The point of my post yesterday was that we cannot assume every test we're given from men is a test also from God. If Jim Jones had given me a cup of poisoned punch to test if I would drink it, I would have thrown it in his face.
The same goes for Joseph Smith. If he knocked on my door and told me he had been commanded by God to marry my wife and have my daughter sealed to him for eternity, I would have slammed the door in his face.
A man of God would not behave ungodly, or demand that I do so. If he does, that's a pretty good sign that he's not a man of God.
So again I ask, at what point is something merely a trial of our faith, and at what point is it a clue that the messages we're getting are not from God at all?
If Jim Jones asked me to turn in my paycheck every week, I might be okay with that if I believed he was a man of God (and hundreds of people did). If he asked me to sell my house and donate the money to the People's Temple, I might agree to that. But if he asked me to go to bed with him (and he asked dozens of his followers that exact thing) it would no longer be a matter of faith, but that would be a clear clue to me that he was an impostor - a man out for power, full of lust, under the protection of my faith.
If I had reason to believe that Joseph Smith, Jr. was a prophet of God, and he asked me to give all of my income to the Church (and he did ask the early members of the Church to do just that) I would probably comply. If he asked me to go on a mission across the ocean, leaving my family on their own, I would probably do that on faith. But if he asked to make my teenage daughter his 24th wife (he actually did ask several of his colleagues for their daughters' hands in marriage - see Compton, 2001), at that point, it would become very clear to me that he was not a man of God after all. How far can a man go until we are willing to question his motives?