DiscussMormonism.com

Posted: **Tue Jul 28, 2015 5:15 pm**

I know I am going to regret this but Ldsfaqs, in your opinion, if DNA research showed Josephine Lyon (or someone else not born to Emma) as fathered by Joseph Smith, would that be:
1. Information damaging to the church
2. Information that the church would embrace and be proud of, or
3. Completely irrelevant to how Joseph Smith's standing as a prophet?

Please, I am not asking if you believe it will show he fathered children by other women, only how you would view irrefutable evidence that he did.

Posted: **Tue Jul 28, 2015 5:16 pm**

I have a question wrote:How could he, he was dead.[?]

The Church has sway with Ancestry.com, why aren't they helping one of their own gain access?

Well, when someone dies, their property typically gets left to someone else. Did Sorensen give it to Ancestry.com? How did it get there? I don't see any indication that the church ever owned it. Is that the case? You stated that the church sold it to Ancestry.com. I don't see that the church ever owned it.

Now the church may have put pressure on someone to make it go away like this but that is different than what you said happened. For the record, I do not think that the church wants this testing to happen because it would be very embarrassing to have proof of sexual polyandry, which the church most definitely does not want. I think it would be highly likely that they would exert pressure to get this buried, but let's not overstate the facts by saying that the church sold something that they never owned.

Posted: **Tue Jul 28, 2015 5:29 pm**

ldsfaqs wrote:
DarkHelmet wrote:That's just the Mormon paranoid persecution complex. If there is a God he gave you this thing called a brain, and one of the amazing functions of the human brain is it can take a bunch of facts and then form conclusions. When people put the facts together in their mind and come to the conclusion that Joseph Smith made it all up (as the vast majority of people do), that's not an evil anti-mormon conspiracy. It's just people using their brains to make informed decisions.

Actually you are wrong as usual, for there are two factors.....

1. There are the gullible who are new to a subject who don't use their brains "enough" who just believe what they are told, not seeing the full, accurate and truthful facts.

Then....

2. There are those who are learned who use their brains, but because of their bigotry and intolerance also only see what they want to see, rather than the full facts and truth that would change their conclusions if they were actually objective. These persons also misrepresent, distort, etc. things in order to support their false and bigoted conclusions.

Most anti-mormons on this forum for example fall into the second category.
You guys have some intelligence, but not enough, and/or your bigotry stops you from seeing things and facts.
I've demonstrated many times on this forum showing you all things you don't see and ignore to make your conclusions, and anti-mormons still don't see them, and thus don't improve and learn. Your bigotry blocks all learning. Your glass is full, so you're incapable of seeing anything else.

So, yes, everyone uses their "brains", however not everyone uses their brains wisely, objectively, free of bigotry, efficiently, accurately, as well as in both study AND experience to truly understand, and also take a suject and put the two sides side by side and compare (still with an objective and fair mind), to see who is really telling the truth on a statement, subject, conclusion, etc.

So, the issue is far more complex than you think.
In fact, I'll give you a public and practical example of my point.

----

For years after 9/11 the media had been saying there were no WMD's in Iraq, and that Sadaam did not support terrorists.
I had seen this, over and over again, and this was also after the 9/11 Report. However, given that I'm not one to just accept what I'm told, I happened to have been listening to "The Rusty Humphries show" for a while. I was lucky, because on that show the host would sometimes interview current and former Military personal and even the top leaders who had worked at Guantanamo Bay, and also been involved and had information related to the WMD search. It was clear hearing these interviews that what the media was claiming of Guantanamo and WMD's was not the truth, and was not accurate. But, this only sparked my interest, again, I wasn't just going to believe what I was told.

So, it came time in which enough time had gone by that whatever the truth was, it should be out there.
So, I Googled WMD's in Iraq, Sadaam Terrorist connections in Iraq, etc. etc.
I spent a couple of days doing this.
Almost every article (all news articles) for pages and pages of Google, including the 9/11 report were all saying there were no WMD's, and no terrorist supporting by Sadaam. However, I started to find articles which listed various evidences of WMD's and terrorist support. I also started finding actual Military and other official Documents and reports indicating WMD's and terrorist support.
Basically this is what I found.....

