Mormon ousted as an apostate

East Valley Tribune—Phoenix, AZ, MSNBC ^ | Sept 23, 2007 | Lawn Griffiths

[colorcountry]

Being excommunicated for apostasy by the Mormon church is one thing, but Lyndon Lamborn is livid that his stake president has ordered bishops in eight Mesa wards to take the rare step of announcing disciplinary action against him to church members today. "I thought if he could go public, so can I," said Lamborn, a lifelong member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who said his research into church history gave him "thousands of reasons the church can't be what it claims to be."

Stake President R. James Molina acknowledged Friday he intends to have Lamborn's excommunication announced to the wards at men's priesthood meetings and womens Relief Society gatherings, even with Lamborn now taking his case public. Molina, as well as officials at church headquarters in Salt Lake City, call such a public warning about an ousted member extremely rare. They say, however, church members must be protected from what discordant ex-followers may say to damage the church...................

[colorcountry]

yeah, stupid me....ROTFLMHO

Wine is an alcoholic beverage resulting from the fermentation of grapes or grape juice. The word comes from the Latin vinum (related to Greek οἶνος) - referring to both "wine" and the "vine". Wine-like beverages can also be made from other fruits or from flowers or grains. In this sense the word wine is used with a qualifier, for example, elderberry wine. The word wine by itself always means grape wine. This terminology is often defined by law.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wines - Definition in context

[restornu]

you got yours I got mine!:)

Wine in the Bible
http://bible-christian.org/wine.html

[colorcountry]

resty, now I understand you aren’t a nutritionist or a vintner, but how long are grapes on the vine? A few weeks out of the year, perhaps? But let’s go so far as to say there are ripened grapes on the vine for a whole month, so maybe, just maybe, the people (before refrigeration) had fresh stomped grapejuice for a month out of every year. How long do you think you could keep grape juice in a warm climate before it turned rancid or fermented?

Seriously, try it. Set some grapejuice out on your kitchen counter for a month, then drink it.....I’m sure that’s what all the people in Biblical times did, they just drank old rank grapejuice (that hadn’t fermented) LOL

You are too, too funny dear.

[JRochelle]

But CC, he had to do that! He had to diddle those women! An angel commanded him to do it! His very life was at stake!

---

—one could argue that his life was taken because of polygamy—

[colorcountry]

—one could argue that his life was taken because of polygamy—" Yes, ma'am, one certainly could. ,-)

[restornu]

Polyandry

One misconception concerning Joseph's polyandry is that it was a practice represented in only one or two unusual marriages; however, fully one-third of Joseph's plural wives, eleven of them, were polyandrous.⁴⁸

In regard to polyandry, Daynes wrote: "Perhaps nothing is less understood than Joseph Smith's sealings to women already married, because the evidence supports conflicting interpretations."⁴⁹

McKeever and Johnson base their shallow glimpse of this subject on what at times could be described as the historical guesswork of Compton, which carries its own subsequent set of problems. The authors merely repeat one sentence from Compton's book and fail to mention or consider any of Compton's long list of theories for reasons behind polyandry which might provide some understanding for the reader.⁵⁰

