For Mormons - How Much Do You Really Know About Joseph Smith?

[SteveVH]

Utah is the most charitable state in the USA.

nationaljournal.com/next-economy/big-questions/the-5-most-and-least-charitable-u-s-states-20140508

Matthew 7:18-20 (KJV)

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

And the Catholic Church is the most charitable organization in the world. Yes, by their fruits you shall know them.

 

[boomerang]

Utah is the most charitable state in the USA.

nationaljournal.com/next-economy/big-questions/the-5-most-and-least-charitable-u-s-states-20140508

Matthew 7:18-20 (KJV)

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

Aren’t LDS members required to tithe 10% and do volunteer work for the church? That would account for the high rates of charitableness. And isn’t most of that charity directed at other LDS members? I don’t recall seeing many LDS hospitals, clinics, orphanages, leper colonies and soup kitchens across this country. Catholics may give less on average, but a good chunk of it goes to non-Catholics, maybe most of it.

 

[zaffiroborant]

LDS apologists have argued Joseph could not have produced the Book of Mormon himself because he had limited formal education. It’s true that he had limited formal schooling, but it does not follow that this makes him incapable of producing such a work. Joseph was very well schooled in the bible, contemporary Protestant religions, and the local issues of the day. He had an incredible memory, was a gifted story-teller, and had a vivid imagination. All this comes from historical documentation from his family and associates. Couple that to the sources he had available to him, and Joseph was quite capable of writing the BoM with no divine help.

And his father was a school teacher.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Just because a guy likes to sleep around doesn’t make him a “sex maniac” it could just as easily be viewed as a power issue. Taking another man’s wife emasculates the husband and solidifies the power and control of the new husband, it shows the group who’s in charge, like with Saul. You see it all the time in nature, JS could have just been in touch with his primordial or natural man. Not having sex with the “stolen” wife would just underscore the power he has, “I took what you cherish and want, made it mine, even though I think nothing of it”

 

[zaffiroborant]

Utah is the most charitable state in the USA.

nationaljournal.com/next-economy/big-questions/the-5-most-and-least-charitable-u-s-states-20140508

Matthew 7:18-20 (KJV)

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

I want to see how much time and money LDS people give outside their churches required tithing or support for things directly connected to local members. I would accept "fast offerings, humanitarian aid, education fund contributions but recently the LDS church has put a disclaimer out saying the church will use money as it sees fit, so while the members may be donating in spirit the church may not honor the donors wishes. I don’t consider my offering to be a charitable donation, it supports my church family.
Do LDS members count time on preparing for and giving a talk on Sunday as volunteering, the time spent on teaching fellow members children, does the LDS bishop count his 30 to 40 hours a week in service exclusively to LDS members as volunteer hours, do members count the the time they spend cleaning LDS chapels or the conference center as volunteer time. The LDS church expects these things from members and in certain cases denies “benefits” to members who don’t comply.
I do many of these things in my church and don’t count it as volunteer time anymore than I would count time spent in caring for my family as charity or volunteering.

 

[iepuras]

Steve,
The OP never asked that any of the points be “addressed.” It asked if Mormon’s knew them. I do.
Joseph Smith freely forgave WW Phelps who left and returned to the church.
Joseph Smith received and shared revelations that pointed to his imperfection, errors, and weakness.
These are good conclusions based on the historical record.

If you dispute them we can talk about it.

The stuff Chris brought up in the OP is what “sticks” when critics throw accusations at my church. Extensive discussions on these issues will only affect the most open minded of people and I doubt Chris, you, or me are among them. Concerning many of his topics … One of my standard tu quoque fallacy responses when questioned by Catholics is to point out that Catholics believe sexually depraved men can validly hold the papacy so let’s move on to other topics.

