? about Joseph Smith' contemporaries

[_CaliforniaKid]

By far the most striking contemporary portrait of Joseph Smith is Josiah Quincy's "Joseph Smith at Nauvoo." It's not too terribly long, and it's a fun and easy read. I recommend giving it a look.

[_Sethbag]

I'm sure someone has compiled a list of all of the apostles and First Presidency councilors who apostatized during Joseph Smith's lifetime. They all knew him very well. Wouldn't what they had to say be some indicator? You'd think so, but according to TBMs it's not so - their words about Joseph Smith are all unreliable because they were biased against him. Hmm? And Brigham Young, John Taylor, etc. weren't biased in favor of him? How is it that the only witnesses a TBM will judge to be reliable are those who were whole-hearted supporters of Joseph Smith throughout his lifetime? Does that really make sense?

[_beastie]

Thanks, Chris, I'll check that one out, too.

Seth, I agree that the statements of disaffected members are important. Of course TBMs not only think they're biased against Joseph Smith, but actually influenced by satan.

I've been thinking of how Sidney Rigdon's contemporaries, that knew him, didn't doubt his religious impulses, as far as I know. If anything, they viewed his religious impulses as extreme and handicapping. But many who knew Joseph Smith did doubt his religious impulses as motivation. I think that is important information in weighing the pious fraud theory. I should probably reread Vogel's book, because if there were nonbelieving witnesses who were friendly to the idea of a pious fraud, he probably included them.

[_Black Moclips]

Wyl's writings are an eye-opener for me. I consider myself an "internet Mormon" and aware of most of the big issues, yet here I find myself reading for the first time critical testimony related to the early days of the church. Thought provoking, yet I find it hard to assess the reliability of people I didn't know over a hundred years ago (believer and non-beleiver alike).

Anyway, the statement that struck me was:

It was hard for me to believe that in free America any religious sect could be persecuted merely because it was too pure and good.

When the question is asked why the church was so persecuted, the answers given can be incredibly complex. But one thing I do know, is that they do not include "The Mormons were just too nice and christlike. They treated everyone with love and respect regardless of their differences and were truly the meek of the earth. This infuriated their neighbors and made them want to rape, murder, and kill them."