ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/gdm/archive/v02.n009

Internet Message Format | 1998-04-05 | 52KB

From: [e-mail] (gdm-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: gdm-digest V2 #9
Reply-To: gdm-digest
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


gdm-digest            Sunday, April 5 1998            Volume 02 : Number 009




----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 15 Mar 1998 20:50:58 -0700
From: "Perry L. Porter" <[e-mail]>
Subject: ---> The 2nd half of the Exegesis of D&C Section 132 By Perry L. Porter Mar 1997

Exegesis of D&C Section 132 By Perry L. Porter Mar 1997

Continued

- -----------------------

31. Repeated that Joseph Smith was a descendent of Abraham. God was
glorified by Abraham's living of the law of polygamy.

In other words, God was made to look more powerfull and important becaue a
famous Biblical figure lived polygamy, thus correct of observence of the
law of plural marriage is essential to making God what he was.

31 This promise is yours also, because ye are of Abraham, and the promise
was made unto Abraham; and by this law is the continuation of the works of
my Father, wherein he glorifieth himself.



32. "Do the works of Abraham", live the law and be saved.

[inconsistent, should read EXALTED, instead of SAVED. Saved from etural
death, by Chirst resurection and attonment, is NOT the same as being
exhalted.]

32 Go ye, therefore, and do the works of Abraham; enter ye into my law and
ye shall be saved.



33. If you don't do like Abraham and live the law you can not receive the
promise of eternal increase of children like Abraham did.

33 But if ye enter not into my law ye cannot receive the promise of my
Father, which he made unto Abraham.



34. Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham because it was the law.  A Biblical
precidence for a prophit's wife to give the prophet a new wife.

34 God commanded Abraham, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham to wife. And why
did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many
people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises.



35. Polygamy not wrong, because it was commanded, even though this section
is written in a defensive posture that the assumption is that polygamy is
wrong.

35 Was Abraham, therefore, under condemnation? Verily I say unto you, Nay;
for I, the Lord, commanded it.



36. Even shedding of innocent blood is ok if you are commanded to do so.
Some laws are less everlasting than others.

36 Abraham was commanded to offer his son Isaac; nevertheless, it was
written: Thou shalt not kill. Abraham, however, did not refuse, and it was
accounted unto him for righteousness.



37. Concubines are ok because they were within the law of Abraham, Isaac
and Jacob because they were commanded to do so. These polygamists became
Gods because they lived the law.

[Implied is that they had no sex outside the prescribed law.  Sex with no
intent to product children, is ok if it is done under the ospisis of the
New and Ever Covenent.]

37 Abraham received concubines, and they bore him children; and it was
accounted unto him for righteousness, because they were given unto him,
and he abode in my law; as Isaac also and Jacob did none other things than
that which they were commanded; and because they did none other things
than that which they were commanded, they have entered into their
exaltation, according to the promises, and sit upon thrones, and are not
angels but are Gods.



38. David, Moses and many others from Adam to now took many wives which
was not wrong as long as the women were given to them according to the
law.

38 David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and
Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning
of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those
things which they received not of me.



39. David's wives and concubines were authorized by Nathan and other
prophets that had keys. Except for causing the death of Uriah so as to
take his wife Bathshiba. David lost his exaltation and his wives were
given to another.

[Did the wives have any choice in this matter?]

39 David's wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of
Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this
power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case
of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation,
and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world,
for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord.



40. Joseph Smith to restore all tings. Joseph Smith to be given any women
he asks for, because the law that permits or requires such. Joseph Smith
asks questions, and get's the law as an answer.

40 I am the Lord thy God, and I gave unto thee, my servant Joseph, an
appointment, and restore all things. Ask what ye will, and it shall be
given unto you according to my word.



41. Joseph Smith asked about adultery. If a man marries a wife in the New
and Everlasting Covenant and she has sex with a man that she was NOT
married to or had been anointed to him during an endowment ceremony, she
has committed adultery and she will be damned.

41 And as ye have asked concerning adultery, verily, verily, I say unto
you, if a man receiveth a wife in the new and everlasting covenant, and if
she be with another man, and I have not appointed unto her by the holy
anointing, she hath committed adultery and shall be destroyed.



42. Sex with a man other than her husband, is adultery for women, unless
she has a New and Everlasting Covenant type of marriage.

[It is ambiguous as to with whom she has a covenant. It must mean that she
can have relations with someone other than her regular husband, if her
other husband's marriage is of the New and Everlasting Covenant type of
marriage. At face value this Scripture on it's own tends to sound out of
character for typical adultery. However, in the cases where Joseph Smith
took as a plural wife, a women that was married to another man civilly,
that marriage was not seen as less valid as a New and Everlasting Covenant
marriage, therefore the women was not committing adultery, as in the case
of Mary Elizabeth Rollings Lightner, whom was still civilly married and
had children by Adam Lightner. Out of that context, the direct
interpretation of this scripture would seem unusual.]

42 If she be not in the new and everlasting covenant, and she be with
another man, she has committed adultery.



43. If a man has sex outside of his Non-New and Everlasting Covenant
marriage it is adultery, but it does not state that he will be destroyed.

[This scripture is also ambiguous, as it refers to the man as being the
husband of the Women that has a civil marriage. But it states that if he
was under a vow, then he has broken his vow. Now why state the obvious, he
is referred to as being her husband, so of course he is under a vow.
Unless it intend that this vow refers to a New and Everlasting Covenant
vow. Also implied with verse 41 is that women are expendable, while men
are not.]