Brian Hales has produced far and away the most extensive coverage of Joseph Smith’s polygamy including the records that are used to suggest that Joseph had sex with other men’s wives, had sex with young girls, and in general was a sex crazed individual. His research assistant/lead began the project as an ex-Mormon, but rejoined the church.
My personal reading of all of this points me STRONGLY to the conclusion that whatever happened with these things (and Brian Hales, Don Bradley, Todd Compton, Richard Bushman, Dan Vogel … neither agree with one another nor possess certainty), it is quite unlikely that Joseph Smith introduced polygamy because of a sexual appetite. If polygamy was not introduced due to sexual appetite then why? I could not (due to time and the need to re-educate myself) and do not desire to review ages and marital status and … on each individual purported spiritual or spiritual/physical marriage. When this is done, brilliant informed people do not have the same conclusions. But, the folks most informed agree with me, “Joseph Smith was not some sex maniac, coupling with multiple women to satisfy his libido.” The historical record IMO almost rules this out. The clarity with which I see this results in me placing much more importance on other aspects of Joseph’s life than on his polygamy (I might note that the idea of being a polygamous man is not attractive to me, I sympathize with the statement, “My brethren know what my feelings were at the time Joseph revealed the doctrine; I was not desirous of shrinking from any duty, nor of failing in the least to do as I was commanded, but it was the first time in my life that I had desired the grave, and I could hardly get over it for a long time. And when I saw a funeral, I felt to envy the corpse its situation, and to regret that I was not in the coffin.”).

I often presume folks are immersed in these issues and I do not need to provide references for common quotes. That was my error in my previous post. The above quote is Brigham Young. The Catholic Priest was Jordan Vajda.
Charity, TOm

There is a slight problem with the pro-LDS apologetics trying to explain away Joseph Smith’s polygamous marriages by arguing that he didn’t have sex with many of his wives. LDS scripture makes it clear that the purpose of polygamy is to have children.

Jacob 2:30 - For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people. [The context of this verse is a sermon on polygamy.]

Doctrine & Covenants 132:63 - For they [wives] are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment.

So if the whole purpose of polygamy was to have children, why should we assume Joseph didn’t have sex with his polygamous wives? It is clear in LDS scripture that Heavenly Father commands polygamy for the express purpose of having children. Shouldn’t we then assume that Joseph obeyed Heavenly Father and had sex with his wives in an effort to have children? They didn’t have in vitro back then. He is your founding prophet and you stated that LDS should be proud of the choices Joseph made. Then shouldn’t the LDS church praise Joseph for obeying Heavenly Father by having sex with his many wives? It was a commandment after all because it was kinda hard back then to have babies without having sex. Funny thing is, though, while I was familiar with Brigham Young’s polygamy, I didn’t know about Joseph’s numerous wives until I started digging into the history. I certainly didn’t learn about it in Sunday School or seminary.

 

[boomerang]

While I do not know “why” Chris chose to do what Chris chose to do, I do know he stands with many folks who make similar choices.
Folks like Loraine Boettner. Or even Chinique or Hislop.

Not really. Pointing out the flaws in LDS history using credible historical documents is in no way the same as the deliberate calumny uttered by Boettner and his ilk.

 

[BrotherofJared]

I’m a Mormon. I’m pretty sure most Mormons are aware of Joseph’s history. The information continues to be uncovered and the church still grows. The rumors that millions are leaving the church are simply unfounded. You could claim that church leaders are providing false information in order to keep those who haven’t left from leaving, but in my travels, I have not seen any evidence of the mass exodus that others claim is taking place.

So, why do you think these facts haven’t unraveled the Mormon faith as you seem to think it should? For starters, I’d like to suggest that Catholic history is not exactly a pillar of worthy emulation, but I don’t think you’ll find any LDS spending anytime stomping on the obvious errors. In fact, I’m quite amazed that I’d find such a post on a Catholic site. I did not know they were taking up the banner to fight the demon within the Mormon religion.

That being said, let’s take this one for example:

Joseph’s history of adultery…

Just to be clear, adultery is having sex with someone else’s spouse or with someone who is not your spouse when you are married. That’s not exactly the way the dictionary spells it out, but I believe a single person who has sex with a married person is also committing of adultery. There is no credible evidence that Joseph ever had sex with any of the wives who had husbands when he married them. He had no sexual relations with any of the women he married until after he was married to them. Therefore, there was no adultery or history of it. But you throw out your statement that Joseph was an adulterer as though it was a fact when it is not. He was a polygamist which is not the same thing.

 

[Holly3278]

I think the facts go to show that Joseph Smith was definitely no “prophet”. He was definitely a false prophet though. He was also a fraud. For example, those Egyptian papyri he used to make the Book of Abraham were finally discovered later on after they were lost and correctly translated by experts in Egyptian hieroglyphics and they turned out to have nothing to do with the Book of Abraham.

 

[BrotherofJared]

So if the whole purpose of polygamy was to have children, why should we assume Joseph didn’t have sex with his polygamous wives?

