Catholics- Would you kill Joseph Smith?

[truthsilence]

What part of 'we haven’t practiced polygamy in over a century and think that it is a sin" seems to have escaped your notice?

What about in the temple, Diana? Not practiced there, either?

 

[dianaiad]

What about in the temple, Diana? Not practiced there, either?

Not any more than you would be practicing it if a Catholic widower married a second time.

“Polygamy” is the practice of taking two spouses under the law.

 

[truthsilence]

Not any more than you would be practicing it if a Catholic widower married a second time.

“Polygamy” is the practice of taking two spouses under the law.

Not any more than? Lets see. A Catholic widower who marries a second time, does not look forward to reuniting in plural marriage in the hereafter. A Mormon widower is indeed engaging in the practice of taking two spouses (or more) for all intents and purposes, as all temple marriages are believed to be eternal, correct?

So you see there is a big difference between what Catholics and Mormons believe about marriage, and the life hereafter as well. We don’t believe in eternal marriage, or eternal ‘increase’. We believe God has created plenty for us to enjoy and experience for eternity with Him. That is our faith our hope and our joy and what we look forward to in Heaven.

 

[dianaiad]

Not any more than? Lets see. A Catholic widower who marries a second time, does not look forward to reuniting in plural marriage in the hereafter. A Mormon widower is indeed engaging in the practice of taking two spouses (or more) for all intents and purposes, as all temple marriages are believed to be eternal, correct?

So you see there is a big difference between what Catholics and Mormons believe about marriage, and the life hereafter as well. We don’t believe in eternal marriage, or eternal ‘increase’. We believe God has created plenty for us to enjoy and experience for eternity with Him. That is our faith our hope and our joy and what we look forward to in Heaven.

And according to our beliefs, that is precisely what you will have.

 

[truthsilence]

And according to our beliefs, that is precisely what you will have.

And all Glory Honor and Praise to His name, forever and ever.Amen

 

[dianaiad]

In my experience, most Catholics know next to nothing about the Mormon faith. Being a Catholic has nothing to do with what we think about Mormons, or ice cream.

And fwiw, we don’t have anything in common with you when it comes to marriage. We don’t believe it ever was perfectly acceptable, in obedience to Christ, to have more than one wife. You get that idea exclusively from Mormonism.

Are you, or are you not, a believer in both the OT and the NT?

Was Abraham a prophet? Isaac?

Do you base any of your beliefs at all upon the OT? (after all, Jesus certainly did…He was a Jew, sent to the Jews…and we still use the OT as scripture and honor His heritage, yes?)

Ok then, just as you believe that the coming of Christ was both a continuation and fulfillment of the Law of Moses–then you also beliee that at one time it was perfectly acceptable to God for a man to have more than one wife.

Thus my comment that polygamy is a sin in both our religions–it’s just been a sin longer for you than for us.

Except of course that Catholics have had instances where more than one wife was fine…or a wife and a leman…lots of different permutations throughout history.

 

[truthsilence]

Are you, or are you not, a believer in both the OT and the NT?

Was Abraham a prophet? Isaac?

Do you base any of your beliefs at all upon the OT? (after all, Jesus certainly did…He was a Jew, sent to the Jews…and we still use the OT as scripture and honor His heritage, yes?)

Ok then, just as you believe that the coming of Christ was both a continuation and fulfillment of the Law of Moses–then you also beliee that at one time it was perfectly acceptable to God for a man to have more than one wife.

Thus my comment that polygamy is a sin in both our religions–it’s just been a sin longer for you than for us.

Except of course that Catholics have had instances where more than one wife was fine…or a wife and a leman…lots of different permutations throughout history.

Of course I am a believer in the entirety of the Bible. However I look to Christ, the New Testament, and the Church, to fully form and direct my Christian faith.

I can see that God allowed certain men to have more than one wife at certain time periods in OT history. That does not mean God gave those marriages His blessing, or that His intent from the beginning was for man to have more than one wife. So no, it was not ‘perfectly acceptable’. God allowed it, which is different from giving it His blessing; and in most cases it is made clear that the results were not positive.

Having more than one wife has never been ‘fine’ in the Catholic church. In any instance it would be adultery, a grave sin.

 

[dianaiad]

Of course I am a believer in the entirety of the Bible. However I look to Christ, the New Testament, and the Church, to fully form and direct my Christian faith.