43 And if her husband be with another woman, and he was under a vow, he
hath broken his vow and hath committed adultery.



44. If a women's husband has had sex outside his marriage vows Joseph
Smith has been granted the priesthood power to give this women to a
non-adulterous man.

[No mention if she is given a choice in this matter or not. It does not
say that Joseph Smith was given the powers over the reverse situation.
i.e. a women commits adultery, her husband can be given to another worthy
women. The only remedy offered by this revelation is that she is to be
destroyed.]

44 And if she hath not committed adultery, but is innocent and hath not
broken her vow, and she knoweth it, and I reveal it unto you, my servant
Joseph, then shall you have power, by the power of my Holy Priesthood, to
take her and give her unto him that hath not committed adultery but hath
been faithful; for he shall be made ruler over many.



45. All keys and power have been restored to Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith to
know all things at sometime.

[This revelation supposedly was given in 1831, but not written down until
1843, less than a year before his death. Other sections of the D&C refer
to Joseph Smith receiving even more keys than "All keys". Most notably and
the endowment. Oddly Joseph had upwards to 15 plural wives before he gave
the first endowments on May 4th 1842. How could he have keys to things
such as the second anointing as far back as 1831 when he didn't know all
there was to know about the first endowment until 1842. Apparently "All
keys and power" is not as encompassing, once you start checking the dates
out.]

45 For I have conferred upon you the keys and power of the priesthood,
wherein I restore all things, and make known unto you all things in due
time.



46. Joseph Smith married (sealed) a couple on earth, therefore they are
married (sealed) in heaven at the same moment. Bind according to word, or
law, becomes bound in heaven. The Sins that Joseph Smith forgives here are
forgiven in heaven. Those sins that Joseph Smith chooses NOT to forgive,
will not be forgiven in heaven.

46 And verily, verily, I say unto you, that whatsoever you seal on earth
shall be sealed in heaven; and whatsoever you bind on earth, in my name
and by my word, saith the Lord, it shall be eternally bound in the
heavens; and whosesoever sins you remit on earth shall be remitted
eternally in the heavens; and whosesoever sins you retain on earth shall
be retained in heaven.



47. Joseph Smith has power to bless or curse anyone he feels like cursing.

47 And again, verily I say, whomsoever you bless I will bless, and
whomsoever you curse I will curse, saith the Lord; for I, the Lord, am thy
God.



48. Whenever Joseph Smith marries by the law will not be cursed here or in
heaven.

48 And again, verily I say unto you, my servant Joseph, that whatsoever
you give on earth, and to whomsoever you give any one on earth, by my word
and according to my law, it shall be visited with blessings and not
cursings, and with my power, saith the Lord, and shall be without
condemnation on earth and in heaven.



49. God will side with Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith told that he has earned
his exaltation with other polygamists.

49 For I am the Lord thy God, and will be with thee even unto the end of
the world, and through all eternity; for verily I seal upon you your
exaltation, and prepare a throne for you in the kingdom of my Father, with
Abraham your father.



50. God recognizes Joseph Smith sacrifices and forgives Joseph Smith's
sins and God makes plans to exalt Joseph Smith as he did Abraham for
obeying God's unreasonable test of faith.

50 Behold, I have seen your sacrifices, and will forgive all your sins; I
have seen your sacrifices in obedience to that which I have told you. Go,
therefore, and I make a way for your escape, as I accepted the offering of
Abraham of his son Isaac.



51. Emma whom was endowed and married to Joseph Smith by way of the New
and Everlasting Covenant. Emma doesn't have to take the wife Joseph Smith
was asking for. God was just testing, as he did with Abraham.

51 Verily, I say unto you: A commandment I give unto mine handmaid, Emma
Smith, your wife, whom I have given unto you, that she stay herself and
partake not of that which I commanded you to offer unto her; for I did it,
saith the Lord, to prove you all, as I did Abraham, and that I might
require an offering at your hand, by covenant and sacrifice.



52. Emma told to accept all of Joseph Smith's current wives, but if Joseph
Smith brings Emma a slut for her approval, Emma can say no. If they lie
about being a slut, that slut will be destroyed.

[In other workds, if Joseph Smith brings Emma a virgin or chase women for
approval, Emma must approve.]

52 And let mine handmaid, Emma Smith, receive all those that have been
given unto my servant Joseph, and who are virtuous and pure before me; and
those who are not pure, and have said they were pure, shall be destroyed,
saith the Lord God.



53. Emma must Obey God in that Joseph Smith now has many vies and he will
get more.

53 For I am the Lord thy God and ye shall obey my voice; and I give unto
my servant Joseph that he shall be made ruler over many things; for he
hath been faithful over a few things, and from henceforth I will
strengthen him.



54. Emma to be faithful to Joseph Smith and live the commandment and law
or Joseph Smith would be destroyed.

54 And I command mine handmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my
servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this
commandment she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord; for I am the Lord thy
God, and will destroy her if she abide not in my law.



55. If Emma does not live the covenant Joseph Smith will have to do Emma's
works of salvation, for Emma, just as Joseph Smith had said. In spite of
what ever course Emma takes, God will bless Joseph Smith a 100 times, with
everything, included wives and children, not with Emma.