The easy answer is that we can’t assume anything. To have sex with other men’s wives would be adultery. I’ve studied and read the biography of an Apostle who’s wife he married. Joseph was sealed to these women for eternity only, not for this life. The women remained with their husbands to whom they were married for life. There was no sharing of the wife.

Mormons believe in a continuation of the seeds (posterity) after we are resurrected. In this way, the sealing of Joseph to these women would allow for that continuation. The scriptures do not state the when to have children. Many of the women who were married to Joseph never bore him any children.

Your statement would seem to indicate that if a woman couldn’t bare children, tubes tied, physical damage or simply not able to produce an egg would be reason not to marry them since, that’s the purpose… Doesn’t make sense.

 

[BrotherofJared]

If you mean “expert” as in having a perfect knowledge and being completely conversant in Egyptian, then there is no such thing. There are only a handful of experts that claim the documents are not correct, and many of those have been outright proven that they aren’t as expert as they thought. The jury is still out on the papyri.

If you just do a little research, you can find out easily the opposite views to what you just said by equally qualified experts in Egyptology.

 

[BrotherofJared]

I want to see how much time and money LDS people give outside their churches required tithing or support for things directly connected to local members. I would accept "fast offerings, humanitarian aid, education fund contributions but recently the LDS church has put a disclaimer out saying the church will use money as it sees fit, so while the members may be donating in spirit the church may not honor the donors wishes. I don’t consider my offering to be a charitable donation, it supports my church family.
Do LDS members count time on preparing for and giving a talk on Sunday as volunteering, the time spent on teaching fellow members children, does the LDS bishop count his 30 to 40 hours a week in service exclusively to LDS members as volunteer hours, do members count the the time they spend cleaning LDS chapels or the conference center as volunteer time. The LDS church expects these things from members and in certain cases denies “benefits” to members who don’t comply.
I do many of these things in my church and don’t count it as volunteer time anymore than I would count time spent in caring for my family as charity or volunteering.

To answer your question, no, we don’t count any of those hours, no attempt is even made to collect that information. If there are any hours counted it is by number of people attending a community event and how long the even lasted. And by community event, we are serving non-members (and members indirectly).

I’m not sure if that answers your question, but if there is any bean counting, it is personal and not provided to the church for statistics at all.

 

[BrotherofJared]

I agree that many Mormons seem to have a mental block when it comes to objectively taking a look at Joseph Smith and seeing him for who he really was. For them, feelings trump evidence.

Especially when the evidence is lacking.

But there are many others who did take a deeper look at things and they are no longer in the church.

But not a deep enough look or they’d still be in
.

That number is rapidly growing primarily because of the internet.

Define rapidly growing. In my book that’d be a decline in membership. Keep an eye on General Conference, when the number of Stakes being established stagnates or diminishes, then there’s a problem. But a decline doesn’t mean it’s not true… (See? The Mormon’s just have this mental block).

The church cannot effectively hide this information anymore.

The church is not trying to hide it. If anything, they are investing in publishing as much information as possible.

LDS apologists at FARMS and FAIR have been unable to answer the questions, and no one in the church leadership has been able to do it either. If you have seen/read their sporadic interviews they only make it worse by evading/denying.

Really? What haven’t we been able to answer. All we have to do is wait and your experts all turn to dust. DNA from the middle east has been found among the American Indians and the priest in the facsimile may not have had to have a lizard’s head.

Ezra Taft Benson’s denials of the doctrine of men becoming gods was particularly troubling. Does he think we’re stupid? He was either incompetent or lying. Neither is good.

I’m not sure where you got this. I would love a link because I’m certain that’s what you THINK he said. However, the general concept of man becoming god and making our own planets is a non-Mormon regurgitation of what non-Mormons think we mean. We believe exactly what the Bible teaches about man’s destiny. It is very clear that “we shall be like him.” That’s all we mean when we say that we’ll be like him.

When in a discussion with a Mormon and their only answer is to bear their testimony, they have lost the argument. That is the act of final desperation when they have no answers.

The funny thing is, you have no answers either, except to cop out with "that’s a mystery. Like you have anymore information than we do. You can’t explain your concept of the Trinity no matter how hard you try. It’s a mystery. Not explainable.

 

[iepuras]

The easy answer is that we can’t assume anything. To have sex with other men’s wives would be adultery. I’ve studied and read the biography of an Apostle who’s wife he married. Joseph was sealed to these women for eternity only, not for this life. The women remained with their husbands to whom they were married for life. There was no sharing of the wife.

