All truth can be considered as a great whole, right?
Brigham said: "Mormonism embraces all truth, both in heaven and on earth"
Joseph Smith said: "We should gather all the good and true principles in the world and treasure them up".
John Widstoe said: "Truth is truth forever. Scientific truth cannot be theological lie. To the sane mind, theology and philosophy must harmonize. They have a common ground of truth on which to meet."
In the discussion on the PBS special, Fregramis made a comment that spiritual truths were only known by obedience and revelation. Fregramis was casting doubt on the scholars and the documents they rely on. Naturally scholarship needs to be checked and verified, especially historical scholarship, where context can be very important. Is that an illegitimate means of discovering truth, even if it is only partial and incomplete truth?
Is any historical knowledge to be believed? Is history learned by obedience and revelation? Is dentristry? Is computer programming? Aren't there other paths to truth that are as valid?
__________________
I'm not voting for Ron Paul because it's not expressly prescribed in the Constitution.
History and Computer Science are two entirely different fields. History is an interpretative field in which historians attempt to understand the past through the lense of clues left in an entirely different time. But Historians are imperfect mediums for history, because humans are inclined to whine, dine, and opine.
One can only discern history by the clues left behind. If I have a letter that may or may not be written by J. Golden Kimball, how do I know that it's from him? Further how do I know that J Golden's comments in that letter tell me anything about the state of the Church, for example, if that's my interest. The church didn't write a letter explaining itself.
Ultimately perfect context in history is unknowable. I could have a dozen letters and from all those letters I might be able to construct some common idea of what things these 12 have in common, but still it is all an approximation, free from specifics and seldom capable of telling us the whole story.
Further, even when actions are "known" to have happened the motives behind actions are often guesswork.
Computer Science deals with the manipulation of computers. If the computer does what you want it to do, you probably programmed it close to the right value--though many computer programs still contain bugs... as do computer hardware, etc... Computers likewise become obsolete, but there are underlying organizational principles common to all of them.
--
The Spirit tells us directly. He's watched the progress of the world over time and throughout all History. He knows thoughts, the whole context, all our actions and the actions of every person leading up to them. As a result He can tell us directly if it be the Will of the Lord, but chances are that even if we know these things, we will have difficulty explaining how we arrived at that knowledge, because the evidence for such a knowledge simply doesn't exist or is unobtainable by any other means than by a similar witness through the Spirit.
--Ray
__________________
I'm not slow; I'm special. (Don't take it personally, everyone finds me offensive. Yet somehow I manage to live with myself.)
I agree that "perfect" knowledge of truth in history is difficult, if not impossible, to attain. But "perfect knowledge" of spiritual truth is also somewhat difficult to obtain, no? Not many people ascend to a "perfect knowledge". In mortality, I think that we are always "seeing through a glass darkly." But is it not possible to attain to at least some picture of truth in history? How then do we relate to each other at all?
I know I am getting kinda deep here....
I guess my point is this: as far as history goes, we do the best we have with the resources available to learn the truth. We verify, we check multiple sources, we compare written history to archaeological finds, etc. We "see through a glass darkly," and we are always interpreting things anew. No, it's not the logical truth of mathematics/computers, where more precision can be achieved. Or so the mathmeticians claim.
__________________
I'm not voting for Ron Paul because it's not expressly prescribed in the Constitution.
I misread the title and thought this was a thread about Episiotomy and was gonna have to come in here and start advising folks this was a TMI (Too Much Information) discussion...
edited to correct spelling
-- Edited by Cat Herder at 09:37, 2007-05-04
__________________
It seems to me the only thing you've learned is that Caesar is a "salad dressing dude."
Coming to truly "see things as they really are" is a life long pursuit.
I've read many journals of the early saints and am amazed at how differently they saw the same events.
I've also read other journals where it was obvious that they were writing untruths for who knows what reasons.
I take my own wife's family as an example. She and the brother just older than her feel that their parents were model mormons. Her older brother and some of her younger siblings curse their father for not giving them enough opportunities to succeed. They grew up in the same house. They were treated the same... what's up with that.
Unless it's written by a prophet and he was speaking as a prophet I don't take much stock in past history unless the Spirit has revealed otherwise.
Those who loose their testimonies over history or DNA are complete fools and idiots. Unfortunatley, they will eventually see that for themselves. The tragedy for them is the people that they hurt (that love them) or those they influence for the worse. That's why the Lord tells us that there will be a day of weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth.... sad thing is ...many of them are wailing and gnashing their teeth already. (we saw that on the PBS mockumentary) In God's time, the weeping is not far off for them.
