Mormon Unorthodoxy at SeN

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
drumdude
God
Posts: 5214
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

Mormon Unorthodoxy at SeN

Post by drumdude »

A growing number of Mormons believe the LDS leadership is in apostasy. They are voicing their concerns on social media, and even going as far as to make their own apologetic videos.

Here is "Who Killed Joseph Smith?"

https://vimeo.com/665462413

It argues that Joseph was murdered by Brigham.

Here is a commenter on SeN defending the video and claiming the LDS church is in apostasy:
Unorthodox SeN commenter wrote:I was a dedicated LDS youth, full temple recommend, meditated, fasted, prayed for 40 days straight. Was visited of the Lord and Joseph Smith as a teen in 1992. On the evening on the anniversary of the martydom, in 1992, I was taken away in vision and shown the deaths of the Joseph and Hyrum, only to my suprise was shown that Willard Richards shot Joseph Smith. So this "special" kind of malice came directly from the Lord and Joseph Smith himself, but I am sure you will shout "Decevied!" But everything shall come to the Light. Their blood cries from the dust like the prophets of old, and the naïve Saints will weep, and wail and gnash their teeth, just like in the days of old when the true church was on earth, and their own members killed each other. The Nephites killed Nephites. Men who saw angels, killed each other, yet in modern day you refuse to accept men would kill other men for monetary gain.

Brigham Young said Joseph Smith did not have an ounce of inspiration in him before he was taken to Carthage.
Brigham Young called Lucy Smith crazy.
Brigham Young said Emma Smith was a liar and fraud.

Now think real hard, who had motive.

In the Lords name, Jesus Christ, I testify these things are true.
And know them to be true with every fiber of my being.
I know more and more people are being shown this truth by the spirit of almighty God.
The Lord is about to shake the foundations and cleanse his church.

...

Justin is doing the research, but spirit has been showing people the truth since 1844.
Just anyone who is shown the truth is excommunicated.

Everything is falling into place and their blood cries from the dust.
The doubters will be ultimately faced with undeniable evidence.
DCP, ironically, makes an appeal to the scholarly consensus to refute this Mormon's testimony. The same consensus he rejects when it comes to the historicity of the Books of Abraham and Mormon.
Defender of the Orthodoxy DCP wrote:Todd Jumper: "The doubters will be ultimately faced with undeniable evidence."

The evidence that justifies our doubts is already undeniable.

If Mr. Griffin is seeking a venue in which to argue his case, with responses, I suggest that he offer presentations at the Mormon History Association and the John Whitmer Historical Association. There are other possibilities too, of course, but those are the first two that come to mind.
Why doesn't John Gee present his Book of Abraham apologetics in the proper venue? Oh, right, because the evidence against him is undeniable...

Unorthodox SeN Commenter wrote:Here’s the bottom line people. This is about forensics and the historical record. He had the Countries leading forensic detective in the film. He has posted every known historical reference on the website.

He has invited any Church historians to debate him. He will happily confess his error if you can prove one. Meanwhile how about a face to face debate?

Not one of you has referenced anything about the film: Instead you all hide behind claims it has been thoroughly debunked without showing how.

Instead you make uninformed judgements about his motives and character.

You talk about people you don’t like who had absolutely nothing to do with the project.

You claim he started a splinter group, that he’s under the influence of the devil. You talk about everything except the actual substance of the film.

I don’t think your standard of judgment is as pleasing to the Savior as you are convinced it is.

I don’t think it’s helping your position Mr Peterson.
I just love the back and forth between these two Mormons. It's like they're arguing about where Hogwarts was really located. Or exactly how tall Hobbits really were. Both of them hold positions which no non-Mormon academic would ever advance. Both of them cherry-pick evidence to suit their pre-existing beliefs.

The best part? Believing Mormons have been so brainwashed to accept apologetics, and not to do their own research, that many of them believe this new Joseph Smith narrative. Here's the comments on the video "Who Killed Joseph Smith?"
Very good work! Loved what you put together. I have never thought this was a possibility till now.
Another piece of evidence this video explains, without actually saying it: the unmistakeable, astonishing silence from the heavens as it pertains to the LDS church receiving ongoing revelations...
Great video. I learned a lot.
Daniel - this isn't the work of Satan. This is the work of LDS apologists like you who teach Mormons not to follow the evidence and to just believe in spite of it.
User avatar
Doctor Steuss
God
Posts: 1672
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:48 pm

Re: Mormon Unorthodoxy at SeN

Post by Doctor Steuss »

A teenage boy receiving heavenly visitation about a church being apostate?

That's ludicrous.

