A
- Status
A
AtticusFinch
Guest
We never said they were not accused of crimes. And yes, they were accused of treason due to preaching the Gospel. But funny how you dodged the other stuff they were NOT accused of and that Joseph was: adultry, bank fraud, treasure hunting, sexual assault, destruction of personal property, etc etc…of course, that is partly because the Apostles never endowed themselves to be a mayor, general, etc etc etc…probably because true men of God did not take honor up themselves while imposters have always used the position for power
T
twopekinguys
Guest
Proof quoted from the D & C that there was a 10 year gap between the “revelation”, and the time it was recorded is considered rumor? I would say that is a primary source wouldn’t you think. Also, I noticed in your earlier post, that the dates you quoted were in conflict with what the D & C says. Maybe you missed it because you didn’t read everything. (you know, like a newspaper) How else can you explain the coincidental timing between the recording of the “revelation”, and his being accused of polygamy. (which he denied)
So it is tearing JS down for being an adulterer? Telling the truth is not tearing someone down. How nice of you to insinuate that because people don’t approve of JS’s adultery that everyone else has a problem. You can’t be serious with this. It really is rather laughable.
Why, or how you have brought porn into this, I have no idea, but, did you know that the most porn that is downloaded off the internet is in Utah? Isn’t Utah the home of mormonism?
“the most-subscribing state is Utah
(where 5.47 of every 1,000 broadband households subscribed to the service at
issue), while the least-subscribing state is Montana (1.92 per 1000 broadband
households)”
people.hbs.edu/bedelman/papers/redlightstates.pdf
You made a claim that this was done, it is up to you to provide the reference.
I provided a link, you should be able to also.
T
twopekinguys
Guest
You might also want to check out the depression rates too. Utah ranks #1 there also.
nmha.org/go/state-ranking
nmha.org/go/state-ranking
H
hosemonkey
Guest
Looks pretty simple to me, mormons idealize JS as a “prophet”, everybody else sees him for what he really was. You are never going to get mormons to believe otherwise, because if they do, their faith in mormonism and in JS will evaporate. mormonism is built on that belief in the story told by and the religion invented by Joseph Smith. Destroy that and the whole house of cards comes down. Debating Joseph Smith is an interesting excersize, but puts mormons into an instant persecution/victim mode, the blinders and the wall go up. We have seen this countless times on these fora. We see mormonism as a false religion, with a false and heretical doctrine and a bogus “prophet” who used “revelation” to further his own power and ego. Guess 'bout the only thing that Christians can do is to commend them to the mercy of Almighty God and hope that the Holy Ghost opens their eyes.:banghead:
T
twopekinguys
Guest
Additional reference:
"The Nauvoo Wasp and the Times and Seasons, the latter being edited by “Joe Smith” himself, contains a long address to the Church of the Mormons in particular, and the rest of the world in general, in which it is stated that Gen. Bennett is “an impostor and a base adulterer.”
It is evidently OK for JS to call someone an “adulter” in print, but heaven forbid someone can say that about JS.
sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/PA/penn1842.htm#091543
Pot, meet kettle.
W
why_me
Guest
Not quite. She denied polygamy because she was against the practice. She also denied it to her son, Joseph Smith III who had to go to Utah to hear about polygamy from the horse’s mouth. It had nothing to do with properties and money. She just didn’t like polygamy. In fact, she missed the Kirkland Joseph more the maverick Nauvoo Joseph.
She led a comfortable life but not a rich life with her husband Major Bidemon. It was only later that she returned to Nauvoo when the coast was clear.
On a side note, since polygamy was not legal no polygamous wife could make a claim on any property. But nice try in your generalizations.
W
why_me
Guest
I have often found atheists to be more christian than christians. And you are a good example of this. However, you should know that on this forum it is perfectly okay to deride mormons and their faith by any means necessary. And it doesn’t break the rules as you can see from the catholic posts on this thread.
It is also amazing to me how many find mormons decent people and yet, mock and bash their faith, when the faith is one of the socialization processes that creates such nice people.
W
why_me
Guest
This is not exactly true. It has often been pointed out by mormons on this forum that no one is perfect and since no one is perfect, all commit mistakes and do wrong. Now what we have in early mormon leaders are frontier people among the people who they are leading. They were not enclosed within walls issueing edicts to be followed. And of course, since they were not perfect, they seemed perfectly human.
I think that it would be wonderful if the popes of the 19th century were also among the people as the early mormon leaders were. And of course, mormon leaders are still out and among the people and they attend their local wards when they have the chance.
W
why_me
Guest
Who Joseph Smith really was is debatable. First, no charges against him ever stuck. Many people have tried to destroy Joseph Smith, the internet is full of such sites. But whatever they say can be countered.
One can claim that you also have your own blinders on. And as you know many people see catholicism as a false religion. In fact, all penecostals in latin america were catholic and now see their former faith as a false religion.
