for what it's worth: My thoughts on new essay re Joseph Smith's polygamy

[_Bazooka]

...the essays don't claim to be one persons take on things like Yollo's essay does

What do the essays claim to be?

The Gospel Topics pages are meant as a personal resource for members as they study and teach about the history and doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. We live in a world where there is so much information available on every topic. And particularly in the age of the Internet, there are both good and bad sources of information. As a Church, it's important for us to research and provide official, reputable, historically accurate information about our history and doctrine.

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/c ... pics-pages

They claim to be official - that means they are authorised by the First Presidency and can be viewed as official explanations by the Church.
So, not one person, but three people aided in their authorisation process by God.

Also,
They claim to be reputable - that means they should be free from deception, obfuscation or other generally misleading statements.
They claim to be historically accurate - so they should be properly referenced to show the historical sources from which the information and statements of historical fact have been drawn from and checked against. This also means they shouldn't contain important omissions.

[_informant]

Most members have been told to shun news outlets or google for information about their faith ... which is why they are searching on LDS.org in the first place! Nice to see you think the general membership of the LDS Church are idiots for trusting their Church. This general disdain of the general membership is extremely common with mopologists isn't it? I wonder why?

i guess you do everything your told you subservient schmuck?????

Didn't you know informant, corporations are people! Just ask your failed Mormon presidential candidate Mitt Romney. So I guess we know the "person" who produced and is promoting the half-truth essays.

corporations are not individual people they are made up of people............go ahead and try to one a cooperation without people dumbo

As for the lame attempt to make a distinction between the anonymous writers of Church essays and an anonymous commentator on the internet, your double standard is duly noted.

Thanks,

Hasa Diga Eebowai

if i say something is my opinion and i state it with a bunch of "I" and "me" pronouns its my own damn opinion

[_Brackite]

Here's the latest in my "for what it's worth" series -- my thoughts about the new LDS essay addressing Joseph Smith's polygamy and polyandry in Kirtland and Nauvoo. The paper ended up being far too long to post normally, so I had to create it as a "google doc." You can access a PDF copy of the paper via the link below.

EDITED TO ADD:

Below is the link to my REVISED draft (with the addition of one word previously left out, to my great chagrin):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B22-zr ... xnTVU/view

Hi Rollo Tomasi,

I believe that your recent review of the "Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo" Essay, is mostly a very good review. The only thing that I have found so far that I really disagree with your review of that essay on is the "marriage" year between Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger. In your review, you rely on Todd Compton's opinion that the "marriage" between Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger occurred in the year of 1833. However, other historians besides Todd Compton believe that the "marriage" between Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger occurred in the year of 1835. I happen to agree with them that the "marriage" occurred in the year of 1835.

See For Example:
http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/faq/fanny-alger-2/

[Guest]

Ahh, you're right. I did miss it. Because somehow that makes a difference. Certainly a large organization run by men who claim to talk to God, couldn't be bothered to place their names on such unimportant documents. I mean think of all the work it would be to do that. Nor would any of the actual writers want credit for them, as they are, after all, not that big a deal. God does work in anonymous mysterious ways.

of course it makes a difference you blithering baboon!!!!!!! if i write an essay with a bunch of "I" and "me" pronouns it means its my own damn opinion

Oh of course it makes perfect sense. Wouldn't it be great if the church had someone who knew how to use pronouns and was capable of publicly proclaiming direction from God instead of hiding behind anonymous authors and internet spokespersons?

"We thank thee oh God for a Corporation to lead us in these latter days".

[Guest]

-

[_SteelHead]

Awesome.

[_informant]

LOL! Good to hear you think so highly of the active believing membership of the LDS Church. They even clean the toilets of a multi-billion dollar corporation and they pay 10% of their income for the privilege. Are you one of those members? Or do you just look down on them too?

you don't understand what it means to be Mormon

The point that Mitt Romney was making was that in law a corporation is a person. Which is a concept that the Supreme Court is running with. Interesting to hear that you completely disagree with that concept, but a lot of people do. Just another reason why the Mormon candidate was so unpopular. You didn't vote for Mitt Romney by any chance did you?

yeah he was so unpopular that he was the damned republican nominee beating out that pizza dude and newt and santorum and all the other yahoos

idiot

And if a highly authoritarian corporation published articles as responses to problematic issues in its history then why not publish the name of the anonymous ghost writers? Why not put the name of the President of the Corporation on the articles?

tell me.......are any of the gospel topics articles signed by their authors???

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Then you get a cookie, my friend.

you were trying to pass off your own personal anecdotal "evidence" as actual evidence that the essays were impossible for members to find..................that's very dishonest............so i used my own anecdotal "evidence" to contrast yours

I was referring to those who tried to find the essays while ON LDS.org, not via a Google search. Moreover, I was simply saying what I have personally heard; I haven't done a scientific survey. Get over yourself.

Pray tell, have you even read my paper?

some of it

why don't you post it here tooo? (then it would be ethically okay not to put your name to it.........i understand i am one scary dude (i guess)))

. I did post it here -- look up at the OP for the link to my paper as a PDF "Google doc."

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Here's the latest in my "for what it's worth" series -- my thoughts about the new LDS essay addressing Joseph Smith's polygamy and polyandry in Kirtland and Nauvoo. The paper ended up being far too long to post normally, so I had to create it as a "google doc." You can access a PDF copy of the paper via the link below.

EDITED TO ADD:

Below is the link to my REVISED draft (with the addition of one word previously left out, to my great chagrin):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B22-zr ... xnTVU/view

Hi Rollo Tomasi,

I believe that your recent review of the "Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo" Essay, is mostly a very good review. The only thing that I have found so far that I really disagree with your review of that essay on is the "marriage" year between Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger. In your review, you rely on Todd Compton's opinion that the "marriage" between Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger occurred in the year of 1833. However, other historians besides Todd Compton believe that the "marriage" between Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger occurred in the year of 1835. I happen to agree with them that the "marriage" occurred in the year of 1835.

See For Example:
http://josephsmithspolygamy.org/faq/fanny-alger-2/

Yes, I know there are other dates that have been suggested -- I chose Compton's 1833 date after reviewing the evidence (including Hales) and concluding (for myself only) that 1833 seems the most likely year of their marriage.

[_informant]

[quote="Rollo Tomasi"I was referring to those who tried to find the essays while ON LDS.org, not via a Google search. Moreover, I was simply saying what I have personally heard; I haven't done a scientific survey. Get over yourself.[/quote]

as was i...........i searched both on LDS.org and on google and found the articles instantly.............your personal anecdote is either totally wrong and meant only to score a cheap shot or the members you associate with are complete idiots

I did post it here -- look up at the OP for the link to my paper as a PDF "Google doc."

no you posted a LINK to a google doc not the actual words of the article