M
mtolympus
Guest
Apparently, it didn’t fool Dalin H. Oaks.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
T
twopekinguys
Guest
But nobody has to “alter” any facts to show mormonism wrong.Mormons are taught to ignore history…especially that history that proves the LDS Church is false.
Apostle Dalin H. Oaks once stated
“Our individual, personal testimonies are based on the witness of the Spirit, not on any combination or accumulation of historical facts. If we are so grounded, no alteration of historical facts can shake our testimonies.” (“1985 CES Doctrine and Covenants Symposium,” Brigham Young University, Aug. 16, 1985, page 26)
Alteration of facts? really? He made this statement during the Salamander Letter scandal when the LDS prophet was fooled by Mark Hoffman. They thought the Salamander letter was real and accurate. So, the even came up with stuff to explain that Salamander meant “spirit” and THAT was what Joseph was talking about. When it came out that the Salamander letter was a hoax, they looked pretty silly.
The truth speaks for itself.
T
TexanKnight
Guest
And that makes it even worse. He KNOWS it is falseApparently, it didn’t fool Dalin H. Oaks.
L
LongJourney
Guest
Tex, could you dissect this for me:And that makes it even worse. He KNOWS it is false
Thomas Gregg, an employee of Thomas Sharp at the time of the murders, later wrote (too lazy to look it up at the moment) that it was entirely probable that their intent was to take Joseph Smith to Missouri to stand trial for charges there. Then things went astray when Joseph started shooting.Any defendant who could be shown to have shot the fatal bullet could be convicted of murder under this indictment-- but so could any defendant who merely joined in the mob of deliberately participated in the illegal arrangement. Under the common-law rule in force in Illinois t the time, a person who participated in an illegal arrangement was criminally responsible for all the consequences of that arrangement, even though unintended by him and even though committed out of his presence by persons whose identity could not be established. There are many cases where this theory of conspiracy has been used to convict and hang persons for murders actually committed by their co-conspirators, identified or unidentified, the four persons hanged for Abraham Lincoln’s murder being one prominent example[footnote]. This indictment was apparently drawn to permit proof of the guilt of any or all of these nine defendants on the theory, regardless of who fired the fatal shot and regardless of whether any of them were even present at the jail. Oaks D, Hill, M. (1979), Carthage Conspiracy, Urbana Illinois, U. of Illinois Press, p. 52.
I would enjoy seeing your answer. Thank you.
T
TexanKnight
Guest
ok…here goes.Tex, could you dissect this for me:
“Any defendant who could be shown to have shot the fatal bullet could be convicted of murder under this indictment-- but so could any defendant who merely joined in the mob of deliberately participated in the illegal arrangement. Under the common-law rule in force in Illinois t the time, a person who participated in an illegal arrangement was criminally responsible for all the consequences of that arrangement, even though unintended by him and even though committed out of his presence by persons whose identity could not be established. There are many cases where this theory of conspiracy has been used to convict and hang persons for murders actually committed by their co-conspirators, identified or unidentified, the four persons hanged for Abraham Lincoln’s murder being one prominent example[footnote]. This indictment was apparently drawn to permit proof of the guilt of any or all of these nine defendants on the theory, regardless of who fired the fatal shot and regardless of whether any of them were even present at the jail. Oaks D, Hill, M. (1979), Carthage Conspiracy, Urbana Illinois, U. of Illinois Press, p. 52.”
Thomas Gregg, an employee of Thomas Sharp at the time of the murders, later wrote (too lazy to look it up at the moment) that it was entirely probable that their intent was to take Joseph Smith to Missouri to stand trial for charges there. Then things went astray when Joseph started shooting.
I would enjoy seeing your answer. Thank you.
There are essentially two things going on here. First, there is conspiracy. Assuming there was a conspiracy to kill Joseph Smith, then it would not matter who fired the shot, all the conspirators would be guilty of the crime, even the conspirators who were not present at the jail.
Now, assume the conspiracy was not to kill Joseph, but to kidnap him and take him to a different jurisdiction. Assuming no one was “deputized” to do so, the kidnapping is a felony. There is a provision of the law called the "Felony Murder Rule. Now, I am not sure this was in place at that time, but assuming it was, then if a death occurs the commission of a felony, then it is First Degree Murder. And all the conspirators would be guilty.
But…let us assume that the mob simply intended to harass Joseph. Once he fired down the stairs, then those in the stairway would be within their rights to defend themselves and shoot back. Remember that Joseph was not in his home. He was in jail. * And he was illegally in possession of a firearm…he was breaking the law.* So, he was in jail for committing a crime and was committing a felony WHILE IN JAIL.
I am not saying he deserved to die…but he likely sealed his own fate when he illegally possessed a firearm and randomly fired down the stairwell.
So much for being a “lamb” or a “martyr”
L
LongJourney
Guest
Thank you. I wondered why you always stress that he had a gun. :doh2:
T
TexanKnight
Guest
Yep. He was a law breaker breaking the lawThank you. I wondered why you always stress that he had a gun. :doh2:
T
TexanKnight
Guest
We will never know what would have happened had Joseph not started a gunfight, but it is very likely none of his friends or family would have been hurt. Then, after starting the firefight, he ran to a window to escape, leaving his friends and family behind.
I have never understood that. I have been the Carthage and been in the room where it happened more than once. I have seen the window he tried to escape from and seen where he died. I never understood, even as a Mormon, why he tried to take the coward’s way out and leave his friend to face the mob he enraged by firing blindly at them.
I have never understood that. I have been the Carthage and been in the room where it happened more than once. I have seen the window he tried to escape from and seen where he died. I never understood, even as a Mormon, why he tried to take the coward’s way out and leave his friend to face the mob he enraged by firing blindly at them.
M
mtolympus
Guest
Mormons are taught to ignore history…especially that history that proves the LDS Church is false.
Apostle Dalin H. Oaks once stated
“Our individual, personal testimonies are based on the witness of the Spirit, not on any combination or accumulation of historical facts. If we are so grounded, no alteration of historical facts can shake our testimonies.” (“1985 CES Doctrine and Covenants Symposium,” Brigham Young University, Aug. 16, 1985, page 26)
They thought the Salamander letter was real and accurate.
Yes, your post shows that Dalen H. Oaks knew before it was proven to be false that Hoffman’s Salamander letter was false. History is full of twisted facts and total lies. In fact, if Hoffman had died in his bomb accident the Salamander letter and all of his other forgeries would never have been proven to be lies.And that makes it even worse. He KNOWS it is false
T
TexanKnight
Guest
No. It shows that he WAS fooled by it and wanted people to ignore so that it would not affect their testimony.Yes, your post shows that Dalen H. Oaks knew before it was proven to be false that Hoffman’s Salamander letter was false. History is full of twisted facts and total lies. In fact, if Hoffman had died in his bomb accident the Salamander letter and all of his other forgeries would never have been proven to be lies.
The LDS Church Leaders KNOW it is false. That is why they ask people to ignore history. That is why they refuse to excavate Cumorah.
It is sad, really
S
SteveVH
Guest
And then to call him a martyr. That’s the one that begins to make my blood boil because it is such an afront to the true martyrs who willingly died (they didn’t run) rather than deny their faith.We will never know what would have happened had Joseph not started a gunfight, but it is very likely none of his friends or family would have been hurt. Then, after starting the firefight, he ran to a window to escape, leaving his friends and family behind.
I have never understood that. I have been the Carthage and been in the room where it happened more than once. I have seen the window he tried to escape from and seen where he died. I never understood, even as a Mormon, why he tried to take the coward’s way out and leave his friend to face the mob he enraged by firing blindly at them.
M
Marie5890
Guest
And that is a real bitter pill to swallow. They know, yet they keep it up.No. It shows that he WAS fooled by it and wanted people to ignore so that it would not affect their testimony.
The LDS Church Leaders KNOW it is false. That is why they ask people to ignore history. That is why they refuse to excavate Cumorah.
It is sad, really
For me, I was fortunate to leave because I just no longer believed in it’s basic tenets. I didnt come across the truth of it’s history, and the whole BoM DNA situation, and the BoA fraud hadnt hit.
But for those who leave because they realize they were lied to, it’s catastrophic to one’s core
M
mtolympus
Guest
Mormons are taught to ignore history…especially that history that proves the LDS Church is false.
Apostle Dalin H. Oaks once stated
“Our individual, personal testimonies are based on the witness of the Spirit, not on any combination or accumulation of historical facts. If we are so grounded, no alteration of historical facts can shake our testimonies.” (“1985 CES Doctrine and Covenants Symposium,” Brigham Young University, Aug. 16, 1985, page 26)
Dalin H. Oaks said “If we are so grounded, no alteration of historical facts can shake our testimonies.” This shows he wasn’t fooled by it and that false history will not shake one’s testimony if it is based on a spiritual fondation.No. It shows that he WAS fooled by it and wanted people to ignore so that it would not affect their testimony.
Mark Hoffman’s forgeries were proven to be false after the above quote was given by Oaks in Aug 1985. The Salamander letter hoax is a perfect example of why LDS testimonys must rely on their own personal witness of the Spirit.
T
TexanKnight
Guest
Dalin H. Oaks said “If we are so grounded, no alteration of historical facts can shake our testimonies.” This shows he wasn’t fooled by it and that false history will not shake one’s testimony if it is based on a spiritual fondation.
nope. It says that, as LDS MUST alter their history as things are proven false…which they are…no one should lose their testimonies. He was fooled as much as Hinkley was.
Mark Hoffman’s forgeries were proven to be false after the above quote was given by Oaks in Aug 1985. The Salamander letter hoax is a perfect example of why LDS testimonys must rely on their own personal witness of the Spirit.
Wrong, even Hinkley who was prophet in waiting and acting prophet was fooled. This is why they spent thousands to buy and hide the Hoffman stuff. It is why they lied to the authorities…and it is why Hoffman agreed to plea.
And nice dodge on the Cumorah point.
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
http://www.skepticalthayne.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mark-hoffmannews.jpgApparently, it didn’t fool Dalin H. Oaks.
This is from an article in LDS church news,.
Mark Hoffman was a con man,who fooled a lot of people, including the LDS first presidency. Oaks was fooled, or else he would have advised the first presidency otherwise and there wouldn’t be LDS church news articles like this one.
T
TexanKnight
Guest
of course he was fooled.http://www.skepticalthayne.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mark-hoffmannews.jpg
This is from an article in LDS church news,.
Mark Hoffman was a con man,who fooled a lot of people, including the LDS first presidency. Oaks was fooled, or else he would have advised the first presidency otherwise and there wouldn’t be LDS church news articles like this one.
Which again proves there is no true prophet running the LDS Church
M
mtolympus
Guest
Mormons are taught to ignore history…especially that history that proves the LDS Church is false.
Apostle Dalin H. Oaks once stated
“Our individual, personal testimonies are based on the witness of the Spirit, not on any combination or accumulation of historical facts. If we are so grounded, no alteration of historical facts can shake our testimonies.” (“1985 CES Doctrine and Covenants Symposium,” Brigham Young University, Aug. 16, 1985, page 26)
Read Oaks’ quote again.nope. It says that, as LDS MUST alter their history as things are proven false…which they are…no one should lose their testimonies. He was fooled as much as Hinkley was.
Just because you want to change the subject doesn’t mean that I have to follow.And nice dodge on the Cumorah point.
T
TexanKnight
Guest
lol…I do not blame you for not following where you are too afraid to go. And it was not a change of subject. It was a broadening of current subject. A broadening I knew you would be too afraid to get into.Read Oaks’ quote again.
I did. And you misread it like you misread the Bible…especially in light of the news article you ignored.
Just because you want to change the subject doesn’t mean that I have to follow.
Gee, I must be a prophet.
M
mtolympus
Guest
Excellent article Rebecca! I enjoyed reading it. This is a news article about the first of Hoffman’s forgeries. The Salamander letter was later and many other forgeries came later.http://www.skepticalthayne.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/mark-hoffmannews.jpg
This is from an article in LDS church news,.
Mark Hoffman was a con man,who fooled a lot of people, including the LDS first presidency. Oaks was fooled, or else he would have advised the first presidency otherwise and there wouldn’t be LDS church news articles like this one.
Mark Hoffman was an excellent con man and a murderer.
I’m sure you don’t think LDS people believe that our apostles and prophets are all knowing. Revelation comes through study and prayer one step at a time. Revelation and help from the Lord lead the LDS leaders through five years of Hoffman’s forgeries which were designed to destroy the LDS Church.
K
kimg901
Guest
Revelation comes through study? Really? Please explain this.Excellent article Rebecca! I enjoyed reading it. This is a news article about the first of Hoffman’s forgeries. The Salamander letter was later and many other forgeries came later.
Mark Hoffman was an excellent con man and a murderer.
I’m sure you don’t think LDS people believe that our apostles and prophets are all knowing. Revelation comes through study and prayer one step at a time. Revelation and help from the Lord lead the LDS leaders through five years of Hoffman’s forgeries which were designed to destroy the LDS Church.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.