M
-- Edited by Mahonri at 14:12, 2007-05-04
__________________
no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing... the truth of God will go forth till it has penetrated every website, sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished and the great Jehovah shall say the work is done
no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing... the truth of God will go forth till it has penetrated every website, sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished and the great Jehovah shall say the work is done
It can be very testimony-challenging to learn about some of the history of the church, which is not talked about--indeed such discussion or reading is discouraged--and to learn it from other sources and then have members of the church simply dismiss such things as "lies" or "bigotry" etc. does not help the person who has encountered this information. We need to be able to talk about these things without resorting to ad hominem attacks or dismissiveness. The point of this thread is that there is truth to be learned through historical study, as well as spiritual study. If Joseph and Brigham turn out to be real human beings who made mistakes, then I think there is a valuable lesson there. All of us flawed mortals can be tools in God's hands. Prophets don't have to be perfect, and neither do lay members.
__________________
I'm not voting for Ron Paul because it's not expressly prescribed in the Constitution.
Right. So why do so many LDS have a problem when Joseph Smith or Brigham Young are presented as human & capable of making mistakes?
Joseph had plural wives without Emma's knowledge. The historical record is pretty clear. Does that make him a fallen prophet? Some argue that it does. It becomes a matter of faith as to whether you accept his prophetic calling. But trying to deny the historical record or calling those who bring it up "anti-" just makes it seem that you are afraid of the truth.
__________________
I'm not voting for Ron Paul because it's not expressly prescribed in the Constitution.
I just had a philosophy class on the theory of knowledge, also known as epistomology just last semester. Sometimes I felt as if my head was going to explode.
I had some trouble with this kind of thing while in high school. However I found a little book by Elder Widstoe called "The Search of Truth" or something similar to that. He argued that there are many ways of obtaining truth, and discribed it as a box with many holes in it, that you can look through, where religion would be one hole, common sense another, science another, as well as art, music, philosophy and others.
The more I read about polygamy, which I've been delving into the last several months, the more I'm realizing how human and fallible the leaders are. We never claim to have infallible leaders, do we? Only the Pope is looked on as infallible by his people, is that right? Oh, but wait. We claim it in a round about way, because it's our doctrine that if a prophet tries to lead us astray, God will kill him... or at least smite him. So... maybe it's what we think "lead us astray" really means...? I'm not sure.
Take this comment, for instance--
Speaking to a group of departing missionaries... "Brethren, I want you to understand that it is not to be as it has been heretofore. The brother missionaries have been in the habit of picking out the prettiest women for themselves before they get here, and bringing on the ugly ones for us; hereafter you have to bring them all here before taking any of them, and let us all have a fair shake." - Apostle Heber C. Kimball, The Lion of the Lord, New York, 1969, pp.129-30.
This could possibly tick some people off, particularly ugly women, don't you think? As if they are second-class saints because of their outward appearance, which they have little to do with. (Remembering this was in the day before plastic surgery, colored contacts, good hair coloring, tanning lotions, manicures, pedicures, botox and whatever else.) How unfair and insensitive, one might think. On the other hand, you think what a sacrifice it was for these men to go overseas back then as a missionary and by damn, if they had a cute woman that wanted to be their wife, forget you! She's mine! Then one might say he wasn't neccessarily speaking of himself having a fair shake (what a nice image there) but rather the surplus of men in Utah. And yes, there really was a surplus of men according to every census record.
So, who knows? Brother Heber was obviously a man who had an eye for women, apostle or not. Was he perfect? No. Did he lead others astray in his comments about women and what is desirable? Not sure. I guess there's some who "expect" much more from leaders and others who aren't surprised by this type of thinking at all. (Right in my own family!)
__________________
Life is tough but it's tougher if you're stupid. -John Wayne
Right. So why do so many LDS have a problem when Joseph Smith or Brigham Young are presented as human & capable of making mistakes?
I would have to say, not because they don't know anything about Church History, even if it is just the basic stuff from Sunday School and Primary lessons, but because we as a people are not immune from the phenomenon of hero worship. And, since we as a people in general do not hero worship sports figures or hollywood figures or high society people or politicians or business tycoons, we go with spiritual leaders and LDS celebrities.
And with that putting of spiritual leaders and LDS cultural celebrities up on a pedestal, many folks just don't know how to deal with someone who knocks that false pedestal out from under them.