55 But if she will not abide this commandment, then shall my servant
Joseph do all things for her, even as he hath said; and I will bless him
and multiply him and give unto him an hundredfold in this world, of
fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, houses and lands, wives and
children, and crowns of eternal lives in the eternal worlds.



56. Emma is to forgive Joseph Smith's sins so that her sins will also be
forgiven, and Emma will be blessed if she does forgive Joseph.

[Since this section center around marriage and fedelity or lack there of
to marriage, is this the implication of what sins of which Emma is to for
give Joseph?]

56 And again, verily I say, let mine handmaid forgive my servant Joseph
his trespasses; and then shall she be forgiven her trespasses, wherein she
has trespassed against me; and I, the Lord thy God, will bless her, and
multiply her, and make her heart to rejoice.



57. Joseph Smith is NOT to sell property (or property signed jointly with
Emma), because Satan would like that. Repeat Joseph Smith was in God's
good favor as was Abraham.

57 And again, I say, let not my servant Joseph put his property out of his
hands, lest an enemy come and destroy him; for Satan seeketh to destroy;
for I am the Lord thy God, and he is my servant; and behold, and lo, I am
with him, as I was with Abraham, thy father, even unto his exaltation and
glory.



58. law of Priesthood has many aspects.

58 Now, as touching the law of the priesthood, there are many things
pertaining thereunto.



59. Joseph Smith was correctly called and set apart like Abraham, and had
his Endowments and was married by the word and law of God. Joseph Smith's
relations were not common sin (adultery) but are justified as ok by God.

59 Verily, if a man be called of my Father, as was Aaron, by mine own
voice, and by the voice of him that sent me, and I have endowed him with
the keys of the power of this priesthood, if he do anything in my name,
and according to my law and by my word, he will not commit sin, and I will
justify him.  In other words, Joseph Smith is being asked to make this
sacrifice of living Plural marriage because of past sins of Joseph Smith.



60. Don't let anyone pick on Joseph Smith for living plural marriage,
because Joseph Smith is making the sacrifice that God asked him to, as a
payment for Joseph Smith's transgressions.

60 Let no one, therefore, set on my servant Joseph; for I will justify
him; for he shall do the sacrifice which I require at his hands for his
transgressions, saith the Lord your God.



61. The law of God is, that if a man marry a virgin and wants to have
another virgin, he can have her if the first wife gives her ok and the 2nd
candidate really is a virgin. This man can not commit adultery by having
sex only with the virgin women "given" to him.

61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood--if any man
espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her
consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have
vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for
they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that
belongeth unto him and to no one else.



62. If a man have 10 virgin plural wives given to him by the law he can
have sex with all 10 and no adultery is happening.

62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit
adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore
is he justified.



63. If any of the 10 virgins has sex with any other man, she shall be
destroyed because the virgin belongs to the 1st man, for the purpose of
making children, not making love, and to fulfill Abraham's promise of
Eternal child bearing, which is part of exaltation in the after life, thus
glorifying God.

63 But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall
be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed;
for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according
to my commandment, and to fulfil the promise which was given by my Father
before the foundation of the world, and for their exaltation in the
eternal worlds, that they may bear the souls of men; for herein is the
work of my Father continued, that he may be glorified.



64. Any endowed priesthood man that is married and teachers her the law of
plural marriage, she must obey or be destroyed.

Women must give whatever wives the man asks for or the women will be
destroyed, because God intends on having the law lived by someone.

64 And again, verily, verily, I say unto you, if any man have a wife, who
holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my
priesthood, as pertaining to these things, then shall she believe and
administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God;
for I will destroy her; for I will magnify my name upon all those who
receive and abide in my law.



65. If wife is not willing to give her husband other wives according this
God's word, then she becomes the transgressor. In this cas, the man is
exempt from the law of Sarah, whom obeyed the law and gave Abraham Hagar
as his wife. The law of Sara is ...

[not giving your husband many virgins, is an act of commission, not an act
of omission]

65 Therefore, it shall be lawful in me, if she receive not this law, for
him to receive all things whatsoever I, the Lord his God, will give unto
him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my
word; and she then becomes the transgressor; and he is exempt from the law
of Sarah, who administered unto Abraham according to the law when I
commanded Abraham to take Hagar to wife.



66. God will tell more about the law later.

[Again this revelation was given 12 years ago, but only written down in
1842, so hows it seems that now is the time to give more about the law,
since many more people than just Joseph Smith has been asked to live it
previous to this time.

66 And now, as pertaining to this law, verily, verily, I say unto you, I
will reveal more unto you, hereafter; therefore, let this suffice for the
present. Behold, I am Alpha and Omega. Amen.





Joseph Smith's take on King David.

The following are some quotes that either come from Joseph Smith or he was
the probable influence on the following view of King David.  Considering
some similarities to Joseph's relationship with Fanny Alger and other
Nauvoo plural wives, the husbands of some of those wives were sent far
away on Missions, I find this a very interesting view of David, as it
relates to convincing Emma of the divine origin of Joseph's plural
marriages.





Murderers Have No Forgiveness

A murderer, for instance, on that sheds innocent blood, cannot have
forgiveness. David sought repentance at the hand of God carefully with
tears, for the murder of Uriah; but he could only get it through hell: he
got a promise that his soul should not be left in hell.

