Mormans and polygamy

[hosemonkey]

I have some ocean front property in Arizona for sale…I just know you would love it.

I am not the one beguiled by mormonism, you are. I am safely outside the compound of mormonism and it’s odd history and amazing beliefs. Those that must beware are those being enticed into the web of mormon falsehoods and those who are ensnared in it’s abberent theology. Those of us who see mormonism for what it it is and are more repelled by it’s falsehoods and obfuscations than it’s bizarre theology because mormonism does not practice full disclosure with it’s inquirers, rather administering the poison after the victim has made the committment of “baptism.” You call it “milk before meat” as I recall. This is blatant thimblerigging and smacks of the sharp real estate practice that you allude to. Not only is mormonism false, it is also fundamentally dishonest.

 

[hosemonkey]

You are upset about an inconsistency, I see.

This is why they did away with polygamy even though it is still a theologically sound doctrine.

 

[KathleenGee]

The 20th century of Christianity has known more martyrs than all the numbers of those martyred in the past combined.

At present, the blood of martyrs overflows the chalice of Christ, Protestant and Catholic and Orthodox…I do not know about Mormon martyrdoms…

 

[hosemonkey]

The 20th century of Christianity has known more martyrs than all the numbers of those martyred in the past combined.

At present, the blood of martyrs overflows the chalice of Christ, Protestant and Catholic and Orthodox…I do not know about Mormon martyrdoms…

Hasn’t been any mormon martyrdoms that I know of. They kinda stay out of the line of fire. That, or they keep it quiet so as not to spook the rookie missionaries.

 

[pablope]

You guys know your fraud! Smith was always looking for get rich quick schemes wasn’t he? Mr. Treasure Hunter.

This is a Judeo-Christian nation. Polygamy was never practiced here. In fact, there was no law against it until 1862, because no Christian would have ever condoned polygamy.

Be that as it may, Smith did commit crimes. Treason. Trespass, destroying private property, conversion, breaking and entering, resisting arrest,
"Mormon writer William E. Bennett admits that Smith’s criminal assault on the offices of a free press resulted in his ultimate undoing:

“Third, Smith’s departure had left the Saints with virtually no leadership since many of the loyal apostles were away on missions.

“Fourth, a messenger informed Smith that the Nauvoo Legion had divided between those who wanted to defend the city and those who wanted to flee.

“So back across the Mississippi both he and Hyrum journeyed, continuing on to Carthage, where they were placed in the town’s jailhouse.”

(Richard Abanes, One Nation Under Gods: A History of the Mormon Church[New York, New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 2002], p. 198), emphasis added

---

Even the LDS -biased and -published Encyclopedia of Mormonism has been forced to admit that Smith’s illegal assault on the offices of a free press provided ample reason for his arrest:

[Smith’s prompt order to] the city marshal to destroy the press and burn all the copies of the paper . . . justified or not, played into the hands of the opposition. It riled anti-Mormon sentiment throughout Hancock County and provided substance for the charges used by the opposition to hold Joseph Smith in Carthage Jail, where he was murdered on June 27, 1844.”

(Reed C. Durham, Jr., “Nauvoo Expositor,” in Encyclopedia of Mormonism, vol. 3, p. 997), emphasis added

---

Indeed, the “substance” to which Mormonism’s Encyclopedia blandly refers was broadly outlined in the Nauvoo Expositor–that is, before Smith destroyed the press in a futile attempt to cover up the illegal and immoral acts of himself and his associates–and which was subsequently followed by the destruction of other private property owned by those who had published the newspaper. These acts of lawlessness quickly formed the legal justification for the arrest and imprisonment of Smith at Carthage:

“These new charges, in addition to . . . old Ohio and Missouri charges along with [an] outstanding warrant for high treason by the President of the United States certainly justify calling Smith an ‘outlaw.’ Unfortunately, Smith was turned into a martyr before he could stand trial for his crimes.”

(Arza Evans, The Keystone of Mormonism [St. George, Utah: Keystone Books, Inc., 2003], p. 162), emphasis added

I would just like to add a little of my humble observation or insight.

If we look at Christian martyrs, a common denominator would be their arrest and incarceration, would be because of religious reasons. Thus crimes charged would be religious in nature.

In JSmith’s case, from the accounts shown, he was arrested for non-religious reasons, even though our Mormon brothers here may rant and rave about it till kingdom come, there is no getting around it, in what I have seen. I have not seen any contrary evidence that he was arrested for a religious activity.