{In reference to the comment by Elder Kimball, I see that as one of those wry sort of inside jokes that get told in limited circles that inadvertantly got recorded and when viewed by those outside of that circle gets misinterpreted because it is out of context. Kind of like the colloquial saying "If you look once, you're a man. But if you look twice, you're not a missionary."}
__________________
It seems to me the only thing you've learned is that Caesar is a "salad dressing dude."
The more I read about polygamy, which I've been delving into the last several months, the more I'm realizing how human and fallible the leaders are. We never claim to have infallible leaders, do we? Only the Pope is looked on as infallible by his people, is that right? Oh, but wait. We claim it in a round about way, because it's our doctrine that if a prophet tries to lead us astray, God will kill him... or at least smite him. So... maybe it's what we think "lead us astray" really means...? I'm not sure.
Take this comment, for instance--
Speaking to a group of departing missionaries... "Brethren, I want you to understand that it is not to be as it has been heretofore. The brother missionaries have been in the habit of picking out the prettiest women for themselves before they get here, and bringing on the ugly ones for us; hereafter you have to bring them all here before taking any of them, and let us all have a fair shake." - Apostle Heber C. Kimball, The Lion of the Lord, New York, 1969, pp.129-30.
This could possibly tick some people off, particularly ugly women, don't you think? As if they are second-class saints because of their outward appearance, which they have little to do with. (Remembering this was in the day before plastic surgery, colored contacts, good hair coloring, tanning lotions, manicures, pedicures, botox and whatever else.) How unfair and insensitive, one might think. On the other hand, you think what a sacrifice it was for these men to go overseas back then as a missionary and by damn, if they had a cute woman that wanted to be their wife, forget you! She's mine! Then one might say he wasn't neccessarily speaking of himself having a fair shake (what a nice image there) but rather the surplus of men in Utah. And yes, there really was a surplus of men according to every census record.
So, who knows? Brother Heber was obviously a man who had an eye for women, apostle or not. Was he perfect? No. Did he lead others astray in his comments about women and what is desirable? Not sure. I guess there's some who "expect" much more from leaders and others who aren't surprised by this type of thinking at all. (Right in my own family!)
Sorry, but I have problems with the tone and attitude of this post.
I'm not convinced that Pres. Heber C. Kimball ever spoke the words "quoted" above. (I'll also admit that it's possible that he did say them... perhaps to get a laugh, since the folks in England constantly accused the Mormons of enticing all of their women away to Utah)
The only infallible one is Our Savior Jesus Christ. I'm fairly certain that our current 15 prophets, seers and revelators would tell you how imperfect they are.
So why publicize sin or transgression or mistakes?
It should not be done unless it's in the scriptures.... that's the only place I know of where Our Savior approves of it.
-- Edited by Mahonri at 04:49, 2007-05-07
__________________
no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing... the truth of God will go forth till it has penetrated every website, sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished and the great Jehovah shall say the work is done
The more I read about polygamy, which I've been delving into the last several months, the more I'm realizing how human and fallible the leaders are.
I too was a little puzzled about this statement coco. Would you care to elaborate on what it is you actually mean and how you have come to that conclusion?
Are you merely indicating that you are coming to an understanding that historical leaders in the Church were imperfect beings, or that perhaps they had less noble of motives for living their lives the way they did, something other than to be obedient to The Lord? How does this translate to how we follow those who have been appointed as The Lord's Annointed in our day and respective sphere of influence?
__________________
It seems to me the only thing you've learned is that Caesar is a "salad dressing dude."
Mahonri- I don't know what you think my "tone" or attitude is, so it's hard for me to address that unless you want to state something a little more specific. I agree that the only infallible one is Jesus Christ and our living prophets are imperfect. I guess I'm on the end of the spectrum that I get a little "bummed" I guess you'd say, when I hear about some quotes of theirs such as the one above. Pres. Kimball said something else very similar which is found in JD 6:256. Although the words "prettiest" and "ugly" are left out, the message is still there.
Why publicize sin or transgression or mistakes? That's an interesting question. What would you rather do with it? Honestly.
Cat- I think a lot of it is "coming to an understanding" as you say. I was not familiar in the least with these words of Pres. Kimball. I'm still thinking them over. I don't want to ignore them or stick my head in the sand. It's our tendency to "deify" past prophets and not listen too much to the current ones. In some way, I hope to come to some terms that even though a prophet may look at different sisters in the Church as "ugly" and say that to other brethren (even if it's a "private" inner-circle, inside joke sort of way) that they are still the Lord's mouthpiece on Earth.
