It is currently Fri Sep 22, 2017 11:10 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:36 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 5081
Location: The Land of Lorn
I love this. The very person you claim could not have had sex with Smith writes that the ONLY REASON for marrying him was to have sex and that is still not good enough for you.

You could be standing in the rain any you would deny it was raining if it didn't fit into your made up world view.

_________________
"I have the truth, and am at the defiance of the world to contradict me if they can." ~Joseph Smith
"The Sots combine with pious care a monkey to enshrine." ~ Mormonism Unvailed, 1834.
I've got things/stuff/jobs to do and when I'm done I may/may not choose/decide to respond/reply/post/comment again. Or not. But maybe? ~Jersey Girl


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:37 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 4902
JLHPROF wrote:
There is no evidence of a physical relationship. Your hatred blinds you to reason so there is no point in discussing with you.



You better believe I hate Joe Smith for all the evil things he did. He fondled little girls and made a mockery of sacred Egyptian writings. Joe Smith deserved what he got at Carthage!

Mormonism is shameful and evil. I thank my lucky stars I was smart enough to get out of it. It was a house of horror built on lies and deception.

_________________
"Say what you like. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "slave" is not an image of Anubis, nor is it functioning as Anubis in the image that is displayed." (zerinus)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:38 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 5081
Location: The Land of Lorn
Exiled wrote:
JLHPROF wrote:
I do not agree with Hales at all. He attempts to prove no sexual relations in Joseph's marriages. I don't agree with him any more than I would agree with Meg "pass the meat" Stout and her covenant companions.

In case I haven't been clear the past posts I am limiting my doubts to Nancy and Helen, the wives that draw the Jeff's comparisons and get Shulem all huffy.
You ask why they would be different from his 17 or 19 year old wives? That is the million dollar question.


See grindael's post above, it was for raising up seed and Helen, herself, said so. There was a lot of convincing that had to be done to get poor Helen to take the plunge in the form of promised exaltation for Helen's family. What more do you want? We all know it sounds horrible that Joseph Smith would have sex with a 14 year old but it looks like that was the case. I think you simply want to have the blinders on because Joseph Smith looks like a pedophile in this case.


Joseph was not a pedophile. There is a word for it... Ephebophilia. And since Joseph "married" women that were older than this, it wouldn't really apply. But it is wrong to call Joseph a pedophile.

Quote:
Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.[1][2] Although girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11, and boys at age 11 or 12,[3] criteria for pedophilia extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13

_________________
"I have the truth, and am at the defiance of the world to contradict me if they can." ~Joseph Smith
"The Sots combine with pious care a monkey to enshrine." ~ Mormonism Unvailed, 1834.
I've got things/stuff/jobs to do and when I'm done I may/may not choose/decide to respond/reply/post/comment again. Or not. But maybe? ~Jersey Girl


Last edited by grindael on Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:38 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm
Posts: 5590
JLHPROF wrote:
grindael wrote:
If, as Brian Hales asserts, polygamy is only some sort of appendage to Monogamous “sealing”, and “non-sexual eternity only sealings fulfill the primary purpose”, then why would Smith ever have to consummate any of the “marriages”? It makes little sense, especially when Smith claimed that God promised to give him whatever he asked for.

I do not agree with Hales at all. He attempts to prove no sexual relations in Joseph's marriages. I don't agree with him any more than I would agree with Meg "pass the meat" Stout and her covenant companions.

In case I haven't been clear the past posts I am limiting my doubts to Nancy and Helen, the wives that draw the Jeff's comparisons .

I bolded that last part to point out that that is incorrect, at least for me. The Warren Jeffs comparisons are based on the entire litany of polygamous behavior. Just because a woman is older doesn't mitigate the Jeffs comparison. Joseph Smith married women who already had husbands, and did so behind his wife's back, when he already had multiple illegal wives. The comparison to the sordid creepy nature of Jeffs' behavior is apt.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:53 pm 
First Presidency
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:48 pm
Posts: 811
Come on JLHPROF, grab yourself a cold one and salute the b.s. we all got suckered into. (I recommend Firestone Union Jack IPA) Seer stones, disappearing plates, sex with young teenagers is enough to make anyone's head spin. You deserve it and you will feel better accepting reality.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2017 10:40 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 5081
Location: The Land of Lorn
And I suppose that this Hymn (326), is just flat out wrong about the reason for the PRACTICE of polygamy...

