Joseph Smith's Personal Claim to Fame.

[_mentalgymnast]

Much like the admissions/intuitions about Mary Baker Eddy.

she was heard to say that:

...in over forty years of church leadership, she had not made a mistake...

Joseph Smith admitted to and was public about his foibles. He was open and honest concerning the reliability of revelation in some instances. He openly prophesied that his name would be had for good and evil throughout all nations.

Why not be more like Mary Baker Eddy and claim to not have made any mistakes? Why would he look to the future and as a matter of fact mandate that his name would be known for good and evil? It seems to make sense, at least to me, that Givens may have something here...

But you can think otherwise, no one is stopping you. Because of the way things are, you HAVE that choice. And it can even make perfect sense to you.

Joseph Smith can be thanked for that.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

Did other religious innovators of his day have the gall to come up with such a bold pronouncement,

Yes.

In regards to their name being known for both good and evil throughout all nations, etc.?

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

James Strang made some prophecies like this, too. And look: here we are, on the world wide web, discussing him. So his name is known for good and evil in all the world, too.

That's weak.

Regards,
MG

[_Darth J]

Much like the admissions/intuitions about Mary Baker Eddy.

she was heard to say that:

...in over forty years of church leadership, she had not made a mistake...

Joseph Smith admitted to and was public about his foibles. He was open and honest concerning the reliability of revelation in some instances. He openly prophesied that his name would be had for good and evil throughout all nations.

Why not be more like Mary Baker Eddy and claim to not have made any mistakes? Why would he look to the future and as a matter of fact mandate that his name would be known for good and evil? It seems to make sense, at least to me, that Givens may have something here...

But you can think otherwise, no one is stopping you. Because of the way things are, you HAVE that choice. And it can even make perfect sense to you.

Joseph Smith can be thanked for that.

Regards,
MG

You're moving the goalposts. Your OP is about predicting future fame, not present infallibility.

[_Darth J]

James Strang made some prophecies like this, too. And look: here we are, on the world wide web, discussing him. So his name is known for good and evil in all the world, too.

That's weak.

Regards,
MG

Revelations of James Strang, Section 14

And the fulness of the unpolluted gospel shall go forth to all nations, and the unpolluted words of the prophets who are in their graves shall be spoken again to men on earth, that they may know that I am God, and there is none else.

The gospel preached by the Strangites is in fact going forth to all nations, via the world wide web.

Explain to me how this is "weak," and not a fulfillment of prophecy.

And while you are in the course of explaining how this is "weak," tell the board all about how it is not "weak" that Oliver Granger's name will be held in sacred remembrance.

[_Darth J]

Did other religious innovators of his day have the gall to come up with such a bold pronouncement,

Yes.

In regards to their name being known for both good and evil throughout all nations, etc.?

Regards,
MG

Read the links.

But keep in mind that other religious innovators did not tend to be as arrogant as Joseph Smith, so they usually were concerned more about their message, rather than their own name, being known all over the place.

[_why me]

If we listen to bill maher his name is certainly being had for good and evil. I don't hear Maher talking about mary baker eddy or for that matter any other religious figure except Joseph Smith as he clasifies Joseph Smith with bernie magdoff.

Also, Joseph's name is a polarizing name for many people, especially now that Mormons are making a name for themselves. Joseph who was a product of his time could not foresee a time well over a hundred years later that his name would still be out there among the nations for good and for evil. If I were him, I would see my name dying out with me with perhaps a little mention in the newspapers for a year or so before I am forgotten, if I were a fraudster.

[_why me]

Read the links.

But keep in mind that other religious innovators did not tend to be as arrogant as Joseph Smith, so they usually were concerned more about their message, rather than their own name, being known all over the place.

Ignorant people would not be thinking that their name would be important at all because they are ignorant and their ignorance would automatically tend to have the world forget them. To make such a bold claim, one that would probably not come true, if one looks at Joseph Smith at that time and how the locals wished to just forget him and the Mormons.

[_Darth J]

If we listen to bill maher his name is certainly being had for good and evil. I don't hear Maher talking about mary baker eddy or for that matter any other religious figure except Joseph Smith as he clasifies Joseph Smith with bernie magdoff.

Also, Joseph's name is a polarizing name for many people, especially now that Mormons are making a name for themselves. Joseph who was a product of his time could not foresee a time well over a hundred years later that his name would still be out there among the nations for good and for evil. If I were him, I would see my name dying out with me with perhaps a little mention in the newspapers for a year or so before I am forgotten, if I were a fraudster.

Let me help you out with your outwitting yourself her, Why Me.

Mary Baker Eddy did not make that prediction about herself. You cannot judge the accuracy of Mary Baker Eddy's prophecies by inserting her name into a prophecy ghost-written about Joseph Smith years after the alleged fact (Moroni's visit).

The premise of the OP is that Joseph Smith had no way of knowing at the time (begging the question of how we know that he recorded this statement when he was 17) that he would be known for good or evil throughout the world. Mentalgymnast is inviting us to infer that he wouldn't, so he must have been told it by a divine messenger.

However, such an inference fails to explain why other religious leaders, including those claiming to be Joseph Smith's successors, also accurately predicted their message/their interpretation of the gospel being known throughout the world.

[_Darth J]

Read the links.

But keep in mind that other religious innovators did not tend to be as arrogant as Joseph Smith, so they usually were concerned more about their message, rather than their own name, being known all over the place.

Ignorant people would not be thinking that their name would be important at all because they are ignorant and their ignorance would automatically tend to have the world forget them. To make such a bold claim, one that would probably not come true, if one looks at Joseph Smith at that time and how the locals wished to just forget him and the Mormons.

You don't get to have it both ways. Either the Mormons were ignored or they were persecuted. Which one do you want it to be?

You are also following Mentalgymnast's question-begging, and adding equivocation to it. What do you mean by "that time:" the time when a third party wrote this statement in Joseph Smith's voice, or the uncorroborated time when Moroni allegedly said this to Joseph Smith about a decade and a half prior?