I want to study these things out so my testimony of these Brethren is not based on some "imagined" idea I have of them, when I don't really know them... like the Utah NOW show where they were discussing the Mormons documentary, Robert Millet said this is a "tell all generation"... much different than when he started teaching at BYU some 25 yrs. ago. The students nowadays know much more of Church history and the attitude of "let's just not discuss that, okay?" is largely dying on the vine. I think that's a good thing myself.
__________________
Life is tough but it's tougher if you're stupid. -John Wayne
Is it gossip when we pass along "faith-promoting rumors"? So much depends on the tone and the intent. I can understand why it might be inappropriate to talk about the goofy thing some GA or another did as a young man, if the intent was to mock or to take away from their authority. But if the intent is to humanize and make the person approachable, that is a different story. Same deal for deceased leaders. I really enjoyed the book "Rough Stone Rolling" because it portrayed Joseph Smith as a human being, warts and all, and I appreciated what he was able to accomplish even with those flaws.
__________________
I'm not voting for Ron Paul because it's not expressly prescribed in the Constitution.
You keep refering to Heber C. Kimball as Pres. Kimball. (Yes, I realize I'm treading on thin ice here since you are just reacting to Mahonri's complaint that you didn't use the title "President" to refer to Gordon B. Hinckley) But you do realize, don't you, that Heber C. Kimball was never the president of the church, right? Shouldn't his title be "Elder?" Of course, I have no idea if he was president of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles--maybe that is what you are refering to. And I certainly don't know if it makes any difference at all whether he was the prophet or "just" an apostle when he made that statement.
It is possible that if you had been there and heard the entire context and setting for that remark it would not have bothered you as much as it does reading it more than 100 years later. Or not. I know enough about Elder Kimball to know that he was a great man. I was surprised to read that quote as you were. I guess the ultimate question about this particular quote is can we forgive him for saying that?
Polygamy was difficult. I am SOOOOOOOO glad I didn't live when it was practiced. There were certainly mistakes made as imperfect mortals tried to practice that law. But I have read many accounts of people who, like you and I, wanted nothing to do with plural marriage and who found it odious when they learned about it. But then they received powerful spiritual witnesses that it was indeed of God and that God wanted them to participate in it. And they went on to live the principle and were blessed for it. They pretty much all say that it was hard but worth it. How could a first wife say it was worth it for her to give another woman to her husband? How could a second wife say it was worth it to never be the "one and only" of her husband? I honestly don't know. But enough of them say that it was worth it that I believe that somehow it really was. Did Joseph Smith make a mistake in introducing plural marriage? If he did then so did a whole bunch of people, men and women, who wanted nothing to do with it initially but who lived it anyway and testified that it was of God.
On the question of studying history to find truth:
I think it is good to make the history more open. I think it does a disservice to ignore difficult things because sooner or later members are going to learn about them. It is better to choose the presentation of those issues than to leave that presentation to people with ulterior motives. A lot can be learned by studying the past--both the successes and the failures--of those who went before us.
But at the same time there is a difficulty with finding truth in history. Since the very beginning people have been publishing lies about Joseph Smith and the Mormon church. It is very difficult to learn truth by studying falsehoods. It could very well be impossible. Just because someone wrote it down a long time ago doesn't mean that it is worth studying or that it contains truth. Because of this reality (all of the lies that have been spread about our past), great care has to be taken in determining what to believe and what not to believe in the history. It certainly is tragic when someone is lead astray by a fictitious account of our past.
Coco is correct. Brother Heber C. Kimball, later Elder Heber C. Kimball as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve and still later President Heber C. Kimball as a counselor to President Brigham Young.
BTW... Perhaps Pres. H. C. Kimball was trying to be witty and had his tounge planted firmly in his cheek IF he said that particular quote.
As for his son, Elder J. Golden... I think I'd believe almost anything folks say he said. :o)
-- Edited by Mahonri at 04:47, 2007-05-07
__________________
no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing... the truth of God will go forth till it has penetrated every website, sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished and the great Jehovah shall say the work is done
Is it gossip when we pass along "faith-promoting rumors"?
No, but it is dishonest if we knowingly do so.
Which leads me to ask: what is the relationship of "faith promoting rumors" to Chruch History? I'm just trying to verify what you mean. For example, do you mean stories that have been passed down as Church History which cannot be verified as factual or have been shown to be untrue? Or are you including the contemporary stories of someone meeting the Prophet in the elevator and him telling them to get their food storage ready ASAP?