In a previous post, he even expected to be rescued. And another common denominator of the true christian martyrs is their submission, holding their humility and steadfastness and trust in the Lord, and their unceasing prayer and asking for the forgiveness of their executioners, so as the offense is not held against them. These are all reflective of how Christ was in His last moments. JSmith’s actions are all contrary to this.

As I previously stated, I find it odd that a supposed prophet, who is supposed to have been charged with the restoration of Christ’s true Church, would not imitate Christ, and there I find no hint of Christ in the person.

JSmith a martyr? Not in the true Christian sense.

 

[Pax_in_Veritate]

I would just like to add a little of my humble observation or insight.

If we look at Christian martyrs, a common denominator would be their arrest and incarceration, would be because of religious reasons. Thus crimes charged would be religious in nature.

In JSmith’s case, from the accounts shown, he was arrested for non-religious reasons, even though our Mormon brothers here may rant and rave about it till kingdom come, there is no getting around it, in what I have seen. I have not seen any contrary evidence that he was arrested for a religious activity.

In a previous post, he even expected to be rescued. And another common denominator of the true christian martyrs is their submission, holding their humility and steadfastness and trust in the Lord, and their unceasing prayer and asking for the forgiveness of their executioners, so as the offense is not held against them. These are all reflective of how Christ was in His last moments. JSmith’s actions are all contrary to this.

As I previously stated, I find it odd that a supposed prophet, who is supposed to have been charged with the restoration of Christ’s true Church, would not imitate Christ, and there I find no hint of Christ in the person.

JSmith a martyr? Not in the true Christian sense.

Interesting observation.

Another interesting case is that of Socrates. In Plato’s Crito, the Greek Socrates allowed himself to be executed for his trouble making. He could have bribed his way out or had people come to his aid and lived magnificently in any city of his choosing with wealthy patrons. He even argued his execution was just and condoned it, because he had in fact broken the laws of the country he was born in, spent over 50 years in, and consciously decided to make his home. He willingly went along with the authority ordering his death. Violence would have been his last instinct.

Socrates argued that the laws of the land regardless of whether they are just or not, MUST be followed. Laws create the fabric of society, protect us, and allow us to prosper. America is a Judeo-Christian country, as many say, and its laws have generally been in line with natural law or God’s laws.

Apparently, Smith on multiple occasions fled certain jurisdictions to avoid prosecution under our laws, beginning perhaps with the banking fraud issue, Organized military units, cleansed the areas he moved into by ordering Mormons to "trample [the Mormon dissenters] into the earth and threatening non-Mormon inhabitants.

Smith evidently did not feel the same fondness for American law that Socrates felt for the law of Athens. Smith had a great disrespect for the law. Maybe he should have stayed and gone through witht he banking fraud proceedings. Socrates would have.

Smith apparently did alot to undermine the laws and politics of the areas he moved into.

 

[Pax_in_Veritate]

Interesting observation.

Another interesting case is that of Socrates. In Plato’s Crito, the Greek Socrates allowed himself to be executed for his trouble making. He could have bribed his way out or had people come to his aid and lived magnificently in any city of his choosing with wealthy patrons. He even argued his execution was just and condoned it, because he had in fact broken the laws of the country he was born in, spent over 50 years in, and consciously decided to make his home. He willingly went along with the authority ordering his death. Violence would have been his last instinct.

Socrates argued that the laws of the land regardless of whether they are just or not, MUST be followed. Laws create the fabric of society, protect us, and allow us to prosper. America is a Judeo-Christian country, as many say, and its laws have generally been in line with natural law or God’s laws.

Apparently, Smith on multiple occasions fled certain jurisdictions to avoid prosecution under our laws, beginning perhaps with the banking fraud issue, Organized military units, cleansed the areas he moved into by ordering Mormons to "trample [the Mormon dissenters] into the earth and threatening non-Mormon inhabitants.

Smith evidently did not feel the same fondness for American law that Socrates felt for the law of Athens. Smith had a great disrespect for the law. Maybe he should have stayed and gone through witht he banking fraud proceedings. Socrates would have.

Smith apparently did alot to undermine the laws and politics of the areas he moved into.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Wikipedia cites the works of Michael D. Quinn, and his interpretation of data, for their post. Michael D. Quinn is suspect at best.

Really, he’s “suspect”.
From “about the author” on Amazon:

*Mike QuinnD. Michael Quinn is a former professor of history at Brigham Young University. His accolades include the Samuel F. Bemis, the George W. Egleston, and the Frederick W. Beinecke prizes; Best Book and Best Article awards from the Mormon History Association; “Outstanding Teacher” by vote of graduating BYU seniors; and invitations to lecture at the University of Paris’s Fondation de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme and other similar venues
*

So just why is Mr. Quinn “suspect”?

