Mormons acknowledge that Joseph Smith, a convicted felon, also had 20-30 wives, one 15 y.o.

[arcadia]

Well, according to the NY Times this A.M., the Mormon church has now quietly but offcially acknowledged that careful research shows that their goofball founder, who had already been convicted of theft by deception before he supposedly found some ancient tablets, did in fact have "20-30" wives. They included the wives of some of his main assistants and at least one minor.

Now, compared to some of the conventional Jewish and Christian Saints who had thousands of wives, old Joe was really an underperformer. But it will be interesting to see how the lancing of this festering boil in the heart of the LDS Fantasyland affects the true believers.

The other interesting piece this morning was that the Pope has resorted to a verse in Revelations to admonish the faithful that if they are only "lukewarm" Christians, their god will "vomit them out". It makes me wonder if true Christians are expected to wield Jesus' sword and kill their family members whom they cannot convert. Or perhaps just stone disobedient children in the village square. Can beheadings be far behind, for an organization so previously fond of slow roasting of "blasphemers" over an open fire? :devil-smiley-029:

 

[Keith&Co.]

. But it will be interesting to see how the lancing of this festering boil in the heart of the LDS Fantasyland affects the true believers.

Why would this affect the true believers?
Polygamy is something that God sometimes commands His followers to adopt. And sometimes he commands them to stop that practice.

Joseph and Brigham were commanded to have many. In 1890, God's revelation was that the shelf life of that practice had expired.

It's like finding out that my dad used to drive the family around with none of us wearing seatbelts. Today's rules don't apply to practices that far back in history....

 

[Valjean]

On the other hand, though. polygyny was probably more opprobrious in the 19th century than it might be today.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, at least she wasn't nine.

Mormonism. Our prophet wasn't quite as pervy as that Muslim guy. Come check us out.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Well, at least she wasn't nine.

Mormonism. Our prophet wasn't quite as pervy as that Muslim guy. Come check us out.

Feh.
The Roman Empire's marriable age was 12. The RCC followed suit. English law was also 12, then the colonies as well.
Some places have been lower, but that's usually with parental consent, and it's more about property and securing estates than pervy schmexing.

 

[Bronzeage]

Mormon polygamy was a tool to deal with a practical problem. The early sect attracted a lot of widows, sometimes quite young widows. The number of single women outnumbered the single women. Polygamy made the husband responsible for the welfare of these unattached women and relieved to church of the burden. It had no real basis in theology and when it became a political issue in Utah's application for statehood, CLDS leaders quietly dropped it from their list of acceptable things to do.

Modern polygamous societies and cults have always run up against the inherent flaw in the idea. A man may only have as many wives as he can support. This means the older, more established men have more wives. It eventually becomes a system where 40 to 60 year old men trade daughters between themselves, to establish economic alliances. Unions of uncles and nieces are very common. This becomes a problem in the second generation. There are a lot of single men who quickly realize their only chance to have a wife is to be subservient to the older men of the group, in the hope of a reward. Independently minded men, the kind any society needs in order to avoid stagnation, will not endure this kind of treatment and leave.
The population ages, the man to woman ratio tips further toward women and the society becomes a matriarchy with an elderly patriarch as a figure head.

 

[ideologyhunter]

It quite literally had a basis in theology --it's commanded in a lengthy revelation in the Mormon D & C (Doctrine and Covenants) which, among other things, claims that a man with multiple wives will have amplified glory in the afterlife. It also has an insane section where God (actually Smith's sock puppet, but whatever) warns Emma, Wife No. 1, that she faces utter destruction if she does not agree to the new arrangement. See, God still = love even in Mormondom. BTW, altho' the main LDS church has banned polygamy since 1890 (although it apparently secretly condoned it and kept it going 'til about 1910), I think they still have the doctrine that a man with more than one woman sealed to him for eternity will have more glory in the afterlife (and be able to procreate in the afterlife & create a vast spirit kingdom.) If any of that is inaccurate it's because it's been a few years since I read up on their theology & it's easier to remember the stories of Smith's con games or the bloody times in Missouri, Illinois, and early Utah. (Get ahold of the book Wife No. 19 for a good read.)

