Why Accept Joseph Smith?

[why_me]

And I can always count on you to be dishonest and the victim.

You create victims. It is your style of writing. You remind me of answersplease with the colors and statements. The difference: you usually write a few sentences that can be replied to, like now.

 

[AtticusFinch]

My point was simple: If the situation were reversed, a person like you would be bringing it up in every post as an indictment against mormonism. That was my point. The mormons have been pretty nice in not bringing it up. I can not say that they would have gotten the same treatment if the situation were reversed.

I do not think I would The reason I do not think I would is that long before the Priest scandal, I knew of LDS sex scandals. I did not talk about it all because what certrain members do is not important. What is important is what JS and other prophets did.

And it was whitewashed in the past…this is where the problem began…in the whitewashing and coverup. My point: all churches have skeletons in the closet. It goes with having human beings as members.

Yes, all have skeletons, but rarely does the actual founder have as many as JS.

 

[AtticusFinch]

You create victims. It is your style of writing. You remind me of answersplease with the colors and statements. The difference: you usually write a few sentences that can be replied to, like now.

My style of writing does not make victims. I simply tell the truth. If that makes you a victim, so be it

 

[lax16]

Hi, Lax16,
Such a beautiful day where I live–I hope you have had one also.

1. At first it was only Joseph Smith, and it was a test of his faith as well as probably a test of other people’s faith so that they would really have to look deep inside their heart and figure out if they really did have a testimony of such things as the Book of Mormon being a true book testifying of Christ, and whether God really did provide modern guidance to a prophet in their own day and time. Some people didn’t “pass” that test. (It was a pretty difficult test of their faith, admittedly so.)

Abraham had a test of his own faith and whether he really believed God could provide a resurrection to his son, Isaac. He knew he had been given a revelation to do something he would have not the slightest belief that God would ask him to do. But when God asked, he did it. He even “rose up early in the morning” to do what God had asked him to do.

Joseph Smith later asked it of a few men who were the faithful, tried and true men who loved God and were honorable in keeping His commandments.

It was never something “all people needed to do to please God”–neither in Joseph Smith’s day nor in Brigham Young’s day of leadership, nor thereafter.

1. It was never a test of faith for non-LDS, and was only a test of faith in terms of living that principle, for a certain few (perhaps 10%-20% of the LDS membership).
2. A covenant people are asked to live by covenant principles that God does not ask other people to live by. Everyone who wants to please God ought to keep the commandments that they have understood God has asked them to keep, being careful to heed the whisperings of the Holy Spirit in conjunction with sincere Bible study and sincere prayer without preconceived answers they are expecting from God if they have questions.
3. Of course the entire Missouri culture and Illinois culture would have a difficult time understanding that a group of people in their midst had received a revelation that ran counter to their own judgment of God’s commandments, and would think that such people were not being guided by God.

As far as being “intolerant of FLDS”, what rubs me the wrong way is the use of an identity by them that tries to tie to the larger LDS organization instead of calling themselves by some other name that would be completely distinctive and never be misunderstood by the media or anyone else. They can do whatever they lawfully want to do, as far as I’m concerned, as long as they do not use manipulative tactics against any of their followers–but I wish they would change their title to an identity that is never confusing to people who do not understand the difference. Other than that, I don’t spend any time at all even thinking about the FLDS other than not being surprised that they get media attention since the media seek out curiosity stories that sell newspapers and advertising.

Hi ParkerD- Thanks for your replies. I, of course, have more to ask you.

1. I am not sure why the OT is quoted so often to explain Mormonism, because Jesus fulfilled it with the NT. Anyway, you are equating JS engaging in polygamy with Abraham sacrificing his son. I am married with children as are you. Would you really compare having intimate encounters with other people (that were probably of your choosing) with killing one of your own children? I know which one I would pick!

Why would JS ask this of other men?

