Criticism of Mormonism/Online documents/"Questions and Answers" on Mormon Stories/Polygamy

1. REDIRECTTemplate:Test3

Response to questions related to Joseph Smith and polygamy

First Vision

A FAIR Analysis of: John Dehlin's "Questions and Answers" A work by author: John Dehlin

Treasure digging

Quick Navigation

• "Joseph Smith married over 30 women"
• "some as young as 14 years old"
• "many of whom were married to other men at the time he married them"
• "Joseph Smith would frequently approach other men’s wives about being his own plural wives — often while the men were away"
• "Joseph Smith publicly lied about his practice of polygamy"
• "Joseph Smith...lied to his own wife (Emma) about the practice."
• "Joseph publicly slandered both Jane and William Law, including publicly calling Jane Law a 'whore'"
• "Joseph ordered the destruction of the printing press, which was both a violation of the 1st Amendment"

The author's unresolved question

"Joseph Smith married over 30 women"

Response to the author's claim

This is true. Subsequent questions, however, demonstrate that the author seems determined to paint a simplistic portrait of plural marriage: one that draws heavily on anti-Mormon sources and interpretations.

The author's unresolved question

"some as young as 14 years old"

Response to the author's claim

There were two wives aged fourteen. We can say nothing about one marriage, due to a lack of evidence. The other marriage was instigated by the bride's parents, and there is considerable evidence that the marriage was not consummated. Many of Joseph's marriages were concerned about sealing families together.

The author's unresolved question

"many of whom were married to other men at the time he married them"

Response to the author's claim

Again, the author gives no context or nuance to his critical picture. In all the cases of polyandry, there is little evidence that the relationships were consummated. In many cases, we know the husbands (some of them non-members) knew of the marriages and did not object. Emma never objected to the polyandrous marriages. No husband attacked Joseph or reproached him for violation of his marital rights or wife's honor. Many of Joseph's marriages—including these—seem to have been intended to seal families together.

The author's unresolved question

"Joseph Smith would frequently approach other men’s wives about being his own plural wives — often while the men were away"

Response to the author's claim

This claim is false. There is only one recorded case of Joseph approaching a potential plural wife while her husband was on a mission. This case occurred at least two years after her husband's departure. The husband ratified the sealing upon his return. This claim too derives from discredited anti-Mormon sources.

The author's unresolved question

"Joseph Smith publicly lied about his practice of polygamy"

Response to the author's claim

The author ignores three vital facts:

1. Joseph's actions were not illegal under the law as long as he did not announce them publicly. If he were to announce them, then he and his plural wives would have been guilty of breaking the law. This was a terrible double-bind without a perfect solution, especially because...
2. If Joseph were to announce plural marriage in Nauvoo, he would have put himself, his wives, and thousands of innocent people at risk of mob violence—as had happened before, and was to happen again following his murder. If he did hide the truth from those who would use violence, that is understandable. However, even this is not as clear-cut as the author makes it, since....
3. Joseph was often charged with a type and form of polygamy that he did not practice. Most of his denials were targeted at these accusations, and were technically true.

The author's unresolved question

"Joseph Smith...lied to his own wife (Emma) about the practice"

Response to the author's claim

We know very little about what Joseph told Emma, and when he told her. Emma would always insist Joseph never practiced plural marriage, though she knew differently. We should be cautious, then, in being too dogmatic about Joseph's treatment of Emma. Once again, there is far more nuance than the author seems willing to admit, or is even aware of.

The author's unresolved question

"Joseph publicly slandered both Jane and William Law, including publicly calling Jane Law a 'whore'"

Response to the author's claim

 ^{[needs work]}

The author's unresolved question

"Joseph ordered the destruction of the printing press, which was both a violation of the 1st Amendment"

Response to the author's claim

• The First Amendment had no legal standing in the suppression of the Nauvoo Expositor. It would not apply to anything except acts by the federal government until after the Civil War. The author is here displaying his ignorance of historical fact. It shows how little study he has given the matter.
• Furthermore, the suppression of the Expositor was not ordered by Joseph alone, but by the Nauvoo city council, which included non-Mormons.
• Finally, the suppression of the Expositor was legal under the law of the day—as courts found in later incidents under the same legal regime. (The destruction of the press itself was not legal and a misdemeanor—but Joseph quickly indicated his willingness to pay the fine if this was the case.)