Although David was a king, he never did obtain the spirit and power of
Elijah and the fullness of the Priesthood; and the Priesthood that he
received, and the throne and kingdom of David is to be taken from him and
given to another by the name of David in the last days, raised up out of
his lineage.

Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Section Six 1843 44, p.339



27.& Although David was anointed a king by the Prophet Samuel, it was not,
according to this teaching of Joseph Smith, after the order of the fulness
of the Melchizedek Priesthood (see 1 Samuel 16:12-13). For this reason,
when David ordered the murder of Uriah (2 Samuel 11), he did not commit
the unpardonable sin.

Ehat & Cook, Words, 10 March 1844 Note, p.390



... while, for the crime of adultery with Bathsheba, and for ordering
Uriah to be put in the front of battle in a time of war, where he was
slain by the enemy, the Priesthood, and the kingdom were taken from David,
the man after God's own heart, and his soul was thrust into hell. Why?
Because "the Holy Ghost spake by the mouth of David" or, in other words,
David possessed the gift of the Holy Ghost, and had power to speak by the
light thereof. But even David, though guilty of adultery and murder of
Uriah, obtained the promise that his soul should not be left in hell,
which means, as I understand it, that even he shall escape the second
death.

Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine, p.433



Status of King David

Question: "Some time ago the question came up as to the standing of King
David because of his sin as pertaining to Uriah.

Because we understand there is no forgiveness for murder some of the class
felt he lost his priesthood and retrogressed from the time of this
incident. Others felt that inasmuch as David repented and abhorred his sin
and indicated his sorrow, that he did not lose his priesthood. Would you
please enlighten us? Whet is the teaching of the Church on this point?
What is his status?"

Answer: David sorely repented all his life, but his sin was so great that
he lost everything and the Prophet Joseph Smith has given us this
information. Speaking of the Jews whom Peter addressed as recorded in the
third chapter of Acts, they could not receive forgiveness for their sins,
although they repented, until Christ comes, and the same is true of David.
These are the words of the Prophet to the Jews:

A murderer, for instance, one that sheds innocent blood, cannot have
forgiveness. David sought repentance at the hand of God carefully with
tears, for the murder of Uriah; but he could only get it through hell; he
got a promise that his soul should not be left in hell.

Although David was a king, he never did obtain the spirit and power of
Elijah and the fulness of the priesthood; and the priesthood that he
received, and the throne and kingdom of David is to be taken from him and
given to another by the name of David in the last days, raised up out of
his lineage.

. . . "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be
blotted out, when the times of refreshing (redemption) shall come from the
presence of the Lord, and he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was
preached unto you," &c.1 ( Acts 3:19-21.)The time of redemption here had
reference to the time when Christ should come; then, and not till then,
would their sins be blotted out. Why? Because they were murderers, and no
murderer hath eternal life. Even David must wait for those times of
refreshing, before he can come forth and his sins be blotted out. For
Peter, speaking of him says, "David hath not yet ascended into heaven, for
his sepulchre is with us to this day."2 ( Ibid., 2:29) His remains were
then in the tomb. Now, we read that many bodies of the Saints arose at
Christ's resurrection, probably all the Saints, but it seems that David
did not.3 ( Matthew 27:52-53.)Why? Because he had been a murderer. . . 4 (
Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pp. 239, 188.)

Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, Vol. 3, p.145



When we see each other in the morning, our sleep has often not been the
same, even though we usually each say the same "Good morning." Uriah
apparently slept very well when, as a loyal lieutenant of King David, he
slept with the servants on the floor at King David's door.. Uriah was
loyal to his men "in the open fields," to his king, and to his wife,
Bathsheba. By contrast, one cannot help but wonder how well the conspiring
and adulterous David slept that same night! The later lamentations of
David suggest that many sleepless nights followed his sending of the
uncompromised Uriah to his death-in the "forefront of the hottest battle,"
where the "valiant men were." Uriah fell, but David plummeted from the
privileged place reserved for him in the next world. (See 2 Samuel 11.)

Neal A. Maxwell, Deposition of a Disciple, p.77



David's repentance.

King James Version 1 Kings 15:5

Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the Lord, and turned
not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life,
save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite.

Joseph Smith Translation (forerly the Inspired version) 1 Kings 15:5

Because David did right in the eyes of the Lord, and turned not aside from
all that he commanded him, to sin against the Lord; but repented of the
evil all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the
Hittite, wherein the Lord cursed him.



After David had repented with all his heart of his crime with the wife of
Uriah, he, notwithstanding the number of wives he had previously taken,
took Bathsheba legally, and by that legal marriage Solomon was born; the
child born of her unto David, begotten illegally, being a bastard,
displeased the Lord and He struck it with death; but with Solomon, a legal
issue from the same woman, the Lord was so pleased that He ordained
Solomon and set him on the throne of his father David. This shows the
difference between the two classes of posterity, the one begotten
illegally, the other in the order of marriage. If Solomon had been a
bastard, as this pious generation would have us suppose, instead of being
blessed of the Lord and raised to the throne of his father, he would have
been banished from the congregation of Israel and his seed after him for
ten generations. But, notwithstanding that he was so highly blessed and
honored of the Lord, there was room for him to transgress and fall, and in
the end he did so. For a long time the Lord blessed Solomon, but
eventually he violated that law which the Lord had given forbidding Israel
to take wives from the idolatrous nations, and some of those wives
succeeded in turning his heart from the Lord, and induced him to worship
the heathen Gods, and the Lord was angry with him and, as it is recorded
in the Book of Mormon, considered the acts of Solomon an abomination in
His sight.

