Page 10 of 13

Re: Bill Reel v. Apologist Jim Bennett

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 4:20 pm
by _Shulem
grindael wrote:In Part IV they discuss polygamy. Right off the bat it is obvious that Bennett doesn't know what he's talking about. He claims that Cowdery admitted to the High Council that Joseph didn't commit adultery. That's absolutely wrong, Cowdery was never there. He was not "called before the council" at all.


Yeah but you have to admit that Bennett didn't hold back in expressing his concerns and dislikes about how Smith behaved. I thought it was telling. I'm not faulting Bennett for getting some things wrong because obviously he knows a lot about this subject and is willing to go on the record. I respect that and appreciate his effort in defending these things in a public setting. How many other apologists are there that are willing to step up to the plate and do this? The man has courage.

Re: Bill Reel v. Apologist Jim Bennett

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:05 pm
by _grindael
The problem is, is that Joseph distanced himself from any "folk magic". He claims religious motivation for the claimed 1820 vision, then claims he messed up, and "repented" (the money digging) and that then, an angel appeared and forgave him too, and he was all goody-goody from thereon in and he was being taught by the angel every year how to run God's kingdom.

(But what was he doing? Messing around with "folk magic" (which they claim is part of Christianity) and conning people out of their money... and even gets arrested, and the Smith's testify and don't mention Joseph's great calling or anything about this great religious narrative at all... and God also told Smith too, to "go not after" ANY OF IT.) So he disobeys God and the angel. So using or training with folk magic would have been wrong also.

That whole faithful narrative story is a fantasy. And, when Joseph starts his church - he uses the stone for a bit, but it goes bye bye, and anyone who uses a stone or does any kind of "folk magic" is condemned.

You can't have it both ways. But they sure try to.

Re: Bill Reel v. Apologist Jim Bennett

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:10 pm
by _Kishkumen
grindael wrote:The problem is, is that Joseph distanced himself from any "folk magic". He claims religious motivation for the claimed 1820 vision, then claims he messed up, and "repented" (the money digging) and that then, an angel appeared and forgave him too, and he was all goody-goody from thereon in and he was being taught by the angel every year how to run God's kingdom.

(But what was he doing? Messing around with "folk magic" (which they claim is part of Chritianity) and God told Smith too, to "go not after" ANY OF IT.) So he disobeys God and the angel.

That whole faithful narrative story is a fantasy. And, when Joseph starts his church - he uses the stone for a bit, but it goes bye bye, and anyone who uses a stone or does any kind of "folk magic" is condemned.

You can't have it both ways. But they sure try to.


It seems Joseph Smith did try to have it both ways. The relics of the Church Patriarch were the magical parchments they used in treasure digging back in New York. The last Patriarch was schlepping them around and showing them to people, explaining their priesthood significance almost until the day he passed away in 2013.

Re: Bill Reel v. Apologist Jim Bennett

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:15 pm
by _grindael
And Smith Sr. was organizing and going on treasure hunts in Kirtland, like the ones with the James Brewster family. Claiming that he has been doing it for "thirty years" and was an expert. And of course there is Jr's treasure hunt to Salem in 1836 which failed but produced a "revelation" claiming they would get all the gold and silver of Salem.

Re: Bill Reel v. Apologist Jim Bennett

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:20 pm
by _grindael
They should have just owned the treasure hunting years and years ago, like Brigham Young, and Porter Rockwell, the Beaman's and others did. Their stories from the late 1800's are full of folk magic and the "treasure of Cumorah".

All that was swept under the rug and Joseph's made up narrative was adopted. And yet, Young and others condemned the Godbeites, who believed in the same stuff. It's all "there can be only one" BS, and folk magic just doesn't work that way. See, Young had to split it, that there were "natural prophets" who had some talent, and that Joseph was one of those, hence didn't need the Priesthood right away. But once the Priesthood comes along, everything else is from Satan, and all of a sudden all the natural seers can't do anything. That was the end of the "peep-stone women" and others in Utah.

