sethpayne wrote: Well, I suppose. But Haun's Mill is important in helping us understand the mindset of those southern Utah Mormons who were whipped up into a murderous war frenzy -- partially by leaders using rhetoric making reference to Missouri specifically and Haun's Mill specifically.
Seems to me Juanita Brooks and Will Bagley would have really missed the boat had they not discussed Haun's Mill in connection with MM.
And as I understand it, the presses in california were calling for the destruction of the Mormons. Not to mention the US government threatening to head west to put the Mormons in line. MMM was a group of people who were persecuted and remembered the persecution and acted accordingly.
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
if the Mormons murdered the catholic pope, would you be pointing to Carthage 1844 as understanding the context of this bad thing?
No. Not unless the murder was committed by a crazed Mormon who believed the 1844 Carthage murders were perpetrated by Catholics and somehow thought that killing the pope was payback. If such were the case, then this context would be quite relevant in understanding the motives of the murderer.
So you tie a nexus, that the retribution must be directed at the initial perpetrators. Are you implying that the Law brothers or their partners in the Nauvoo Expositor were responsible for the destruction of the Mormon press in Missouri? If so, why did JSJr have Walmart Law as a FP counselor after the Missouri incident?
Kishkumen wrote: This is because the daily bread of the Mopologist is tit-for-tat retaliation. That which they do every day they will not see as wrong in their forebears.
Now kish, I am a man of context. I see context in most things that happened to the Mormons. I even see context in polygamy. What you and the other critics need to see is context and intended and unintended consequences and actions. And you need to use your imagination more. It would help a great deal in your understanding of Mormon history and actions.
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:What happened to the Mormons in missouri had intended and unintended consequences for the saints and for the mobs. For the saints, they became suspicious of outsiders, esepcially those like Law who wished their leaders harm.
sock puppet wrote:So you tie a nexus, that the retribution must be directed at the initial perpetrators. Are you implying that the Law brothers or their partners in the Nauvoo Expositor were responsible for the destruction of the Mormon press in Missouri? If so, why did JSJr have Walmart Law as a FP counselor after the Missouri incident?
Of course not, that would be absurd. But to acknowledge that events in Missouri contributed to the ethos of Nauvoo seems to be to be a fairly responsible use of the historical record.
sethpayne wrote: Well, I suppose. But Haun's Mill is important in helping us understand the mindset of those southern Utah Mormons who were whipped up into a murderous war frenzy -- partially by leaders using rhetoric making reference to Missouri specifically and Haun's Mill specifically.
Seems to me Juanita Brooks and Will Bagley would have really missed the boat had they not discussed Haun's Mill in connection with MM.
And as I understand it, the presses in california were calling for the destruction of the Mormons. Not to mention the US government threatening to head west to put the Mormons in line. MMM was a group of people who were persecuted and remembered the persecution and acted accordingly.
After the Mountain Meadows Massacre had taken place, to what extent would non-Mormons have been entitled to remember it and to act accordingly, I wonder?
If the US government had taken the decision (which I am glad they did not) to launch a punitive expedition against the LDS in the same way that they did against groups of Native Americans who had killed those encroaching on their land, I wonder whether whyme would have felt motivated to excuse the consequent massacres on the same 'remember the context' grounds that he habitually uses?
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.
sock puppet wrote:So you tie a nexus, that the retribution must be directed at the initial perpetrators. Are you implying that the Law brothers or their partners in the Nauvoo Expositor were responsible for the destruction of the Mormon press in Missouri? If so, why did JSJr have Walmart Law as a FP counselor after the Missouri incident?
You are still missing the boat. William Law knew exactly what he was trying to do. He attempted to create a Warsaw Signal in the heartland of the Mormons. And he knew that he would get a reaction. The expositor would have become an 'insider' rag that would stir up the hearts of the people against the Mormons. It had no other purpose.
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:For the saints, they became suspicious of outsiders, esepcially those like Law who wished their leaders harm. And they saw the destruction of the expositor as a way to protect their freedom to worship freely and to protect their safety. .
And from their experiences in Missouri with their own presses and property destroyed saw the destruction of the Expositor as a justifiable act. Context is everything.
And you think god was directing them in this colossal miscalculation?
Chap wrote: After the Mountain Meadows Massacre had taken place, to what extent would non-Mormons have been entitled to remember it and to act accordingly, I wonder?
If the US government had taken the decision (which I am glad they did not) to launch a punitive expedition against the LDS in the same way that they did against groups of Native Americans who had killed those encroaching on their land, I wonder whether whyme would have felt motivated to excuse the consequent massacres on the same 'remember the context' grounds that he habitually uses?
To understand MMM we need to look at context and what happened to the Mormons in their brief history up until MMM. And what do we see? A lot of persecution. I am sure that quite a few saints were shell shocked in Utah and they had a fear of foreigners. MMM was a crazed act but we still need to see the context of the event itself.
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
sock puppet wrote: And you think god was directing them in this colossal miscalculation?
I think that it was human fear plain and simple. And justifiably so.
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