Our leaders

[_beastie]

Did Smith claim to be a messiah? Did Smith struggle over polygamy? Did he consider ending it before he was vicuosly murdered?

Look, I do not view Joseph Smith as some perfect little never do nothing wrong person. I think he started a Church with good intents and that God inspired him. I think that as often happens he gave in to some pride and liked the power it brought him over his people. I think he made some major mistakes along the way, polygamy being the largest.

Do I view him as a cut and dry malicious scoundrel. No I do not. I think the issues are complex.

Am I willing to cut him more slack due to what I have invested in Mormonism? I hold this out as a real possibility.

I watched a documentary about this sect, and these members struggled over God's order for the Messiah to have sex with his female followers, too. They sought spiritual affirmation before engaging in this behavior, including the "Messiah's" own son who had the honor of dedicating his own wife to the Messiah for the sacred sex. You really think these people didn't struggle??? What, you think anyone other than Joseph Smith naturally leaped at the chance to have sex without struggling with the moral side of the issue? The fact that they struggled is witnessed by their determination to create a theology justifying it.

So they all struggle when "God" tells them to do something that affronts their cultural mores. You're left with the distinction that one claimed to be a Messiah and the other claimed to be the Prophet of the Restoration.

Absolutely your emotional attachment to Mormonism colors your ability to recognize that for anyone other than those spiritually devoted to Joseph Smith, his sexual behavior was scandalous (leaving aside for the moment some of his other behaviors, like encouraging people to buy unhealthy swamp land and supporting a fraudulent bank).

[_Jason Bourne]

Absolutely your emotional attachment to Mormonism colors your ability to recognize that for anyone other than those spiritually devoted to Joseph Smith, his sexual behavior was scandalous (leaving aside for the moment some of his other behaviors, like encouraging people to buy unhealthy swamp land and supporting a fraudulent bank).

Yes I know am sure this fellows followers struggled with all this. Yes I agree that most found Smith's behavior with polygamy scandalous. I do as well. In fact one of the ways I came to conclude it was scandalous was to accept that I found it, and would find it scandalous when it comes from someone else I did not believe was a prophet.

The Kirtland Bank issue is not near as cut and dry. Keep in mind the failure of the Kirtland bank was part of an overall economic downturn in the USA that caused the failure of hundreds of banks as well.

But I really have no desire to debate that at all.

Yes, yes I understand my attachments to the LDS Church causes me to cut Joseph Smith more slack then I do others.

I also think that many of you who have abandoned any belief in the LDS Church caused you to treat Smith more harshly then is deserved as well as make irrational conclusions like we see from TD and Inconceivable here. Inc think the people of Illinois were justified in driving the saints out. TD thinks just because the locals did not like the saints that automatically makes them guilty of being bad and scoundrels.

[_Inconceivable]

I would have opted for prosecution and imprisonment of the leaders. Unfortunately, Smith was killed and Young took his flock and fled before them to insulate himself and others from the justice that would have come upon them. Please understand, the Mormons fled because they resisted the laws of the land. Smith and other law breakers spending the rest of their lives in prison would have served as a lasting indictment upon the twisted religeon. I believe it would have prevented it to be any more than a blip in an American history book.

Another sample of irrational thought. Other than polygamy and the press issue what laws were being broke? The saints did not flee because they were resisting the laws of the land. Are you really this goofy? Make you case rather than your asinine irrational claims. You think it justice to kill and drive people from their homes? Because they have a large voting block? If so you are a scary person.

There was not one bit of justification for what happened in Nauvoo. Not one. ANd even with that Smith and crew had broken no laws that deserved life time punishment. You really need to get a grip man.

In other words:

"Other than breaking laws of the land that were punishable by imprisonment, what laws were broke?"

Huh?

What did happen in Nauvoo anyway? Mostly threats, but not much else.

1) The temple burned by arsen a year or so later - not the night of the Exodus (remember the painting that is hard to find now?).

2) Brigham Young and the apostles left as a forward party to "prepare the way". They had plenty of supplies for the entire journey.

3) The frozen river was not a sign from the Mormon God. The "saints" disobeyed BY's commandment to stay behind to properly prepare for the journey - they did not.

4) The horrible conditions of the exodus westward was a result of the lack of preparation of the mass of frenzied saints abandoning the safety of Nauvoo. The "saints" consumed all of the forward party's supplies in about one week.

5) Hundreds (thousands) did not die in Nauvoo. They died in the wilderness.

6) Emma, Lucy Mack and their families (and some old abandoned people) refused to leave or were left behind. They weren't raped and seldom pillaged. In fact, Emma remarried and lived within 200 feet of the mansion house for the rest of her very long life.

7) If BY and his band of perverts remained in Nauvoo, the wheels of justice would have seen each one in prison. Who knows? The Mormon God may have issued the Manifesto in 1847 instead of the 1890, eh? Kind of difficult to do if DC 132 won't be revealed to the church at Salt Lake for another 5 years though.

What kept this band from prosecution to that time was their secret combination to protect each other - no more, no less.

Mexican territory - the great basin - had no legal claim on perverts. The United States did. I think all other issues could have been worked out in time.

BY's intention was to leave months before the rest of the saints. His thoughtful reasoning was to prepare the way. If the saints had obeyed him, I muse whether many would have even followed later in the relative safety of the spring/summer (after the run off) - seeing that Nauvoo became just another frontier town after the band of perverts had abandoned it.

(sorry for the long post but I think it's worth considering)

[_beastie]

TD thinks just because the locals did not like the saints that automatically makes them guilty of being bad and scoundrels.

I think you have misstated her position. If I understand her correctly, her point isn't that they were scoundrels because locals didn't like them. They were scoundrels due to the reasons locals didn't like them.