I can see that God allowed certain men to have more than one wife at certain time periods in OT history

Indeed. Certain commandments for certain periods of time, for certain reasons and for specific peoples. That happened during the time Christ was teaching, as well.

. That does not mean God gave those marriages His blessing, or that His intent from the beginning was for man to have more than one wife.

You are quite right. That does not. That He DID bless such unions is rather clear when He, through Nathan, yelled at David for fooling around with Bath-Sheba and getting her husband killed. Nathan said: 2 Sam; 7 ¶ And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;
8 And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

I would personally call ‘being given’ something by the Lord having the Lord bless it. Please notice; it wasn’t the number of David’s wives that were the problem. It was how he GOT them–or at least one of them.

. So no, it was not ‘perfectly acceptable’. God allowed it, which is different from giving it His blessing; and in most cases it is made clear that the results were not positive.

As I have shown above, in at least one case the Lord actively took credit for the multitude of wives one of His prophets had. That speaks to considerably more than simply ‘allowing’ it.

However, that was then, for that people and that time; this is now.

.Having more than one wife has never been ‘fine’ in the Catholic church. In any instance it would be adultery, a grave sin.

You are separating the Catholic church from Christianity and its roots in Judeo-Christian tradition? Because the Lord certainly saw a big difference between polygamy and adultery way back when, didn’t He?

 

[truthsilence]

Indeed. Certain commandments for certain periods of time, for certain reasons and for specific peoples. That happened during the time Christ was teaching, as well.

No, I do not agree with you. I said God allowed it, I certainly did not say it was a commandment.

You are quite right. That does not. That He DID bless such unions is rather clear when He, through Nathan, yelled at David for fooling around with Bath-Sheba and getting her husband killed. Nathan said: 2 Sam; 7 ¶ And Nathan said to David, Thou art the man. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel, I anointed thee king over Israel, and I delivered thee out of the hand of Saul;
8 And I gave thee thy master’s house, and thy master’s wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

I would personally call ‘being given’ something by the Lord having the Lord bless it. Please notice; it wasn’t the number of David’s wives that were the problem. It was how he GOT them–or at least one of them.

Again, I don’t agree. The story of David is a story of life changing repentance; the mercy and goodness of God, his forgiveness and love for us even when we fail to seek His will, but instead choose our own. We can learn many lessons from David. God gave him what he wanted, but not because that was what God wanted for Him. He was taught a great lesson from his selfish excesses. Still, his family seem to have suffered the consequences for years to come.

As I have shown above, in at least one case the Lord actively took credit for the multitude of wives one of His prophets had. That speaks to considerably more than simply ‘allowing’ it.

However, that was then, for that people and that time; this is now.

I disagree completely.

You are separating the Catholic church from Christianity
And I think you are, or rather, Joseph Smith did.
and its roots in Judeo-Christian tradition?
No, plural marriage is not “tradition”. It is, was and always will be, adultery.
Because the Lord certainly saw a big difference between polygamy and adultery way back when, didn’t He?

No, Polygamy never was God’s plan for us and never will be.

Peace,
Tami

 

[Bill_Pick]

No, actually, you haven’t, unless I missed something very, very big.

Indeed, the only real witnesses we have to what happened INSIDE the room was from Taylor and Richards, and their accounts do two things: first, they disagree with each other enough so that collusion is not a logical conclusion, and they agree with each other on the main events enough to be reasonable.

The eyewitness accounts of the men outside corroborate their stories as far as what they could see of those events.

Stripped of emotional rhetoric, there is nothing suspect about their description of what happened.

WHY ARE YOU ASKING CATHLOIC WHY NOT ALL CHRISTIANS

 

[dianaiad]

WHY ARE YOU ASKING CATHLOIC WHY NOT ALL CHRISTIANS

I’m not asking Catholics anything at all. I didn’t write the OP.

 

[Pro_Domina]

If Joseph Smith were alive today, preaching the restored gospel, establishing the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, would you kill him? Please assume that you will not be punished by the law, as those who did kill him were not punished.

I have read much on this forum, by Catholics, implying approval of the killing of Joseph Smith. For example. “he died in a gun fight” (one against 200), he was a con man, h was a polygmamist, etc.