Journal of Discourses, Vol.13, p.191 - p.192, Orson Pratt, October 7, 1869



The greatest promise, it seems, that God could give to Abraham was that
his seed should be as the stars for multitude and as innumerable as the
sand upon the sea shore, and that in him and his posterity all the nations
of the earth should be blessed. It seemed to be the greatest gift that God
could pronounce upon him; at any rate, I do not read of anything that He
puts ahead of this. David also, though a transgressor is the matter of
Uriah the Hittite, and though deprived of many of his blessings because of
this great sin, yet the Lord had promised him that He would build him a
sure house; and if you will read the history of the dynasty you will see
how remarkably God fulfilled His word in that regard, and how He preserved
his seed. Notwithstanding they were wicked men, He preserved them. He said
that He had made promises to His servant David, which He would fulfill;
and I have no doubt that in these days, when the time shall come, the seed
of David will be found upon the earth just as the Lord said it should be.

Collected Discourses, Vol.5, George Q. Cannon, June 7, 1896



As a polygamist, David, the anointed King and Prophet of Israel, was
called a man after God's own heart; and God Himself expressly declares, by
the mouth of Nathan the Prophet, that he gave him his wives.

Parley Pratt Autobiography(1985), p.385



All original writings of mine are just that, to reproduce, forward or use,
parts or whole, you need to get permission from [e-mail] firt.



Ciao Perry     <[e-mail]>    http://pobox.com/~plporter

- -

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 05 Apr 1998 21:33:14 -0700
From: "Perry L. Porter" <[e-mail]>
Subject: ---> Brigham Young Manual hits the news

Subject: BY Manual hits the news

From the Idaho State Journal, in Pocatello.

The title is "Mormon Church Manual paints Polygamist Young as Monogamist".

Mormon church manual paints polygamist Young as monogamist

Officials says it is not meant to be a biography of the leader

By Vern Anderson The Associated Press

SALT LAKE CITY - Valeen Tippetts Avery, a professor of history at Northern
Arizona University, had never met the perplexed young woman who came
knocking at her door.

Newly married to a Mormon, the student had been reading up on the faith
and attending its women's auxiliary. She was confused now, and someone had
suggested she talk to Avery.

''Dr. Avery,'' she said, ''I just got the new Relief Society manual, which
is about Brigham Young, and he only has one wife.''

Avery, a Mormon who knew the pioneer leader had 55 wives, couldn't explain
why the lesson manual being used since January by male and female church
members in 22 languages paints America's most famous polygamist as a
monogamist.

But she had some advice.

''The Mormon church is trying to say to the new people coming into the
church, as well as to the larger American society, that there was nothing
questionable in the Mormon past,'' Avery told the woman. ''And if you want
answers to these kinds of sticky questions, you're not going to find them
inside accepted Mormon manuals and doctrines.''

The absence of any mention of polygamy is just one of the criticisms being
leveled at the manual, the first of a projected series based on selected
teachings of presidents of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints.

''Homogenized pap,'' snorts historian Will Bagley. ''I think it really
shows a contempt for the intelligence of the members.''

''Whoever compiled the manual is extraordinarily embarrassed by the
church's second president,'' says Ron Priddis of Signature Books.

''It's a religious tract, not history,'' scoffs historian Nancy J.

Taniguchi.

''This isn't about Brigham Young. It's about what somebody in the church
Correlation Department thinks is Brigham Young,'' says Glen Hettinger, a
lawyer and amateur church historian in Dallas.

Church officials say the barbs are unfairly aimed at a work that never was
intended as a portrait of the colorful, controversial colonizer who
brought the Mormons west to establish a theocratic empire. Instead, they
say, it is a highly selective compilation of Young's teachings on a
variety of gospel topics seen by church leaders as relevant today.

''We're introducing Brigham Young to a church member throughout the world
who is not familiar with the historian's perspective, so it's not a
biography. It's not a history,'' said Craig Manscill, chairman of the
writing committee that produced the 370-page work.

Not the intent

''Those who believe that this is a historical account of Brigham Young, or
an all-inclusive book of his teachings, or something to learn more about
Brigham Young the man, the statesman, the great colonizer and so on - that
was never the intent,'' said Ronald L. Knighton, managing director of the
church's Curriculum Department.

Rather, the focus was the gospel of Jesus Christ ''as taught through the
mouth and sermons of that great president of the church,'' he said.

Within months of assuming the church presidency in March 1995, Gordon B.

Hinckley told the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles to begin updating the
curriculum of the adult male priesthood quorums and of the Relief Society,
both of which had always been separate.

Soon, a writing committee was formed, using ''Discourses of Brigham
Young,'' a 1954 compilation of Young's teachings by Apostle John A.

Widtsoe, as the primary source for a new priesthood manual. A few months
later, church leaders decided the manual would be used by both men and
women and added women to the writing committee.

Widtsoe's work, narrowly winnowed from the hundreds of Young speeches
contained in the multivolume ''Journal of Discourses,'' had served to
spruce up and sanitize the rough-and-ready frontier prophet for modern
audiences. Widtsoe eliminated many of the cantankerous, contradictory,
humorous and hyperbolic rantings for which Young was known and widely
beloved, together with doctrines he espoused that the church no longer
did.