 

[JeanMichel]

Really, he’s “suspect”.
From “about the author” on Amazon:

So just why is Mr. Quinn “suspect”?

Mr. Quinn is a noted historian with a rather colorful manner of writing. He is know to write from a psychological position; attempting to portray what people thought and felt. In addition, he achieves his statements by adding up different historical facts and then adding them to produce a point. For example, he has accused Smith and many of the early members of the Mormon church of having a lax position on homosexuality by stating that many of the brethren would share the same bed when traveling. This is a unique position that he has taken with no other historians supporting his deduction. Of course, when we look closer we see a very personal reason. He divorced his wife and family and became a practicing homosexual; how do we Catholics treat a person who acts similarly? Do we credit him with a voice of reason and truth?

This thread has become less than Christian and resembles rabid anti-Mormonism rags. Smith was but a child when he started down this path. As a very young man he supposedly translated the book of Mormon. He never denied any of his stories. It appears indeed that he was a man of many, many weaknesses. A perfect example of a sinner that he admitted repeatedly. I read a book entitled Rough Stone Rolling, by a Mormon historian. It was not printed by the Mormon Church and does seem to have been recognized as an honest account of the development of the Mormon church. Many of these issues are covered, many of the account cited are proved incorrect, and many others supported.

Catholics need to be sources of truth and light. We need not repeat lies and mis-truths. Let’s pull back from rolling in the gutter of anti-Mormonism. Mormons are good people who strive to follow Christ. Let him who is perfect cast the first stone at them.

 

[zaffiroborant]

Let him who is perfect cast the first stone at them.

Except in the case of Mr. Quinn??

 

[Pax_in_Veritate]

Mr. Quinn is a noted historian with a rather colorful manner of writing. He is know to write from a psychological position; attempting to portray what people thought and felt. In addition, he achieves his statements by adding up different historical facts and then adding them to produce a point. For example, he has accused Smith and many of the early members of the Mormon church of having a lax position on homosexuality by stating that many of the brethren would share the same bed when traveling. This is a unique position that he has taken with no other historians supporting his deduction. Of course, when we look closer we see a very personal reason. He divorced his wife and family and became a practicing homosexual; how do we Catholics treat a person who acts similarly? Do we credit him with a voice of reason and truth?

This thread has become less than Christian and resembles rabid anti-Mormonism rags. Smith was but a child when he started down this path. As a very young man he supposedly translated the book of Mormon. He never denied any of his stories. It appears indeed that he was a man of many, many weaknesses. A perfect example of a sinner that he admitted repeatedly. I read a book entitled Rough Stone Rolling, by a Mormon historian. It was not printed by the Mormon Church and does seem to have been recognized as an honest account of the development of the Mormon church. Many of these issues are covered, many of the account cited are proved incorrect, and many others supported.

Catholics need to be sources of truth and light. We need not repeat lies and mis-truths. Let’s pull back from rolling in the gutter of anti-Mormonism. Mormons are good people who strive to follow Christ. Let him who is perfect cast the first stone at them.

Listen, the Mormons cast the first stone and refuse to acknowledge any valid point whatsoever even one so simple as Smith committing criminal acts.

You should be ashamed of yourself for slandering the writer. Being a homosexual does not deride a logical point. No rational person would disregard a valid point solely because the writer is a homosexual. None of his points, including Smith being a criminal have anything to do with homosexuality.

You are an illogical bigot of the worst degree.

Shameful!

Good job! Mormons and Jeanmichel for ignoring the other 3 authors I provided to simply show criminality!

 

[Pax_in_Veritate]

Listen, a few Mormons cast the first stone and refuse to acknowledge any valid point whatsoever even one so simple as Smith committing criminal acts while propagandizing his proposed martyrdom.

You should be ashamed of yourself for slandering the writer. Being a homosexual does not deride a logical point. No rational person would disregard a valid point solely because the writer is a homosexual. None of his points, including Smith being a criminal have anything to do with homosexuality.

You are an illogical bigot of the worst degree. Why would you bring that up>

Shameful!

Good job! Mormons and Jeanmichel for ignoring the other 3 authors I provided to simply show criminality!

 

[Pax_in_Veritate]

Listen, a few Mormons cast the first stone and refuse to acknowledge any valid point whatsoever even one so simple as Smith committing criminal acts while propagandizing his martyrdom.

You should be ashamed of yourself for slandering the writer. Being a homosexual does not deride a logical point. No rational person would disregard a valid point solely because the writer is a homosexual. None of his points, including Smith being a criminal have anything to do with homosexuality.

You are an illogical bigot of the worst degree.

Shameful!

