Becoming like God

[_readtoomuch]

I thought I would read the essay before I read any critics and overall it is better than all the previous essays. But I guess my issues are that so much depends on the words of Joseph Smith. The church mentions revelations during the last two years of his life and then goes on to talk about the King Follett sermon. Yet, given that the Church discredited Joseph by admitting to the world he was a polygamist, it seems that I am not sure what to believe. I mean, did he write the revelations down? Was he telling the truth? Was he speculating? I mean I am confused. When someone is revealed to be a liar, what can you believe? Joseph lied to the world and the church. He lied at the pulpit, in numerous publications and in front of a judge lying about him not being a polygamist yet I am supposed to believe a word he says?? Notice the church doesn't quote a revelation regarding becoming a God or exaltation. Yet they accept everything he says.....or do they? Lets see: Zelph, Ancient Nephite Altar at Adam Ondi Ahman, Ancient city of Manti just to mention a few. Yet most people think the Book of Mormon happened in Meso America. Has anyone read the Wentworth letter? Furthermore, everyone seems to bite off on the Mother in Heaven. I am ok with those who just choose to believe. But so much of the Mormon Church hinges on the words of Joseph Smith and yet given he went to his grave denying he was a Polygamist isn't enough to question what he said at a funeral of a friend. I don't believe he mentioned a revelation. Lying is a big thing in the Mormon church i.e. 1890 Manifesto, Polygamy and so on. I mean where is the revelation about the information regarding the endowment? Oh yea, it doesn't exist.

[_Tobin]

It isn't as confusing as you like to pretend it is. If Joseph Smith did factually see and speak with God and God chose him, then he's a prophet of God. On the other hand, if none of that is true - then he's a complete fraud and a liar. So how do we know which it is? Easy. Ask God. After all, God supposedly spoke with him and revealed his will to Joseph Smith. If God is able to do that, he certainly can answer us if we wish to know.

[_DarkHelmet]

Joseph Smith was caught in a lot of lies and scams. He was caught cheating on his wife. Some of his "revelations" were canonized, others were not. The modern church has created a mythical Joseph Smith that is far from the documented, historical Joseph Smith. The real Joseph Smith was discredited long ago, while he was still alive because he was a liar, scammer, and serial adulterer who used his charisma to gain a religious following.

[_readtoomuch]

I don't need God to tell me Joseph Lied about Polygamy. I don't need God to tell me he married 14 year old girls or other men's wives. Yea if God would just tell me, he would tell me to get my ass out of the sand and see the world as it really is. I rejected Jim Jones and David Koresh on far less information. The problem is that there is so much that we know it isn't really hard to say "he really wasn't who he said he was" I have lived my whole life in the Church and I am just fed up with the untruthfulness of it all. I mean I believe in the Gospel and to the extent the church embraces it such as during the Sacrament meeting then ok. But there is so much reliable evidence that Joseph Smith is a fraud, I am not sure how anyone can believe. Oh yea I know........they don't know anything about Joseph Smith. As long as you live in the dark and can pretend the church is telling you the truth then you are OK

[Guest]

I don't need God ...

I'll stop you right there. That is the fundamental problem with the critics, such as yourself, on this forum. They don't need God!?! They won't speak with God. And they don't believe in God or believe in any kind of God that can answer them. The problem isn't Joseph Smith at all. The problem is your inability to seek and speak with God.

[_Gadianton]

it seems that I am not sure what to believe. I mean, did he write the revelations down? Was he telling the truth? Was he speculating? I mean I am confused. When someone is revealed to be a liar, what can you believe?

Take a couple steps back RTM and think about what we're talking about here. We're talking about some dude who claims to have met an immortal homo sapien and revealed a bunch of mumbo jumbo about eternity and cosmic this and that. Does it really matter if he carefully wrote down his ideas or if he had a history of lying, or if he had an impeccable character? When someone claims to have a revelation from God, you shake your head and move on. Maybe it's a good idea to mock the person and make a little fun, depending on how big of a moron the person is.

Joseph Smith's character and manner of revealing is secondary at most to the question of the truth of his revelations. For some reason honesty issues really hits members hard, probably because the Church has spent so much time concocting tales of purity about its leaders, but to me, this is the crack in the damn where the critical thinking starts not the final stake.

[_Tim the Enchanter]

readtoomuch, welcome. I enjoy reading your posts to the forum thus far. They echo my own thoughts a few years ago when I analyzed these issues and asked myself the same questions.

We were taught to take every word from the church leaders as if from the Lord's own mouth. I strived to do this. I extended this not just to the prophet, but my local leaders as well. My local leaders (stake president) even told me this was the correct interpretation of this verse in the D&C. And yet, come to find out, my trust in the church leaders was misplaced. Later, after I had discovered and analyzed all these issues, I met again with the stake president (a new stake president by this time) who wanted to know what the status of my testimony was. I explained to him the issues that troubled me. In response, he said he wished he could take out a piece of paper and explain where I was wrong but that he didn't know the issues like I did and had no interest in learning more about them.

This and other experiences lead me to conclude that the church is just not what it claims to be—which is the one true church on the earth with a prophet that will never lead the church astray. Is the church good? In some ways, yes. In some ways, no. Is the church full of good people? In my experience, yes (though there certainly some snakes in the grass like in every large group of people). Are the good people and the good that the church does enough to give it your continued devotion? Only you can answer that.

For me, I decided to be a pioneer. Just as generations ago my ancestors left the faith of their fathers to join with the Mormons and crossed the plains to Utah because they truly believed, I decided to do all I could to leave the faith of my fathers because I truly don't believe in it. It's funny how I identify with my pioneer ancestors more than ever these days. But it sure as hell ain't easy. I don't know your situation, but I'm married to a TBM with mostly TBM relatives and 4 kids. So it's not like flipping a light switch.

[_No_Hidden_Agenda]

I don't need God ...

I'll stop you right there. That is the fundamental problem with the critics, such as yourself, on this forum. They don't need God!?! They won't speak with God. And they don't believe in God or believe in any kind of God that can answer them. The problem isn't Joseph Smith at all. The problem is your inability to seek and speak with God.

Asked God, He said Joseph lied.

Musta done it wrong.

[_Tobin]

Asked God, He said Joseph lied.

Musta done it wrong.

If you want to lie before God, that is your problem. You can answer him when you stand before him to be judged.

[_cognitiveharmony]

One of my a-ha moments was when I realized that Joseph taught a quasi-trinitarian God for many years after his supposed first vision. If he in fact had seen Jesus Christ and God the Father the way that he describes in the official history, then there is absolutely no explanation for this other than he did NOT actually see God. There's no way around this. I probed this question deeper than any other during my exit from Mormonism because everything rested upon this fulcrum. If he saw God, then it's true, if not, a fraud. I found 0 evidence that he ever alluded to anything other than a quasi-trinitarian concept of God until at least the mid 1830's. Seeing the changes to the Book of Mormon in the 1837 edition regarding this very subject cemented it for me. Add to the this the multiple and often very different first vision accounts and I was left with one conclusion. The man I once looked up to was actually a sociopathic conman.