DiscussMormonism.com

This web-page is 99% completed:
http://sidneyrigdon.com/criddle/Smith-ConMan.htm



There are probably still some uncorrected misspellings, etc. --
but what I'm looking for is constructive criticism that will help
me to touch up any substantial errors other readers may detect.

Uncle Dale

Some threads that start off slow have the potential to go sky high.

Ray A wrote:Some threads that start off slow have the potential to go sky high.

People carelessly accuse President Smith of having been a "con man."
I'm merely asking them to put their money where their mouth is.

Uncle "or at least explain why they call him that" Dale

I think you are covering things quite well Dale. Next time I see Joseph accused by his contemporaries as a 'juggler' I'll know what they meant.

I also appreciated your looking into views of Joseph pre Hurlbert and Howe.

I guess some would say Abner Cole was no better a reliable spokesman for Mormonism than Hurlburt or Howe?

I havn't finished the article yet.

Miss Taken wrote:...
I guess some would say Abner Cole was no better a reliable spokesman for Mormonism than Hurlburt or Howe?
...

Well -- some would say that Hurlbut planted false memories into the
minds of Joseph Smith's old neighbors in Palmyra and Manchester.

Two and a half years had gone by since the Mormons departed New York;
so I guess that the Smith neighbors had plenty of time to forget who
the Smith family folks had been.

How Hurlbut went back in time, to plant false memories in the heads of Cole, Sherer and
Benton before 1833 remains a great mystery. Satan is powerful -- perhaps he can go back in time.

Either all of that --- or people really were saying Joe Smith was a con man before Hurlbut did.

UD

If Joe was a con man then so were all the three witnesses, the eight witnesses, his mom, his wife, and sidney (if he had something to do with the Book of Mormon). And can I also include the wives of the witnesses, except Martin's of course. I cannot see the witnesses lying to their wives. I am sure that at least one would spill the popcorn.

Now if Joe did not have these witnesses, your case would be better served.

why me wrote:If Joe was a con man then so were all the three witnesses, the eight witnesses, his mom, his wife, and sidney (if he had something to do with the Book of Mormon). And can I also include the wives of the witnesses, except Martin's of course. I cannot see the witnesses lying to their wives. I am sure that at least one would spill the popcorn.

Now if Joe did not have these witnesses, your case would be better served.

It's rather weird to see a Mormon (?) writing "Joe". Why not go all the way and call him "ole' Joe"?

Ray A wrote:
It's rather weird to see a Mormon (?) writing "Joe". Why not go all the way and call him "ole' Joe"?

On this forum I usually do. I believe in communicating at the level of the board that I am on. Also, dale has a few articles in his site where Joe is called many things and I believe ol' joe is one of them.

I believe the testimony of Joseph Smith. I believe he was a prophet. He wasn't perfect and he made mistakes but he was still a prophet of God. He was not a con man. Joseph Smith was anything but a liar. He couldn't stand lies. It was against his nature. Everything I've read that Joseph has written is testimony to me that he was an honest and upright man. That's not to say he didn't have faults and make mistakes but I don't care about his mistakes. I wouldn't dare judge him.

Paul O

Even if all charges were true, it would not affect the Book of Mormon's status as Sacred Allegory.

---