https://archive.org/stream/sacredhymnss ... 2/mode/2up

_________________
"I have the truth, and am at the defiance of the world to contradict me if they can." ~Joseph Smith
"The Sots combine with pious care a monkey to enshrine." ~ Mormonism Unvailed, 1834.
I've got things/stuff/jobs to do and when I'm done I may/may not choose/decide to respond/reply/post/comment again. Or not. But maybe? ~Jersey Girl


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:36 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:04 am
Posts: 3327
I have never seen more powerful reasoning or evidence for this idea that Joseph Smith married many women for sexual relations than what Grindael puts out. I stand amazed every time an apologist comes here and tries to get Joseph off the hook. Grindael wins every. single. time. It's because there is vastly more evidence than not, but its not easy access to, and not at all examined by apologists. Grindael, my hats off to you and your stellar and significant research and evidence.

_________________
"Isn't it ironic that a church that depends so much on a fictional book being actual history has done so much to revise, cover up and ignore real history?" - Fence Sitter

"Science believes in accountability here and now. Religion believes in it in the hereafter." - Maksutov


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 6:46 am 
God

Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2015 2:01 am
Posts: 6374
Here’s the problem for JLHPROF

Plural marriage was instituted by God for the sole purpose of producing earthly children.
Nowhere will he find a Church source claiming otherwise.

Joseph’s plural marriages didn’t (supposedly) produce any children.
Joseph failed to comply with any aspect of D&C 89, the revelation he claims God gave him about the rules concerning plural marriage.

So either Joseph was firing blanks - in which case how did he produce children with Emma and why would God command plural marriage for the purpose of producing children of a bloke who couldn’t produce children?

Or Joseph refused to have sex with his wives, an act of flagrant disobedience to a commandment of God.

So JLHPROF, the burden rests with you to show using Church sources, that plural marriage was instituted for something other than producing children (a feat no apologist at any point has been able to do). Holding my breath....

_________________
“A reliable way to make people believe in falsehoods is frequent repetition, because familiarity is not easily distinguished from truth. Authoritarian institutions and marketers have always known this fact.”
― Daniel Kahneman, Nobel Prize Winner, 'Thinking, Fast and Slow'


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:46 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 5:02 am
Posts: 12450
Not only that, but just because a dude 'married' of age and older women, doesn't let him off the hook regarding his sexual appetite. The fact of the matter, unless you dismiss all the evidence otherwise, Joseph Smith was schtupping these women. The FACT that a believing Mormon is defending this behavior removes all doubt about its doctrinal permanency within Mormondom.

- Doc

_________________
In the anointed we find a whole class of supposedly ‘thinking people’ who do remarkably little thinking about substance and a great deal of verbal expression. - Dr. Thomas Sowell, Harvard, Columbia, University of Chicago


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 9:47 am 
First Presidency
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:48 pm
Posts: 811
I always thought the older women were merely an attempt for ole joe to legitimize the practice in his mind and give himself an excuse to go after his real targets. If he only went after the young girls like fanny alger, he would have been profiled easier by his congregation of dupes and targets. It would have been a lot harder for him to get what he wanted. I don't know how that would be proven but knowing human nature ....


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:57 pm 
Holy Ghost
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2014 11:38 am
Posts: 883
Don't forget that the older wives were useful tools for Joseph to test if the younger ones were keeping secrets. They were helpful participants in the grooming process.

_________________
Ubi Dubium Ibi Libertas
My Blog: http://untanglingmybrain.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 3:25 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 7:48 pm
Posts: 4902
JLHPROF wrote:
You ask why they would be different from his 17 or 19 year old wives? That is the million dollar question.



So what is the million dollar answer, buddy? Why did Joseph Smith (a mature man) like 14 year old girls so much? What is your million dollar answer to that? Answer me, you Mormon!

PS. Do you like 14 years old girls and would you marry one if you could? That is not a rhetorical question. I want to know if you are like Joseph and go for the kiddies.

:twisted:

_________________
"Say what you like. The figure which Joseph Smith identifies as the "slave" is not an image of Anubis, nor is it functioning as Anubis in the image that is displayed." (zerinus)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:52 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 5081
Location: The Land of Lorn
It's really not about winning. I'm not after any prizes. I have often thought about how to explain what Joseph did, and just have to appeal to Occam's Razor...

What did Joseph do? According to apologists...

He was "translating" the Bible or he had some kind of conversation with angels/God and was told he was to be an instrument to bring about the "restoration of all things".

