"I have more to boast of than ever any man had."

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
User avatar
sock puppet
Valiant A
Posts: 173
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2021 9:29 pm

"I have more to boast of than ever any man had."

Post by sock puppet »

On May 26, 1844, Joseph Smith gave a sermon on board the Maid of Iowa (a steamboat on the Mississippi River). The sermon is full of gems. The least of which is not this one: "I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I. The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet. You know my daily walk and conversation. I am in the bosom of a virtuous and good people.” (History of the Church 6:408-409)

As some of you may recall, Daniel Peterson decided to tackle this stinky turd almost 8 years ago now in a piece he penned for the Deseret News. https://www.deseret.com/2014/9/4/205477 ... r-boastful
Daniel Peterson wrote:First, the context: Joseph was applying a passage from the apostle Paul (2 Corinthians 11-12) to his own perilous situation. The idea of “boasting” wasn't Joseph’s; it was Paul’s. The critics typically forget that.
Paul boasted. True enough. But in quite different ways and contexts than did Joseph Smith. Paul wrote in 2 Cor. 11:10 "As the truth of Christ is in me, no man shall stop me of this boasting in the regions of Achaia." In 2 Cor. 11:16-17 "I say again, Let no man think me a fool; if otherwise, yet as a fool receive me, that I may boast myself a little. That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting." In 2 Cor. 12:9-11, "Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong. I am become a fool in glorying; ye have compelled me: for I ought to have been commended of you: for in nothing am I behind the very chiefest apostles, though I be nothing."

Paul boasted of Christ, not after the Lord, glorying in that "the power of Christ may rest upon" Paul, taking pleasure in his own distresses "for Christ's sake:... ." Joseph Smith arrogated and elevated his 'achievement' over even that of Jesus: that he, Smith, had done what 'Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did...The followers of Jesus ran away from Him; but the Latter-day Saints never ran away from me yet." (Never mind that 8 months earlier, at the October 1843 general conference, the Saints rebuffed Joseph Smith's request of them to boot Sidney Rigdon out of the First Presidency.)
Daniel Peterson wrote:Second, Joseph seems actually to be praising his followers’ faithfulness, not himself.
Never mind, huh, Daniel, the sentences from the History of the Church, "I have more to boast of than ever any man had. I am the only man that has ever been able to keep a whole church together since the days of Adam. A large majority of the whole have stood by me. Neither Paul, John, Peter, nor Jesus ever did it. I boast that no man ever did such a work as I." He was claiming that the Saints stood by him, but Joseph Smith was boasting that as his accomplishment, and juxtaposing that against Jesus.
Daniel Peterson wrote:Third, Joseph didn’t write the quotation; it was reconstructed after his death. Thus, it almost certainly doesn’t represent his precise words. Even “History of the Church” (often called the “Documentary History”) says that it rests upon a "synopsis" by Thomas Bullock.

Joseph delivered the sermon on May 26, 1844. A month later, he was dead. So did he supervise or approve this entry? No. Entries in the “History of the Church” for at least his last five years were actually made by others, after his assassination.
How does Daniel know that the May 26, 1844 sermon was not supervised or approved by Joseph Smith in the month from May 26, 1844 until he died on June 27, 1844? This is a very detailed account, and Jesus was likely no minor character to be inserted willy-nilly by Smith's scribes.
Daniel Peterson wrote:Fourth, Joseph’s authenticated personal statements plainly reveal him to have been a humble and sincere man, struggling to do the will of God as he understood it — and this particular statement should be placed in the context of his overall life and behavior. (See Mark McConkie’s “Remembering Joseph: Personal Recollections of Those Who Knew the Prophet Joseph Smith.”)

Consider, for example, the following excerpt from a private letter Joseph wrote to his wife, Emma, in June 1832: “I will try to be contented with my lot, knowing that God is my friend. In him I shall find comfort. I have given my life into his hands. I am prepared to go at his call. I desire to be with Christ. I count not my life dear to me (except) to do his will.”