- Sadaam was in fact engaging in large scale support of terrorist group activity's on his soil. (enemy of my enemy is my friend kind of thing)
- MOST WMD's had been shipped to Syria just prior to the War starting.
- Large stashes of WMD's WERE in fact found, though only a few.
- Large stashes of the "ingredients" required and specific for making WMD's WERE also found.

Now, these were not simply "opinion" articles from some conservative websites or something. In fact, most of the solid material I found wasn't even found on conservative websites, but in fact document dump websites. So, this was not made up bulldonkey, it was the actual and full truth and facts.

Yet, what have we ALL been told, and even the conservative side really hasn't said much on?
That there were no WMD's, and no terrorist support.
Thus, that narrative, that the entire world believes, is an absolute LIE.

And let me be clear..... I don't follow "conspiracy's". I'm not an Alex Jones supporter that believes his 9/11 conspiracy's, Bilderberg, etc.
I hate the guy, because of that and he also lies about conservatives taking liberal talking points in some things. He does a LOT of good in many things, but he ruins it by his also nut job and false views.

So, that's the deal.... It's the absolute truth. I learned if for myself, and I'm not lying at all.
Now, you might ask me to "prove it". But, I can't, because like all of my study, I study things out for myself and then move to the next thing.
I don't study sadley to be a "scholar", to write in depth articles proving things, as well I don't "collect" information. In hindesight, I wish I had done these two things, especially on the blacks and the priesthood issue because of what I learned 20 years ago when I was restudying the church again, and resolved that issue (and a couple others) and reconverted. But, such is life, we all have our interests and talents. My primary skills resided in Music and the Physical/Educational.

So, there you go...... Absolute truth.

Wow. Interesting read. And you were able to post it relatively quickly, like all these ideas are bouncing around in your head. At the risk of psycho-analyzing, this really helps me understand the thinking processes of ldsfaqs. I have brother who posts similar rants on Facebook, and I've been thinking about him a lot recently, and why he feels the need to ignore mainstream, conventional ideas and cling to fringe beliefs. He also talks down on the masses, calling us sheeple who are too dumb and lazy to find the truth. He posts "evidence" for his position while ignoring the mountains of evidence that disprove his position because it comes from the "liars" in the mass media and only "sheeple" would believe that. I can understand the excitement of being part of a small and elite group of smart people who know the real truth, and I think that helps explain the appeal of Mormon apologetics.

But this thread is about Joseph Smith's DNA, not liberals and WMD conspiracy theories.

Posted: **Tue Jul 28, 2015 6:08 pm**

Maybe Ugo is a sly fox and upset with his golden parachute ride to Italy. And imagine the Church not being behind something Dan is ... oh my.

But wait, if I remember right ... Ugo found that William Schryver was a descendant, or was that he was a descendant of Hugh N?

Wonder what ever happened to Will?

Posted: **Tue Jul 28, 2015 7:05 pm**

fetchface wrote:
I have a question wrote:How could he, he was dead.[?]

The Church has sway with Ancestry.com, why aren't they helping one of their own gain access?

Well, when someone dies, their property typically gets left to someone else. Did Sorensen give it to Ancestry.com? How did it get there? I don't see any indication that the church ever owned it. Is that the case? You stated that the church sold it to Ancestry.com. I don't see that the church ever owned it.

Now the church may have put pressure on someone to make it go away like this but that is different than what you said happened. For the record, I do not think that the church wants this testing to happen because it would be very embarrassing to have proof of sexual polyandry, which the church most definitely does not want. I think it would be highly likely that they would exert pressure to get this buried, but let's not overstate the facts by saying that the church sold something that they never owned.

Fair enough.