The problem on this forum is that non catholics can not make that claim about the catholic church as catholics are making the claim ( flame throwing, bashing, disrespect etc) against mormons or any other religion. If they did, a thousand report buttons would be pressed, the posts would be investigated and the original poster of the post could be banned.
On this thread we have a few catholic flame throwers that seem to have carte blanche.
H
hosemonkey
Guest
L
lax16
Guest
ParkerD - It is obvious that when you don’t have an answer you attack the person. I hope you are not in a position of authority or work with children…what do you say to people that come to you when they are having a problem or a faith crisis?
You would better serve the LDS community by providing examples that show Joseph Smith’s love for the Bible and the Commandments. Provide your resources and your DNA…Stop the personal attacks.
I guess I will google for answers since you can’t provide them. Or let the other posters provide them.
Don’t say peace and best wishes to a person after insulting them. It’s saracastic and insincere.
Don’t blame the Catholic Church for my shortcomings. They are all mine. And, thanks be to God, I don’t have a problem with pornography.
P
ParkerD
Guest
DNA studies:
wivesofjosephsmith.org/DNA.htm
deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695226318,00.html
josephsmithjr.org/the-news/60-smith-descendants-other-wives
The introductory heading to D & C 132 states that Joseph Smith received the commandment to practice plural marriage in 1831, which is totally consistent in that he began a “translation” (i.e. inspired clarification) of the Bible in 1830 and finished that process in July 1833 with the New Testament, although he planned to go back and seek further inspiration about texts within the Bible after that initial completion. So he would have been reading in Genesis and asking God about the details of Genesis in 1830, in which case that is when he would have begun to question about Abraham and Jacob and plural marriage.
My post had stated that revelation even to a prophet may be an iterative process, which has to do with “line upon line, precept upon precept,” so although Joseph Smith was told an answer about a question in 1830 or 1831, that does not mean he received complete understanding about the subject, nor does the date of the writing down of a revelation mean it was the date of having received the revelation. So keep in mind two aspects of this–he was told why Abraham and Jacob had more than one wife in 1830, was told “you must begin living this principle” as a test of his own faith in about 1831, was further commanded about it in subsequent years, and received more detailed doctrinal understanding about the sealing power and about celestial marriage in the years 1836 (when Elijah and an Elias restored keys of temple work by coming as heavenly messengers to the Kirtland Temple) through 1842 when Joseph Smith wrote about temple work in a letter contained in D & C 128 based on the further guidance he had received on the subject, which would be because of asking further questions (seeking understanding) and receiving answers by inspiration and revelation.
Here is a source exploring the issue of “rumors” about Joseph and plural marriages:
en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/Polygamy/Fanny_Alger_and_William_McLellin
My point has been that the charge of “adultery” would pertain to having sexual relations (not whether he was sealed in an eternal marriage covenant) with a woman who was already married. There is no strong evidence that he had sexual relations with a woman who was already married–just rumors without evidence.
My point about adultery in general is that someone with a strong moral sense and strong desires to live by the commandments of God is going to keep the law of chastity and do it “easily” meaning that it is not a hard commandment to keep, in any of the forms it takes. Also, just because a couple of areas in Utah have high subscription rates that push up a statistic, does not generalize to the whole population of Utah.
If Joseph Smith was “guilty” under the commandments of God (as compared with in the view of some people who did not believe he was inspired by God), then his eyes would have shown that and sincere people would have seen that in his eyes. (That can be done even by looking at people’s eyes on television or in person–the eyes are the window to the soul.) His sincere followers would have seen a change in his eyes and would have been uncomfortable continuing to follow him–I’m talking about women and men of integrity and virtue themselves who had a strong moral sense and who would be able to discern virtue within the eyes of someone else, especially one serving as a teacher or leader. The rumors came from people disaffected with the church, or having an agenda to prove for whatever reason.
P
ParkerD
Guest
I don’t know which person you think I was attacking–not you. I was meaning that men (not you since I don’t know your gender) with a strong moral sense can identify with the strong moral sense of another man and can gain a feeling about that other person’s moral integrity by reading their writings, by observing their interactions with other people including written interaction and verbal interaction, and by observing how they react in stressful situations during the course of their lives (whether the person has “mettle”). If someone is going to accuse Joseph Smith of adultery, then that is a very serious charge and ought to be accompanied by their having thought thoroughly and deeply about anything they have read on the subject and compared it with their own life experience as regards the law of chastity and as regards their own love for the commandments of God and how they have reacted during their own lives to keeping the commandments of God.ParkerD - It is obvious that when you don’t have an answer you attack the person. I hope you are not in a position of authority or work with children…what do you say to people that come to you when they are having a problem or a faith crisis?
You would better serve the LDS community by providing examples that show Joseph Smith’s love for the Bible and the Commandments. Provide your resources and your DNA…Stop the personal attacks.