1. Are you saying polygamy was a test of faith? Not that it was necessary because so many women would have been left without anyone to care for them? Or that there was a shortage of men? (Things I have been told for years by Mormons).
2. Covenant people - is this another reference to the OT?
   Please give examples of God asking a covenant people to live by covenant principles not expected of others?
3. Joseph Smith should not have been killed. It is easy to see with the recent FLDS situation that people get really mad at polygamists. We also know that it was not uncommon for people to take the law into their own hands at that time in U.S. history. Would you say that the “entire Missouri and Illinois culture would have a difficult time understanding…” is a complete understatement? Do you think JS was jeopardizing the lives of others by expecting to be accepted in an established area vs. out in the middle of nowhere (like Utah)?

Thanks!

 

[why_me]

My style of writing does not make victims. I simply tell the truth. If that makes you a victim, so be it

As a catholic, posts should be posted with charity. Most antimormon posters on this forum have no charity. That is my point. The posts are not good representatives of the catholic faith.

 

[why_me]

“Sorry, bub, but if you want us to comment on Josephs bad business sense, or his struggles with his family, then you are going to have to back off the attacks.”

Translation: She is only going to be honest if we stop telling the truth

I thínk that you have misunderstood. The kind of attacks on this thread do not lead mormons to discuss problems. If one wishes to discuss, I think that mormons would have no problem. But certain posters are like pitbulls, and it really does not matter what is said or replied to because the attack will soon follow. The is the point behind wha diana said.

 

[why_me]

Yes, all have skeletons, but rarely does the actual founder have as many as JS.

There were many accusations leveled at Joseph Smith but none really stuck. Now Joseph and others made bad business decisions with the Kirkland Bank Society but then again, many banks went under in 1837 with the banking crisis that gripped america. We also experienced it in 2008. Capitalism is a risky business. But when Joseph entered Nauvoo with the mormons his reputation was intacted. And to my knowledge he was not found guilty of any of his charges. But there were many people out to get him.

fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2006_Legal_Trials_of_Joseph_Smith.html

This is an interesting article but it will not change your mind.

 

[ParkerD]

Hi ParkerD- Thanks for your replies. I, of course, have more to ask you.

1. I am not sure why the OT is quoted so often to explain Mormonism, because Jesus fulfilled it with the NT. Anyway, you are equating JS engaging in polygamy with Abraham sacrificing his son. I am married with children as are you. Would you really compare having intimate encounters with other people (that were probably of your choosing) with killing one of your own children? I know which one I would pick!

Why would JS ask this of other men?

Lax16,
I will honestly answer that if God asked me to sacrifice my oldest son, knowing full well that God has the power to resurrect my son immediately and with the impression that He would do that and that my faith was being tested, versus the idea of having plural marriage and having to deal with the issues that would bring into my life and the life of my wife (whom I love and cherish as did Joseph Smith in his relationship with Emma), then I would rather be asked to sacrifice my son, and be done with it and move on with life with my resurrected son restored to life and with the knowledge that he was going to be the means of the posterity I had been promised (if I had been Abraham).

Joseph Smith was doing what God asked Him to do, specifically.

1. Are you saying polygamy was a test of faith? Not that it was necessary because so many women would have been left without anyone to care for them? Or that there was a shortage of men? (Things I have been told for years by Mormons).

Yes, it was a test of faith, primarily. Later there was an imbalance of more women than men as adult members, but the primary issue was a test of faith.

1. Covenant people - is this another reference to the OT?
   Please give examples of God asking a covenant people to live by covenant principles not expected of others?

Surely you jest. A tabernacle, a holy of holies with sacred ceremonies, circumcision, and the example Christ gave when saying that the law of Moses allowed divorce but that “from the beginning it was not so.”

1. Joseph Smith should not have been killed. It is easy to see with the recent FLDS situation that people get really mad at polygamists. We also know that it was not uncommon for people to take the law into their own hands at that time in U.S. history. Would you say that the “entire Missouri and Illinois culture would have a difficult time understanding…” is a complete understatement? Do you think JS was jeopardizing the lives of others by expecting to be accepted in an established area vs. out in the middle of nowhere (like Utah)?

There is no question that he was aware the situation he was being asked to live by would eventually jeopardize his own life and possibly the lives of others. It was not publicly talked about until the LDS were in Utah, so your insight was correct. The intent Joseph Smith had was that it be lived privately without “fanfare” and without general public knowledge for the very reason you noted–the protection of the members of the church from mobs and others. But rumor had a “thousand tongues” then as now.

