Thought better of it. :-)

[Archaea]

and other research centers.

For example, one of my friends while at BYU two decades ago read and entered data concerning polyandry from the journals of Joseph's wives. It was weird stuff and makes Joseph a more complex character than we are led to believe in the polished version presented by the Church officially.

[Alkili]

Thanks, I've always wondered about how smooth everything was at the begining of the church, because it didn't always seem to mesh with how the different churches in the Book of Mormon started. Nothing really big just things like Alma baptizing himself.

It would make more sense in my mind that things wouldn't be so perfect.

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

on some of the more difficult and surprising issues such as the ones that fusnik mentioned below and have made your peace with them, I have a question:

Do your wives know as much about all of this as you do? I have explored a lot of these areas myself and have resolved most of them in my mind or decided to take them on faith and my testimony remains intact. I have done so without really talking much about them to my wife.

The reason I have done this is becase I don't think her testimony would survive some of it and I don't want to be responsible for that. Maybe I am selling her short but I don't want to chance it. Since I know she will never hear about these things in church I feel like if I don't tell her she won't ever know. I say this in all seriousness.

Anyone else confronted this choice?

Very freaky UD. I've pondered exactly the same thing and have the same concerns. Mrs. myboynoah is a convert and has a strong spiritual belief and testimony of the Restored Gospel and the blessings that come from living the Gospel. She tends to put all things "church" up on a pedestal, a tendency I have tried to temper a bit since people will disappoint. For example, "God's Army" disturbed her because it showed missionaries doing 19-year-old-boy types of things ("That isn't the way missionaries should act."). She's beyond that now, but would rather have everything church-related presented in a positive light. This is certainly understandable.

My concern is how she encounters the more interesting aspects of our history. Since I've dealt with many of these things already, I'd like to pave the way for her (and my children as well). But when is the right time, and what is the right thing to discuss? I don't know that she is particularly interested, preferring to focus on the joy the Gospel brings into people's lives rather than the human foibles or oddities found in the past. Our discussions on Blacks and the Priesthood, Adam-God, and the trials of the French Mission in the late '50s, among other things, I think have helped her to see that The Church and The Gospel are two separate things, that our leaders are fallible, and that the focus of our faith should be God and His Son.

I want her to read Bushman's book because I want her (or anybody else, for that matter) to see what a true miracle God was able to perform through JS, in spite of his humanity. But the polygamy/polyandry stuff is a big concern.

My bottom line is that I think it best that she and my children know it all eventually. The question is how do I manage that process. Anyway, she was just called as Primary President, so I suspect sharing times will be her main focus for some time into the future

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

Anyway, she was just called as Primary President, so I suspect sharing times will be her main focus for some time into the future

LOL. I have had my first primary calling for the last year or so. The funny thing is, there is not a great deal that person really NEEDS to know about the gospel that is not taught in the lesson manual I use for the seven year olds. In fact, in most instances I would say teaching the basics to children is infinitely prefereable to sitting in gospel doctrine IMO.

I guess maybe I just prefer the milk to the meat. To much meat gives me heartburn (not the good kind). ;-)