Re: Bill Reel v. Apologist Jim Bennett

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:27 pm
by _grindael
Respected sir I would in form you that I arrived at home on sunday morning the 4th. after having a prosperous journy, and found all well the people are all friendly to <​us​> except a few who are in opposition to evry thing unless it is something that is axactly like themselves and two of our most formadable persacutors are now under censure and are cited to a tryal trial in the church for crimes which if true are worse than all the Gold Book business... (Smith to Cowdery, Oct. 1829)


Not so much persecution, was there in the midst of Palmyra prior to the publication of the Book of Mormon.

Re: Bill Reel v. Apologist Jim Bennett

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:43 pm
by _Kishkumen
I think you are right when you argue that Smith was monopolizing power by rejecting the magic of others.

Re: Bill Reel v. Apologist Jim Bennett

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 5:52 pm
by _grindael
That's the thing. Any practicing of "magic" was stepping on SOMEONE'S toes. In the 1902 Conference John W. Taylor decried the "peep stone women" who were looking in stones and telling fortunes and things about future mates ... this ticked off the Patriarchs, who had their "blessings" which were to do something like that. Taylor actually tells them to go to the Patriarchs to get information on future partners, but they never gave out information like that. It was all boring lineage stuff and so religious. No wonder people loved the peep stone shows. So it wasn't just the leader of the church that was being wronged, it was just about anyone with the Priesthood. What, that regular person can dowse and find wells and silver and stuff, and I can't with my priesthood. We must put a stop to that. It would have been out of place for God to tell Smith in 1820 to use magic. In fact, Smith said God told him ALL WAS WRONG... and since the apologists say magic and religion were so inseparable, well, they just can't have it both ways, even though they desperately want to.

Re: Bill Reel v. Apologist Jim Bennett

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 6:08 pm
by _grindael
How do apologists account for this timeline:

1820 - Joseph sees God and Jesus who tell him to go not after ANY religion or listen to anyone, they are ALL CORRUPT
1821? - Goes to Pennsylvania border and finds white stone - trained with dowsing rod by Sr.?
1822 - Borrows Chase stone - begins scrying, etc.
1823 - Sees Angel Moroni - tells him to quit money digging is forgiven sins becomes Methodist Exhorter, (around this time) joins debating club, etc. continues to look for buried treasure
1824 - Visit to Cumorah - says instructed by angel on how to run kingdom, continues to look for buried treasure and find lost items, practicing magic
1825 - Visit to Cumorah - says instructed by angel on how to run kingdom - continues moneydigging
1826 - Visit to Cumorah - says instructed by angel on how to run kingdom - continues to search for treasure and scry, gets arrested, etc.
1827 - Visit to Cumorah - continues to look for buried treasure and scry, (fall of 26) and even promises Samuel Lawrence he knows how to scry location of mine in Harmony if he introduced him to Emma, has introduction, but can't find mine for Lawrence (early 27) and stiffs Lawrence on the expenses of the trip, promises to be his servant but breaks promise, Moves to Palmyra continues to drink and brag about talents, look for treasure, then claims to get plates in Sept. 27

1828-29 - Uses stolen peepstone to "translate" Book of Mormon. Has problems with Emma and father... Tries to join Methodist Church but is rejected, goes back to "translating", Harris loses manuscript, starts over with Cowdery and finishes it.

He was using folk magic as a "prophet-in-training"? Not what Smith claimed and not what he did. He was trying to make money doing it. The same thing the angel supposedly condemned him for so he could not get plates. How did Joseph really get them, since he was still doing the same things when the angel supposedly gave them to him?

Re: Bill Reel v. Apologist Jim Bennett

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2019 7:38 pm
by _Shulem
grindael's on a roll! Kishy weighing in too.

:lol:

I've still got Part 6 to do. Loving it.

Makes me wonder who is going to be the first apologist on Doctor Scratch's list that will have the balls to step up to the plate and face Bill Reel.

Get your tickets!

:wink: