Joseph Smith believed all sects were false

[_Jason Bourne]

You really are an overbearing bore you know.

Again ad hominem. That's it Jason? It's all you've got?

I have plenty. And you are a bore. An over bearing bore. I can still debate with you. But you are a bore and an unpleasent aggresive one at that.

So what have you read Marg?

[_Jason Bourne]

What it appears Bond is you've posted nothing more than ad hominem fallacy in this thread. I'm not the issue, if you have other sources which counter Tucker then quote them. If you have other information which counters Smith con artist activities before publication of the Book of Mormon then present it. Stick with the issues.

Uh, I'm Bond. He's Bourne.

Straigh up man! Bourne is much tougher then Bond too! :-)

[_marg]

What you have read is pertinent to the issues of the thread. What have you read marg. If you are going to judge Smith then what have you read that he wrote? I noted claimed revelations that censroed Smith. These put words in GOd's mouth scolding Smith. This is on point. Have you read those revelations? They seem to directly dispute your points.

So what have you read marg. Why won't you answer?

Have you read the post I wrote above which is a quote of an article regarding the psychologhy of con men?

Are you suggesting with your comment above that because there is a revelation censoring Smith..that a God did indeed scold Smith? I'm not sure what you are saying this revelation which you mention proves. Elaborate in greater detail, quote it and tell me what you reason from it.

[_marg]

I have plenty. And you are a bore. An over bearing bore. I can still debate with you. But you are a bore and an unpleasent aggresive one at that.

So what have you read Marg?

Since you continue with ad hominem, I likely won't bother responding to you in this thread in the future.

[_Jason Bourne]

What you have read is pertinent to the issues of the thread. What have you read marg. If you are going to judge Smith then what have you read that he wrote? I noted claimed revelations that censored Smith. These put words in God's mouth scolding Smith. This is on point. Have you read those revelations? They seem to directly dispute your points.

So what have you read marg. Why won't you answer?

Have you read the post I wrote above which is a quote of an article regarding the psychologhy of con men?

Are you suggesting with your comment above that because there is a revelation censoring Smith..that a God did indeed scold Smith? I'm not sure what you are saying this revelation which you mention proves. Elaborate in greater detail, quote it and tell me what you reason from it.

What have you read marg. Why should I do your leg work. The D&C, Book of Mormon and many of Smith's writings are on line. Read what the man wrote, get a feel for what he was from his own mouth then maybe your conclusions will have more substance.

But now I will indulge you a bit. The point is this. In Smith's revelations, whether one believes they were of God or not. God scolds and threatens Smith. The nature of these revelations do not reflect a person who was a deist, atheist or lacking some sort of fear of God.

Let's look at this Section for the D&C:

THE
DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS
OF THE CHURCH OF Jesus Christ OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS
SECTION 3
Revelation given to Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Harmony, Pennsylvania, July 1828, relating to the loss of 116 pages of manuscript translated from the first part of the Book of Mormon, which was called the “Book of Lehi.” The Prophet had reluctantly allowed these pages to pass from his custody to that of Martin Harris, who had served for a brief period as scribe in the translation of the Book of Mormon. The revelation was given through the Urim and Thummim. HC 1: 21–23. See also Section 10.
1–4, The Lord’s course is one eternal round; 5–15, Joseph Smith must repent or lose the gift to translate; 16–20, The Book of Mormon comes forth to save the seed of Lehi.


