Joseph Smith's most breathtaking lie.

[_zeezrom]

Luckily, the modern prophets are more organized! Just imagine how amazing it would be if these more systematic leaders of today started writing scripture. Wow!

[_Darth J]

Hi Darth,

I don't think I can be quoted as saying that Joseph Smith didn't actively pursue secretive measures in Nauvoo in order to regulate the practice of polygamy to a restricted group of people.

The phrase you're looking for here is "lied about it so he didn't get caught."

That being said, I assert again...as I did earlier...that there was a lot of stuff going on during that time that presents a rather muddled picture to look at these many years later.

And that's a banal, undisputed assertion that fails to address the issue.

If things are just so muddled that you can't figure out what Joseph Smith was saying or doing, then you have no basis to be a Mormon. You know, since you're saying you can't be sure what he was saying or doing.

The above would be a problem if you were serious about your skepticism, but you're not. You're just handwaving to maintain your "rational faith paradigm." Viz.,

A) If the Church is true, then the Church is true.
B) The Church is true.
C) Therefore, the Church true.

Or the abridged version:

A) If the Church is not true, then my life is a lie.
B) Therefore, the Church is true.

[_Darth J]

Luckily, the modern prophets are more organized! Just imagine how amazing it would be if these more systematic leaders of today started writing scripture. Wow!

[_Darth J]

Maybe Joseph Smith was like the Druids. No one knows who he was...or what he was doing...but his legacy remains.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qAXzzHM8zLw

[_Darth J]

Just...Jesus H. Christ, "actively pursue secretive measures."

[_grindael]

Trying to claim that there was a lot of things going on is just a diversion from the real issue, whether Joseph lied about practicing polygamy. He ABSOLUTELY did. Here is Joseph in October (5th) of 1843:

Walked up and down St[reet] with Scribe and gave instructions to try those who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives on this Law. Joseph forbids it and the practice thereof. No man shall have but one wife. [rest of page blank] {page 116} (Scott H. Faulring, An American Prophet's Record, p.417)

A month later on November 2, 1843 he "married" Fanny Young. Three days later, Emma tried to poison him. (According to Brigham Young and others). Joseph had multiple wives at this time and months later when he claimed he could "find only one" and PROVE everyone a perjurer who claimed that it was true. Since Illinois did not recognize polygamy, Joseph was legally committing adultery with anyone he "married". There are others things that happened to prove this, (by Joseph himself no less). On June 12, 1842 Joseph Smith dictated to Hyrum Smith a binding Address from the First Presidency which contained specific commands to the Church concerning marriage:

Nauvoo.

To our well beloved brother, Parley P. Pratt, and to the elders of the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in England, and scattered abroad throughout all Europe, and to the Saints,Greeting:

Whereas, in times past persons have been permitted to gather with the Saints at Nauvoo, in North America—such as husbands leaving their wives and children behind; also, such as wives leaving their husbands and children behind; and such as women leaving their husbands, and such as husbands leaving their wives who have no children, and some because their companions are unbelievers. All this kind of proceeding we consider to be erroneous and for want of proper information. And the same should be taught to all the Saints, and not suffer families to be broken up on any account whatever if it be possible to avoid it. Suffer no man to leave his wife because she is an unbeliever, nor any woman to leave her husband because he is an unbeliever. These things are an evil and must be forbidden by the authorities of the church, or they will come under condemnation; for the gathering is not in haste nor by flight, but to prepare all things before you, and you know not but the unbeliever may be converted and the Lord heal him; but let the believers exercise faith in God, and the unbelieving husband shall be sanctified by the believing wife; and the unbelieving wife by the believing husband, and families are preserved and saved from a great evil which we have seen verified before our eyes.

Behold this is a wicked generation, full of lyings, and deceit, and craftiness; and the children of the wicked are wiser than the children of light; that is, they are more crafty; and it seems that it has been the case in all ages of the world. And the man who leaves his wife and travels to a foreign nation, has his mind overpowered with darkness, and Satan deceives him and flatters him with the graces of the harlot, and before he is aware he is disgraced forever: and greater is the danger for the woman that leaves her husband, and there are several instances where women have left their husbands, and [pg. 2] come to this place,& in a few weeks, or months, they have found themselves new husbands, and they are living in adultery; and we are obliged to cut them off from the church. I presume There are men also that are quilty of the same crime, as we are credibly informed. We are KNOWING to their having taken wives HERE and are CREDIBLY informed that they have wives in England. [Words in caps underlined in original, words in red deleted for the Millennial Star, view letter in Star, here https://mormonitemusings.files.wordpres ... -wives.jpg]

The evils resulting from such proceedings are of such a nature as to oblige us to cut them off from the church. [Not in original, but printed in the Millennial Star]

There is another evil which exists. There are poor men who come here and leave their families behind in a destitute situation, and beg for assistance to send back after their families. Every man should tarry with his family until providence provides for the whole, for there is no means here to be obtained to send back. Money is scarce and hard to be obtained. The people that gather to this place are generally poor, the gathering being attended with a great sacrifice; and money cannot be obtained by labour, but all kinds of produce is plentiful and can be obtained by labour; therefore the poor man that leaves his family in England, cannot get means, which must be silver and gold, to send for his family; but must remain under the painful sensation, that his family must be cast upon the mercy of the people, and separated and put into the poorhouse.

