats in the synagogues; 7 they love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and to be called ‘Rabbi’ by others.
    13 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.
    15 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when you have succeeded, you make them twice as much a child of hell as you are.
    16 “Woe to you, blind guides! You say, ‘If anyone swears by the temple, it means nothing; but anyone who swears by the gold of the temple is bound by that oath.’ 17 You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold sacred? 18 You also say, ‘If anyone swears by the altar, it means nothing; but anyone who swears by the gift on the altar is bound by that oath.’ 19 You blind men! Which is greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred? 20 Therefore, anyone who swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. 21 And anyone who swears by the temple swears by it and by the one who dwells in it. 22 And anyone who swears by heaven swears by God’s throne and by the one who sits on it.

    23 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cumin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former. 24 You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel.

    25 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26 Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.

    27 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean. 28 In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.

    29 “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. 30 And you say, ‘If we had lived in the days of our ancestors, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 So you testify against yourselves that you are the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. 32 Go ahead, then, and complete what your ancestors started!

    33 “You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell? 34 Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers. Some of them you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from town to town.