1 The works, and the designs, and the purposes of God cannot be frustrated, neither can they come to naught.
2 For God doth not walk in crooked paths, neither doth he turn to the right hand nor to the left, neither doth he vary from that which he hath said, therefore his paths are straight, and his course is one eternal round.
3 Remember, remember that it is not the work of God that is frustrated, but the work of men;
4 For although a man may have many revelations, and have power to do many mighty works, yet if he boasts in his own strength, and sets at naught the counsels of God, and follows after the dictates of his own will and carnal desires, he must fall and incur the vengeance of a just God upon him.
5 Behold, you have been entrusted with these things, but how strict were your commandments; and remember also the promises which were made to you, if you did not transgress them.
6 And behold, how oft you have transgressed the commandments and the laws of God, and have gone on in the persuasions of men.
7 For, behold, you should not have feared man more than God. Although men set at naught the counsels of God, and despise his words—
8 Yet you should have been faithful; and he would have extended his arm and supported you against all the fiery darts of the adversary; and he would have been with you in every time of trouble.
9 Behold, thou art Joseph, and thou west chosen to do the work of the Lord, but because of transgression, if thou art not aware thou wilt fall.
10 But remember, God is merciful; therefore, repent of that which thou hast done which is contrary to the commandment which I gave you, and thou art still chosen, and art again called to the work;
11 Except thou do this, thou shalt be delivered up and become as other men, and have no more gift.
12 And when thou delivered up that which God had given thee sight and power to translate, thou deliveredst up that which was sacred into the hands of a wicked man,
13 Who has set at naught the counsels of God, and has broken the most sacred promises which were made before God, and has depended upon his own judgment and boasted in his own wisdom.
14 And this is the reason that thou hast lost thy privileges for a season—
15 For thou hast suffered the counsel of thy director to be trampled upon from the beginning.
16 Nevertheless, my work shall go forth, for inasmuch as the knowledge of a Savior has come unto the world, through the testimony of the Jews, even so shall the knowledge of a savior come unto my people—
17 And to the aNephites, and the Jacobites, and the Josephites, and the Zoramites, through the testimony of their fathers—
18 And this testimony shall come to the knowledge of the Lamanites, and the Lemuelites, and the Ishmaelites, who dwindled in unbelief because of the iniquity of their fathers, whom the Lord has suffered to destroy their brethren the Nephites, because of their iniquities and their abominations.
19 And for this very purpose are these plates preserved, which contain these records—that the promises of the Lord might be fulfilled, which he made to his people;
20 And that the Lamanites might come to the knowledge of their fathers, and that they might know the promises of the Lord, and that they may believe the gospel and rely upon the merits of Jesus Christ, and be glorified through faith in his name, and that through their repentance they might be saved. Amen.

So this comes from a man you think totally disregarded God. If he wrote this himself then he sure appears to be one who is in fear of God. If God gave it to him or if he thought God gave it to him he was willing to publically publish this scolding to the world.

This certianly does not fit your theory proposed on this thread.

[_Jason Bourne]

I have plenty. And you are a bore. An over bearing bore. I can still debate with you. But you are a bore and an unpleasent aggresive one at that.

So what have you read Marg?

Since you continue with ad hominem, I likely won't bother responding to you in this thread in the future.

Not ad hominem at all marg. Facts. You are a bully to people. You bullied liz and gramps 76.

So, let's move on. I gave you some substance. Address it. And tell us what you have read. That is not ad hominem and is pertinant to the discussion.

[_Jason Bourne]

What do you mean by "religious" Bond? Do you think J. Smith believed in an interfering sort of God?

Yes

The reason I think he didn't is because he knew darn well, it was all a hoax, just like his treasure seeking hoaxes. He appreciated the credulity of people.

This is a fine opinion. I believe that he believed what he was doing was from God.

His institution of polygamy was another tip off, being so convenient following his being caught by his wife with Fanny.

Polygamy came later and I think LDS apologists apply it retroactivley to the affair.

If his father was a deist, what gives you the impression he wasn't?

His revelations, sermons, letters just do not reflect that.

[_Jason Bourne]

You appear to lack an appreciation of the concept of reasoning...applied to evidence.

Please stop the ad hominems.

There is plenty of evidence J. Smith knew his treasure seeking was a con, he admitted it to his father in law and that was witnessed by a friend.

I don't think he admitted it was a hoax but rather told his FIL that he would stop doing it. He was also under a lot of pressure to be accepted by his FIL.

But besides evidence of witnesses there is common sense evidence, that con men appreciate their own cons. One would have to be extremely credulous, (lack good reasoning ability) to believe that Smith with his treasure seeking didn't appreciate his own cons.

In Bushman's bio on Smith he discussed Joseph's desire to please and help his father. It seems Joseph was under a lot of pressure by his dad to "perform" treasure seeking skills. I think Jospeh, given the superstitious culture he lived in, did believe he had teasure seekling skills. As he began his religous career he refused his father's psuhing him to more treaure seeking activity and commented that it did not fit his call as a prophet. This may have been a ruse to put the more unsavory treasure seeking activity behind him or it may have been sincere.

in my opinion the evidence indicates Smith didn't fear a god. And if that is the case, he wouldn't have believed in an interfering sort of God such as a Christian one.

The revelation I posted above disputed that claim.