I need more of a definition of gossip (if we talk about ANYONE who's dead, but we have their words recorded - this is gossip??) and faith-promoting rumors. If I were in the business of spreading rumors with the intention of promoting faith, I think I'da left this HCK quote out. There are other quotes that I think would fit the bill if one's intention is to promote faith.
I would think we should not rely on stories or traditions that cannot be verified. Granted, people's idea of what is adequate verification varies. As for the meeting the Prophet in the elevator, I give little to no credence with things like that. Of course, if it's me that he's meeting in the elevator that's a different story. Although I can't think of a single situation that would warrant my sharing something like that with anyone other than close family.
As for polygamy itself, MrBok, I wouldn't yet say conclusively that I want nothing to do with it. That's a strong statement, when there are plenty of quotes in the JD that tell us in no uncertain terms that it is a requirement for godhood. And yes, that goes quite contrary to the Proclamation on the Family, as I read it.
As for HCK's comment being tongue in cheek, yes, I've thought of that. The quote sort of bothers me, but not too much. My first reaction was - good grief, this guy really knows how to make those poor women feel good. Second thought was I actually found it kind of funny, because (not trying to sound arrogant) I identify with the "prettier" girls. Then I thought of some of my single sister friends and I got very mad on their behalf and that's when the sharp-tongued comebacks fly into my head which is a wonderful reason I was born when and where I was. If I hadn't got myself killed, I'da surely got beat, I think. Then, like I said before, I thought of the men actually serving the missions being told they couldn't marry one, but you know the more I think of that, I think it's good counsel not only to the missionaries themselves (who should be focused on preaching the gospel, not getting wives) and also to the would-be wives who may be so enamored with the new-found Truth, they are not in the state of mind to make a wise marital choice. They mistake their joy in the gospel for love of the messenger or something along those lines. Once they gather in Utah, etc... and settle into life, a more appropriate choice could be made. I've concluded that this was the basic meaning HCK was trying to get across.
__________________
Life is tough but it's tougher if you're stupid. -John Wayne
Coco, I don't see polygamy as being in opposition to the proclamation on the family. It says that marriage is between a man and a woman. That is still true under polygamy. The wives aren't married to each other. You might think of it as several marriage contracts. In each contract, the marriage is executed between a man and a woman. I don't know much about the ceremony used to marry another wife, but I imagine that, although the other wife or wives may be present, the ceremony doesn't include them. Of course, I could be wrong. But we know that the original practice of it was right, as was the rescinding of it. I honestly don't really expect to understand it in this life. Even if they reinstate it, I doubt I'll be called to do it. After all, it's all I can do to support the wife and kids I have. It was a requirement that you be able to support all the wives you had.
__________________
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen! - Samuel Adams
Thanks coco, that is a much better explanation of where you're coming from.
I want to study these things out so my testimony of these Brethren is not based on some "imagined" idea I have of them, when I don't really know them... One thing I wanted to comment on this statement, for everyone's benefit, is that ultimately, one's testimony on anything that is true comes by the confirmation of The Holy Ghost. Studying things out is helpful in gaining greater understanding, and in most instances the catalyst to pondering and deepening a testimony, but the actual knowledge to understand a mystery (which is defined by The Savior as those things that no man knoweth -- and by man, I'll risk the accusation of heresy to add the clarifying descriptor of "natural") comes from asking in prayer and having it revealed unto him or her by way of The Comforter.
So, moral of the story here is, make sure you are basing your testimony on any gospel principle, or any leader in the Church, be it your EQ president, Bishop, Stake President, General Authority, or a living (or previous) Prophet, Seer, and Revelator is based on having it revealed to you by the Holy Ghost.
Once one has that testimony, it is really much easier to follow their counsel despite any mortal imperfections. That is The Lord's way, not man's. Whom The Lord calls, The Lord qualifies. Yet man says this is where one becomes blind in obedience, because if one does that, you obviously haven't vetted the person to see that they are worthy for your trust... Isn't it wonderful how The Lord's way is higher than man's?
__________________
It seems to me the only thing you've learned is that Caesar is a "salad dressing dude."
"What is the relationship of "faith promoting rumors" to Chruch History? I'm just trying to verify what you mean. For example, do you mean stories that have been passed down as Church History which cannot be verified as factual or have been shown to be untrue? Or are you including the contemporary stories of someone meeting the Prophet in the elevator and him telling them to get their food storage ready ASAP?"