Posted: **Tue Jul 28, 2015 7:09 pm**

It really seems like a no-win for the church. Either Joseph Smith did father kids and the apologists look like fools, or it is proved he did not, and every prophet since Joseph Smith through Grant look like idiots. The apologists, like LDSfaqs, conveniently forget all those prophet statements, the Smoot hearings, and the testimonials from Joseph Smith own wives.

Posted: **Tue Jul 28, 2015 8:04 pm**

Fence Sitter wrote:I know I am going to regret this but Ldsfaqs, in your opinion, if DNA research showed Josephine Lyon (or someone else not born to Emma) as fathered by Joseph Smith, would that be:
1. Information damaging to the church
2. Information that the church would embrace and be proud of, or
3. Completely irrelevant to how Joseph Smith's standing as a prophet?

Please, I am not asking if you believe it will show he fathered children by other women, only how you would view irrefutable evidence that he did.

I have always stated that it was "possible" he might have been intimate with other women.

As to my response, since I've already been an anti-mormon, I'm now more informed of who Joseph fully was, so IF he did in fact have "relations" with some of his sealed wives, I would first look if they were the "Time and Eternity" ones, not simply the Eternity ones.
If they were Eternity only, then he would have sinned.
If they were Time also, then his actions would have been lawful, but potentially not "honest" in relation to his wife, IF in fact she never knew he had relations with any as she seems to have always claimed. So, that would be between him and his wife and God.

Bottom line, is I wouldn't be effected at all, because I know that even the best of men that have ever lived on this planet can sometimes have their own "crosses" to bear, and sometimes are not perfect in stopping them.
Me for example, as good, loving, understand and knowledgable in doing and knowing good and evil, standing only for the good, I have some imperfection myself, some that I strive to control, some I don't control enough. But, they are mostly "personal" that don't effect others, so while I'm not perfect, I'm trying to do what I can as anyone.

I also know the Prophet's history in many other ways, thus I know he also was a good man, a man who strived to follow God, and was a Prophet of God. I know in scripture Prophets and Apostles have been imperfect, and errored.

So, in answer to your question, what is important to me is the WHOLE TRUTH.... and context of things.
I don't expert perfection, but there is no better faith, no better religion..... I've studied other faiths, and there mostly isn't a one that is even close to as good in many things, but especially as good as a people in general. It was in fact one of the first things that attracted me to the church over other religions. Mormons were still human, but they truly strived to actually live their faith, sometimes imperfectly, but they were and are true examples of what a True Religion, it's people would look and behave like, but yet not also act "brainwashed" like the Jesus Freaks.

Posted: **Tue Jul 28, 2015 8:24 pm**

DarkHelmet wrote:Wow. Interesting read. And you were able to post it relatively quickly, like all these ideas are bouncing around in your head. At the risk of psycho-analyzing, this really helps me understand the thinking processes of ldsfaqs. I have brother who posts similar rants on Facebook, and I've been thinking about him a lot recently, and why he feels the need to ignore mainstream, conventional ideas and cling to fringe beliefs. He also talks down on the masses, calling us sheeple who are too dumb and lazy to find the truth. He posts "evidence" for his position while ignoring the mountains of evidence that disprove his position because it comes from the "liars" in the mass media and only "sheeple" would believe that. I can understand the excitement of being part of a small and elite group of smart people who know the real truth, and I think that helps explain the appeal of Mormon apologetics.

But this thread is about Joseph Smith's DNA, not liberals and WMD conspiracy theories.

Like I said, I'm not a conspiracy fringe nut, so if you think you understanding me some is understanding your brother, you might be mistaken.
I did however research a subject until I really found all the facts of the issue to make a proper judgment.
LIke I said, I had to go through some 20-30 pages or something of Google on a subject before I started finding the evidences that clearly demonstrated that there WERE in fact WMD's and Sadaam supported Terrorist groups etc.
Do you think most other people are going to study 20-30 pages of Google Material to make sure they are finding ALL the facts?
Nope.....