 

[AtticusFinch]

As a catholic, posts should be posted with charity. Most antimormon posters on this forum have no charity. That is my point. The posts are not good representatives of the catholic faith.

I truth holds no charity for you, then you should run from the lie

 

[AtticusFinch]

I thínk that you have misunderstood. The kind of attacks on this thread do not lead mormons to discuss problems. If one wishes to discuss, I think that mormons would have no problem. But certain posters are like pitbulls, and it really does not matter what is said or replied to because the attack will soon follow. The is the point behind wha diana said.

I know of posters who have put Diana on ignore because of her “pitbull” style of posting. If truth scares you to the point of being afraid to discuss your faith, then you should find your way out of the false beliefs

 

[AtticusFinch]

There were many accusations leveled at Joseph Smith but none really stuck.

Actually, all of them stuck. Do not confuse LDS whitewashing and ignoring as things not sticking.

Now Joseph and others made bad business decisions with the Kirkland Bank Society but then again, many banks went under in 1837 with the banking crisis that gripped america.

Do not try to excuse Joseph by lumping him in with others. None of the “others” claimed to be a “prophet” who spoke to God. Joseph claimed God told him to start this bank. Now, either Joseph lied, or the LDS God has no business sense.

Capitalism is a risky business. But when Joseph entered Nauvoo with the mormons his reputation was intacted.

No, he didn’t. He ran from the folks who swindled in Ohio, he ran from his arrest in Missouri, he had a conviction in New York, and he was about to have people angry at him messing with their wives. He did not have a good reputation, even among other Mormons.

fairlds.org/FAIR_Conferences/2006_Legal_Trials_of_Joseph_Smith.html

No, Fair is an LDS Apologetics site. Not everything there is accurate.

 

[AtticusFinch]

and just so you know, I do not always trust information from Catholic Apologetics sites, either.

 

[dianaiad]

And I can always count on you to be dishonest and the victim.

I will admit, Atticus, that I have a real failing. If I SEE a post, and it addresses something I have said, I tend to answer it no matter what I have vowed to myself that I will no longer do. There is only one way that I can prevent that, unfortunately.

…and that is to arrange things so that I don’t see those posts. I guess the time has come for me to do that with you.

 

[AtticusFinch]

I will admit, Atticus, that I have a real failing. If I SEE a post, and it addresses something I have said, I tend to answer it no matter what I have vowed to myself that I will no longer do.

So, along with being dishonest, you have no self control…not a great combination

…and that is to arrange things so that I don’t see those posts. I guess the time has come for me to do that with you.

Not a bad decision. If you can’t back up what you post, and what you do post is disproven at every turn, and if you do not like seeing the truth about JS, the best thing for you to do is run

 

[lax16]

Lax16,
I will honestly answer that if God asked me to sacrifice my oldest son, knowing full well that God has the power to resurrect my son immediately and with the impression that He would do that and that my faith was being tested, versus the idea of having plural marriage and having to deal with the issues that would bring into my life and the life of my wife (whom I love and cherish as did Joseph Smith in his relationship with Emma), then I would rather be asked to sacrifice my son, and be done with it and move on with life with my resurrected son restored to life and with the knowledge that he was going to be the means of the posterity I had been promised (if I had been Abraham).

Joseph Smith was doing what God asked Him to do, specifically.

Yes, it was a test of faith, primarily. Later there was an imbalance of more women than men as adult members, but the primary issue was a test of faith.

Surely you jest. A tabernacle, a holy of holies with sacred ceremonies, circumcision, and the example Christ gave when saying that the law of Moses allowed divorce but that “from the beginning it was not so.”

There is no question that he was aware the situation he was being asked to live by would eventually jeopardize his own life and possibly the lives of others. It was not publicly talked about until the LDS were in Utah, so your insight was correct. The intent Joseph Smith had was that it be lived privately without “fanfare” and without general public knowledge for the very reason you noted–the protection of the members of the church from mobs and others. But rumor had a “thousand tongues” then as now.

Dianaiad - Well, I would bet my bottom dollar most people would choose intimate relations with people of their choice over killing their child anyday if both were pleasing to God. And not because of sinfulness, but if given the choice of hanky-panky over killing I think it’s a no-brainer.