Yet, there are problems with this. The original "church" as set up by Joseph was very simple. A restoration of what Jesus set up in what they called the "meridian of time". Joseph can't sustain this as he continually adds things and changes his "revelations". Is there a problem with someone who just changes and adds or deletes things from claimed "revelations"? What does common sense tell us? To explain this, apologists have to get complicated. It's all "line upon line". Then why go and CHANGE PREVIOUS "REVELATIONS"? Why not be open and honest and say that God revealed MORE to me? Joseph does SAY this, but it is what he DOES is deceptive. What good reason was there for Joseph to change those "revelations" and add things to them later? There isn't one. It's all ad hoc and the apologists know this, yet have to perform all kinds of mental gymnastics to try and make it appear legitimate. And what do later Mormon "apostles" and historians do? THEY LIE and say his "revelations" were NEVER CHANGED. And so "lying for the Lord" is just ok? Right?

Joseph considered himself a "forerunner", but couldn't make it fit into what was written in the Bible. John was the forerunner and the promised "Elijah". Joseph was teaching that the spirit and power of Elijah was simply the elders preaching the gospel and converting people. And Joseph changed the Bible to read that it was Moses and JOHN who were on the Mount of Transfiguration and then later claimed it was Elijah!!!! It's all crazy and convoluted and a confused mess.

We then have the Fanny Alger incident. A supposed man of God hires a young girl and invites her to live in his home, and then secretly "marries" her behind his wife's back? What's wrong with that picture? It is claimed before this that Joseph had a "revelation" about marring other women, but it was for marrying Lamanite women, not girls like Fanny Alger. And what for? Not for any lofty heavenly purpose about raising up righteous seed and becoming gods, but to cement an alliance with the Indians. Phelps writes this later in 1861,

Quote:
Verily I say unto you that the wisdom of man in his fallen state, knoweth not the purposes and the privileges of my holy priesthood. but ye shall know when ye receive a fulness by reason of the anointing: For it is my will, that in time, ye should take unto you wives of the Lamanites and Nephites, that their posterity may become white, delightsome and Just, for even now their females are more virtuous than the gentiles.


This was the purpose of the polygamy that Joseph supposedly FIRST INSTITUTED. Not what is claimed in the 1843 "revelation" but to make their posterity WHITE. Ezra Booth, who was an eyewitness to what happened in 1831 wrote that,
Quote:
In addition to this, and to co-operate with it, it has been made known by revelation, that it will be pleasing to the Lord, should they form a matrimonial alliance with the Natives; and by this means the Elders, who comply with the thing so pleasing to the Lord, and for which the Lord has promised to bless those who do it abundantly, gain a residence in the Indian territory, independent of the agent.


How does this transform into what Joseph was doing in Nauvoo? What does this have to do with the preexistence and God's plan for men to become gods? Nothing. Joseph wasn't even teaching that there were multiple gods then. He taught there was only ONE GOD. A trinity like God with the Holy Ghost being the "mind" of God and Jesus being the incarnation of the FATHER. The "Inspired Version",

Quote:
All things are delivered to me of my Father; and no man knoweth that the Son is the Father, and the Father is the Son, but him to whom the Son will reveal it.(Luke 10:22)


Joseph had been accused of trying to seduce Eliza Winters, one of Emma's friends in New York/Pennsylvania. He was teaching that "adultery was no crime". This is in 1830!!!! Ezra Booth again,

Quote:
Now, permit me to inquire; have you not frequently observed in Joseph, a want of that sobriety, prudence, and stability, which are some of the most prominent traits in the christian character? Have you not often discovered in him, a spirit of lightness and levity, a temper of mind easily irritated, and an habitual proneness to jesting and joking? Have you not repeatedly proved to your own satisfaction, that he says he knows things to be so by the spirit, when they are not so? You most certainly have. Have you not reason then to believe, or at least to suspect, that the revelations which come from him, are something short of infallible, and instead of being the production of divine wisdom, emanate from his own weak mind? Some suppose his weakness, nay, his wickedness, can form no reasonable objection to his revelations; and "were he to get another man's wife, and seek to kill her husband, it could be no reason why we should not believe revelations through him, for David did the same." So Sidney asserted, and many others concur with him in sentiment. (Ezra Booth to Edward Partridge, September 20, 1831).

