The Commercials, an interesting read

[_Darth J]

WHAT FACTUAL ASSERTIONS IN THE OP ARE NOT TRUE?

They are all not giving the entire story.

"Washington, D.C. is the capitol of the United States."

Oh, but I didn't give the entire story of the United States and how Washington, D.C. came to be the capitol. So my statement is false.

[_Simon Belmont]

Anything else not true, Simon?

Impressive. Thank you.

I just want to know how many books, and if Joseph Inc. has done any research on Joseph Smith.

Am I really evil for asking such a thing?

"Washington, D.C. is the capitol of the United States."

For this analogy to work you'd have to say something like:

"Washington D.C. is capital of socialism, because of the current administration"

[_Doctor Scratch]

Simon Belmont is stunningly dishonest. He went from claiming to have penned multiple "research papers" on Joseph Smith, to admitting that, in fact, not a one of them has been published. Then, he claimed that he was unwilling to post any of these amateur efforts because they were on paper, as if he'd written them with his trusty old Royal, or something. *Then*, we learn that, in fact, these aren't necessarily "research papers" at all, and that in fact, at least two of them are "book reviews"! Not only that, but Simon does actually have e-files of them somewhere.... It's just that he's out of town. Lol. I don't know that I've ever seen anyone's sockpuppet implode so swiftly. I daresay that Belmont's credibility will never recover from this. What a pity.

Again, I do not understand your hostility.

And I don't understand your remarkable dishonesty. Are you sure you're a believing Latter-day Saint?

I have written multiple research papers. Nowhere did I claim they were published.

In the context of your remark to Joseph, you were pretty clearly suggesting superiority of some kind. Are we now to understand that your measure of "superiority" were simply some unpublished, amateur articles of some sort?

I do, in fact, have one on paper with me that I will run down to the hotel lobby and copy and mail to anyone who wishes.

What are you doing hauling around paper copies of your "research papers"? Why bring such a thing to a hotel?

Two of the ones that came to mind were book reviews, yes.

Presumably, someone with a "MA" in philosophy would understand the difference between a "research paper" and a book review.

So, please point out where I was being dishonest.

It's all right here on this thread, Simon.

[_Simon Belmont]

And I don't understand your remarkable dishonesty. Are you sure you're a believing Latter-day Saint?

I am unsure as to why I have hit a nerve with you. I am not an apologist, I am just an educated believing Latter-day Saint.

In the context of your remark to Joseph, you were pretty clearly suggesting superiority of some kind. Are we now to understand that your measure of "superiority" were simply some unpublished, amateur articles of some sort?

I claim superiority over Joseph Inc. in that I have more knowledge about Joseph Smith than he does. I claim this in confidence because I have seen the types of posts he makes (see: LDS FamilySearch etc hates Linux, for a good laugh). All I asked was if he had researched Smith at all, and to list any books or papers he had written.

What are you doing hauling around paper copies of your "research papers"? Why bring such a thing to a hotel?

I happen to be visiting an old friend who is now a professor; she asked for a copy.

Presumably, someone with a "MA" in philosophy would understand the difference between a "research paper" and a book review.

I do indeed, which is why I listed what I consider one of my best works about the 1826 trial.

My intention was not dishonesty, I assure you. It is unnecessary for you to be hostile toward me -- I have done nothing to you.

[_Dr. Shades]

I think that if you are going to post snide remarks about a historical person that other people hold sacred, then you should know something about that person instead of repeating what other critics say. I asked what he knew, and he hasn't replied.

Do you know something about Joseph Smith instead of repeating what other Mopologists say?

If not, how are you any different from Joseph, the opening poster?

[Guest]

Impressive. Thank you.

Well, I can't be waiting around forever for you to say anything other than it isn't true because you don't like it.

I just want to know how many books, and if Joseph Inc. has done any research on Joseph Smith.

Am I really evil for asking such a thing?

I never said you're evil. You made a claim and said you guarantee it. So, I call.

"Washington, D.C. is the capitol of the United States."

For this analogy to work you'd have to say something like:

"Washington D.C. is capital of socialism, because of the current administration"

No, the analogy is about objective fact. Your response is that the OP is false because it doesn't tell the "whole story." The factual assertions in the OP are:

"I live in western Illinois, America's heartland"

Until June 27, 1844, this was true.

"I'm basically a story writer, I love to be creative
Everybody likes a good yarn! Right?"

You may not like the LDS scriptures being called stories that Joseph Smith made up, but the only prima facie case the LDS Church has of their authenticity is a subjective emotional state that you're supposed to associate with truth.

"When I was younger I bounced between jobs, gold digger, glass looker"

The terminology may not be the standard way of referring to Joseph Smith's treasure seeking, but the substance of this statement is true.

"But then I started writing and I knew I'd found my calling"

This is true. The Book of Mormon's publication is what changed the course of Joseph Smith's life.

"I've written three books and I've developed a loyal following"

If we're talking about the Book of Mormon, the Book of Commandments, and the publication of Book of Abraham chapters and facsimiles, then this is true.

