Apologetic Argument: Joseph Smith's Man Love

[_Darth J]

On 6 May 1843, Joseph Smith said made the following prophecy:

I prophecy in the name of the Lord God of Israel, unless the United States redress the wrongs committed upon the Saints in the state of Missouri and punish the crimes committed by her officers that in a few years the government will be utterly overthrown and wasted, and there will not be so much as a potsherd left for their wickedness in permitting the murder of men, women and children, and the wholesale plunder and extermination of thousands of her citizens to go unpunished, thereby perpetrating a foul and corroding blot upon the fair fame of this great republic, the very thought of which would have caused the high-minded and patriotic framers of the Constitution of the United States to hide their faces with shame. Judge [Stephen A. Douglas], you will aspire to the Presidency of the United States; and if you ever turn your hand against me or the Latter-day Saints, you will feel the weight of the hand of the Almighty upon you; and you will live to see and know that I have testified the truth to you; for the conversation of this day will stick to you through life.

While anti-Mormons say this was a failed prophecy, the FAIR wiki explains that there are many ways this prophecy could be fulfilled, or has yet to be fulfilled.

Joseph and Brigham's forbidden love never would have been accepted by the public in their lifetimes. So has the United States been utterly overthrown and wasted, or has there been a redress of grievances?

As it turns out, the U.S. government has recently announced that it plans to use foreign aid to promote gay rights. http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/5305 ... y.html.csp

Thus, redress is being given to the wrongs done by the government by failing to protect the right of Joseph and Brigham to engage in a consensual same-sex relationship. This continuing fulfillment of prophecy is yet another part of the mounting evidence that Joseph and Brigham knew each other most intimately. Proponents of the Church will have a hard time explaining this one away.

[_stemelbow]

Every time someone finds specious reasoning in Mormon apologetics and says so, it's basically Haun's Mill all over again.

You didnh’t find anything. Indeed, you can’t find any LDS who posts here who says, essentially, the Church is true because you can’t prove it untrue. The speciousness is coming from you, DJ.

Can you absolutely prove that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young could not possibly have been lovers?

What does that matter, mr. Point misser?

Speaking of things being proven not true, do you believe that the Loch Ness Monster lives in your house? How can you know for sure? Can you prove it is not true, or cannot possibly be true?

Again what does that matter?

What exactly does it mean to prove that something "cannot possibly be true"?

That’s my question.

Stemelbow, since you have failed to prove that Joseph and Brigham were homosexual lovers, why shouldn't we believe it? Nobody yet has shown that it isn't true.

Believer whatever you like. What do I care? Its like talking to a wall.

From what I hear, to argue against the notion that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were not homosexual lovers, it is not necessary to prove that they were lovers.

Fine. Go on accepting your made-up idea. Who cares?

Looks like a bunch of fussin' and whimperin' and whining because you can't prove that our beliefs are not true. It's nothin' much. Go ahead and pout, Stemelbow.

You seem to be opposed to the idea that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were lovers. But all you're doing is saying that such a belief is "silly." The scriptures tell us that the righteous will be ridiculed for our belief. So if we are being ridiculed, it must mean that what we believe is true. Your persecuting us is proof that the scriptures are true.

Calling your idea silly is not persecutin’, mr. strawman. Your pouting has gotten the best of ya again.

[_Darth J]

Gordon B. Hinckley wrote a balanced, accurate, and honest history of the Church that was titled, Truth Restored. That book is officially published by the Church.

In Chapter 12 of Truth Restored, Elder Hinckley (he was an apostle when he wrote it) tells us about the death of Brigham Young:

The end of his labors came on August 29, 1877. A few days earlier he had fallen seriously ill. His last words as he lay dying were a call to the man he had succeeded—“Joseph! Joseph! Joseph!”

Surely this was not the first time that he cried out Joseph's name. Nevertheless, as he lie terminally ill in this hisgreatest—and last—hour of need, I ask you: would this man blaspheme before God by continuing to fix his life, his honor, and his own search for eternal salvation on a forbidden love with a prophet (and by implication a church and a ministry) that never happened?

Never mind that his wives are about to be widows and his children fatherless. Never mind members of the Church would one day be persecuted for opposing same-sex marriage, and turn from the love between these prophets of the Restoration even as the Church turned from the eternal law of plural marriage. Disregard all of that, and tell me whether in this hour of death this man would enter the presence of his Eternal Judge saying the name of and finding solace in a man who, if not the lover of the prophet of God, would brand them as perverts and sodomites until the end of time? He would not do that! He was willing to die rather than deny his love affair with Joseph Smith.