Mormons believe in a continuation of the seeds (posterity) after we are resurrected. In this way, the sealing of Joseph to these women would allow for that continuation. The scriptures do not state the when to have children. Many of the women who were married to Joseph never bore him any children.

Your statement would seem to indicate that if a woman couldn’t bare children, tubes tied, physical damage or simply not able to produce an egg would be reason not to marry them since, that’s the purpose… Doesn’t make sense.

And you are assuming he didn’t have sex with them. Why is that? Because that would make your prophet look bad? That’s what I told myself until I allowed myself to consider that Joseph Smith may have been a false prophet.

And Mormons also believe in multiplying and replenishing the earth, i.e., having children in mortality. If you go back and read both chapters I referenced, you will find that both are discussed.

Well, I have read that many of his wives did say, both explicitly and euphemistically, that they had sex with him.

So if some of these marriages actually were for eternity only, why did Joseph take these wives away from other men, including his own apostles? Was Joseph making a judgment that these men would not be exalted and would not have wives in the celestial kingdom? If his apostles are exalted, should they not get to be married to their earthly wives for eternity? That’s a cruel thing for Joseph to do.

Go back and reread my statement that you quoted. I said no such thing that ** marriage** is only for having children and that women who cannot have children cannot get married. My statement was about polygamy specifically. Your own Mormon scriptures say that polygamy is for the purpose of having children. Why don’t you ask your bishop if a woman can become a plural wife if she is known to be infertile? And don’t assume that if a woman’s tubes are tied, she cannot get pregnant. I know someone who got pregnant twice after having her tubes tied.

 

[gazelam]

I want to see how much time and money LDS people give outside their churches required tithing or support for things directly connected to local members. I would accept "fast offerings, humanitarian aid, education fund contributions but recently the LDS church has put a disclaimer out saying the church will use money as it sees fit, so while the members may be donating in spirit the church may not honor the donors wishes. I don’t consider my offering to be a charitable donation, it supports my church family.
Do LDS members count time on preparing for and giving a talk on Sunday as volunteering, the time spent on teaching fellow members children, does the LDS bishop count his 30 to 40 hours a week in service exclusively to LDS members as volunteer hours, do members count the the time they spend cleaning LDS chapels or the conference center as volunteer time. The LDS church expects these things from members and in certain cases denies “benefits” to members who don’t comply.
I do many of these things in my church and don’t count it as volunteer time anymore than I would count time spent in caring for my family as charity or volunteering.

For me, the story of the widow’s mite puts the kibosh on any notion that giving to one’s own faith is not charitable. She was giving to the Temple treasury.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Especially when the evidence is lacking.

But not a deep enough look or they’d still be in

You could get your history all lined up nice and neat, and it wouldn’t matter to me. (Not that I think that is possible.) I left Mormonism for atheism because I didn’t believe in your God, and still do not.

The church is not trying to hide it. If anything, they are investing in publishing as much information as possible.

Not really. I assume you are referring the essays the LDS Church has published on their website recently. If so, sure, they’re a step in the right direction but they still omit what suits an agenda. And, Joseph Smith’s polygamy is hidden, still.

Mystery, in theological terms, is not us throwing our hand in the air. The doctrine of the Trinity is explained quite rationally. The mystery is how God is three and God is one. We believe what God has revealed about Himself. God has revealed Himself as one. God has revealed Himself three distinct persons. We hold no idea that God can be comprehended, because we are not God, nor punky gods in the making. God is God, we are not.

This is not similar to a Mormon testimony, which is a replacement for providing a rational explanation for Mormon belief. If you can’t explain something rationally, then why believe it? Or, why not believe just any old thing?

Really? What haven’t we been able to answer. All we have to do is wait and your experts all turn to dust. DNA from the middle east has been found among the American Indians and the priest in the facsimile may not have had to have a lizard’s head.

Ok, you’re cracking me up. I think you need to provide some references.

I’m not sure where you got this. I would love a link because I’m certain that’s what you THINK he said. However, the general concept of man becoming god and making our own planets is a non-Mormon regurgitation of what non-Mormons think we mean. We believe exactly what the Bible teaches about man’s destiny. It is very clear that “we shall be like him.” That’s all we mean when we say that we’ll be like him.

This is just dishonest. There are many former LDS here who were taught and believed just this. Your church has not refuted it, just have decided to gloss that part over because they know Christians view it as non-Christian.