I guess I will google for answers since you can’t provide them. Or let the other posters provide them.
Don’t say peace and best wishes to a person after insulting them. It’s saracastic and insincere.
Don’t blame the Catholic Church for my shortcomings. They are all mine. And, thanks be to God, I don’t have a problem with pornography.
I wrote that you were getting answers from other people, so that would mean as you become satisfied with those answers then whether I participate in trying to give you answers becomes a moot point and a waste of my time. It took me about ten seconds to type the words “Joseph Smith descendants DNA” and get links to articles–this is not difficult, and that is not a personal attack–it is an observation.
I have not perceived that you are in a “faith crisis”. I have perceived that either you are in a position where you may be preparing to teach others (as one poster noted about themselves) or are merely a curious observer. One can sense where a person is coming from with their question, by how the question is asked and by follow-up questions. As a parent and if I am ever in a position where I need to answer questions about this kind of subject (I do answer my children’s questions and they have never asked about this subject) I do encourage them to look at primary sources for answers to their questions, and make a thorough study and look for balanced and authoritative sources then also seek the Holy Spirit to confirm truth versus rumors and opinions and non-primary biased sources if they are going to draw conclusions that impact how they live their lives.
P
ParkerD
Guest
Lax16,
Since you asked about whether I have been in a position that I would have counseled others with chastity issues in their lives, I will explain that I have had that situation years ago but that it never involved adultery, only young women and young men and I will explain some of the counsel I gave at that time:
To the young women, I tried to get them to see that as they placed their body into a situation where they were being used by a young man, that they were treating their body as a separate entity from their core person and allowing that separate entity to be used as something to try and please the young man, but if they would reconsider and realize that their body is their personal property and that to disconnect (in their own mind) their core person from their body is unhealthy and dangerous for their inner peace–they cannot do that and have inner peace. I also counseled them that as they placed their body into an intimate relationship with a young man, their core person would never be the same because their whole emotional self forms a connection (an emotional bond) with the person with whom they have that kind of a relationship, and thus the importance of the law of chastity and the importance of repentance and the atonement of Christ to try and restore that which has been lost and the counterfeit experience (inner peace and a counterfeit emotional bond that would need to be erased through the atonement of Christ working in that young person’s life as they repent.)
To the young man, I tried to get them to see that by treating a young woman as an object for their experimentation or gratification, they were placing a significant emotional and spiritual hardship in the life of that young woman with the counterfeit emotional bond that was intended by God and by nature to be a lasting, life-long commitment in such an intimate relationship. They needed to realize that a young woman will have a very difficult time getting over such a thing, if ever, and that the extreme selfishness of their act places them in a condition of needing not only repentance and forgiveness from Christ and from the young woman, but also a whole change of outlook about how they view women and how they will view them and treat them in the future.
I tell you those things above so you may understand that when I wrote about the question of Joseph Smith and “adultery”, I am totally familiar with the understanding that he would have had about these kinds of issues and certainly about the emotional impact on the life of a woman to have an intimate relationship outside of her marriage and the difficulty of the emotional confusion that would entail for a woman, and the selfishness of the man who would place a woman into that kind of position in her life.
Joseph Smith did not act out of selfish motives–one can sense this who sincerely studies his life, but only if they sincerely do study his life whereas they are going to be bombarded with superficial arguments where someone is trying to discredit him as happened during his life and as happens today on the internet or wherever, if they do not do a sincere study and consider the implications of the things he did in trying to help bring about a Zion people on earth among his followers. One would look at how he reacted when he heard of people in need, how he reacted when a person had turned against him but repented and came back seeking restored friendship, and how he wrote about the core doctrines of the gospel regarding unselfishness and regarding leadership without selfish or grandiose motives. (See, for example, Doctrine and Covenants 121, entire section.)
Since you asked about whether I have been in a position that I would have counseled others with chastity issues in their lives, I will explain that I have had that situation years ago but that it never involved adultery, only young women and young men and I will explain some of the counsel I gave at that time:
To the young women, I tried to get them to see that as they placed their body into a situation where they were being used by a young man, that they were treating their body as a separate entity from their core person and allowing that separate entity to be used as something to try and please the young man, but if they would reconsider and realize that their body is their personal property and that to disconnect (in their own mind) their core person from their body is unhealthy and dangerous for their inner peace–they cannot do that and have inner peace. I also counseled them that as they placed their body into an intimate relationship with a young man, their core person would never be the same because their whole emotional self forms a connection (an emotional bond) with the person with whom they have that kind of a relationship, and thus the importance of the law of chastity and the importance of repentance and the atonement of Christ to try and restore that which has been lost and the counterfeit experience (inner peace and a counterfeit emotional bond that would need to be erased through the atonement of Christ working in that young person’s life as they repent.)