[_Runtu]

You didnh’t find anything. Indeed, you can’t find any LDS who posts here who says, essentially, the Church is true because you can’t prove it untrue. The speciousness is coming from you, DJ.

why me has said almost exactly that many times, stem: the church hasn't been proven untrue, so the witness of the spirit proves it's true.

[_Darth J]

Every time someone finds specious reasoning in Mormon apologetics and says so, it's basically Haun's Mill all over again.

You didnh’t find anything. Indeed, you can’t find any LDS who posts here who says, essentially, the Church is true because you can’t prove it untrue. The speciousness is coming from you, DJ.

I have faith, and faith is evidence. If you want to say that Joseph and Brigham were not lovers, then the burden is on you to prove that they weren't. I already have faith that they were, but I want to see proponents of the Church prove that my faith is wrong.

Can you absolutely prove that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young could not possibly have been lovers?

What does that matter, mr. Point misser?

Exactly. What does it mean to absolutely prove that something could not be true?

Speaking of things being proven not true, do you believe that the Loch Ness Monster lives in your house? How can you know for sure? Can you prove it is not true, or cannot possibly be true?

Again what does that matter?

Until someone absolutely proves that it is not true, I think you should just assume that the Loch Ness Monster lives in your house.

What exactly does it mean to prove that something "cannot possibly be true"?

That’s my question.

And what do you think the answer will be? It looks like you're demanding that people do something when you don't even understand what you expect them to do.

Stemelbow, since you have failed to prove that Joseph and Brigham were homosexual lovers, why shouldn't we believe it? Nobody yet has shown that it isn't true.

Believer whatever you like. What do I care? Its like talking to a wall.

It's like talking to a wall..........

How about that, Stemelbow?

From what I hear, to argue against the notion that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were not homosexual lovers, it is not necessary to prove that they were lovers.

Fine. Go on accepting your made-up idea. Who cares?

If you want to call it a made-up idea, the burden is on you to prove that it is made up.

Looks like a bunch of fussin' and whimperin' and whining because you can't prove that our beliefs are not true. It's nothin' much. Go ahead and pout, Stemelbow.

You seem to be opposed to the idea that Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were lovers. But all you're doing is saying that such a belief is "silly." The scriptures tell us that the righteous will be ridiculed for our belief. So if we are being ridiculed, it must mean that what we believe is true. Your persecuting us is proof that the scriptures are true.

Calling your idea silly is not persecutin’, mr. strawman. Your pouting has gotten the best of ya again.

You can feel justified in maintaining whatever you like, Stemelbow. I see no reason to go after people for believing something that another may or may not feel is true.

[_stemelbow]

why me has said almost exactly that many times, stem: the church hasn't been proven untrue, so the witness of the spirit proves it's true.

That's not "exactly" that. The proof to him is the Spirit...not that its not proven untrue (still, whatever that means).

[_stemelbow]

Go on believing whatever you want, DJ. Here, I'll take back the made-up idea part just because I don't care. Have fun.

[_Darth J]

Go on believing whatever you want, DJ. Here, I'll take back the made-up idea part just because I don't care. Have fun.

My faith is evidence that it is true. But there are also evidences that are consistent with the faith I already have. It seems to really disturb you that you can't prove that the first two prophets of the Restoration were not homosexual lovers. Just more poutin' and whimperin' from Stemelbow because he can't prove that the things we believe in aren't true.

Your ridiculing our beliefs doesn't have anything to do with a proponent's claim that Joseph and Brigham being lovers is proven not true, or that it cannot possibly be true.

[_stemelbow]

It seems to really disturb you that you can't prove that the first two prophets of the Restoration were not homosexual lovers. Just more poutin' and whimperin' from Stemelbow because he can't prove that the things we believe in aren't true.

You are such a disengenuous conversationalist--how's about them apples? that much is proven. I'm not disturbed, DJ.

[_Darth J]

It seems to really disturb you that you can't prove that the first two prophets of the Restoration were not homosexual lovers. Just more poutin' and whimperin' from Stemelbow because he can't prove that the things we believe in aren't true.

You are such a disengenuous conversationalist--how's about them apples? that much is proven. I'm not disturbed, DJ.

Why can't proponents of the Church leave believers in Joseph and Brigham's forbidden love alone? What is so terrible about believing what we believe?

We have faith. We interpret that faith to mean what we already believed it means. And we interpret the evidence to mean what we already believed.

It looks like proponents of the Church can't do nuthin' besides that there whimperin' and whining and fussin' because they say they can absolutely prove our beliefs aren't true, or that they are proven untrue, but they can't prove that Joseph and Brigham were not gay for each other.

It is adorable to watch you pout, though, Stemelbow.