 

[Keith&Co.]

think they still have the doctrine that a man with more than one woman sealed to him for eternity will have more glory in the afterlife

It's not the number of wives, it's the number of descendants. You worship through your ancestors in a sort of pyramid scheme. So if you have lots of kids, and they have lots of kids, and they have lots of kids, you gain power more quickly in the afterlife.
Multiple wives means even more kids.
This is also why the Mormons are so into genealogy, to know and retroactively baptize their ancestors and hurry them along to glory.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

think they still have the doctrine that a man with more than one woman sealed to him for eternity will have more glory in the afterlife

It's not the number of wives, it's the number of descendants. You worship through your ancestors in a sort of pyramid scheme. So if you have lots of kids, and they have lots of kids, and they have lots of kids, you gain power more quickly in the afterlife.
Multiple wives means even more kids.
This is also why the Mormons are so into genealogy, to know and retroactively baptize their ancestors and hurry them along to glory.

How does that work? Is it just by the number of descendants or does each descendant give X amount of glory, which is split up amongst his ancestors?

For instance, if a man's paternal great-great grandfather was a Mormon and he then retroactively baptizes his maternal great-great grandfather, does the paternal one then only get half of the glory from the man's kids as he would have if the maternal one hadn't been baptized?

 

[Keith&Co.]

So if you have lots of kids, and they have lots of kids, and they have lots of kids, you gain power more quickly in the afterlife.

How does that work? Is it just by the number of descendants or does each descendant give X amount of glory, which is split up amongst his ancestors?

For instance, if a man's paternal great-great grandfather was a Mormon and he then retroactively baptizes his maternal great-great grandfather, does the paternal one then only get half of the glory from the man's kids as he would have if the maternal one hadn't been baptized?

Glory is cumulative. If you're Mormon, you have x glory.
If you and your sister are Mormon, you each have x glory.
If your dad is Mormon, then Dad has X glory, plus he's got two descendants with X glory, so he's cooking with 3X glory.
When you raise your first kid in the faith, he has 1X, you have 2X, your dad has 4X.
And if i remember Primry correctly, if your son is not Mormon, but HIS son is, you get 1X from your grandkid and a microglory from you kid, who is still a conduit if not an actual source of useful amounts of glory.

 

[Sarpedon]

But if your mormon grandson posthumously baptises your non-mormon son, do you still get his glory?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

How does that work? Is it just by the number of descendants or does each descendant give X amount of glory, which is split up amongst his ancestors?

For instance, if a man's paternal great-great grandfather was a Mormon and he then retroactively baptizes his maternal great-great grandfather, does the paternal one then only get half of the glory from the man's kids as he would have if the maternal one hadn't been baptized?

Glory is cumulative. If you're Mormon, you have x glory.
If you and your sister are Mormon, you each have x glory.
If your dad is Mormon, then Dad has X glory, plus he's got two descendants with X glory, so he's cooking with 3X glory.
When you raise your first kid in the faith, he has 1X, you have 2X, your dad has 4X.
And if i remember Primry correctly, if your son is not Mormon, but HIS son is, you get 1X from your grandkid and a microglory from you kid, who is still a conduit if not an actual source of useful amounts of glory.

Well, that's fine then. I was worried that the retroactive baptisms were screwing over people who were good Mormons all their lives and giving some of their power to some dude who wandered into the cool kids' Heaven a century or two late.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Well, that's fine then. I was worried that the retroactive baptisms were screwing over people who were good Mormons all their lives and giving some of their power to some dude who wandered into the cool kids' Heaven a century or two late.

Well, the easiest way to understand Mormon Theology is 'if it sounds too good to be true, you're probably on the right track.'
Everything is set up for the happiest of happy endings.

- - - Updated - - -

But if your mormon grandson posthumously baptises your non-mormon son, do you still get his glory?

