Sarah Pratt: Credible Witness?

[_beastie]

The question is, was he a good man? Was he good enough to permit God to work through him as a prophet of the restoration?

I think that as the whole of the picture is observed from a distance that there is reason to believe so. To focus on one part of an aged canvas at a time without moving back and observing the whole view/perspective is myopic.

Human beings are complex, and usually even the most notorious have aspects about their behavior that can be called "good". Yet, if the ONE PART is significant enough, most people would refrain from calling the individual "good", despite the fact that it's just ONE PART that presents the problem.

Add to this the fact that it's not just one aspect of Joseph Smith' behavior that is morally problematic. Aside from his secretive, manipulative polygamy, you also have the fact that he manipulated people to purchase land that had been causing serious health problems, and he knew it. You have the fact that he was involved in a bank fraud. As a money digger, he also displayed the willingness to trick people out of their money.

If God chose someone like this to be the prophet of the restoration, he just doesn't have common sense. Even stupid ole' human beings running a business know that it's very important to be selective regarding who you choose as your "spokesman" or even advertising symbol. And God can't figure this out? He can't figure out that Joseph Smith' problematic behavior makes it less likely that people will believe his religious claims?

[_Sethbag]

And God can't figure this out? He can't figure out that Joseph Smith' problematic behavior makes it less likely that people will believe his religious claims?

On the contrary, God chose an obvious charlatan on purpose. You see, if God had chosen an actual righteous, holy, pure man to be his spokesman on Earth, it might have been too easy to believe what he said. Believing in Joseph Smith, despite his charlatanry, however, takes a real act of faith. And believing on faith alone is always better than believing based on evidence, right?

[_beastie]

On the contrary, God chose an obvious charlatan on purpose. You see, if God had chosen an actual righteous, holy, pure man to be his spokesman on Earth, it might have been too easy to believe what he said. Believing in Joseph Smith, despite his charlatanry, however, takes a real act of faith. And believing on faith alone is always better than believing based on evidence, right?

While I don't think apologists would use the word "charlatan", I think they would definitely hint at this argument.

And that links to another one of my pet peeves. Why is faith the be-all, end-all, according to God?? Why is it a GOOD thing to believe in something that does not have adequate evidence to support it? Because isn't that what faith IS? If there is adequate evidence to support it, faith isn't necessary.

[_Runtu]

I could go on and on, but I think you get the idea.

What is my vested interest?


Which is the illusion? That is the question, and yet you continue to avoid answering it. So, again, I ask:

Which is the most accurate view of the picture? The "illusion" of three-dimensions facilitated by the goggles, or the "reality" of two offset images as seen by the unaided eye?

Here's the problem, William. You've worked so long and hard to rationalize evil that your conscience has been deadened, so much so that you call evil good and good evil. Your vested interest is simply in not admitting that this is what you have done with your life.

[_truth dancer]

Hi TD. Polygamy/polyandry can be discussed and debated till the cows come home. Whatever happened, happened. We are out of touch with the players except through the written word. Joseph Smith himself is accountable to God for whatever he did. We know he was not a perfect man. The question is, was he a good man? Was he good enough to permit God to work through him as a prophet of the restoration?

Actually MG, I do not think this is the question at all.

I think the questions are:

Would God of the universe, pick a man like Joseph Smith to restore the one true church in preparation for the return of Jesus Christ? (Of course God can do whatever God wants, nevertheless, rational thought would suggest God would not chose a man whose behavior was questionable at best).

Is a man who engaged in some of the despicable things Joseph Smith did, in tune with holiness enough to feel the prompting of the HG or worthy enough to be visited with Jesus and angles? (I suppose God could work through anyone, nevertheless, it seems more likely that one who was in touch with holiness would be better able (worthy) to receive the messages from the divine.

Why would the God of the Universe, allow Joseph Smith to get a practice/doctrine so completely wrong, a practice that is REQUIRED for exaltation? (For a man who is receiving messages on the details of his friends lives, channeling the voice of Jesus, being visited by angels, even God himself, it seems odd that he would be so mistaken, and God would not step in).

If Joseph Smith's sexual manipulative behavior is common among other powerful cult and religious leaders, why does Joseph Smith get a free pass? (I find this so odd... that in the LDS church, the same men who would condemn others who engage in the same exact behavior as Joseph Smith, respect and excuse Joseph Smith. I seriously find this fascinating... the way the brain works to justify and rationalize away what it doesn't want to accept).

If men had a neighbor guy do to his wife and daughters what Joseph Smith did to girls and women, they would be outraged. Why is Joseph Smith's behavior fine and dandy? Why is it OK for Joseph Smith to manipulate and coerce girls and teenagers unless it is one's daughter?
(Again, I think it goes to the fascinating ability of our brains to not face reality if it is too difficult to accept).

I think that as the whole of the picture is observed from a distance that there is reason to believe so. To focus on one part of an aged canvas at a time without moving back and observing the whole view/perspective is myopic.

Everyone has good and not so good qualities. As you know, I have worked with hundreds of abusive men... they ALL have some goodness in them. But the not-so-good behavior makes them dangerous. They go to jail (or get counseling).