Therefore, to remedy the evil, we forbid a man to leave his family behind because he has no means to bring them. If the church is not able to bring them, and the parish will not send them, let the man tarry with his family—live with them—and die with them, and not leave them until providence shall open a way for them to come all together. And we also forbid that a woman leave her husband because he is an unbeliever. We also forbid that a man shall leave his wife because she is an unbeliever. If he be a bad man (i. e. the unbeliever) there is a law to remedy that evil. And if she be a bad woman, there is law to remedy that evil. And if the law will divorce them, then they are at liberty; [p. 3] otherwise they are bound as long as they two shall live, and it is not our prerogative to go beyond this; if we do it, it will be at the expense of our reputation.

These things we have written in plainness, and we desire that they should be publicly known, and request this to be published in the Millennial Star.

May the Lord bestow his blessing upon all the Saints richly, and hasten the gathering, and bring about the fulness of the everlasting covenant are the prayers of your brethren. [View Original letter here https://mormonitemusings.files.wordpres ... 2-1842.jpg]

The above states that Joseph Smith himself came “under condemnation” for the “evil” of “marrying” a woman that had a legal husband. Did Sylvia Sessions and many other of Smith's already married "wives" go before the High Council in Nauvoo and ask for a divorce? Where is the evidence for this? Where was Joseph’s authority to disobey this Address? Why write it and make it binding on the “Saints”, if he himself could disobey it at will?

This was a LIE by Joseph. It's not "messy", it's chaos. And Joseph's policy was to deny, deny, deny, by telling lies, lies, lies. The First Presidency Message expressly states,

…and greater is the danger for the woman that leaves her husband, and there are several instances where women have left their husbands, and [pg. 2] come to this place,& in a few weeks, or months, they have found themselves new husbands, and they are living in adultery; and we are obliged to cut them off from the church.

So by Joseph’s own First Presidency Message, he was living in adultery with any woman that he “married”, because he didn’t have the authority to break up their marriage or their family when they weren’t legally divorced. Please see my article here, for more information on this letter and Joseph's blatant adultery. http://mormonitemusings.com/2015/09/17/ ... ffidavits/

[_sock puppet]

It's curious that Joseph Smith would claim that the Nauvoo Expositor committed libel by saying that he had multiple wives. You know, since it's so unclear whether he denied having multiple wives.

Now if someone were seriously wondering whether Joseph Smith denied having multiple wives, what he would do is look at multiple sources, like the Nauvoo City council minutes, and his letter to Governor Ford, and his hiding plural marriages from Emma, and so on, and then see if this statement attributed to him is consistent with other sources. And he might even admit it's a moot point whether this specific statement was made, since there's cumulative evidence from other sources that independently establish Joseph Smith's lying.

But that's a person who was serious. Mentalgymnast has excluded himself from that category.

Hi Darth,

I don't think I can be quoted as saying that Joseph Smith didn't actively pursue secretive measures in Nauvoo in order to regulate the practice of polygamy to a restricted group of people. That being said, I assert again...as I did earlier...that there was a lot of stuff going on during that time that presents a rather muddled picture to look at these many years later.

Regards,
MG

Indeed, JSJr's Mormon god is a god of confusion. Not one of straightforward simplicity. No transparency with JSJr's Mormon god, nor JSJr for that matter.

[_sock puppet]

Everything that JSJr touched in his life became messy.

Stones that roll down mountains really do make messes.

Especially rough stones. Honorable mention goes to gall and kidney stones too.

[_mentalgymnast]

If things are just so muddled that you can't figure out what Joseph Smith was saying or doing, then you have no basis to be a Mormon. You know, since you're saying you can't be sure what he was saying or doing.

Hi Darth,

Thanks again for your enlightening exercise in showing my circular reasoning. Yep, that's all there is to me. Thanks for pointing that out again.

Anyway, by muddled, I mean that a person can...as you well know...take the word of this person or that person and make what you want out of it. As far as Joseph was concerned things weren't "muddled". Back to my first link:

https://archive.org/stream/TheWordsOfJo ... 5/mode/2up

Second from the last paragraph on pg. 376:

Joseph says... "I am innocent of all these charges."

and:

https://archive.org/stream/TheWordsOfJo ... n+wives%22

pg. 377. Second paragraph:

Joseph says: "I am the same man, and as innocent as I was fourteen years ago." "I labored with these apostates until I was out of all manner of patience..."

back to pg.376 and then again pg.377:
Why did William Law change his tune? What about this Jackson fellow...is he to be trusted? What is Jonathan Dunham's testimony worth? Esquires? Johnson? Wells? Hatfield? Are we to take Dr. Foster at his word? Is the Law's "clique" trustworthy?

There's where things get muddled. And then folks pick and choose which and whose testimony they're going to rely on as the default 'truth'.

I think that there is a lot of cherry picking that goes on. Both sides do it. One side tends to pick the word of the apostates and the other side the word of those that were faithful to the restoration narrative.

Regards,
MG

[_sock puppet]

Luckily, the modern prophets are more organized! Just imagine how amazing it would be if these more systematic leaders of today started writing scripture. Wow!

I think that they have. Just look at the 11/3/2015 additions to Handbook 1. That's the type of legally circumspect mischief that the modern prophets are capable of.