Oh, wait...
Dr Exiled
God
Posts: 1602
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:40 pm

Re: Mormon Unorthodoxy at SeN

Post by Dr Exiled »

I love how supposed revelation and visions are used against the church of supposed revelations and visions. It's like Cartman v. The Psychics in a Southpark episode:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22Tj_l4PcPs
Myth is misused by the powerful to subjugate the masses all too often.
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 8980
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Mormon Unorthodoxy at SeN

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

Dr Exiled wrote:
Thu Jan 26, 2023 6:26 pm
I love how supposed revelation and visions are used against the church of supposed revelations and visions. It's like Cartman v. The Psychics in a Southpark episode:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22Tj_l4PcPs
As long as a Mormon splinter group doesn’t go this way I’m good:

https://youtu.be/mspZ6hnCQeI

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
drumdude
God
Posts: 5214
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

Re: Mormon Unorthodoxy at SeN

Post by drumdude »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Thu Jan 26, 2023 7:40 pm
Dr Exiled wrote:
Thu Jan 26, 2023 6:26 pm
I love how supposed revelation and visions are used against the church of supposed revelations and visions. It's like Cartman v. The Psychics in a Southpark episode:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22Tj_l4PcPs
As long as a Mormon splinter group doesn’t go this way I’m good:

https://youtu.be/mspZ6hnCQeI

- Doc
omg :lol: :lol: :lol:
Philo Sofee
God
Posts: 5015
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 1:18 am

Re: Mormon Unorthodoxy at SeN

Post by Philo Sofee »

Doctor Steuss wrote:
Thu Jan 26, 2023 5:51 pm
A teenage boy receiving heavenly visitation about a church being apostate?

That's ludicrous.

Oh, wait...
:lol: Right? Truly astonishingly RICH IRONY here!!!
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 5810
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: Mormon Unorthodoxy at SeN

Post by Moksha »

This video helps demonstrate that the school in Provo is appropriately named. Wonder if the Mormon History Association would consider viewing this video.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
User avatar
Kishkumen
God
Posts: 6121
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 2:37 pm
Location: Cassius University

Re: Mormon Unorthodoxy at SeN

Post by Kishkumen »

This entertains me to no end. I don’t see it in terms of actual historical evidence, but it looks like religious mythology in the making. The succession is one of those fault lines in the story of LDS origins. The LDS Church has chosen, for understandable and practical reasons, to push the idea that only it is the rightful heir to the legacy of Joseph. Regardless of the truth or any problems with his claim, Brigham MUST be the successor of Joseph. But his claim is pretty weak. It is only natural that people who become disenchanted with the LDS Church find reason to reject Young.

Accusing Young of conspiring to assassinate Smith is pretty excessive, but Young was a pretty greedy, power-hungry, and ambitious character. So, some people will go there. The outcome is popcorn worthy, but it is not credible historically beyond the level of conspiracy theorizing.

Conspiracy theory looks to see how the pieces might fit in the way the theorist likes. If they look to fit, the theorist takes that as evidence they are justified to build on. In this way, supposition is piled on supposition into a giant house of cards. BY gives plenty of fodder for that, but there is no solid evidence that I have seen showing BY had Joseph Smith killed.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about the answers.”~Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow
User avatar
Moksha
God
Posts: 5810
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:13 am
Location: Koloburbia

Re: Mormon Unorthodoxy at SeN

Post by Moksha »

This usage of evidence to test the veracity of the witnesses' statements seems new-fangled, let alone offering an alternative explanation for the murders. This would never be admissible in Stake court.
Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace
drumdude
God
Posts: 5214
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:29 am

Re: Mormon Unorthodoxy at SeN

Post by drumdude »

Kishkumen wrote:
Fri Jan 27, 2023 11:39 am
This entertains me to no end. I don’t see it in terms of actual historical evidence, but it looks like religious mythology in the making. The succession is one of those fault lines in the story of LDS origins. The LDS Church has chosen, for understandable and practical reasons, to push the idea that only it is the rightful heir to the legacy of Joseph. Regardless of the truth or any problems with his claim, Brigham MUST be the successor of Joseph. But his claim is pretty weak. It is only natural that people who become disenchanted with the LDS Church find reason to reject Young.

Accusing Young of conspiring to assassinate Smith is pretty excessive, but Young was a pretty greedy, power-hungry, and ambitious character. So, some people will go there. The outcome is popcorn worthy, but it is not credible historically beyond the level of conspiracy theorizing.

Conspiracy theory looks to see how the pieces might fit in the way the theorist likes. If they look to fit, the theorist takes that as evidence they are justified to build on. In this way, supposition is piled on supposition into a giant house of cards. BY gives plenty of fodder for that, but there is no solid evidence that I have seen showing BY had Joseph Smith killed.
This issue of legitimate claim seems to be the main focus of DCP’s next film. So far, according to his blog notes, I see

“Brigham was a nice guy.”
“Brigham was a good orator.”
“Brigham was the only logical successor.”
“Brigham was a good leader.”
“Brigham took on the countenance of Joseph in a miracle.”
Post Reply