The funny thing is, you have no answers either, except to cop out with "that’s a mystery. Like you have anymore information than we do. You can’t explain your concept of the Trinity no matter how hard you try. It’s a mystery. Not explainable.

And we’re fine with that. It is the LDS critique of Christianity, and touting itself as better because you believe God is a man, therefore, not so mysterious, that puts the religion outside of Christianity.

Also, mystery is a theological term, and is not the same as Mormon testimony. A mormon testimony is a replacement for rational thought or explanation. When the word mystery is used, there is underlying rational thought. God has revealed Himself as one, God has revealed Himself as three persons. It is rational to accept what God has revealed about Himself. What is a mystery is how God is three and God is one. We cannot grasp God, which is rational. God is God, not a human, and is beyond the grasp of that which He has created, us. The theological term is always used in context of the supernatural. It is not a crutch for skirting around historical claims that don’t align to fact.

Mormon testimony bearing is the goto response when the rational wall has been hit.

 

[Jerusha]

Define rapidly growing. In my book that’d be a decline in membership. Keep an eye on General Conference, when the number of Stakes being established stagnates or diminishes, then there’s a problem. But a decline doesn’t mean it’s not true… (See? The Mormon’s just have this mental block)…Really? What haven’t we been able to answer. All we have to do is wait and your experts all turn to dust. DNA from the middle east has been found among the American Indians and the priest in the facsimile may not have had to have a lizard’s head…

There is a conference in SLC going on at this very moment. David Tweede is very specifically saying that the LDS church is manipulating the membership stats in such a way that their reports can be called outright lies. Same as for the unpublished and secret financial records. they hide the fact that there is substantial investment of excess capital. It is not being used for charitable causes. Why don’t you listen to the exmo conference? I am sorry, but I am not listening to it at the present moment, because of serious audio problems for me.

If YOU listened to the LDS general conference, you would know that no new temples have been announced for more than a year. Why that? Maybe because there are no longer enough recommend-holding LDS to keep them busy? They are no longer a paying proposition. Maybe someone would like to do some research on number of hours per week all the world temples are open for business, and compare that to twenty years ago.

Simon Southerton has specifically and on multiple occasions refuted those claims about the X lineage. Those people had their origins in northwestern Asia, not the near east. People with that lineage exist today in the Altaic region of what is now Russia. They left Asia at the same time, and were already genetically mixed with the Asians who came here. The mutation rate is consistent, and provides a definite timeline. I would add that that genetic mixing gave them the genetic diversity to withstand a population bottleneck during their journey to and through the Americas. There was no wall of prejudice and bigotry and warring cultures, such as described in the BoM.

 

[Jerusha]

AS for my friends who believe that Joseph Smith was the author of the BoM, I would sincerely like to believe that. It would certainly make things simpler. However, the replacement portion-- I Nephi to Jarom, is significantly different from the rest of the book. Those early books, actually written later, have a much higher proportion of material copied from the Bible. Non-Biblical content is much poorer in parallels to other literature available in that time, but much richer in material specific to the Smith family experience. Other than III Nephi, there is not as much Biblical content in the rest of the book (although there is still plenty ) This, by itself, is enough to convince “Joseph only-ites” that there are other explanations.

However, my intent is not to divide.

As for Catholics being critical of Mormonism, since Mormonism arose from a profoundly anti-Catholic culture, and still holds precious its anti-Catholic beliefs and books, we have every right to defend ourselves. Especially since LDS missionaries target Catholics. When I was in high school, LDS classmates told me that there are no miracles in the Catholic Church, that the Catholic Church had lost “the spirit” very early. I had a hissy-fit. Recently, I found that such a statement came directly from educational materials used back then.

 

[Chris-WA]

Utah is the most charitable state in the USA.

nationaljournal.com/next-economy/big-questions/the-5-most-and-least-charitable-u-s-states-20140508

Matthew 7:18-20 (KJV)

A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

There is no doubt the CoJCoLDS makes some good contributions to the world in terms of charity work, but that by no means in any way makes it true, just like you would have to acknowledge the fact that the charity work of the Catholic Chuch, which is by far the single largest charity organization in the entire world by a longshot, in any way makes it the true church. You probably are not going to leave Mormonism for Catholicism because the Catholic Church does so much charity, right? It is possible for the LDS church to do good charity work and for Joseph Smith to be a fraud at the same time.

 

[Jerusha]

Luke 8:12-13