Polygamy, which church founder Joseph Smith secretly established as ''the
new and everlasting covenant of marriage'' and which Young publicly
championed, was dropped 13 years after his death in 1877 and appears
nowhere in the Widtsoe index or the new manual.

Also missing from the manual are Young's theories that Adam was God the
Father and that Eve was just one of God's wives, the rest having been left
on other worlds. Blood atonement was another casualty.

Quotes altered

Worse than a glaring lack of context, though, say critics who have closely
compared statements in the manual to Young's sermons, are the resulting
misrepresentations of his ideas.

''I'd say that about 10 percent of the quotes are overtly lifted out of
context, with about another 10 percent that are more subtly altered. In
addition, about 5 percent have been abbreviated to avoid offense regarding
race, nationality, gender and so on,'' Priddis said.

Bagley is perhaps the most vociferous in his disdain for the new manual,
which he sees as a misguided attempt ''to pass Brigham Young off as a 20th
century Mormon,'' as ''this defanged creature.''

Young as Hinckley

The ill-considered result, he said, is ''Brigham Young as Gordon B.

Hinckley.''

Knighton acknowledges the work is ''a cut and paste of doctrine,'' but
''not to misrepresent or try to interpret.''

''We'd ellipse occasionally as the brethren would counsel - most of those
ellipses, or many of them, came from the First Presidency's reading - but
it was not an intent to capture full discourses,'' he said.

The absence of polygamy - even in a chronology of Young's life that
mentions his first wife - should not be surprising, Manscill said, because
the church dropped the practice in 1890.

''Was it in the material that we reviewed? Oh, it was there. And did we
ellipse in certain places? Of course we did. But we were following what
our leaders had asked us to do,'' he said, ''meaning that this was the
(current) doctrines.''

Ronald K. Esplin, director of the Joseph Fielding Smith Institute for
Church History at Brigham Young University and a Young scholar, would have
preferred a more historically seasoned manual. But he recognizes church
leaders need to cater to first-generation Mormons who require a steady
diet of basic gospel principles.

''No doubt the concerns for a worldwide curriculum are not ones that
satisfy lifelong, fifth-generation Wasatch Front Latter-day Saints,'' he
said. ''That's been true for quite some time and it's probably even more
true right now.''

- -------------------------------------------

[Commentary below, As a graduate of BYU, I find this rewriting of history
appalling.  I know most of the people quoted on both sides of this
article.]


Mormon church manual paints polygamist Young as monogamist
...

Avery, a Mormon who knew the pioneer leader had 55 wives, couldn't explain
why the lesson manual being used since January by male and female church
members in 22 languages paints America's most famous polygamist as a
monogamist.

But she had some advice.

''The Mormon church is trying to say to the new people coming into the
church, as well as to the larger American society, that there was nothing
questionable in the Mormon past,'' Avery told the woman. ''And if you want
answers to these kinds of sticky questions, you're not going to find them
inside accepted Mormon manuals and doctrines.''

[One has to ask one's self if sanitizing history is the best course of
action?]

The absence of any mention of polygamy is just one of the criticisms being
leveled at the manual, the first of a projected series based on selected
teachings of presidents of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints.

''Homogenized pap,'' snorts historian Will Bagley. ''I think it really
shows a contempt for the intelligence of the members.''

...

Church officials say the barbs are unfairly aimed at a work that never was
intended as a portrait of the colorful, controversial colonizer who
brought the Mormons west to establish a theocratic empire. Instead, they
say, it is a highly selective compilation of Young's teachings on a
variety of gospel topics seen by church leaders as relevant today.

[So where is the churches or BYU's definitive autobiography of Brigham,
that shows ALL of his color and controversy?]


''We're introducing Brigham Young to a church member throughout the world
who is not familiar with the historian's perspective, so it's not a
biography. It's not a history,'' said Craig Manscill, chairman of the
writing committee that produced the 370-page work.


[How can you introduce a man that is WORLD famous for a peculiar
lifestyle, and never mention that lifestyle once!  It is like writing the
history of JFK and failing to mention how he died or that he was
President!]


Not the intent

''Those who believe that this is a historical account of Brigham Young, or
an all-inclusive book of his teachings, or something to learn more about
Brigham Young the man, the statesman, the great colonizer and so on - that
was never the intent,'' said Ronald L. Knighton, managing director of the
church's Curriculum Department.

[Then why was this not mentioned in the introduction of the manual, rather
than an excuse, once the cat is out of the bag?]


Rather, the focus was the gospel of Jesus Christ ''as taught through the
mouth and sermons of that great president of the church,'' he said.

[Brigham Young added very little to what about Jesus Christ, other than
that he thought that Jesus was married to multiple women and had children
by them.  But Brigham said much about the father of Jesus, and I don't
mean Joseph.  contrary to sanitized histories of Brigham young, he
mentioned that Adam was the father of Jesus not 2 or 3 times but preached
over 250 sermons containing or on the very subject of Adam God.  Yet this
is not seen as significant to be included or at lest lied about in the
manual?]


Within months of assuming the church presidency in March 1995, Gordon B.
Hinckley told the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles to begin updating the
curriculum of the adult male priesthood quorums and of the Relief Society,
both of which had always been separate.