I do this with just about every subject..... anti-mormons have also helped me do so.
That's why LDS sometimes say they like anti-mormonism. It's because you all force us to look DEEPER into a subject to find the actual and full truth and facts, because we aren't interested in "settling" for your negative judgment. It's entirely why we can know the same things you do, and yet not believe them. It's not because we ignore the bad like you believe (put on shelf like you believe). It's entirely because we SIMPLY KNOW MORE...... thus are Conclusions on an issue are based on a better "sample size" you could say.

Also, I don't "ignore" things that contradicte my position. Like I said, I simply know MORE, which makes the contradictory things demonstratably false, or a non-issue. Like, if Joseph did in fact have sex, it would be really a non-issue because of what else I know.
Other things anti-mormons claim, are demonstratebly false...... Taking facts out of their context, misrepresenting facts, or just outright lying..... Thus, you believing we "ignore" things might be true for the average person who doesn't engage in Church/Historical intellectual pursuits, but it's NOT true for the rest of us. We directly engage your claims, and find out the actual truth, and 99% of the time, your claims are simply utterly false.

I posted a link to a MormonThink article that FAIR analyzed the other day.
Only 14% of the Facts alone the MormonThink article stated was the actual fact and truth.
Of course, that's not counting the "conclusions" from such facts. Anti-mormons inlcuding MormonThinks "conclusions" would be likely around 99% False. Which is why you've seen me likely say that many times. Yes, not all facts anti's claims are false, but nearly all of their conclusions certainly are.

I and the rest of us, are simply people who love the truth and right.
We are not "excited" about doing Apologetics. In fact, it's tiring. We would rather be doing something else.
We would be fine if people simply disagreed. I wouldn't be here if that's all that occured.
But, the lying and misrepersenting in 99% of what people say is simply Evil, it's Bigotry at it's base.
So, that why most of us do what we do...... Not standing against evil is allowing evil to win.

Posted: **Tue Jul 28, 2015 8:29 pm**

cwald wrote:It really seems like a no-win for the church. Either Joseph Smith did father kids and the apologists look like fools, or it is proved he did not, and every prophet since Joseph Smith through Grant look like idiots. The apologists, like LDSfaqs, conveniently forget all those prophet statements, the Smoot hearings, and the testimonials from Joseph Smith own wives.

I don't know how apologists like me are "fools" for simply stating that Joseph "may" have had sex according to the evidence, because the evidence clearly shows both are possible, that he didn't have sex, or that he did.
It's only Anti's who jump YES HE DID when the evidence is unreliable. We've never said he "did not for sure have sex". You just falsely think we've said that, like you falsely claim of everything else.

Further, Anti's have been proven fools for years now by LDS scholarship, 100's of arguments most of you now no longer use that have been debunked that even you bigots can't argue against, and many more that you still ignore and have yet to figure out you have been debunked on.

You haven't proved us "fools" yet. The Book of Mormon for example is only being proven true, not false. 100's of things anti's said a 100 years ago proved the Book of Mormon false, now science has proven as true.
Before DNA for example you tried to use "body typing study's" against the Book of Mormon and Church positions, yet when DNA came along, I didn't even bat an eye, because it was the same false and stupid arguments that I had long before debunked, you were simply now using a new gun or bullets to spray.

Posted: **Tue Jul 28, 2015 8:55 pm**

ldsfaqs wrote: since I've already been an anti-mormon, I'm now more informed of who Joseph fully was

QFT

DiscussMormonism.com

Ugo Perego and the Case of the Missing DNA

Re: Ugo Perego and the Case of the Missing DNA

Re: Ugo Perego and the Case of the Missing DNA

Re: Ugo Perego and the Case of the Missing DNA

Re: Ugo Perego and the Case of the Missing DNA

Re: Ugo Perego and the Case of the Missing DNA

Re: Ugo Perego and the Case of the Missing DNA

Re: Ugo Perego and the Case of the Missing DNA

Re: Ugo Perego and the Case of the Missing DNA

Re: Ugo Perego and the Case of the Missing DNA

Re: Ugo Perego and the Case of the Missing DNA