Joseph Smith's behavior (sexually and otherwise), in my opinion, like other cult and religious leaders who use their power to control, coerce, manipulate, or take advantage of women, disqualifies him as a "good man". Again, he may have had some good qualities, but a good man? Nope.

I guess we all have different standards.

~dancer~

[_mentalgymnast]

Would God of the universe, pick a man like Joseph Smith to restore the one true church in preparation for the return of Jesus Christ? (Of course God can do whatever God wants, nevertheless, rational thought would suggest God would not chose a man whose behavior was questionable at best).

This is where I think it becomes necessary to consider what the scriptures say.

26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.
30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
31 That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him aglory in the Lord.

There are many references in the scriptures which state that God chooses the weak of this world to perform his work. The proud and the mighty have a difficult if not impossible time accepting this.

Is a man who engaged in some of the despicable things Joseph Smith did, in tune with holiness enough to feel the prompting of the HG or worthy enough to be visited with Jesus and angles? (I suppose God could work through anyone, nevertheless, it seems more likely that one who was in touch with holiness would be better able (worthy) to receive the messages from the divine.

The scripture quoted above seems to say yes.

Why would the God of the Universe, allow Joseph Smith to get a practice/doctrine so completely wrong, a practice that is REQUIRED for exaltation? (For a man who is receiving messages on the details of his friends lives, channeling the voice of Jesus, being visited by angels, even God himself, it seems odd that he would be so mistaken, and God would not step in).

We've been down this path before. God allows people to be people. Look around. Teach correct principles and let them...even prophets...govern themselves.

If Joseph Smith's sexual manipulative behavior is common among other powerful cult and religious leaders, why does Joseph Smith get a free pass? (I find this so odd... that in the LDS church, the same men who would condemn others who engage in the same exact behavior as Joseph Smith, respect and excuse Joseph Smith. I seriously find this fascinating... the way the brain works to justify and rationalize away what it doesn't want to accept).

For any misdeads/sins that Joseph Smith committed my guess is that he will not recieve a free pass. The atonement/repentance processes are just as applicable to him as any of us. God looks on the heart. God judges. We can't...we can't see the whole picture as I mentioned before.

If men had a neighbor guy do to his wife and daughters what Joseph Smith did to girls and women, they would be outraged. Why is Joseph Smith's behavior fine and dandy? Why is it OK for Joseph Smith to manipulate and coerce girls and teenagers unless it is one's daughter?
(Again, I think it goes to the fascinating ability of our brains to not face reality if it is too difficult to accept).

Whatever wrongs Joseph Smith did are not fine and dandy.

Joseph Smith's behavior (sexually and otherwise), in my opinion, like other cult and religious leaders who use their power to control, coerce, manipulate, or take advantage of women, disqualifies him as a "good man". Again, he may have had some good qualities, but a good man? Nope.

Your judgement is made from your isolated perspective. God may look at things a bit differently. We are locked into the here and now and are prone to make judgments based on what we see/experience in the here and now. I really don't think we can get any kind of a firm grasp on how God may look at things from an eternal perspective.

We sure do like to tell him to do/think things through our way don't we?!

I guess we all have different standards.

And God/Christ is apparently willing to be very merciful and forgiving as long as we look to him in faith. The evidence seems to point towards Joseph Smith having done so.

Regards,
MG

[_BishopRic]

The evidence seems to point towards Joseph Smith having done so.

Regards,
MG

No, the evidence seems to point towards Joseph Smith lying about his guidance from God.

[_beastie]

The question is, was he a good man? Was he good enough to permit God to work through him as a prophet of the restoration?

Why did you even ask this question, MG, if the answer is irrelevant?

[_mentalgymnast]

The evidence seems to point towards Joseph Smith having done so.

Regards,
MG

No, the evidence seems to point towards Joseph Smith lying about his guidance from God.

I went to click on what I thought was your link..."the evidence"...and it didn't take me anywhere. Where is the evidence that points in the direction of Joseph Smith, even in his utmost extremities, not relying on God for strength? Afterall, what I said previous to your cut and paste was, "And God/Christ is apparently willing to be very merciful and forgiving as long as we look to him in faith". Joseph Smith was just as much in need of God's mercy as any one of us.

I don't recollect saying that Joseph was always correct in everything he said or did...even at times when he thought he was being directed through inspiration. He himself said that some revelations were from God, some were of man, and some were of the devil. He knew that he was susceptible to incorrect inspirations/intuitions.

I assume that you've read some of Joseph Smith's private letters to his friends, and especially those to Emma, in which he frequently calls upon the mercies/blessings of the Lord?

He was a man of faith.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

The question is, was he a good man? Was he good enough to permit God to work through him as a prophet of the restoration?

Why did you even ask this question, MG, if the answer is irrelevant?

Cannot goodness and weakness reside within the same individual? My contention is that Joseph Smith was a good man with weaknesses. Even though God chooses to work with the weak of the world, this does not discount the fact and/or possibility that he also looks upon the basic "good-heartedness" of those same individuals. You know that a person can be good...yet weak when it comes to the appetites of the flesh..."the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak".

The answer is not irrelevant. God would have a rough time working with someone who's basic nature is evil/corrupt.

Regards,
MG