Soon, a writing committee was formed, using ''Discourses of Brigham
Young,'' a 1954 compilation of Young's teachings by Apostle John A.
Widtsoe, as the primary source for a new priesthood manual. A few months
later, church leaders decided the manual would be used by both men and
women and added women to the writing committee.

[But missing from the manual, are the Women of Brigham Young, or women
being significant?  Off all the people on earth that knew Brigham Young
well, would not his wives know him best?  What do the women of the relief
society learn for a year?  The perspective of the wife of our logiest
prophet, mothers of the prophet's children?  NOTHING!  What we get is a
1996 view of one man, as seen by other men, threw the eyes of a male
compiler, of speeches preserved by other men.  What women's organization
would not be proud of that!  They added women to the committee, did they
add women to the book?  What does this REALLY say of the churches real
used for women in the church?  Will they dedicate an entire year to the
study of any Mormon Women in relief society?  When was the last relief
society lessens that dealt with the life of a women that spanned more than
one lesson?]


Widtsoe's work, narrowly winnowed from the hundreds of Young speeches
contained in the multivolume ''Journal of Discourses,'' had served to
spruce up and sanitize the rough-and-ready frontier prophet for modern
audiences. Widtsoe eliminated many of the cantankerous, contradictory,
humorous and hyperbolic rantings for which Young was known and widely
beloved, together with doctrines he espoused that the church no longer
did.

[Widtsoe's book was already a sanitized history, but for today's world
wide church, they removed his wives!  It is not as if the church doesn't
have a copy of the Journal of Discourses!]

Polygamy, which church founder Joseph Smith secretly established as ''the
new and everlasting covenant of marriage'' and which Young publicly
championed, was dropped 13 years after his death in 1877 and appears
nowhere in the Widtsoe index or the new manual.

Also missing from the manual are Young's theories that Adam was God the
Father and that Eve was just one of God's wives, the rest having been left
on other worlds. Blood atonement was another casualty.

[Anyone want a really long post of the 250 Brigham young speeches on
plural marriage, please email me, but they take about 1 to 3 meg of disk
space.]


Quotes altered

Worse than a glaring lack of context, though, say critics who have closely
compared statements in the manual to Young's sermons, are the resulting
misrepresentations of his ideas.


[Also see below]


''I'd say that about 10 percent of the quotes are overtly lifted out of
context, with about another 10 percent that are more subtly altered. In
addition, about 5 percent have been abbreviated to avoid offense regarding
race, nationality, gender and so on,'' Priddis said.

[Anyone out there willing to take the time to flesh this out?]


Bagley is perhaps the most vociferous in his disdain for the new manual,
which he sees as a misguided attempt ''to pass Brigham Young off as a 20th
century Mormon,'' as ''this defanged creature.''

Young as Hinckley

The ill-considered result, he said, is ''Brigham Young as Gordon B.
Hinckley.''


[Does Brigham become more credible by making him sound like a 20th century
Hinkley, or does it discredit the integrity of Hinkley to attempt such a
travesty of church history?]


Knighton acknowledges the work is ''a cut and paste of doctrine,'' but
''not to misrepresent or try to interpret.''

[Spin doctor-ing, this is an out and out lie!]


''We'd ellipse occasionally as the brethren would counsel - most of those
ellipses, or many of them, came from the First Presidency's reading - but
it was not an intent to capture full discourses,'' he said.

[Boy this guy is going to have his butt in a sling, come monday, he just
fingered the brethren as the source of the deception!]


The absence of polygamy - even in a chronology of Young's life that
mentions his first wife - should not be surprising, Manscill said, because
the church dropped the practice in 1890.

[So because, the church stopped, "starting" polygamous marriages in 1890,
that means we can not act as if it never happened?  BTW, it is 1904, they
just can't help themselves from lying!]


''Was it in the material that we reviewed? Oh, it was there. And did we
ellipse in certain places? Of course we did. But we were following what
our leaders had asked us to do,'' he said, ''meaning that this was the
(current) doctrines.''

[Vern Anserson seems to be asking the right questions, and Manscill seems
to be speaking out of school.  The big question is what is there about
belonging to the only true church, that requires that we falsify our past
history to homogenize with current doctrines?  How tenuous is that truth,
that lying is our best option?]


Ronald K. Esplin, director of the Joseph Fielding Smith Institute for
Church History at Brigham Young University and a Young scholar, would have
preferred a more historically seasoned manual. But he recognizes church
leaders need to cater to first-generation Mormons who require a steady
diet of basic gospel principles.

[Will that ever end?  Well the church call a moratorium on converts and
children, so that we can all become adults at once and be treated as such?
 This is just a convenient excuse.  The RLDS church has dealt with it's
previous denial of Joseph's plural marriages, and other whitewashed
history, and it cost them a over 20,000 members, but they bit the bullet.
When are we going to bite the bullet of reality?  Or are numbers more
important than integrity?]

''No doubt the concerns for a worldwide curriculum are not ones that
satisfy lifelong, fifth-generation Wasatch Front Latter-day Saints,'' he
said. ''That's been true for quite some time and it's probably even more
true right now.''


[Is F.A.R.M.S. satisfying that deeper quest for knowledge in the area of
Adam God, Plural marriage, etc.?]



| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |

Then there is the following misrepresentations in the new Relief Society
and Priesthood Manual about, Brigham Young.