I would probably kill anyone with the approval of the Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church. Without thinking twice a perverter of souls.

 

[Pro_Domina]

Dude, I was just perusing the board and came your disgusting remark and it revolted me to the core of my being. I cannot, in good conscience, let this go without comment.

I was there that day. Suffice it to say that I cannot begin to describe the living hell of that day and the living hell of the days and weeks that followed. I don’t know who you think you are, but for you to say that ANYBODY deserves something like that is absolutely beyond my comprehension. Do you have any concept of what you said? You should give thanks to God that YOU weren’t caught in that nightmare. I’ll pray for you; you obviously have some very, very serious problems.

I dunno about that…

Remember that people converted while dying in the Great Flood.

And what are you going to say? That the people were good?

I guess God should not have burned Sodom by that rationale.

Oh but the Eternal God sort of changed in the 60’s.

I forgot.

 

[dianaiad]

I dunno about that…

Remember that people converted while dying in the Great Flood.

They DID???

And what are you going to say? That the people were good?

I guess God should not have burned Sodom by that rationale.

Oh but the Eternal God sort of changed in the 60’s.

I forgot.

 

[Bill_Pick]

If Joseph Smith were alive today, preaching the restored gospel, establishing the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, would you kill him? Please assume that you will not be punished by the law, as those who did kill him were not punished.

I have read much on this forum, by Catholics, implying approval of the killing of Joseph Smith. For example. “he died in a gun fight” (one against 200), he was a con man, h was a polygmamist, etc.

WHY ARE YOU ASKING IF CATHLOICS KILL JS HE WAS JUST A PERSON THAT STARTED ANOTHER CULT.

 

[dianaiad]

WHY ARE YOU ASKING IF CATHLOICS KILL JS HE WAS JUST A PERSON THAT STARTED ANOTHER CULT.

Does that make it OK to murder him?

See, Joseph Smith was murdered by 200 + men in blackface. The excuse used was his destruction of a printing press.

The reason was that the neighbors didn’t like him or the church he started.

So the question was, Would Catholics kill Joseph Smith?

Im not certain why the question was asked, since as far as I know there weren’t any Catholics in the mob that did kill him. However, there have been some very enlightening–and disturbing, responses.

The ones that raise my virtual eyebrow are the ones that attack him in some attempt to justify the original murder…coupled with some form of “of course, no Christian would do this NOW…”

Dunno why no Christian would do this NOW, though. What’s so different about people that such a thing has suddenly become an impossibility?

 

[Bill_Pick]

Psst, don’t look now, but…

I’m not RCC.

Well…yeah. But then I’m a Mormon. Thinking you guys are wrong about a few things comes with the territory.

Just like thinking that Mormons are a few scoops shy of an ice cream sundae comes with being a Catholic.

As you believe them to be, yes. That’s what makes you a Christian. Doesn’t make you RIGHT, but that’s a whole 'nuther situation.

Ok, in your faith it’s a sin.

As a matter of fact, it’s a sin in our faith too. The thing we both have in common is that it USED to be perfectly acceptable to have more than one wife…in our case a whole lot more recently than in yours. --like a couple of millenia.

IS MORMONISM CHRISTIAN ?

 

[dianaiad]

IS MORMONISM CHRISTIAN ?

Oooohhhhh…I get to go first!!!

yes.

(grin)

 

[KestrelRose]

If Joseph Smith were alive today, preaching the restored gospel, establishing the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, would you kill him? Please assume that you will not be punished by the law, as those who did kill him were not punished.

I have read much on this forum, by Catholics, implying approval of the killing of Joseph Smith. For example. “he died in a gun fight” (one against 200), he was a con man, h was a polygmamist, etc.

I could not assume that God’s law “Thou shall not kill” wouldn’t be enforced.

If there are “Catholics” who imply approval of such a deed, they need to do some serious soul searching. The ends never justify the means.

Joseph Smith died at the hands of a mob. Mobs in general are ruled by stupidity and hatred. This has nothing to do with either Catholicism or Christainity in general.

 

[mfbukowski]

No he should have been locked away and forbidden contact with other so that his lies and heresy may have been contained and not spread.

Definitely an interesting take on freedom of religion. Are you also a stormtrooper? Get the gas chambers ready. I assume that also goes for his believers

That really goes well with your signature.