Regardless that Compton's dismissed theories remain long on speculation and short on fact, if McKeever and Johnson are going to base their writings on another author's research, then they ought to at least discuss the meaning of the original author's findings as defined by that author. Instead, McKeever and Johnson decide for themselves what miniscule item their readers will see of Compton's work and from there determine how their readers will interpret it. While Compton apparently sees no problem in his own self-described theorizing of uncertainties, this does not give license for McKeever and Johnson to launch their own undocumented branch of speculation. For example, McKeever and Johnson conclude from their miniscule sampling of Compton that Joseph committed adultery and wonder how Latter-day Saints can reconcile that in light of biblical prohibitions against it. Besides the fact that God at times commands men to do things that He at other times forbids them from doing,⁵¹ for Joseph, barriers to marriage were removed. Richard Van Wagoner, one of McKeever and Johnson's key sources, notes that Joseph "believed he had been given powers that transcended civil law. Claiming sole responsibility for binding and unbinding marriages on earth and in heaven, he did not consider it necessary to obtain civil marriage licenses or divorce decrees. Whenever he deemed it appropriate he could release a woman from her earthly marriage and seal her to himself or to another with no stigma of adultery."⁵² Similarly, Daynes noted that with marital barriers removed, there was no need to commit acts of adultery or fornication,⁵³ thus, Joseph's plural marriages were "not adultery because a man could not commit adultery with wives who belonged to him."⁵⁴ Ultimately, the generalized and speculative characterizations regarding these unique marriages find Joseph labeled by a term (polyandry) that does not apply in the fullest sense of definition and degree of intimate involvement implied by its use.

Looking beyond McKeever and Johnson's obsession with sexual triangulation, the logical and probable conclusion to be drawn from Joseph's practice is that God inspired and commanded him to be sealed to these women as both a means to test their faith and in certain cases establish eternal links.⁵⁵ Glen M. Leonard described those few that entered into the relationships as having to "endure a more severe test of their faith." He recounted Joseph's request of Heber C. Kimball to take his wife as his own eternal companion. While Heber labored extensively with "soul-searching, fasting, and prayer,"⁵⁶ he finally agreed to give her to Joseph. When Heber told Joseph of his decision, the prophet simply wept at his act of faith.⁵⁷ It was at this point, which is key, that Joseph informed Kimball "that the request was an Abrahamic test of his willingness to submit his will to the Lord's and that the sacrifice of his wife would not be required."⁵⁸ Joseph then sealed Heber and his wife as eternal mates. John Taylor passed this test with the same results. After Taylor informed the prophet that he could have his wife, Joseph said that he did not want her, rather he simply wanted to know where he stood.⁵⁹ In a limited number of other instances, of which direct detail is lacking, some did allow their wives to be sealed to Joseph for eternity. "This ordinance," notes Leonard, "ensured the woman a marriage that would be valid in the resurrection no matter what became of her temporary, civil agreement. For some, it may have seemed the only way to gain that sacred promise."⁶⁰

In 1854, Jedediah M. Grant, whom Compton also cites in one of his theories, provided some unique insight into why a few early Saints had to endure the test:

What would a man of God say, who felt aright, when Joseph asked him for his money? He would say, "Yes, and I wish I had more to help to build up the kingdom of God." Or if he came and said, "I want your wife?" "O yes," he would say, "here she is, there are plenty more."

...I would ask you if Jehovah has not in all ages tried His people by the power of Lucifer and his associates; and on the other hand, has He not tried them and proved them by His Prophets? Did the Lord actually want Abraham to kill Isaac? Did the Prophet Joseph want every man's wife he asked for? He did not, but in that thing was the grand thread of the Priesthood developed. The grand object in view was to try the people of God, to see what was in them. If such a man of God should come to me and say, "I want your gold and silver, or your wives," I should say, "Here they are, I wish I had more to give you, take all I have got." A man who has got the Spirit of God, and the light of eternity in him, has no trouble about such matters.

I am talking now of the present day. There was a time when we could be tried pretty severely upon these points, but I now could pick you out hundreds of men that cannot be tried in this way, but they will hand over every thing they possess. They understand the nature of such doctrines, and the object of such requirements. They know it is to prove the people, both men and women, and to develop what they will do. How can the Priesthood judge the people, if it does not prove them.⁶¹

Speculation aside, this form of pseudo-polyandry was about God trying His people and eternal relationships. Joseph's sealings to these women highlight principles of faith and eternal marriage. These are the aspects characterized in Joseph amidst the challenging issue of understanding polyandry and its underlying true purposes.

