Brother Crockett vs...?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Post by _the road to hana »

Coggins7 wrote:
Oh, for heaven's sake, coggins. By your own standards, Josephine Lyon's statement counts as reliable documentary evidence.



You're not even trying to follow the nuances of my, or rc's arguments here Beastie. One statement from a historical character who herself was not factually or empirically sure of such a relationship is historical anecdote, and would need corroboration and verification from independent sources. You have the same problem with Fanny Alger. No one, not Fanny or her family members ever mention sex, yet you will, pitbull-like, close you jaws around this kind of thing and swing back and forth from the tree limb until your teeth fall out.

Show us the evidence, that's all we're asking.


Show us evidence than anyone had sex with anyone. Short of film, or DNA, you can't do it.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

Oh, I see, so a family member would have had to actually witness the sex???? LOL!!!

See how pointless these debates are, folks?

The case of Sarah Whitney is interesting. I think it's clear they consummated their marriage BEFORE Joseph Smith instructed her to marry Kingsbury. Look at the intimacy of the letter he wrote to Sarah:

LETTER BY JOSEPH SMITH TO NEWEL K. WHITNEY, HIS WIFE AND DAUGHTER.

PAGE ONE
LINE TEXT
1 Nauvoo, August 18th 1842
2 Dear, and Beloved, Brother and
3 Sister, Whitney, and & c.--
4 I take this opportunity to communicate,
5 Some of my feelings, privetely at
6 this time, which I want you three
7 Eternaly to keep in your own
8 bosams; for my feelings are so
9 Strong for you Since what has
10 pased lately between us, that the
11 time of my abscence from you
12 Seems so long, and dreary, that
13 it Seems, as if I could not live
if you
14 long in this way; and ^ Three would
15 come and See me in this my lonely
16 retreat, it would afford me great
17 relief, of mind, if those with whom
18 I am alied, do love me, now is the
19 time to afford me succour; in the
20 days of exile, for you know I
21 foretold you of these things. I am
22 now at Carlos Graingers, Just back
23 of Brother Hyrums farm, it is only one
24 mile from town, the nights are
25 very pleasant, indeed, all three of
can
26 you come^ and See me in the
27 fore part of the night, let Brother
28 Whitney come a little a head, and
29 nock at the south East corner of
the
30 the house att ^ window; it is next to
31 the cornfield; I have a room inti-
32 -rely by myself, the whole matter
33 can be attended to with most perfect
know
34 Safty, I ^ it is the will of God that you
me
35 should comfort ^ now in this time
36 of affliction, or not at all, now is the

PAGE TWO
LINE TEXT
1 time or never, but I hav no kneed of saying
2 any such thing, to you, for I know the
3 goodness of your hearts, and that you
4 will do the will of the Lord, when it is
5 made known to you; the only thing
6 to be careful of, is to find out when
7 Emma comes then you cannot be
8 Safe, but when She is not here, there
9 is the most perfect Safty: only be
10 careful to escape observation, as
11 much as possible, I know it is a
12 heroick undertaking; but so much
13 the greater friendship, and the more
will
14 Joy, when I see you I ^ tell you all
15 my plans, I cannot write them on
16 paper, burn this letter as soon as you
17 read it; keep all locked up in
18 your breasts, my life depends up-
19 -on it. one thing I want to see you
to
20 for is ^ git the fulness of my blessing
21 Sealed upon our heads, &c. you
22 will pardon me for my ernest-
this subject
23 -ness on ^ when you consider how
24 lonesome I must be, your good
make
25 feelings know how to ^ every allow
26 -ance for me, I close my letter.
27 I think Emma wont come tonight
28 if she don't don't fail to come to
29 night, I subscribe myself your
and
30 most obedient, ^ affectionate,
31 Companion, and friend.
32 Joseph Smith

The letter and signature are in the handwriting of Joseph Smith.



http://www.xmission.com/%7Eresearch/family/strange.htm

There are affidavits affirming that Joseph Smith married Sarah Whitney AND Joseph Kingsbury wrote about his marriage to her, as well.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

Defenders of the faith, I have a question for you:

How does it feel to have to work furiously to explain that there is no evidence Joseph Smith had sex with the already married women he married?? I bet it's the fulfillment of your fondest dreams, isn't it?
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_rcrocket

Post by _rcrocket »

beastie wrote:Sheesh. The affidavit stated that her mother told her Joseph Smith was her father.

Now, either Josephine lied, her mother lied, or her mother had sex with Joseph Smith which led her to believe Joseph Smith was her daughter's father.



You are very poor at discriminating between different classes of evidence, which is what an historian must do. You simply accept Josephine's statement without question. She has no first-hand knowledge.