"... especially to those who are presiding officers, Set that example
before your [wife] and your children,..."
Teachings of Presidents of the Church, Brigham Young, Page 165
The cite is : Discourses of Brigham Young, page 198, Edited by John A.
Wodstoe.


"... especially to those who are presiding officers, Set that example
before your _wives_ and your children,..."
Discourses of Brigham Young, p.198, Edited by John A. Wodstoe.

"...especially to those who are presiding officers, Set that example
before your _wives_ and your children..."
Journal of Discourses, Vol.15, p.230, Brigham Young, October 9, 1872


| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |


"Let the husband and father learn to bend his will to the will of his God,
and then instruct his _wives_ and children in this lesson of
self-government by his example as well as by precept, ..."
Young, Brigham. Discourses of Brigham Young, Edited by John A. Wodstoe.
1941, p.198

"Let the husband and father learn to bend his will to the will of his God,
and then instruct his _wives_ and children..."
Journal of Discourses, Vol.9, p.256 - p.257, Brigham Young, March 16, 1862

"Let the husband and father learn to bend his will to the will of his God,
and then instruct his [wife] and children..."
Teachings of Presidents of the Church, Brigham Young, Page 165
The cite is : Discourses of Brigham Young, page 198, Edited by John A.
Wodstoe.


[Note that the original had a recreance to Celestial or Plural Marriage,
as it was practiced at the time.  Note that even in 1941 it was still ok
to admit that our ancestors lived polygamy, but in 1998, apparently we are
to ashamed of the marriage system of our ancestors and the original and
edited test is sanitized for the delicate testimonies of the weak
members.]



| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |




Additionally, on page 163, the first paragraph of the lesson, begins with
the word "It", with the words [eternal marriage] in brackets supplied to
define what the pronoun is referring to. Trouble is, "eternal marriage" is
not used as the reference for the pronoun in the original, but refers to
the nature of eternity.  Brigham Young was not talking about how much he
or others knew about it, but how little any man knows about it, especially
how it relates to the Marriage Relation.  Then Brigham Young goes on about
how we could not get to know every one whom ever lived, even if we spent
only 5 minutes with them.  Which has nothing to do with [eternal
marriage].
Discourses of Brigham Young, page 195.

Brigham Young's Address delivered at the General Conference, in the
Tabernacle, Great Salt Lake City, October 6, 1852 is entitled, "Marriage
Relations of Bishops and Deacons."

Brigham Young Corrects Paul's First epistle to Timothy, third Chapters "A
Bishop must be blameless, the husband of one wife, Vigilant, sober ..."

To this Brigham responds, "... I believe directly the reverse; but his
advice to Timothy amounts simply to this - It would not be wise for you to
ordain a man to the office of a Bishop unless he has a wife ; you must not
ordain a single or unmarried man to that calling."
(JD v2. p.88)

Brigham Young's talk is about Plural Marriage, not [eternal marriage] as
the manual would have you belive.  The paragraph leading up to the quote
states:

"I have no reasonable grounds upon which to say it was not the custom in
ancient times for a man to have more than one wife, but every reason to
believe that it was the custom among the Jews, from the days of Abraham to
the days of the Apostles, for they were lineal descendants of Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob, all of whom taught and practised the doctrine of
plurality of wives, and were revered by the whole Jewish nation, and it is
but natural that they should have respected and followed their teachings
and example.

So much I wished to say to my brethren and sisters.  We have had a
splendid address from brother Hyde, or which I am grateful. ..."
Journal of Discourses, Vol.2, p.89 - p.90, Brigham Young, October 6, 1854

Here is the quote in full context.

"I say to the congregation, treasure up in your hearts what you have heard
to-night, and at other times.  You will hear more with regard to the
doctrine, that is, our "Marriage Relations."  Elder Hyde says he has only
just dipped into it, but, if it will not be displeasing to him, I will say
he has not dipped into it yet; he has only run round the edge of the
field.  He has done so beautifully, and it will have its desired effect.
But the whole subject of the marriage relation is not in my reach, nor in
any other man's reach on this earth.  It is without beginning of days or
end of years; it is a hard matter to reach.  We can tell some things with
regard to it; it lays the foundation for worlds, for angels, and for the
Gods; for intelligent beings to be crowned with glory, immortality, and
eternal lives.  In fact, it is the thread which runs from the beginning to
the end of the holy Gospel of salvation--of the Gospel of the Son of God;
it is from eternity to eternity.  When the vision of the mind is opened,
you can see a great portion of it, but you see it comparatively as a
speaker sees the faces of a congregation.  To look at, and talk to, each
individual separately, and thinking to become fully acquainted with them,
only to spend five minutes with each would consume too much time, it could
not easily be done.  So it is with the visions of eternity; we can see and
understand, but it is difficult to tell.   May God bless you.  Amen."
Journal of Discourses, Vol.2, p.90, Brigham Young, October 6, 1854

[To take a quote from the Discourses of Brigham Young by Widstoe, and look
up the original takes at most 5 minutes.  If you want to know if the quote
is taken out of context, it only takes a few minutes, isn't that a small
price to pay for intellectual integrity?]


| - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |





Ciao Perry     <[e-mail]>    http://pobox.com/~plporter

- -

------------------------------

End of gdm-digest V2 #9
***********************