DiscussMormonism.com

Response to Hales, by Jeremy & Johnny

https://mormonitemusings.com/2018/08/27 ... my-part-i/

Who does that strange artwork on Mormonitemusings?

Wow, just takin em to the woodshed Grindael. It's what I love the most, is your trenchant and persistent going at the issue and toe to toe. This was just a great read! I loved every minute of it. It shows that in dialogue we all could do better, but the apologists are truly vastly too guilty of just slinging and slander and goo gaw when it comes to dialoging. Keep up the great research. It is very helpful. I think the one thing that shines out strongest is that apologetic attempts at intimidating just doesn't work.

Philo,

And you haven't got to the good parts yet! This long, tediously researched essay is packed full of stuff. And the last part has more of what Hales was up to in trying to vilify those who do not agree with him. There was actually an article he wrote about John Dehlin being a wolf in sheeps clothing and and "anti-mormon". He took it down, but we have the archive. All that because John would not use or refer to Hales' research in one of his podcasts. And going after the dead Richard Van Wagoner and calling my friend Grant Palmer a plagiarist. Thing is, Hales and Gregory Smith both plagiarized Van Wagoner and I show how they did it, using the same stuff they accused Grant of using. (And they blocked me from commenting on the Interpreter when I did so) The hypocrisy, double standards, it is all par for the course. We put a lot of original documents in the essay (coming in later installments), along with lots of other good stuff.

Brian Hales wrote:It appears that plural marriage is gospel meat that can only be understood by those who have sufficiently prepared themselves in faith and knowledge.

Wow, just wow. What an idiotic and stupid statement. I think Brian Hale's has had his brain fried by the CULT. This kind of statement is utterly FALSE and goes to show that Hales can't be trusted with anything -- he will lie, cheat, and steal in order to preserve his testimony. Wicked!

It appears that plural marriage is gospel meat that can only be understood by those who have sufficiently prepared themselves in faith and knowledge. ~Brian Hales

Start out with a heaping teaspoon of special pleading................

So, in order for a person to UNDERSTAND plural marriage as practiced by Joseph Smith they have to have FAITH! You have to accept it on FAITH and trust that the Lord and his prophet got things right. But remember, faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things, it's just putting your trust in something that you may not fully understand or see. There is a big difference between knowledge and faith. But Hales wants you to have faith that precedes knowledge. The knowledge Hales wants you to have is that your faith in Smith's polygamy is justified no matter what because Joseph was a prophet. Kind of like Abraham was justified in slitting his son's throat because he was a prophet and God told him to do it even though he didn't really have to.

Wow, just wow. Who said Mormonism isn't a CULT?

grindael wrote:Philo,

And you haven't got to the good parts yet! This long, tediously researched essay is packed full of stuff. And the last part has more of what Hales was up to in trying to vilify those who do not agree with him. There was actually an article he wrote about John Dehlin being a wolf in sheeps clothing and and "anti-mormon". He took it down, but we have the archive. All that because John would not use or refer to Hales' research in one of his podcasts. And going after the dead Richard Van Wagoner and calling my friend Grant Palmer a plagiarist. Thing is, Hales and Gregory Smith both plagiarized Van Wagoner and I show how they did it, using the same stuff they accused Grant of using. (And they blocked me from commenting on the Interpreter when I did so) The hypocrisy, double standards, it is all par for the course. We put a lot of original documents in the essay (coming in later installments), along with lots of other good stuff.

Yeah it was an interest lead up but I'm intrigued by what might be coming.

Stem,

The roots of polygamy run deep and are into everything. We cover a lot of topics, and chose to footnote things extensively, and like I explained, many of them are essays in their own right, some thirty or forty pages long. If you read my William Law vs. Joseph Smith thread, I lifted that from one of the notes to this. We literally spent years researching this and updating it with information we learned over time. Hales also made his research available and we went though every bit of it. (I kid you not). What was baffling was how Hales presented the evidence in his books, leaving out things, (partial quotes of documents), this we do not do. Part I was the shortest of the parts, and Part Two is over four hundred pages, (with documents, pictures, many of which take up a whole page), and so there will be a lot for people to study and digest. Unfortunately, the length of it made progress slow and it's a real task to get it online. We linked to EVERYTHING we could find, conference reports, Journal of Discourses, the CHL, all provided so people can read the originals in context.