Kishkumen wrote:I am sorry to hear that Grant was bullied out of the LDS Church.
I think that Grant bullied himself out of the church. And besides, I haven't heard much from him lately. But now with a new craving for publicity he is back among the exmormon faithful, basking in his glory as martyr. Not bad for 15 minutes of fame.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
And which one of these wives said that Joseph Smith was a horny toad? Which one said that he abused them? As far as I can tell, not one. And after he was murdered, no women claimed that he was lustful jerk who was in it for the sex. How to explain it? And fanny's parents never thought that this relationship with fanny was improper. Why should I think any different? And not one claimed that Joseph Smith was committing adultery.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
why me wrote:And not one claimed that Joseph Smith was committing adultery.
Seems that the gist of these podcasts was that this charge was leveled many times.
At MDD, the argument has been made that all of this was known for quite some time (I had never heard about William Law being chosen as a sexual surrogate for Emma Smith, but then again I am still in the learning process). The argument continues that although this was known, it in no way impinges on the restored Gospel.
why me wrote:And which one of these wives said that Joseph Smith was a horny toad? Which one said that he abused them? As far as I can tell, not one. And after he was murdered, no women claimed that he was lustful jerk who was in it for the sex. How to explain it? And fanny's parents never thought that this relationship with fanny was improper. Why should I think any different? And not one claimed that Joseph Smith was committing adultery.
Why would a woman who consented to become the polygamous or polyamorous wife of a man complain that the man was a 'horny toad'? How would we possibly know what Fanny's parents thought? Why would one of his 'wives' claim that Joseph was committing adultery?
This is the worst argument in the history of arguments. You make it often. It never gets any better or makes any more sense.
~Those who benefit from the status quo always attribute inequities to the choices of the underdog.~Ann Crittenden ~The Goddess is not separate from the world-She is the world and all things in it.~
Why me, I think that William Law genuinely felt that Joseph shouldn't have been killed by the mob. He was a law-abiding citizen, at least it seems that way to me. He wanted Joseph to be tried by the courts and says as much in his later letters. He had no reason to feel guilty for what happened to Joseph, though he did feel there was something of Karma going on.
It also seems to me that it was not William Law but Joseph that had the real power in Nauvoo (perhaps Law underestimated this power).
Joseph had the power to make or break a man, he also formed around him a close set of 'friends' if you like, who would support him no matter what. Some of those 'friends' included some quite unsavoury characters. Really unsavoury actually..
Remember Law believed in the gospel, but came to believe that Joseph had used his power and influence to completely over-ride the 10 commandments in effect. Stealing was sanctioned, murder, adultery, counterfeiting, in quite a Machiavellian way, or so it seems to me. That's a hard medicine for anyone to swallow. Joseph was using the Nauvoo charter to over-ride the law.
Wiliam Law's reaction, to me, is absolutely understandable. And remember at that time he still believed in the 'gospel' so to speak. He felt Joseph had become corrupted by the power, the wealth, and the religious influence that he no doubt had.
Law was also accused unfairly I believe, of 'oppressing the poor, counterfeiting, theft, conspiracy to murder, seduction, and adultery'
The counterfeiting charge was bought by Theodore Turley, when later evidence suggests that it was Turley himself who was guilty.
Along with him, Hawes, Jackson, Eaton, and Bonney were 'implicated in a complex series of alleged conspiracies, from murders in Iowa to a dissenter plot to murder the Smith family in spring of 1844, all of which defy dissentanglement'
Of these men, at least 3 were in the Council of 50...
(See Brooke - The Refiners Fire - p 270)
Law's reputation was literally floored. How would you feel if that happened to you. I think I would feel a little angry. Particularly if it wasn't true. And all evidence from his later life suggests that the charges were concocted.
I think the early church leaders have a lot to answer for, even if they did what they did to ensure the continuity of the church. The means doesn't always justify the end.
Mary
Last edited by Schreech on Tue Feb 28, 2012 10:39 am, edited 4 times in total.