I'm not sure which 'his' you're talking about but it doesn't matter. Yes. Grandson's glory flows through son so you still get his and you get son's glory as well.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Is your glory based on number of descendents or number of Mormon descendents?

For instance, if I have three kids and two of them are Mormons and one of them is some kind of dirty infidel, do I get a +2 or a +3 bonus to my Glory rolls when using my divine abilities?

 

[Malintent]

. But it will be interesting to see how the lancing of this festering boil in the heart of the LDS Fantasyland affects the true believers.

Why would this affect the true believers?
Polygamy is something that God sometimes commands His followers to adopt. And sometimes he commands them to stop that practice.

Joseph and Brigham were commanded to have many. In 1890, God's revelation was that the shelf life of that practice had expired.

It's like finding out that my dad used to drive the family around with none of us wearing seatbelts. Today's rules don't apply to practices that far back in history....

My father would tell me to sit back and put my seatbelt on after I got annoying enough in the backseat... Don;t think it was a rule then, just somethng to keep my annoying kid voice out of his right ear while he was trying to drive an all-steal car with no power stearing, windows, doorlocks, or any AC.

 

[Malintent]

Is your glory based on number of descendents or number of Mormon descendents?

For instance, if I have three kids and two of them are Mormons and one of them is some kind of dirty infidel, do I get a +2 or a +3 bonus to my Glory rolls when using my divine abilities?

I once rolled over 9000 glory

 

[Keith&Co.]

Is your glory based on number of descendents or number of Mormon descendents?

For instance, if I have three kids and two of them are Mormons and one of them is some kind of dirty infidel, do I get a +2 or a +3 bonus to my Glory rolls when using my divine abilities?

As i understood it, it's the number of Mormon descendents. Having descendents who don't know the right way to worship doesn't do you a whole lot of good.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Is your glory based on number of descendents or number of Mormon descendents?

For instance, if I have three kids and two of them are Mormons and one of them is some kind of dirty infidel, do I get a +2 or a +3 bonus to my Glory rolls when using my divine abilities?

As i understood it, it's the number of Mormon descendents. Having descendents who don't know the right way to worship doesn't do you a whole lot of good.

OK, good to know. Can it skip generations or does it have to be an unbroken line of Mormons? For instance, say that my infidel kid is ends up becoming a crack whore because of the emptiness of her life without Jesus (a reasonable assumption I'm sure we can all agree on) and has a child with some random dude, but the courts take it away from her and give it to one of my good kids to raise in the True Faith. Do I get glory points from that kid right off the bat or do I need to wait until the whore dies (not a long wait of course, given her lifestyle, but we'll focus on it for the sake of the discussion) and gets retroactively Mormonized before I get glory points for that kid?

Also, is it the total number of descendents or the total number of living descendents? For instance, if I have 100 Mormon descendents but 43 of them are already dead and 57 are living, do I have 100 Glory points or 57?

Also, what can one do with Glory? If I have 15 wives and my sons all have 15 wives and so on and so on so I've ended up with a couple thousand Glory points a few centuries later, am I living in Asgard while a Mormon kid who died in a traffic accident when he was 14, so he only had seven children, ends up living in a dirt shack in Heaven's Somalia?

 

[Keith&Co.]

OK, good to know. Can it skip generations or does it have to be an unbroken line of Mormons?

You get the glory from your descendents, no iffs/ands/buts. I can't recall if adopted kids count.

Also, is it the total number of descendents or the total number of living descendents? For instance, if I have 100 Mormon descendents but 43 of them are already dead and 57 are living, do I have 100 Glory points or 57?

100.

Also, what can one do with Glory?

The whole selling point of the religion is that you can eventually become a god.
Your purpose on Earth is to raise enough glory to eventually go elsewhere in the universe and make your own world. That's why you have the kids to get the power to create a paradise.

 

[Valjean]

If you're happily living in Baptist Heaven and are posthumously baptized, are you required to relocate, or can you contest the reassignment?

I'm thinking legal representation might be a bit hard to find, considering the venue...