- Sute on Jonathan Stapley on the Law of Adoption: “There’s quite a bit of JS’s teachings or stories about him given the same way that we take at face value. Jumping over to the Adam God issue, we also have Eliza who revered Joseph even more than BY. So we’d have to say the two of them were in on that together as we well when she said it came from JS? Now we can all debate about what they knew, what we think they knew, what we think we know about what they taught etc. they aren’t here to ask. But I take what BY says at face value when says Joseph taught him something. So it came from Joseph. He was very loyal to him. We’re nearly in Matthew claimed Jesus said, “Man does not live by bread alone territory….” with that kind of language is where I’m bristling. Back to the topic, we do have BY sharing his vision/dream of Joseph (which we accept and teach as real and of doctrinal import, not imagined) bringing up the law of adoption that the brethren were wanting more light on. Which clearly implies it was brought up before and and others know about it from Joseph.” Oct 18, 23:14
- on Jonathan Stapley on the Law of Adoption: “To be clear, Sute, I’m not uncomfortable with this doctrine or the fact that Church leaders taught and practiced it. Nor do I feel like pushing doctrines and practices onto Brigham Young accomplishes anything useful for Church members today, since he’s part of our history and line of succession. That’s a big part of my personal frustration with people who try to push polygamy onto Brigham Young instead of Joseph Smith. That being said, there are limitations to what we can say about what Joseph Smith taught and did in several topics that Brigham Young claimed to have learned from Smith. For example, the Adam God doctrine. There are things that we know JS said that created the context in which BY could offer his views on Adam being our God and it fit well enough within Latter-day Saint teachings. But we do not have an unambiguous statement on record that makes it so we can say that JS taught the same doctrine that BY did on the issue. Could JS have? Sure. But we don’t have enough evidence to prove that he did. (My personal opinion is that BY unintentionally exaggerated JS’s teachings on this or took a few logical leaps from what JS said and sincerely thought he was teaching the same as JS.) What I’m saying here is similar. BY claimed to have learned it from JS, but from what I recall, the historical evidence we have available to us to support that is shakey. JS could have, but it’s not clear. I’m fine with it either way and I was not trying to imply that BY was going rogue.” Oct 18, 22:48
- on Jonathan Stapley on the Law of Adoption: “I don’t understand Sute’s accusatory tone. It’s not like Brigham Young failed to innovate doctrines and that everything from Joseph is crystal clear. And the law of adoption is hardly something that would damage Smith’s image.” Oct 18, 21:22
- on Jonathan Stapley on the Law of Adoption: ““Brigham Young claimed he learned it from JS” is weasal language we resort to all to often if we want to pretend JS was Saint while BY was just going rogue. I see no reason to believe that BY didn’t honor and revere JS and would not lie about him. If some of the uncomfortable things BY taught were from Joseph, deal with denying them at your own loss of further light and knowledge.” Oct 18, 20:31
- on Thoughts on Our Polygamy Problems: “Right, I talk about the priesthood ban in the OP too. But racism was common to the culture, but polygamy was not. Bank failures were common, polygamy was not. I think comments on this thread indicate that the religion’s founder implementing of wicked policy that was very much out of step with the larger society calls into question the legitimacy of that founder.” Oct 18, 15:50
- on Thoughts on Our Polygamy Problems: “How about the black priesthood/temple ban? You can either throw God under the bus or paint BY in a bad light. I prefer not to blame God, but the “doctrine” continued until 1972. So there is at least one precedent for overturning a “doctrine” even though it had a long history. Neither JS nor BY were perfect. JS had polygamy, a bank failure, lying to Emma, etc. BY had the black ban, Adam-God, blood atonement, formalizing polygamy, and perhaps MMM. Our leaders, all of them, were flawed.” Oct 18, 15:40
- on Jonathan Stapley on the Law of Adoption: “My memory is that it isn’t clear. As with most things, Brigham Young claimed he learned it from JS, but it was mostly associated with BY.” Oct 18, 15:13
- on Thoughts on Our Polygamy Problems: “Texas, yes, I do see church leaders departing from Joseph Smith’s utopian teachings. Roger, this is one of the points I bring up in the OP and will discuss more later. Are you suggesting that we just pretend that the church presidents from JS to HJ Grant didn’t practice polygamy? That fact makes “moving on” is a real challenge, I’d argue. If JS was a real bad guy for implementing the practice, many would argue that that suggests problems with the church he founded.” Oct 18, 13:53
- on Thoughts on Our Polygamy Problems: “Polygamy was a failed (and/or disastrous) social experiment. Like the United Order. D&C 132 needs to be either edited or deleted. Trying to justify polygamy is a losing proposition. You end up throwing God under the bus, or painting JS in an extremely bad light. As for allowing men to marry more than one woman in the Temple, that practice needs to stop. As for how all this will be sorted out in the post-existence, it’s not worth speculating about. Apologists need to move on.” Oct 18, 12:20