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov
Equality wrote:Polygamy wasn't secret? That's an interesting take. I don't think Bushman would agree with you. Palmer says about 100 people in Nauvoo, a city of approximately 18,000, knew about it. If it wasn't secret, and if the "King of the Earth" thing was just symbolic, why did Joseph Smith send Sidney Rigdon to the Laws' house to offer to reinstate them into the church after the prospectus for the Expositor was distributed in May 1844? Why did Joseph Smith order the destruction of the press if it wasn't really "exposing" polygamy? Again, you just make assertions. "Not credible because no proof." Of course, that's not true. You may be ignorant of the evidence but it's there. Have you looked at it? Have you listened to the Grant Palmer podcast? Read the Cook article? Have you ever read the Expositor? Have you read Klaus Hansen's book on the Council of Fifty?
Are you aware that the accusations that the Laws made regarding Smith's advances are similar to many reports of Joseph Smith's advances toward other women? Does the fact that Smith had at least 11 plural wives already married to other men, many of whom were very faithful? Does the fact that their story matches closely with Joseph Smith's known modus operandi not give them credibility?
You and I both know there are many definitions of "secret". As I stated, it was only a "secret" in the sense it was generally not known to the world and general membership (after all many Mormons today don't know he was a polygmaist - does that make it a "secret"?). It wasn't a secret in the sense that Joseph Smith was trying to hide it from the leadership of the church. It wasn't a secret in the sense others, unrelated to the leadership knew. It wasn't a secret in that other people didn't or couldn't find out indirectly. It just wasn't widly published (until Law did what he did) and that is all. And bear in mind, there were reasons it wasn't published. The church had many enemies and this would have just added fuel (which Law did) to the fire. This was one of the reasons (and the other slanderous junk it was printing) the press was destroyed in fact. It really was a public nuisance and it was legal in that day to put a stop to it. In answer to your next question of why Sidney Rigdon and others were sent to invite the Laws back is simple. It was simply an attempt to ask Law to stop what he was doing, repent, and come back into the fold. Nothing more. Also, let me say again that the Council of Fifty is a leadership of the "Kingdom of God" on earth. During the millenium they will adminster this kingdom here on earth in a very temporal way, but as far as I can tell, we aren't in the millenium. There is nothing more to read into it than that. And finally, I am fully aware that Joseph Smith was a polygamist. There is nothing new about that. I don't need to believe Law to know that. And you need to bear in mind, Abaraham was also a polygamist as were many of the prophets and kings of ancient Israel in the Bible. So obviously, polygamy does not prove one is not a prophet of God (I really don't understand why critics of the church keep bringing this up?).
Last edited by Guest on Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:28 am, edited 7 times in total.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
'After father's death Brother Law took our whole family and administered to our wants and with such good and kind care we began to improve our health...'
This is all after Emily's sister Harriet had died and her father had passed away 11 days later at the age of 46.
See The Rise of Mormonism - p 589..
Again this doesn't sound like a man who exploits people. (Remember he seems to be the only man who honoured the Lawrence sisters Bond)....
"It's a little like the Confederate Constitution guaranteeing the freedom to own slaves. Irony doesn't exist for bigots or fanatics." Maksutov
Equality wrote:This makes no sense. It's like saying you don't believe a whistleblower because he reports a crime he witnesses at work. How does taking steps to expose a fraud make the person exposing the fraud less credible?
Law wasn't a whistleblower. He was a troublemaker. Who was he attempting to inform with his actions? Clearly not the leadership of the church (they knew). Clearly the members of the church weren't impressed, they didn't believe his slanderous accusations nor join his "newly" minted church in droves. As I said, Law isn't credible. You may characterize him however you want and believe his non-sense. I certainly don't believe him and I really doubt many Mormons today will either.
"You lack vision, but I see a place where people get on and off the freeway. On and off, off and on all day, all night.... Tire salons, automobile dealerships and wonderful, wonderful billboards reaching as far as the eye can see. My God, it'll be beautiful." -- Judge Doom
Tobin wrote:Law wasn't a whistleblower. He was a troublemaker.
Damn. So the critics' case has been blown out of the water.
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.