[_Inconceivable]

Inc think the people of Illinois were justified in driving the saints out. TD thinks just because the locals did not like the saints that automatically makes them guilty of being bad and scoundrels.

Jason,

My point is that the people of Illinois didn't drive the "saints" out.

BY and his band (not the "saints") were lawbreakers. The law drove the band out.

The band put fear into the hearts of the "saints" to follow them.

As you may recall, Joseph and Hyrum attempted the same as BY when they fled across the river to the Rocky Mountains several weeks before Carthage. They were denounced as cowards, causing them to return to Nauvoo, contrary to the revelation of the Mormon God.

Smith understood justice, why else would he say he was going as "a lamb to the slaughter". The cause set in motion was unavoidable.

However, Smith did have the meaning of lamb and wolf a little mixed up, though.

[_Nevo]

Would you be so generous to the leader of any other religious group that engaged in this behavior?

Engaged in polygamous behaviour? It depends on the person and the circumstances. I might be that generous.

[_Inconceivable]

Would you be so generous to the leader of any other religious group that engaged in this behavior?

Engaged in polygamous behaviour? It depends on the person and the circumstances. I might be that generous.

I suppose we call that the law of situational ethics -

I abandoned this belief when I left the Mormon church

..so now when I notice something that waddles, looks and poops like a duck, I have little difficulty in calling it what it is.

(quack)

[_beastie]

Engaged in polygamous behaviour? It depends on the person and the circumstances. I might be that generous.

I meant specifically the behavior Joseph Smith engaged in. You know, lying to his wife about it, using God to threaten her into submission, not openly recognizing or taking care of his wives, using spiritual manipulation to get young women to agree quickly to his proposal... that kind of thing.

[_Nevo]

I don't happen to believe that people do things for one and only one reason, or hold one set of beliefs at the exclusion of all other viewpoints. We rationalize by shifting between reasons and viewpoints, in speaking to others and in our own minds.

I think this is a valid observation. I remember hearing Richard Bushman a number of years ago wonder if the discrepancies in Joseph's various accounts of the First Vision might be attributed to Joseph's telling the story differently to himself over time. This had never occurred to me before.

As Blake Ostler describes it, "revelation is not the filling of a mental void with divine content. It is the synthesis of a human and divine event. The prophet is an active participant in revelation, conceptualizing and verbalizing God's message" (Ostler, "The Book of Mormon as a Modern Expansion of an Ancient Source," 111). Joseph experienced revelation as "sudden strokes of ideas" that (he believed) came from God, but on some level these were also his own ideas. But I guess I won't get any argument from you there ;)

[_truth dancer]

Jason, you completely misunderstand my point. Probably my fault. Let me try again.

Jason, I am suggesting that besides their followers, Joseph Smith & Co, were not looked upon as men of honor.

I am suggesting that in most cases the views were motivated by something other than fact. Can you deal with the issues I raised? Religious, economic nad political bigotry or jealousy seemed to motivate most the conclusions about Smith. Therefore they were not objective in most cases.

With this I completely disagree. Just like today, people do not think too highly of those who claim to be the true messenger of God, who sleep around claiming it is God's will, lie to their wives, coerce girls to be their polygamous wives, etc. etc. No, I don't think for one minute those who did not like Joseph Smith were jealous any more than you might be jealous of David Koresh or any other similar cult/religious leader. (I say cult because at the time it was certainly not a religion).

Did they know everything about Joseph Smith? OF course not, just like you don't know everything about other cult leaders, Warren Jeffs for example.

Interesting most his followers thought very highly of him. Yet you rely on the views of his enemies and discount his followers, those who knew him best really. Thus I question your objectivity in this.

Of COURSE Joseph Smith followers thought highly of him, just as do all followers of various cult and religious leaders. If they didn't they wouldn't be followers. ;-)
That is all. My post regarding the saints being kicked out of town was to support this claim.

And for the reasons noted above I explain why I think this is poor reasoning.

To be honest Jason, I think you want to find something different in Joseph Smith than others who claim and behave the same as did he. I really don't see a difference.

If you think Joseph Smith & Co, WERE looked upon (by non-believers) as great and noble men please give me some evidence for this.

I have read a number of quotes here and there by non LDS that speak highly of him. The mayor of Boston-a Quincy I think, did. A frecnh contemporary author I think it was Tocqueville ? (I wonder if he knew Joseph Smith coerced girls and women while lying to his wife)?who commented that Smith could go down in history and the greatest American of the 19th century. I am doing this form memory. I don't have the time or energy to look this up right now.

OK, thanks, so there were some gentile folks who thought Joseph Smith was a good man. I still hold the majority of non followers did NOT think Joseph Smith was an honorable or decent man.

Besides this point, no I do not think that men who sleep around, lie to their wives, coerce girls and women into a relationship, and claim God told them to behave in such a way are men of honor.

Personally I agree that plural marriage was a major failing. But I also hold the possibility that Joseph really believed God was commanding this.

Why does Joseph Smith get a free pass and not others? I have the sense that most if not all of those men who claim to be the true messanger of God, and use this as an excuse to sleep with girls and women believe similarly.

Again... whether Joseph Smith had a good side or not, my point is, most folks do not think highly of those who behave as did Joseph Smith, and as do other men with similar claims.

Most folks today and in the days of Joseph Smith do not think highly of married men who sleep around with girls and women other than their wives, using God as an excuse, and who lie to their wives.

You seem to want to put Joseph Smith in a separate catagory of cult/religious leaders. With all due respect I think if you were not LDS you would see that Joseph Smith is no different than every other guy who makes the same or similar claims.

One last thing... my reasons for not thinking highly of Joseph Smith are NOT because others in his day didn't think highly of him. Not at all. It is because I do not think highly of men who behave as did he.

~dancer~