This is an archived copy of a post written by Conflict Of Justice ( Used with permission: Conflict Of Justice may not agree with any alterations made.

“She was married for 7.5 months and was about 6 months pregnant with her first husband, Henry Jacobs, when she married Joseph after being told Joseph’s life was in danger from an angel with a drawn sword.” (CES Letter)

See also:Did Joseph Smith Pressure Women To Marry Him?

Not Polyandry – Joseph Smith’s sealing to Zina Young was for the afterlife only. It did not involve a physical relationship and was very different than the “marriage” Zina had to Henry Jacobs. It was literally a matter of saying some words at a ceremony and then possibly never seeing each other until the afterlife.
Women were to strictly have only one husband, according to D&C 132:63:

“But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery.”

Why was Joseph Smith sealed to women who were already married? Because civil marriage and sealings were totally different things. One could be sealed “for eternity” to one person and married “for time” to another, because a sealing for eternal cohabitation in the afterlife did not involve sexual or earthly relations. The “new and everlasting covenant” of eternal marriage would nullify civil marriage in the afterlife: “All old covenants have I caused to be done away.”

Zina herself said that the sealing was about “associating in family relationships in the worlds to come.”
Joseph Smith did not tell Zina Jacobs that his life was in danger from a threatening angel. She heard that from her brother, because Joseph Smith was telling lots of people about the angel experience, explaining why he was introducing polygamy. It had nothing to do with Zina specifically.

Brigham Young Marriage

See also:Did Joseph Smith Marry Women Already Married?

Two years after Joseph Smith’s martyrdom, Zina Young split with her husband Henry Jacobs and married Brigham Young in a civil marriage. The fact that Zina no longer bore Henry’s last name at this ceremony makes this clear. CES Letter claims:

“After Joseph’s death, she married Brigham Young and had Young’s baby while her first husband, Henry, was on a mission.” (CES Letter)

Not true. Henry Jacobs was present at the ceremony. There is no evidence that Henry and Zina were still together. CES Letter claims: “Henry separated only after Brigham Young took his wife and told Henry that Zina was now only his (Brigham) wife.” But CES Letter provides no evidence, and it is not true, no matter how many times they repeat it. They were already split. Brigham Young’s marriage was Levrite marriage, which was for time only and not for the afterlife.     Whitewashing History?

“If anyone needs proof that the Church is still whitewashing history in 2014 side from the above-mentioned issues, Zina is it.” (CES Letter)

CES Letter says Mormons are whitewashing history, yet aren’t they the ones who refuse to accept the distinction between marriage for time and sealing for eternity? They repeat the same argument over and over and pretend like they are the same thing.

The reason the LDS website does not mention Joseph Smith as a “concurrent husband with Henry Jacobs” is because he wasn’t. It was an eternity-only sealing. The reason Brigham Young is not mentioned as a “concurrent husband” is because he wasn’t. Zina had split with Henry. The reason church sources have “nothing in there about the polyandry,” is because there was no polyandry. The church sources are correct. CES Letter just can’t stop lying.

CES Letter Logical Fallacies

FalsehoodThe premise of this argument is false. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young did not commit polyandry with Zina Young. She was split from Henry when she married Brigham Young. Brigham Young did not tell tell “Henry that Zina was now only his (Brigham) wife.”
RepetitionThis entire argument was already made twice by CES Letter on page 32. They already repeated the threatening angel allegation several times. CES Letter repeats the same fake claims of polyandry and co-marriage several times within this argument, instead of providing any evidence.
StrawmanThis argument misrepresents the Mormon concept of marriage.
EtymologicalCES Letter says Zina was married to Henry “7.5 months” to make the number appear larger, instead of just rounding off to a whole number. CES Letter cites “100% LDS sources.” What, as opposed to 12% LDS sources?
Tu QuoqueCES Letter complains about history being white-washed, but they themselves whitewash this issue. They demand websites mention every single detail of Zina Young’s “biographic snapshot,” yet there is so much vital information that they themselves cherry-pick.

Now, CES Letter recycles the same argument they already made earlier over again, and they add the spin that it is being covered up by the church. They can’t give any serious evidence for any kind of coverup, just that a couple websites apparently don’t mention the eternity-only sealing and remarriage. Scandalous! But if there were a real cover-up, how did CES Letter find out about this issue in the first place?

This is how CES Letter operates, heavily on innuendo. The entire argument is not only false, it is illogical. Why would the Mormon website talk about polygamy if this is something we no longer practice? As far as history goes, the records are all available. CES Letter demands the church openly teach about these things, yet condemns the church for ever teaching them? This is how CES Letter operates: through innuendo. They repeat the Big Lies, and they wrap them in a veneer of science.

Hypocritical Anti-Mormons – Why do so many “pro-equality” activists–who think people should be free to marry whoever they love–condemn Mormons for their history with polygamy? Wasn’t Zina a consenting adults who made all of her decisions for herself? Shouldn’t polygamy be on their list of marriages that deserve equality? Well yes, it should, and this is why anti-Mormons spin polygamy as something that coerces and manipulates women into subjugation. Lately, this narrative has become evens easier as there really are crazy cults that actually do victimize women and force people to marry. Interestingly, we only seem to hear about splinter groups in Utah, however.

The key component is the claim that men are victimizing women. This frame of “predator versus victim” leads us to a Marxist ideology. Marxism is all about protecting victims from the predators. Marxists think the biggest miracle about mankind is that we evolved to the top of the food chain without ever becoming predators of other animals. Economically, Marxists protect working classes from a predator class. Marxism is all about protecting the vulnerable from those seeking unequal advantage, and all about keeping people weak in order to keep them reliant on a benevolent dictator for safety.
Big LieCES Letter uses the same big lie tactic that they used against the Book of Mormon and the Book of Abraham. They start of with the big lie that marriage for time and for eternity were the same. This compounds and leads to other lies to attack Joseph Smith’s character, and they repeat the Big Lie over and over. One lie leads to another.

This lie is easier for the reader to accept after all those earlier arguments that attached the same kind of narrative about the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham. If Joseph Smith made up all these books of scripture haphazardly, isn’t it reasonable that he was stealing other men’s wives?

CES Letter can get away with this Big Lie because it is the consensus among so many people that Joseph Smith had carnal relations with girls, and because it takes so long to actually investigate the evidence. People are too lazy to actually look through all the historical documents. Even mainstream church apologists are beaten down by all of the accusations and have give way to the big lie. They are too tired defending against it. Even if you don’t believe the allegations, just this association frames Joseph Smith and Brigham Young as creeps.

For the Book of Abraham, the big lie was that the book was “translated” from a recovered fragment of papyrus that we now know is the Book of Breathing. They repeat it over and over. With polygamy, the big lie likewise will be used by CES Letter to make all sorts of implications to attack Joseph Smith’s character.

Categories: Apologetics