Polyandry and Intimacy Issues

Some might argue that these relationships were strictly platonic. Compton disagrees, "Though it is possible that Joseph had some marriages in which there were no sexual relations, there is no explicit or convincing evidence for such a marriage (except, perhaps, in the cases of the older wives). And in a significant number of Joseph's marriages, there is evidence for sexual relations."⁶²

While McKeever and Johnson readily accept the insinuation that all of Joseph's relationships were sexual, they fail to consider or even recognize the speculative (and what at times has been described as the self-serving) nature of Compton's exploration of polyandrous marriages. Sources do not show nor is there any reliable evidence that the way Joseph practiced polyandry included sexual or familial relations. Compton's only hint of possible intimacy with a married wife is a second-hand late account in 1915 wherein a daughter of one of Joseph's married wives related a story told to her thirty-three years earlier, that she was Joseph's child. This debatable piece of evidence, taken at face value, has been plausibly interpreted as meaning either that Joseph was the biological father or that he was the father in merely a spiritual sense. Either way, if the married wife, Sylvia Sessions, meant with certainty that Joseph was the biological father, she obviously would have to have been restricting her relationship to Joseph and not her excommunicated first husband,⁶³ thus demonstrating a faulty application of the definition of polyandry.

Although Joseph fathered some children through marriages with wives that had been single, a parallel case cannot be made which supports that type of intimacy with wives that had been married to others. While Compton finds evidence for sexual relations in some marriages, he admits the possibility that other marriages had no sexual relations, which marriages those are, he does not specifically say.⁶⁴ Compton's ultimate position is that if there is no good evidence to prove a non-intimate relationship, then the union must be sexual. The broad and often speculative nature of Compton's work can be shown in his treatment of Zina Huntington Jacobs' relationship with Joseph: "Nothing specific is known about sexuality in their marriage, though judging from Smith's other marriages, sexuality was probably included."⁶⁵ Speculation based on "probably included" hardly amounts to fact, although certain critics (such as McKeever and Johnson) seem to think it does.

Compton's treatment of polyandry, as reflected in McKeever and Johnson's subsequent use, is summarized by Richard Lloyd Anderson as

inconsistent in the standards of judgment applied to polyandry. For woman after woman in this book, the following statement or its equivalent is made: "Absolutely nothing is known of this marriage after the ceremony"... Good history is characterized by careful interpretation of reliable documents, together with disclosing what cannot be determined. But Compton reverses these responsible methods in discussing sexuality, particularly in regard to the eight sealings to women with living husbands. He begins by probing the relatively small number of statements on physical relations in all marriages. These add up to first-, second-, and third-hand statements about some eight women, about a fourth of the Prophet's polygamous wives... This uneven mixture is then characterized as "a great deal of evidence that Joseph Smith had sexual relations with his wives"... That judgment is next intensified without further information...[refer to McKeever quote above]...Stripped of verbiage, this deduction moves in three steps: (1) About 28 percent of Joseph's marriages had full physical dimensions; (2) Evidence for the part may be taken for the whole; (3) Therefore, sexual relations characterized most of his marriages. However, the middle span of this bridge badly sags. In Sacred Loneliness does not have a factual basis for its conclusions regarding polyandry.⁶⁶

[restornu]

I thought the foot notes would work so here is the link

http://www.fairlds.org/Mormonism_201/m20117b.html#en44

[Pan_Yans Wife]

restornu,

I’m really disappointed that you would resort to a personal attack.

Only God sits in the judgement seat and only He can determine where my soul will reside in the hereafter.

To state that I will be placed alongside the Pharisees and Sadducees shows that you have little faith in God’s ability to read one’s soul and determine for Himself where I will belong.

Thankfully, I’ve been saved by the grace of Christ. So, I don’t worry too much about your attempt to read the tea leaves and divine where I belong. I will be with Him, soon enough.