Given that he publicly admitting to rejecting all other religous groups as false,

It is not quite that simple. He decreed their creeds false. Later he stated that he believed in all truth no matter where it came from. He also believed in sustaining the rights of others to worship what, where and how they may.

given that his behavior indicated no fear of God, given that he spoke on behalf of God and would know full well no god spoke to him, given that he was a con man

That he was a con man in not a absolute. Or that he did not believe his con if he was.

[_desert_vulture]

Well hello Vulture, last time we talked you bailed. So you are interested again? Note my words, "common sense evidence, that con men appreciate their own cons" Please don't take words out of context. Can you explain to me how an individual can devise and perpetuate a con lasting many years without fully appreciating what they are doing? For example do you think J. Smith didn't appreciate that his head in the hat night time treasure seeking was a con or do you believe he sincerely believed what he was doing was legitimate, that it would actually work?

You seem to be operating under the premise that I am here to defend Joseph Smith. Check your premises, they are flawed. I am here to engage in rational dialogue. Talking about my beliefs regarding someone else's beliefs is engaging in the highest degree of speculation. I prefer to examine evidence, and see where the evidence leads. I noticed that you have a tone that you use with posters such as Liz and Bourne, and that you have made a feeble attempt to use with me. Is this your modus operandi? Make feeble attempts to intimidate others on the internet? If so, it is a meaningless pursuit that will not win you friends or make you very happy.

I disengaged from our last conversation because you blatantly exaggerated many points, confused the issues, and basically degraded the entire dialogue into an emotional diatribe of convoluted concepts. At that point I disengaged by stating to you "Whatever" because I realized that no matter how many points I made, and no matter how I treated you, you would dig in your heals and choose to reinforce your own confirmation bias, rather than engage in mutual dialogue.

You disengaged from the thread the same way, with Wade Englund over on the Joseph Smith Conspiracy thread:

While others may play your game Wade...I'm not interested. I'll let your posts stand or fall on their own as to whether or not you indicate intellectual dishonesty in your argumentation.

Added note: it is a waste of time, arguing with individuals who are intellectually dishonest.

Your accusations remind me of quite a few interactions I've had with the TBM posters on the FAIR/MAD board, BCC, M* and others. Sometimes it is a waste of time to discuss concepts with individuals who are not open to a rational objective discussion. I don't mind talking with you about Mormon issues, if you will actually discuss things rationally rather than emotionally. Are you capable of that?

As to whether Joseph Smith was a conman regarding his many money digging adventures, I don't think you are off the mark. Joseph Smith told his FIL that the stone in a hat trick was a farce, and that he didn't actually see anything in the rock. I tend to think that because the Smith family was extremely poor, and couldn't even provide the basic necessities for life and sustenance, that Joseph Smith would do his magic tricks for a fee, or for the free lamb that was provided as the sacrificial lamb to the treasure guardians. He came up with the con in order to survive. It seems logical that if he was able to concoct a scheme that would earn him some money, or get them some free food, and his abject poverty created a sense of urgency, that he did con people out of their money looking for treasure that didn't exist.

However, your argument doesn't stop there. You want to make the logical leap that if Joseph Smith was a conman, then there is no way that God would use him as a prophet. It is a very tempting conceptual path to take. It seems reasonable. But could someone who was a conman not be used by a higher power in some way. I'd like to see you introduce evidence that BECAUSE Joseph Smith was a conman that this therefore disqualified him, and he COULD NOT POSSIBLY BE A PROPHET IN ANY SENSE OF THE WORD. Now that would be a good conversation. I don't think that you can do it without becoming emotional again, or engaging in insulting dialouge, but I would like to see you try. It would be nice to have discourse with you in a rational way. We are not so different, you and I.

-DV

[_marg]

Not ad hominem at all marg. Facts. You are a bully to people. You bullied liz and gramps 76.

So, let's move on. I gave you some substance. Address it. And tell us what you have read. That is not ad hominem and is pertinant to the discussion.

Since you are again continuuing to employ ad hominem, I might consider moving some of these post to the upper forum. I haven't decided. I might respond in here, I don't know. But it appears given posts in this thread by Mormons they are unable to tolerate criticisms of Smith and so they resort to posts such as ad hominem, testimony bearing, irrelevant off topic posts and even harrassment.

I don't think it's unusual. It's typical behavior of well indoctrinated members of cults.