"Although my readers are very loyal they are a small group"

If we're talking about relative size of the Mormons versus other religious groups at the time, then this is true.

"So I've had to go deeper, better penetrate my marketplace"

If the "marketplace" is looking for converts, then this is true.

"I started a small bank......that didn't go so well...for the depositors anyway he he he"

I already explained why this is not technically entirely accurate.

"I set up subscription fees, real estate investments"

And for more on this, please see D&C 124.

"and I even bought an Egyptian mummy."

No, four mummies, and it wasn't all his own money to buy them.

"I'm a real family guy, I think a man should take care of his women....woman I mean. I only have one wife...I'm completely normal in that way...you know....just having one wife...who is for sure way older than 14 years old."

Joseph Smith had many plural wives, and some of them were teenage girls.

So is the OP "false" because it isn't faith-promoting?

[_Jersey Girl]

Cards on the table. I know you don't know me from anyone else on this board. Not yet, at least. :-) I'm not LDS nor have I ever been LDS. We don't get enough LDS on this board and I'd like to see you stay. If I seem to be strident in the way that I approach you, it's only because the rest of the community is going to nail you to the wall if you don't learn to stop dancing around and eventually, you'll dance out the door and we'll be down one more LDS.


You: I think that if you are going to post snide remarks about a historical person that other people hold sacred, then you should know something about that person instead of repeating what other critics say. I asked what he knew, and he hasn't replied.

Me: You already know what this place is and what content you're likely to read here. You put a man's head on the image of a woman's body in a bikini and claimed that if if was offensive you'd take it down. Redefined obviously protested the image and as far as I know, the image remains intact in the Telestial forum so don't waste your time telling me how sacred Joseph Smith is, while you offend in another forum.


You: Yes, and I just asked for a list. It was not my intention to have Joseph Inc. send me any actual writings of his (hint: he has none).

I listed some of the writings of mine.

Me: You should be refuting the statements in the OP, not playing "my knowledge is bigger than your knowledge" games.

If your knowledge is more extensive than the OP, then demonstrate it. Go through it line by line and decimate it.


Me: I'm looking for indications of integrity/character/wisdom and that's all I'm looking for. Period.

You: You will not find these qualities in Joseph Inc.


Me: Will I find them in you, Simon?

Now have yourself a good evening and think about what's going on here. You shot off your keyboard and made a claim that has nothing to do with effectively refuting the content of the OP that you find so offensive.

[_cafe crema]

When the church positions itself among the "profane" array shown on TV (you know KY intense, shamwow and so forth) it leaves itself open to cynicism and mocking. That people are going to parody the ads is a given. After all advertising particularly TV advertising is something that all parents I know teach their kids to regard with at least suspicion if not out right cynicism.

[_Inconceivable]

Simon,

you went after someone that you believe is not as adept at arguing his position as you think you are - you considered him (Joseph) as an easy target to attack and confound - not because he was entirely wrong but because you thought you could deceive others into thinking his entire statement was false. Shame on you.

What you will find here is that there are plenty of individuals that are very well read on the history of the scumbag Joseph Smith and his gang of reprobates. They have no intention of sitting by to permit a 2 bit hack puppet apologist take advantage of someone for their words.

No one give a rats ass how much you profess to know when you waste 2 full pages without producing once scrap of substance.

Additionally, if you are not willing to reveal yourself, what you profess to credit yourself with is about as valuable as a coat in a furnace.

[_Joseph]

Well blemont, looks like you are getting the what for from those on the forum.
What do I know of Joseph Smith. Too much, and some of it through direct family ties to "The Prophet" and his family. Too much, some of it through direct family ties to those who were virulent Anti-Mormons and even murdered a number of them. Possibly a few who were in the crowd at Carthage though no proof of that is in any family records like at Hauns Mill and Nauvoo.

I have been in the homes of many in the higher leadership positions of LDSinc. I have seen and held Boyd K. Packers paintings and some of Dallin Oaks books, in their homes. Spencer W. Kimball, LeGrand Richhards, even Paul Dunn, among many others. I have been in the homes and stayed with a number of General Authorities through the years. I have been on the Stand at General Conference in a number of sessions. Look in some older photos of some sessions and I am there. Suit, tie, white shirt and the whole deal, looking just like a mini-mafia soldier. I have even been taken on a personal tour through the upper rooms of The Temple in SLC and Manti with a few GA's and seen and looked into the Holy of Holies, though not stepped through the doors.

Not all who post on these forums are no nothings when it comes to LDSinc. Many held positions of leadership. Many know leaders as well as the everyday members. Some of us have even been published in LDS as well as other books, magazines and newspapers. Some of us have our work in the possession and libraries of MOST of The Brethren, from personal visits to their offices and some of their homes.

Our feelings about LDSinc come from direct exposure and experience with Leadership and members.

Get as strident as you want. Just don't enter into 'challenges' unless you are willing to actually go through with them.

Put up the $50,000 and make it worth my time. Go ahead, big shot.