And,

Quote:
There are also some other things, the meaning of which, you will not be likely to apprehend, without some explanation. In this, as well as several of the commandments, it is clearly and explicitly stated, that the right of delivering written commandments, and revelations, belong exclusively to Smith, and no other person can interfere, without being guilty of sacrilege. In this office he is to stand, until another is appointed in his place, and no other person can be appointed in his stead, unless he falls through transgression; and in such a case, he himself is authorized to appoint his successor. But how is he to be detected, should he become guilty of transgression. The commandment makes provision for this. His guilt will become manifest by his inability to utter any more revelations, and should he presume "to get another man's wife," and commit adultery; and "by the shedding of blood, seek to kill her husband," if he retains the use of his tongue, so as to be able to utter his jargon, he can continue as long as he pleases in the bed of adultery, and wrap himself with garments stained with blood, shed by his own hands, and still retain the spotless innocence of the holiest among mortals; and must be continued in the office of revelator, and head of the Church. Some others, and especially Cowdery, have earnestly desired to relieve Smith of some part of his burden. (Ezra Booth to Ira Eddy, November, 29, 1831.)


In a letter to William Clayton, Joseph referred to himself as "David", and Brigham Young called him that in 1842 when they were discussing the Orson and Sarah Pratt problem. Young said that Orson loved his wife MORE THAN DAVID (Joseph Smith). What did Joseph DO in Nauvoo? Took other men's wives and called himself David and had himself crowned a KING. I mean, really, what is the simplest explanation for Joseph's behavior? That which goes back to the beginning. Are these connections just meaningless? Not on your life.

I can go on and on and on. Yet the simplest explanation is thrown out the window for one that is so fantastical that it cannot be believed by anyone that has a lick of common sense and reason. Everything about what Joseph taught is treated the same. Common sense is simply thrown out the window and replaced with apologist mumbo jumbo.

The evidence tells the story, not the crafted ad hoc ____ that continually comes from Mormon apologists.

_________________
"I have the truth, and am at the defiance of the world to contradict me if they can." ~Joseph Smith
"The Sots combine with pious care a monkey to enshrine." ~ Mormonism Unvailed, 1834.
I've got things/stuff/jobs to do and when I'm done I may/may not choose/decide to respond/reply/post/comment again. Or not. But maybe? ~Jersey Girl


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:02 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 5081
Location: The Land of Lorn
Could Joseph have used the older women to convert other younger women without "marrying" them? Especially when they were ALREADY OTHER MEN'S WIVES? How does this fit into ANYTHING that was taught in the church up to that time? It doesn't. But it fits the pattern of Joseph doing what he pleased because he was DAVID and could commit adultery and had the promise from God that he could have whatever the ____ he wanted. In 1844 Smith taught,

Quote:
Again the doctrin or sealing power of Elijah is as follows: If you have power to seal on earth & in heaven then we should be crafty. The first thing you do go & seal on earth your sons & daughters unto yourself & yourself unto your fathers in eternal glory & go ahead and not go back but use a little Craftiness & seal all you can & when you get to heaven tell your father that what you seal on earth should be sealed in heaven. I will walk through the gate of heaven and Claim what I seal & those that follow me & my Council. The Lord once told me that what I asked for I should have. I have been afraid to ask God to kill my enemies lest some of them should peradventure repent. I asked a short time since for the Lord to deliver me out of the hands of the govornor of Missouri & if it must needs be to accomplish it to take him away & the next news that came pouring down from their was Govornor [Thomas] Reynolds had shot himself. And I would now say beware O earth how you fight against the saints of God & shed innocent Blood, for in the days of Elijah his enemies came upon him & fire was called down from heaven & destroyed them. (Wilford Woodruff's Journal, Vol. 2, 1841–1845, p.365, March 10, 1844, added emphasis. This quote was drastically changed when it was put into the History of the Church (without ellipsis or any notification) and is still used today in its edited form. See it here... https://www.LDS.org/manual/teachings-jo ... 6?lang=eng (NOTE 8)


Crafty definition (1828):

Quote:
1. Cunning; artful; skillful in devising and pursuing a scheme, by deceiving others, or by taking advantage of their ignorance; wily; sly; fraudulent. He disappointeth the devices of the crafty. Job 5.


Who would even think that they could be CRAFTY to God? :eek: ..."Uh, yeah, God, I sealed all these women to myself, because I had the sealing power and so you have to let me keep them. ____ their husbands. They're mine. Nothing you can do about it God. I was just so ____ CRAFTY. And I did have that revelation that you would let me have whatever I wanted... don't forget that God".

No wonder later church historians changed this quote when the put it in the History of the Church!