Yes.
__________________
I'm not voting for Ron Paul because it's not expressly prescribed in the Constitution.
D&C 93:24-25 " And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come; And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning. "
I had an institute teacher who thinks this applies to people who tell "faith promoting rumors , or falsehoods". We need to be careful with this kind of thing.
For example; The story of the Willie and Martin handcart companies. You know how all the time you hear that none of the people in those companies apostasized, it isn't true. Yet people keep on telling it anyway.
When I was little and I didn't want to finish the food on my plate my mother would always remind me about all of the starving children in China. Finally one day I looked up at her and said..."Oh is that right, Name one!".
I'd love to know the names of those who apostatized that were in the Willie and Martin companies. I had ancestors in both... they remained faithful of course. One of them left the Church for a time but his wife always remained faithful... their son (born in Sanpete Co.) on the other hand was a rascal.
__________________
no unhallowed hand can stop the work from progressing... the truth of God will go forth till it has penetrated every website, sounded in every ear, till the purposes of God shall be accomplished and the great Jehovah shall say the work is done
I'd love to know the names of those who apostatized that were in the Willie and Martin companies.
According to the book "The Price We Paid" by Andrew D. Olsen, only three of the five subcaptains in the Willie handcart company remained faithful to the church. John Chislet and Johan Ahmanson both left the church (Ahmanson within months of getting to Utah, Chislet a few years later. My great-great uncle was one of the three who stayed true, despite being threatened with excommunication for strongly suggesting they wait until the next spring to start on the final trail west. Nothing else is stated about "regular" party members except those who had histories and of those, it appears they all remained in the church.
In the Martin company, only the two children who went west of the Pucell family with their parents stayed in the church. The siblings who stayed east to work all left the church after hearing of their parent's death and the hardships the two suriving children. The family had been one of the earliest convert families in England too. Beyond that, the book is silent, apparently for the same reason as with the Willie company.
Most of the people stayed true, I would assume, but it would be presumptious to assume everyone did. Not everyone makes it through their refiner's fire intact.
And, for those individuals who did stay true, life was not rosy for them once they got to Zion either. Many of them had very hard lives despite the hardship they had already gone through.
__________________
It seems to me the only thing you've learned is that Caesar is a "salad dressing dude."
I've got an ancestor that was in one of those two companies too... I should find out who it was... maybe we're related Cat... That would both frighten and delight me. We might be able to use our Wondertwin powers with more power than ever if it were so...
--Ray
__________________
I'm not slow; I'm special. (Don't take it personally, everyone finds me offensive. Yet somehow I manage to live with myself.)
Yea, you know how much I would have to work out to be able to lift and support more than one wife. I can barely lift the one I've got without getting a back injury!!!!
Seems my great-great grandfather's idea of providing for his plural wives was to send them off with their kids to settle in other places while he stayed put in Brigham City. And, he would go and visit them up in Idaho on occasion and bring them some food or other supplies. That could explain in part why my great-great grandmother ended up divorcing him...
{feeling the spiritual smacking upside the head of all my paternal line ancestors on the other side of the veil }
Ray, unless you're ancestor was the same man who advised the Willie company to not leave until the Spring, doubtful we're related. But, if he is, that would make us WonderCousins... it was his sister who was the great-great grandmother mentioned above.
__________________
It seems to me the only thing you've learned is that Caesar is a "salad dressing dude."
Are you sure? He ended up being a sub-captain in the glorious Outhouse Company of the Mormon pioneer trek...
That honor alone (being a leader in the Outhouse) is probably why there have been no General Authorities called from his namesake... can't have a whole lot of faith promoting pioneer stories about yer pioneer ancestors being told in General Conference if folks are too busy snickering about the Outhouse Company...
__________________
It seems to me the only thing you've learned is that Caesar is a "salad dressing dude."
See, if I'da heard "let's wait 'till spring" I'da probably said, "You got it!!" Hard to decline on common sense...
This almost reminds me of a thread at the other place talking about how a lot of our day to day "work" is ... self-inflicted, if you will. Bigger house= more chores, more clothing= more laundry... that type of thing. I can't help but think- wasn't much of their problems self-inflicted? Can you really say - I'm going to be extra blessed in the next life because of the hardships my bad decisions provided me here?? (ducking dead ancestor slapping, too)
__________________
Life is tough but it's tougher if you're stupid. -John Wayne
Although I can't think of a single situation that would warrant my sharing something like that with anyone other than close family.
