Peterson the historical skeptic

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

MG > jOsEpH wouldn't sEll tHe pLatES!

Joseph Smith > tries to sell the Book of Mormon

MG > jOsEpH lOvED eMmA!!

Joseph Smith > ****ed Fanny Alger, kids, and other men’s wives

[malkie]

I am saying it is not a stretch that Smith lied to Emma.

At what point in Joseph’s life did he go to the ‘dark side’? It must have been at a fairly young age for him to be lying to Emma BIG TIME as the time approached for the BIG CON of the Book of Mormon.

Can you point, let’s say, to a particular experience/time in his youth that ‘turned him’ so that by the time he was between 14-15 years old he had gone dark?

Surely it wasn’t reading James 1:5?

Regards,
MG

Hmmm, I never thought about it that way before, but, if pressed, my guess would be his initial tale about the first vision could have been a significant starting point.

After that, I believe that Shakespeare has the answer - he wove a tangled web, with ever more lies needed to support the ones already told.

Eventually he got to the point where he was deceiving the so-called love of his life, as has already been well attested to.

Just my opinion, of course, but thanks for the prompt.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

jOsePh wasn't lIkE oThEr pReAcHeRs!!



Yeah, he was worse.

- Doc

[canpakes]

Why are you determined to label Smith as an idiot?

Check out the JSP. Tell me how what you see there squares with your determination to cast Smith as an idiot.

We’re talking about Joseph’s early years leading up to and including the Book of Mormon translation period.

Ah. After that time is when he must have attended night school and obtained his masters degree, so that must be what changed things as regards the record of the JSP.

He wasn’t an idiot. You know that I don’t think that. But Emma verifies that he was in no wise a savant either.

I’m left wondering what resources or examples Emma drew upon to determine how Joseph should be assessed.

How about just calling him a talented/creative author? What’s with insisting on limiting the possibilities to some sort of behavioral or intellectual extreme?

So you’re left back at square one. How did Joseph do what he did at such a young age and under the circumstances he was living in?

He was an excellent storyteller.

Really, it doesn’t take much more than that. Heck, you can even just be a mediocre story teller, and develop a fan base. You might not even need a story at all. Maybe a person just manages to convince a few others that he’s a prophet; that’s all that it takes to start a following. It still happens in the modern day. Check out Apollo Quiboloy in the Philippines, or our own stateside Johnny Enlow, who fashions himself as a modern-day evangelical prophet (as in, he IS a mouthpiece of THE LORD), and even as virtually all of his ‘prophecy’ ends up being wrong, he still has tens of thousands of followers who hang on to his every word … and not even because he tells a good story. Rather, because he tells them something that they want to believe.

You just have to find the right audience.

Check in with Denver Snuffer, even. How do you reconcile the fact of his backers believing what he has to say?

I think we may be moving into the ‘talking in circles’ phase of this discussion.

We usually always get there sooner or later. : D

[Gadianton]

Check in with Denver Snuffer, even. How do you reconcile the fact of his backers believing what he has to say?

Especially given they will rank Joseph Smith higher on the infallibility meter than the average member.

[master_dc]

interesting thread thus far.

MG, I think the issues that you need to address are as follows:

• People make up stories and publish them all the time, of all ages, what is so unique about Joseph?

• What impact does having scribes (like Cowdery) have on adding some form of "polish" to the manuscript?

• Some of the questions have been "why would Joseph put Emma through any of this, especially when she was so pregnant?" Do you find this type of behavior, even today, plausible?

When I read your comments I am reminded that we, as people, tend to conflate plausible with possible. What is the likelihood that someone in Josephs situation could co-create (he had scribes) the Book of Mormon? if that is greater than 0%, the outcome is expected in rare occasions. It just happened to be Joseph. Some "miraculous" events come down to this.

[consiglieri]

Why are you determined to label Smith as an idiot?

Check out the JSP. Tell me how what you see there squares with your determination to cast Smith as an idiot.

We’re talking about Joseph’s early years leading up to and including the Book of Mormon translation period. He wasn’t an idiot. You know that I don’t think that. But Emma verifies that he was in no wise a savant either.

So you’re left back at square one. How did Joseph do what he did at such a young age and under the circumstances he was living in?

https://interpreterfoundation.org/estim ... vidence-1/

I think we may be moving into the ‘talking in circles’ phase of this discussion.

Regards,
MG

Moving into?

[doubtingthomas]

How did Joseph do what he did at such a young age and under the circumstances he was living in?

Doesn't mean he was incompetent. Pious fraud?

[MG 2.0]

interesting thread thus far.

MG, I think the issues that you need to address are as follows:

• 1. People make up stories and publish them all the time, of all ages, what is so unique about Joseph?

• 2. What impact does having scribes (like Cowdery) have on adding some form of "polish" to the manuscript?

• 3. Some of the questions have been "why would Joseph put Emma through any of this, especially when she was so pregnant?" Do you find this type of behavior, even today, plausible?

When I read your comments I am reminded that we, as people, tend to conflate plausible with possible. What is the likelihood that someone in Josephs situation could co-create (he had scribes) the Book of Mormon? if that is greater than 0%, the outcome is expected in rare occasions. It just happened to be Joseph. Some "miraculous" events come down to this.

1. Restoration instead of renewal. A new dispensation of priestly/God given authority to perform saving ordinances and administration of covenantal relationships that bind.
2. Not a whole lot. Oliver wrote down what Joseph said. The ‘work’ was what came from Joseph’s lips.
3. Not sure what you’re asking. The fact was she was pregnant and had a miscarriage whilst all the hullabaloo was occurring. Joseph was caught between a rock and a hard place. So was Emma. She is the one that encouraged her husband to get on the road to the Harris place to see what was going on.

In regards to your other question, I think it was Dan Vogel that said Joseph was the ‘main man’ during the translation. Not much, if any, help from the scribes. Although Emma may have wanted to engage more, haha. She had to write down everything he said without her interjection/ correction.

I suppose you could take the position that Joseph was that ‘one in a million’ that just happened to do what he did with the idea of promoting the ‘long con’. I see that as being more unlikely than actually relying on what he said happened, etc.

There were just too many instances where it would have been easier for him to say, “You know what? This con isn’t worth it. Tar and feathers for one thing. Not cool. Let’s call it a day and move on.” But he didn’t. Right up until he left this world at Carthage.

Regards,
MG

[canpakes]

There were just too many instances where it would have been easier for him to say, “You know what? This con isn’t worth it. Tar and feathers for one thing. Not cool. Let’s call it a day and move on.” But he didn’t. Right up until he left this world at Carthage.

Tar and feathers clean up pretty well after a few days.

Farm work is forever.