Quote:
“Again: The doctrine or sealing power of Elijah is as follows:—If you have power to seal on earth and in heaven, then we should be wise. The first thing you do, go and seal on earth your sons and daughters unto yourself, and yourself unto your fathers in eternal glory.”8

_________________
"I have the truth, and am at the defiance of the world to contradict me if they can." ~Joseph Smith
"The Sots combine with pious care a monkey to enshrine." ~ Mormonism Unvailed, 1834.
I've got things/stuff/jobs to do and when I'm done I may/may not choose/decide to respond/reply/post/comment again. Or not. But maybe? ~Jersey Girl


Last edited by grindael on Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:11 pm 
God

Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 3:39 pm
Posts: 6089
grindael wrote:
Ezra Booth, who was an eyewitness to what happened in 1831 wrote...


When you say "eyewitness", specifically what do you mean? First person?

How many and who were other "eyewitnesses" to what happened in 1831?

Are there some eyewitnesses that don't agree with Ezra Booth?

Regards,
MG

_________________
Some people make stuff up. Even here on a board like this. Go figure. What is kind of silly, in a way, is that it would take me so long to figure that out. Maybe I didn't want to think it was true. Maybe I give too much the 'benefit of a doubt' to other people. I guess I should know better.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=45503


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:18 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 5081
Location: The Land of Lorn
mentalgymnast wrote:

When you say "eyewitness", specifically what do you mean? First person?

How many and who were other "eyewitnesses" to what happened in 1831?

Are there some eyewitnesses that don't agree with Ezra Booth?


Do your own research. Good luck finding what you are looking for.

_________________
"I have the truth, and am at the defiance of the world to contradict me if they can." ~Joseph Smith
"The Sots combine with pious care a monkey to enshrine." ~ Mormonism Unvailed, 1834.
I've got things/stuff/jobs to do and when I'm done I may/may not choose/decide to respond/reply/post/comment again. Or not. But maybe? ~Jersey Girl


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:21 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 5081
Location: The Land of Lorn
Here is the altered quote from History of the Church...

Quote:
Again: The doctrine or sealing power of Elijah is as follows:—If you have power to seal on earth and in heaven, then we should be wise. The first thing you do, go and seal on earth your sons and daughters unto yourself, and yourself unto your fathers in eternal glory. I will walk through the gate of heaven and claim what I seal, and those that follow me and my counsel.

The Lord once told me that what I asked for I should have. I have been afraid to ask God to kill my enemies, lest some of them should, peradventure, repent.

I asked a short time since for the Lord to deliver me out of the hands of the Governor of Missouri, and if it needs must be to accomplish it, to [p.254] take him away; and the next news that came pouring down from there was, that Governor Reynolds had shot himself. And I would now say, "Beware, O earth, how you fight against the Saints of God and shed innocent blood; for in the days of Elijah, his enemies came upon him, and fire was called down from heaven and destroyed them. (Joseph Smith, History of the Church, Vol. 6, p.253)


When has any Mormon "prophet" ever called down fire from heaven? :lol:

_________________
"I have the truth, and am at the defiance of the world to contradict me if they can." ~Joseph Smith
"The Sots combine with pious care a monkey to enshrine." ~ Mormonism Unvailed, 1834.
I've got things/stuff/jobs to do and when I'm done I may/may not choose/decide to respond/reply/post/comment again. Or not. But maybe? ~Jersey Girl


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2017 5:36 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 5081
Location: The Land of Lorn
Remember there was no polygamy in Jesus Church. So Joseph has to go back to the Old Testament and therefore the NEED for a "restoration" of ALL the Dispensations.

_________________
"I have the truth, and am at the defiance of the world to contradict me if they can." ~Joseph Smith
"The Sots combine with pious care a monkey to enshrine." ~ Mormonism Unvailed, 1834.
I've got things/stuff/jobs to do and when I'm done I may/may not choose/decide to respond/reply/post/comment again. Or not. But maybe? ~Jersey Girl


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 12:04 pm 
God

Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 1:25 pm
Posts: 5590
grindael wrote:
Quote:

When you say "eyewitness", specifically what do you mean? First person?

How many and who were other "eyewitnesses" to what happened in 1831?

Are there some eyewitnesses that don't agree with Ezra Booth?


Do your own research. Good luck finding what you are looking for.

:lol: perfect answer, grindael.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:17 pm 
Dragon
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2011 2:15 am
Posts: 5081
Location: The Land of Lorn
Yeah Lemmie,

I'm sure that if I (or someone else) had written that Jo was a stand up guy and that he never did anything wrong and quoted someone who said so our resident Apologist wouldn't have given it a second thought. :rolleyes:

You only get the third degree if it is something that conflicts with their apologetic worldview. There must be something wrong with the quote, because it was critical of ol' Jo. Anything will do, to latch on to and protect the "faithful" narrative. Well, if he wants to go down that rabbit hole, he can do so on his own. I'm sure he can trot right on over to FAIRMORMON and find lots of bad things about Ezra Booth and he'll believe every word of it.

Lord knows, I'm sure it means nothing that Booth went to Missouri and was there for a special conference Smith called and observed him on the journey back to Kirtland, was there when he gave his famous "revelation" about Satan being in control of the Mississippi river and all the other ____ that went on on that trip, and all the other things he witnessed first hand.

An interesting coda to the Booth dissension, is this "revelation" Smith wrote on September 11, 1831 after they returned from Missouri...

Quote:
15 Behold, I, the Lord, was angry with him who was my servant Ezra Booth, and also my servant Isaac Morley, for they kept not the law, neither the commandment;

16 They sought evil in their hearts, and I, the Lord, withheld my Spirit. They condemned for evil that thing in which there was no evil; nevertheless I have forgiven my servant Isaac Morley.

17 And also my servant Edward Partridge, behold, he hath sinned, and Satan seeketh to destroy his soul; but when these things are made known unto them, and they repent of the evil, they shall be forgiven.

18 And now, verily I say that it is expedient in me that my servant Sidney Gilbert, after a few weeks, shall return upon his business, and to his agency in the land of Zion;

19 And that which he hath seen and heard may be made known unto my disciples, that they perish not. And for this cause have I spoken these things.

20 And again, I say unto you, that my servant Isaac Morley may not be tempted above that which he is able to bear, and counsel wrongfully to your hurt, I gave commandment that his farm should be sold.

21 I will not that my servant Frederick G. Williams should sell his farm, for I, the Lord, will to retain a strong hold in the land of Kirtland, for the space of five years, in the which I will not overthrow the wicked, that thereby I may save some.


Smith was condemning people who had been critical of him, or course, Booth among them. And notice that he wanted -- as a condition, for Morely to sell his farm so Smith could use the money. Even one of his descendants (Morely's) wrote that "his earthly inheritance had to be sacrificed before he could comprehend the principle of obedience." http://scholarsarchive.BYU.edu/cgi/view ... ontext=etd His farm had to be sold so he wouldn't be tempted "above that which he is able to bear"? Really?

And then there is that five year prophecy about the redemption of "Zion", which Joseph later confirmed in 1835: that it would take place on September 11, 1836, five years after this "revelation" was written by Smith. That too, failed to happen, of course.

_________________
"I have the truth, and am at the defiance of the world to contradict me if they can." ~Joseph Smith
"The Sots combine with pious care a monkey to enshrine." ~ Mormonism Unvailed, 1834.
I've got things/stuff/jobs to do and when I'm done I may/may not choose/decide to respond/reply/post/comment again. Or not. But maybe? ~Jersey Girl


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Here's to Joseph Smith Con-Artist
PostPosted: Fri Sep 08, 2017 1:30 pm 
God

Joined: Sat Jun 01, 2013 3:39 pm
Posts: 6089
MG wrote:
When you say "eyewitness", specifically what do you mean? First person?

How many and who were other "eyewitnesses" to what happened in 1831?

Are there some eyewitnesses that don't agree with Ezra Booth?


grindael wrote:
Do your own research. Good luck finding what you are looking for.


lemmie wrote:
:lol: perfect answer, grindael.


Well, of course. :wink:

Quote:
Many have belittled Joseph Smith, but those who have will be forgotten in the remains of mother earth, and the odor of their infamy will ever be with them, but honor, majesty, and fidelity to God, exemplified by Joseph Smith and attached to his name, will never die.
President George A. Smith


Ezra Booth was one of those guys.

Other witnesses view things differently.

The work to which Joseph Smith was called lives on. It will outlive you and any other detractor that comes along.

Regards,
MG

_________________
Some people make stuff up. Even here on a board like this. Go figure. What is kind of silly, in a way, is that it would take me so long to figure that out. Maybe I didn't want to think it was true. Maybe I give too much the 'benefit of a doubt' to other people. I guess I should know better.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=45503


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cwald, Doctor CamNC4Me, Doctor Steuss, DrW, Fence Sitter, Google [Bot], kairos, Mittens, moinmoin, RockSlider, Stem and 43 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group