Your later posts suggest that one is forced to accept Josephine's statement because there is no better. That is a foolish rule for an historian to follow.

Josephine's evidence is evidence indeed, but it is far too weak to accept without considering deeply the possibility that it is wrong.
_rcrocket

Re: Brother Crockett vs...?

Post by _rcrocket »

solomarineris wrote:Oh no! We wouldn't dare...
We know for sure
1# Joseph Smith didn't bang underaged famales, behind Emma Smith's back
[snip]


I have many friends who are not members of the Church. I don't live in Utah. Ninety-nine percent of them are Jews, Catholics, Buddhists, Evangelicals or Christians. Vulgarity is somewhat rare among the educated of them.

But, I find it fascinating that the enemies of the Church on this board are frequently vulgar and low-brow. Get in line with the rest of them.
_sunstoned
_Emeritus
Posts: 1670
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:12 am

Post by _sunstoned »

Coggins7 wrote:
Bottom line, Cogs, BY married a woman who was already married and had sex (and a child) with her.



Bottom line, we have no historical evidence that she was still married, under the assumptions and conditions of the times, when she married BY.

Read the essay.


We have no historical evidence that she got a divorce. Produce the divorce papers if you can. Without that, the default is that she was still married.
_sunstoned
_Emeritus
Posts: 1670
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:12 am

Post by _sunstoned »

beastie wrote:Defenders of the faith, I have a question for you:

How does it feel to have to work furiously to explain that there is no evidence Joseph Smith had sex with the already married women he married?? I bet it's the fulfillment of your fondest dreams, isn't it?


Isn't this the truth. Nothing to fear folks, the reputation of the prophet of the restoration, the one that stands next to Christ, is still in tacked because so far we can't find conclusive evidence that he slept with the wives of other men that he married.
_Boaz & Lidia
_Emeritus
Posts: 1416
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:31 am

Post by _Boaz & Lidia »

beastie wrote:The only evidence that would satisfy defenders of the faith would be a videotape of Joseph Smith in bed with these women. And even then they'd probably claim it was doctored.

During the period the LDS church actually WANTED to prove that Joseph Smith married - in very deed - other women (in the dispute with the RLDS), the wives of Joseph Smith said, as plainly as they could while still retaining Victorian sensibilities, that they had sex with their "husband", Joseph Smith. Now, their word isn't good enough.
Yet their words attesting to anything faith promoting IS.
_the road to hana
_Emeritus
Posts: 1485
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:35 pm

Re: Brother Crockett vs...?

Post by _the road to hana »

rcrocket wrote:
solomarineris wrote:Oh no! We wouldn't dare...
We know for sure
1# Joseph Smith didn't bang underaged famales, behind Emma Smith's back
[snip]


I have many friends who are not members of the Church. I don't live in Utah. Ninety-nine percent of them are Jews, Catholics, Buddhists, Evangelicals or Christians. Vulgarity is somewhat rare among the educated of them.

But, I find it fascinating that the enemies of the Church on this board are frequently vulgar and low-brow. Get in line with the rest of them.


Unless you're spending 24 hours a day with them, you don't really know how they are in their private lives, any more than they know how you are in yours.
The road is beautiful, treacherous, and full of twists and turns.
_Chap
_Emeritus
Posts: 14190
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 10:23 am

Post by _Chap »

rcrocket wrote:
beastie wrote:Sheesh. The affidavit stated that her mother told her Joseph Smith was her father.

Now, either Josephine lied, her mother lied, or her mother had sex with Joseph Smith which led her to believe Joseph Smith was her daughter's father.



You are very poor at discriminating between different classes of evidence, which is what an historian must do. You simply accept Josephine's statement without question. She has no first-hand knowledge.

Your later posts suggest that one is forced to accept Josephine's statement because there is no better. That is a foolish rule for an historian to follow.

Josephine's evidence is evidence indeed, but it is far too weak to accept without considering deeply the possibility that it is wrong.


Josephine's evidence, a solemn declaration of a fact upon oath, is strong evidence that her mother said that she (Josephine) was the daughter of Joseph Smith. Josephine had first-hand knowledge of what her mother said.

The existence of the affidavit clearly leads to a significant increase in the weight that can reasonably be given to the hypothesis that

(a) Joseph Smith was Josephine's father

and rather more to the hypothesis that

(b) Joseph Smith had sex with Josephine's mother (but she may have had sex with other people too, so Joseph Smith may not have been Josephine's father)

and more still to the hypothesis that

(c) Joseph Smith was generally assumed to have sexual relations with his plural wives, so that Josephine being his child was a reasonable possibility.
Post Reply