Really, D, you can’t expect me or anyone else to think that in his plural marriages JS was changing diapers and tending to the emotional needs of his wives. I’m sure some men in plural marriages did/do that, however, from what I am hearing JS was a very busy man.
If he was starting business ventures, moving people from state to state, etc. and died at a young age, my guess is that he didn’t have much time for family life.

And, no I do not ask questions in jest. I have learned from you to get the offical LDS teaching/opinion on things before forming my opinions. There is so much reference to the OT to support LDS teachings, that I am truly surprised. I rarely look to the OT to support Christianity (except in fulfillment) so I will always ask for clarification on the LDS view of “covenants” etc.

Was JS asked to engage in any other “difficult” tests of faith?

You say JS loved his wife Emma very much - and maybe he did. But why would God want any woman to have to witness her husband literally having “a romp in the hay?” If you said God was testing the faith (and patience) of Emma Smith, not Joseph, I might agree with you.
Usually tests of faith are difficult not pleasurable.

Can you provide any examples from the OT/NT that would show God asking anyone else in the span of several thousands of years to engage in similar “tests of faith?”

Thanks!

 

[Jay53]

Dianaiad - Well, I would bet my bottom dollar most people would choose intimate relations with people of their choice over killing their child anyday if both were pleasing to God. And not because of sinfulness, but if given the choice of hanky-panky over killing I think it’s a no-brainer.

Really, D, you can’t expect me or anyone else to think that in his plural marriages JS was changing diapers and tending to the emotional needs of his wives. I’m sure some men in plural marriages did/do that, however, from what I am hearing JS was a very busy man.
If he was starting business ventures, moving people from state to state, etc. and died at a young age, my guess is that he didn’t have much time for family life.

And, no I do not ask questions in jest. I have learned from you to get the offical LDS teaching/opinion on things before forming my opinions. There is so much reference to the OT to support LDS teachings, that I am truly surprised. I rarely look to the OT to support Christianity (except in fulfillment) so I will always ask for clarification on the LDS view of “covenants” etc.

Was JS asked to engage in any other “difficult” tests of faith?

You say JS loved his wife Emma very much - and maybe he did. But why would God want any woman to have to witness her husband literally having “a romp in the hay?” If you said God was testing the faith (and patience) of Emma Smith, not Joseph, I might agree with you.
Usually tests of faith are difficult not pleasurable.

Can you provide any examples from the OT/NT that would show God asking anyone else in the span of several thousands of years to engage in similar “tests of faith?”

Thanks!

Just FYI, I think you were supposed to be addressing Parker, not Diana. While they are both Mormons, they have 2 completely different styles of posting.

 

[lax16]

Just FYI, I think you were supposed to be addressing Parker, not Diana. While they are both Mormons, they have 2 completely different styles of posting.

Jay53- Thanks, I just noticed this myself then saw your post.

I’m not sure why I did that?

Parker - that was for you!

 

[dianaiad]

Jay53- Thanks, I just noticed this myself then saw your post.

I’m not sure why I did that?

Parker - that was for you!

I’ll bet I know, because it’s happening to me more and more often. You had just replied to me, yes? so…you had already copy/pasted my name to insert into the posts for the sake of quoting.

…now you are replying to Parker, and for some reason the copy/paste function didn’t ‘take…’ so while you THOUGHT you were pasting Parker’s name into the post, mine came up because it was the one still in your clipboard…

In my case, I think my ergonomic keyboard is going wonky.

Whatever, I’m quite certain that Parker understands as well as I do!

Diana

 

[Stephen168]

No more than the folks who killed him did.

You do realize that mormon printing presses were equally destroyed by mobs.

To summarize: Joseph Smith was not worse than anyone else of his day; therefore he was a prophet.

 

[why_me]

To summarize: Joseph Smith was not worse than anyone else of his day; therefore he was a prophet.

To summarize: after years of persecution by mobs, the mormons decided to act against an antimormon paper in their midst.

We need to remember that the mormons of nauvoo were just a little nervous of this newspaper. It was not just a mayor and town council affair. The mormon community was also concerned that mobs would enter Nauvoo and the destruction of mormon private property would begin all over again.