These are scarcely the words of a man who believed himself better than Christ. Nor are these, which are taken from “History of the Church” (5:401):

“I do not think there have been many good men on the earth since the days of Adam; but there was one good man and his name was Jesus. Many persons think a prophet must be a great deal better than anybody else. … I do not want you to think that I am very righteous, for I am not.”
Daniel had to dig back from May 1844 twelve years, to June 1832 to find a quote that showed Smith wanted to do the Lord's will as some kind of impeachment against what his self-aggrandizing statement made in May 1844?

This is one of those examples where critics' statements got Peterson's goat but he'd have been better off just leaving this one alone.
"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." Aldous Huxley
"The truth has no defense against a fool determined to believe a lie." Mark Twain
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 1106
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: "I have more to boast of than ever any man had."

Post by dastardly stem »

Thanks for the memory. The lol-iest part of this to me is Joseph is boasting about something that many had done before him. What does keeping a church together for 14 years mean? Churches were kept together for a duration of 14 years many times over, some to a better degree than Joseph's Church was. I mean just like any Church people came and went, stuck around or left and opposed it or forgot about it.

Anyway, thanks for the writeup. The comparison to Paul's boasting is silly as you set them side by side.
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
BeNotDeceived
CTR B
Posts: 142
Joined: Wed May 19, 2021 7:52 pm

Re: "I have more to boast of than ever any man had."

Post by BeNotDeceived »

The worst part about his boasting was that he was bragging about having the charisma and know-how to keep people in a religion he knew 100% was fraudulent and contrived by his own creativity, plagiarism and imagination. :lol: :oops:
malkie
Bishop
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:41 pm

Re: "I have more to boast of than ever any man had."

Post by malkie »

sock puppet wrote:
Fri May 06, 2022 5:48 pm
...
Daniel Peterson wrote:Third, Joseph didn’t write the quotation; it was reconstructed after his death. Thus, it almost certainly doesn’t represent his precise words. Even “History of the Church” (often called the “Documentary History”) says that it rests upon a "synopsis" by Thomas Bullock.

Joseph delivered the sermon on May 26, 1844. A month later, he was dead. So did he supervise or approve this entry? No. Entries in the “History of the Church” for at least his last five years were actually made by others, after his assassination.
...
Does Prof P mean to tell us that these ... 'Entries in the “History of the Church” for at least his last five years ...', including the rest of the Maid of Iowa sermon, are not to be relied on?
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 3002
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: "I have more to boast of than ever any man had."

Post by Philo Sofee »

malkie wrote:
Fri May 06, 2022 11:14 pm
Does Prof P mean to tell us that these ... 'Entries in the “History of the Church” for at least his last five years ...', including the rest of the Maid of Iowa sermon, are not to be relied on?
They do this on every single subject that ends in a way that doesn't strengthen their own invented version of Joseph Smith. This is no surprise. They certainly know far more about what Joseph Smith said than Smith himself or anyone who wrote the history. Just asks 'em, they'll tell ya! :roll:
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 3083
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: "I have more to boast of than ever any man had."

Post by Moksha »

People always leave off the preface to that quote:
"My narcissism is off the scale. I have more to boast of than ever any man had."
Dr, Peterson's point is well taken that Joseph's narcissism has subsequently been eclipsed by that of Donald Trump.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
High Spy
Valiant A
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2022 12:26 pm
Location: Tralfamadore
Contact:

Re: "I have more to boast of than ever any man had."

Post by High Spy »

BeNotDeceived wrote:
Fri May 06, 2022 7:42 pm
The worst part about his boasting was that he was bragging about having the charisma and know-how to keep people in a religion he knew 100% was fraudulent and contrived by his own creativity, plagiarism and imagination. :lol: :oops:
With zero photographic evidence of anything. :lol:

To boot, but not march8miracle.org. :mrgreen: dbnp
3*8** Knight Lion, but not Nite Lion. 🐳 gbng

Everybody's heard the whale and 8 are linked. :lol:

Choose the 🥩
drumdude
God
Posts: 1995
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

Re: "I have more to boast of than ever any man had."

Post by drumdude »

I think if DP had been born in the early 1800s, he would be a critic of Joseph just like he’s a critic of Trump.

Likewise, if he had been born to Trump supporting parents, he would be an apologist for Trump.

DP doesn’t have the ability to objectively evaluate his biases. Most people don’t, which is what makes atheists who were once religious so good at spotting them.
Post Reply