To the young man, I tried to get them to see that by treating a young woman as an object for their experimentation or gratification, they were placing a significant emotional and spiritual hardship in the life of that young woman with the counterfeit emotional bond that was intended by God and by nature to be a lasting, life-long commitment in such an intimate relationship. They needed to realize that a young woman will have a very difficult time getting over such a thing, if ever, and that the extreme selfishness of their act places them in a condition of needing not only repentance and forgiveness from Christ and from the young woman, but also a whole change of outlook about how they view women and how they will view them and treat them in the future.
I tell you those things above so you may understand that when I wrote about the question of Joseph Smith and “adultery”, I am totally familiar with the understanding that he would have had about these kinds of issues and certainly about the emotional impact on the life of a woman to have an intimate relationship outside of her marriage and the difficulty of the emotional confusion that would entail for a woman, and the selfishness of the man who would place a woman into that kind of position in her life.
Joseph Smith did not act out of selfish motives–one can sense this who sincerely studies his life, but only if they sincerely do study his life whereas they are going to be bombarded with superficial arguments where someone is trying to discredit him as happened during his life and as happens today on the internet or wherever, if they do not do a sincere study and consider the implications of the things he did in trying to help bring about a Zion people on earth among his followers. One would look at how he reacted when he heard of people in need, how he reacted when a person had turned against him but repented and came back seeking restored friendship, and how he wrote about the core doctrines of the gospel regarding unselfishness and regarding leadership without selfish or grandiose motives. (See, for example, Doctrine and Covenants 121, entire section.)
A
AtticusFinch
Guest
The Popes often go to local parishes. The problem is, the Pope has a billion sheep he shephards.
A
AtticusFinch
Guest
A
AtticusFinch
Guest
Yeah, but it is good evidence. Quotes from witnesses are always good evidence.
L
lax16
Guest
ParkerD- When I spoke about you being in a position of authority or working with children, it was in reference to the way you go on the attack when asked questions about religion.
Children ask lots of questions and it would be terrible to think that you would respond the way you did to me. Really, jumping to the conclusion that someone has a problem with sex/porn because they don’t understand the whole “sealing” thing and the human nature of Joseph Smith??!!
I have NEVER accused Joseph Smith of anything. I have asked a series of questions about the nature of God and man. If that adds up to an accusation in your eyes, so be it.
As far as googling info about DNA proving Joseph Smith only engaged in sealings - it would never occur to me in a million years that this stuff even existed. Thanks for providing the link. Also, I have been told several times that Mormons don’t find DNA to be reliable, especially when it pertains to disproving the Book of Mormon.
Anyway, I stilll don’t understand the LDS concept of the nature of God and how sealings work when there are multiple wives. If I ask you, you jump down my throat. If I use the internet, you say it’s an anti-Mormon source.
Well, ParkerD, some people like to ask a lot of questions about religion. That’s one of the things that Catholicism (and Judaism) encourages. God knows that some people will question Him, His existence, His divine nature, His Son, His Church… and He has provided answers for it all. I have had my questions answered in the Catholic Church. It is easy to reference, it is unchanging, it is available for all to see.
Children ask lots of questions and it would be terrible to think that you would respond the way you did to me. Really, jumping to the conclusion that someone has a problem with sex/porn because they don’t understand the whole “sealing” thing and the human nature of Joseph Smith??!!
I have NEVER accused Joseph Smith of anything. I have asked a series of questions about the nature of God and man. If that adds up to an accusation in your eyes, so be it.
As far as googling info about DNA proving Joseph Smith only engaged in sealings - it would never occur to me in a million years that this stuff even existed. Thanks for providing the link. Also, I have been told several times that Mormons don’t find DNA to be reliable, especially when it pertains to disproving the Book of Mormon.
Anyway, I stilll don’t understand the LDS concept of the nature of God and how sealings work when there are multiple wives. If I ask you, you jump down my throat. If I use the internet, you say it’s an anti-Mormon source.
Well, ParkerD, some people like to ask a lot of questions about religion. That’s one of the things that Catholicism (and Judaism) encourages. God knows that some people will question Him, His existence, His divine nature, His Son, His Church… and He has provided answers for it all. I have had my questions answered in the Catholic Church. It is easy to reference, it is unchanging, it is available for all to see.
P
ParkerD
Guest
Lax16,
I fail to see how the above questions/accusations including both sets of questions/accusations were not “accusing Joseph Smith of anything.” I fail to see how by a person attacking Joseph Smith helps them understand the Mormon religion. I also fail to see how if people are going to attack Joseph Smith that I don’t have a right to confront the position they have taken, and do it directly by commenting about what they have had to say.
I think these things can be discussed in a non-confrontational way, but if people have already formed opinions and jumped to conclusions, then to get their attention one will sometimes be blunt and upfront.
Peace to all.
- Status