Good job! Mormons and Jeanmichel for ignoring the other 3 authors I provided to simply show criminality!

 

[KathleenGee]

What I am objecting to is the cover up of Mormonism’s anti-Catholic past in its teachings, the fraudulent behavior of Joseph Smith and his associates.

Fraud.

JeanMichael are you entertaining the thought of becoming a Mormon? because you are compromising truth for just being nice.

My oldest boy went to a liberal Catholic school and he said to me that their idea of being a Christian was just being nice.

Subsequently, my former pastor privately considered being nice a form of heresy…compromising the truth.

And when truth is being compromised and people cannot question for fear of upsetting those in authority over them and being labelled, then the compromise of truth is keeping people in bondage.

The CAF forum is here to discuss and point out and reveal the truth and to address errors. One of the corporal works of mercy is to teach truth, to instruct. There are many people who come to CAF to read.

There are former Mormons who have been intently watching our reaction to the Mormons building a grandiose temple in the countryside surrounding Rome where the Eucharist has been received for 2,000 years…because they know the history of Mormon teachings against the Roman Church.

You come across as an accomplice to cover up and deny and berate Catholics here who seek the truth.

 

[Pax_in_Veritate]

I would edit my post 171 post if I could to be a little more civil. It went a little over the line.
I just can’t understand why someone would attack the author instead of the argument.

It is fair to say that some arguments are correct and some are not. But the topic had been polygamy, joseph smith, the catholic church, martyrdom, and criminality- not homosexuality.

I cited to 4 sources saying Smith committed criminals acts. For some reason the focus shifted to the one author. This is a deflection when we should be staying on topic.

Criminal acts is a point Fly refused to concede.

 

[KathleenGee]

Crime, fraud, exploiting people always looking for a profit off of others.

 

[flyonthewall]

Listen, the Mormons cast the first stone and refuse to acknowledge any valid point whatsoever even one so simple as Smith committing criminal acts.

You should be ashamed of yourself for slandering the writer. Being a homosexual does not deride a logical point. No rational person would disregard a valid point solely because the writer is a homosexual. None of his points, including Smith being a criminal have anything to do with homosexuality.

You are an illogical bigot of the worst degree.

Shameful!

Good job! Mormons and Jeanmichel for ignoring the other 3 authors I provided to simply show criminality!

You have shown no criminality whatsoever.
What you did provide is anti-mormon half-truths and falsehoods and you basing your conclusions on them.

The question was asked, why Quinn was suspect. An answer was given to which you call the one who responded an “illogical bigot of the worst degree”.
I guess it is true, when you cannot address the issue, then attack the messenger.

What I have seen here, in this thread, are desperate attempts to discredit a person, who if correct, would disrupt your beliefs and perhaps, your way of life.
Anyone who recognizes the heavy-handed negative slant taken without regard for a balanced study, is immeditely villanized.
Now where have I seen this type of thing before…

 

[flyonthewall]

I would edit my post 171 post if I could to be a little more civil. It went a little over the line.
I just can’t understand why someone would attack the author instead of the argument.

It is fair to say that some arguments are correct and some are not. But the topic had been polygamy, joseph smith, the catholic church, martyrdom, and criminality- not homosexuality.

I cited to 4 sources saying Smith committed criminals acts. For some reason the focus shifted to the one author. This is a deflection when we should be staying on topic.

Criminal acts is a point Fly refused to concede.

I refuse to concede criminal acts as there are none, and you still have not provided anything that proves it.
Here is a link that address it:
en.fairmormon.org/City_of_Nauvoo/Nauvoo_Expositor

“The destruction of the Expositor issue was legal; it was not legal to have destroyed the type, but this was a civil matter, not a criminal one, and one for which Joseph was willing to pay a fine if imposed.”

There were no laws against polygamy when it was practiced. After polygamy began, anti-bigamy laws were passed. The church used legal means to appeal.
Still no criminality.

Martyrdom does not involve criminality

Your sources have already been addressed by others and if you spent as much time researching a balanced approach you would have found them.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

Return to the topic of the OP please

 

[KathleenGee]

Jesus Christ gave us victory over the flesh by dying to self and our passions. He has left us the ‘blueprint’ for sanctity and has never left us orphaned.

I myself would in no way enter into a marriage with my husband having other wives, especially in our country and the effects of having multiple partners.

Mormons should study more of the Blessed Mother and her assistance in helping us live chaste lives, faithful lives.

Scripture repeatedly draws on the image of the faithful covenant between Groom and Bride, of the faithful suffering the infidelity of the other, but hopefully waiting for the Beloved’s return. No multiple partners recognized here.