[tantiboh]

~”I’m sorry to tell you this, but yes Abraham WAS an adulterer. Hagar was his wife’s handmaiden and NOT his wife. That IS the very definition of adultery.”~

Alright, so you deny the prophetic calling of Abraham. Fair enough. Not Biblical, but thanks for the clarification. This is, of course, following the logic that Smith must be discounted as a prophet for what you call adultery.

Consistency is of the utmost here, CC. You cannot say that Joseph Smith must be discounted as a prophet for adultery, say that Abraham was an adulterer, and still be true to the Bible’s teachings regarding Abraham’s divine calling. These three things do not mesh; something has to give.

[tantiboh]

~”You are presumptuous. You cannot read my heart and determine when and where I fall short of God’s example, tantiboth. You can not see as He does.”~

Don’t fabricate a personal attack, PYW. I said nothing about your personal state of righteousness. I did say you should not try to redefine God’s definition of right and wrong - by labeling polygamy as adultery, that’s exactly what you do. It is not adultery when it is commanded of God, such as in the case of Abraham.

[MHGinTN]

First of all, she didn't deny Abraham was a prophet/the prophetic calling. That mischaracterization was typically dishonest.

Second, even if Joe Smith didn't touch these wives of other men (and that is something I do not believe because it would make liars out of too many witnesses who knew him well) and only married them while they were married to other men, do you really have no insight into the wrong of breaking marriage vows? Do you really think God would command Abraham to violate the vows he took to Emma, and demand that other women violate the vows they took to their still alive husbands? Are you blind to the lesson taught in the passages regaridng Abimalech and Sarai? Disgusting, simply irrational and disgusting.

[tantiboh]

CC, the debate isn’t over whether Smith engaged in sexual relations with his wives. The question is, did he engage in sexual relations with any of the women sealed to him at the same time they were married to their husbands. There are 8 such cases. There is only 1 of those where there is a credible claim of such, and that claim is secondhand.

Here is the source for my information (though I’m sure you’ll say ‘ick’ when you see FARMS):
http://farms.byu.edu/display.php?table=review&id=290

Is there some gray here? Sure. I continue to study it, and personally, I’m not yet satisfied that I have all the information. Still, I prefer to adhere to the concept of innocence until proof of guilt - and I do, after all, have the testimony in my soul of the Holy Ghost regarding Smith’s divine calling.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

I didn't "fabricate" a personal attack. I didn't ping the moderator, did I?

You implied that I was speaking for God.

I would never do so.

However, as Elsie and I have pointed out on this thread, you are overlooking Jesus' very words regarding adultery.

And you cannot refute them, tantiboh.

Matthew 5:27-28

27. "You have heard that it was said, `Do not commit adultery.'

28. But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

[1000 silverlings]

Scripture says of the redeemed now in heaven , they have "washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb: therefore are they before the throne of God and serve Him day and night in His temple" (Rev. 7:14, 15).

One kingdom, one God, one temple, no marriage in heaven, and so on and so forth. But then you have "another gospel" and better revelations

[JRochelle]

Why would God demand that they commit adultery (one of those BIG sins) in order to test their faith?

Thats so backwards and you know it.

[colorcountry]

You put words into my mouth. I didn’t deny the prophetic calling of Abraham. I said he was a sinner. And he was.

You have a problem with that?

[colorcountry]

Thank you MHG, for defending me against that false accusation. tantiboh must resort to making up claims now, to defend his weak position. Quite telling isn’t it, that he must put words in my mouth about Abraham. Sheesh, I thought he was one of the better ones.

[colorcountry]

CC, the debate isn’t over whether Smith engaged in sexual relations with his wives. The question is, did he engage in sexual relations with any of the women sealed to him at the same time they were married to their husbands.

That might not be the argument you are framing, but you must have missed resty's posts where she was exclaiming that Joseph Smith didn't have sex with any except Emma.....

To quote resty, "Use your higher mind" tanti....LOL

[restornu]

Imagine that!

[Pan_Yans Wife]

There’s nothing to imagine, resty. When the truth is spoken, it is recognized.