Joseph Smith Megathread

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Joseph Smith Megathread

Post by _harmony »

zeezrom wrote:How do you know god works through people. Does god need to do that?


I hestitate to answer, but since it's Simon's thread and not yours... the answer is "no". If a person is going to believe that God needs to work through people, then its equally likely to believe he works through the Pope, David Koresh, Jim Jones, and a host of others. Which is no doubt why a personal relationship with God is discouraged by the Brethren. If one has a personal relationship with God, one doesn't need the Brethren. All that's needed is a secretary to file the paperwork.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Simon Belmont

Re: Joseph Smith Megathread

Post by _Simon Belmont »

Jason Bourne wrote:Joseph Smith unfortunately did many things that were repugnant to many of his neighbors who lived in his own time. Polygamy was certainly one of those. Culturally it was abhorrent to the world in which he lived.


You mistake my position as condoning polygamy. I do not. I also do not pretend to know exactly why the Lord commanded Joseph Smith to engage in polygamy. He has his reasons.

And by the way, your foolish arguments about polygamy do not deserve even responses. If this is what you need to make you feel good about it have at it. But it is pretty clear you are not the authority on Joseph Smith that you pretend to be.


You have not a clue about with whom you are dealing.

However, when one has to decide whether they trust the person that says God is appearing to them and speaking to them well them his mistakes, egregious errors and even intentional things the person claiming supernatural communication does then they have absolute bearing on the decision.


I am not sure what your point is here, but I will say this:

I have read voraciously about Joseph Smith from the time I was old enough to read. I have read every book, every pamphlet, every news article, and every publication I could get my hands on. To this day, I read everything new that comes from the press. Joseph Smith made mistakes, and he had human failures, but he was a sincere, honorable man.

You know who says this? The very few that claim God speaks to them. Maybe the prophets are not being honest about this.


I believe you will find, upon further research, that there have been much more than "a very few" that have claimed supernatural direction.

Joseph Smith used his power and position and applied duress that would come from his position and power to persuade women to enter into plural marriage, yes dude, MARRIAGE, with him.


You cannot demonstrate this. It is your opinion. I assure you that I have studied more about this than you have, and I do not come to the same conclusion.

And yes, many of these marriages were consummated.


Again, I do not deny this. It has no bearing on whether he was what he claimed to be.

And yes he did lie about it, to the public but even more seriously, to his wife Emma. He hid many of these marriages from here and even did a mock wedding when she gave her permission for him to marry the Partridge girls when she did not know he had already married them.


You really want to bring Emily Partridge into this? Do you even understand this story? Joseph Smith mentioned it to her, asking if she wished the matter ended. Answering in the affirmative, Joseph Smith left her alone. Later, Emily said this:
[In] those few months I received a testimony of the words that Joseph would have said to me and their nature before they were told me and being convinced of them I received them readily.


Tell me Simon, why are you so ok with what Joseph Smith did with polygamy but would never accept a man like Wayne Bent and his polygamy in the name of God.


I do not claim to know every reason for God's commandments. I accept that Joseph Smith was a mortal man and made many mistakes, as do we all. He was, nonetheless, a prophet of God.
_Simon Belmont

Re: Joseph Smith Megathread

Post by _Simon Belmont »

zeezrom wrote:How do you know god works through people. Does god need to do that?


I do not think God needs to do anything. He knows what is best for His plan, and he does, in fact work through people. That is why we must love our neighbor, and serve our fellow human beings.
_Trevor
_Emeritus
Posts: 7213
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 6:28 pm

Re: Joseph Smith Megathread

Post by _Trevor »

Simon Belmont wrote:ad nauseum, I assure you.


Simon, amice, to which declension does nausea belong? Sigh.
“I was hooked from the start,” Snoop Dogg said. “We talked about the purpose of life, played Mousetrap, and ate brownies. The kids thought it was off the hook, for real.”
_zeezrom
_Emeritus
Posts: 11938
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 8:57 pm

Re: Joseph Smith Megathread

Post by _zeezrom »

harmony wrote:I hestitate to answer, but since it's Simon's thread and not yours... the answer is "no". If a person is going to believe that God needs to work through people, then its equally likely to believe he works through the Pope, David Koresh, Jim Jones, and a host of others. Which is no doubt why a personal relationship with God is discouraged by the Brethren. If one has a personal relationship with God, one doesn't need the Brethren. All that's needed is a secretary to file the paperwork.

I also hesitate to comment on this interesting take on things but since it is a free forum I will do so.

I never thought of the Mormon church as discouraging a personal relationship with God. Maybe we could say the church discourages making your personal relationship more important than your connection with someone else's relationship with God (e.g. TS Monson's). Sorry Simon, but you were the one who brought up this idea of God needing to work through men.
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)

The Holy Sacrament.
_Tarski
_Emeritus
Posts: 3059
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:57 pm

Re: Joseph Smith Megathread

Post by _Tarski »

Simon Belmont wrote:


You mistake my position as condoning polygamy. I do not. I also do not pretend to know exactly why the Lord commanded Joseph Smith to engage in polygamy.


You systematically refuse to even consider the most obvious answer: God did not command Joseph Smith to practice polygamy.

What undisputable fact on the record does not fit with that hypothesis?
when believers want to give their claims more weight, they dress these claims up in scientific terms. When believers want to belittle atheism or secular humanism, they call it a "religion". -Beastie

yesterday's Mormon doctrine is today's Mormon folklore.-Buffalo
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Joseph Smith Megathread

Post by _harmony »

zeezrom wrote:I never thought of the Mormon church as discouraging a personal relationship with God. Maybe we could say the church discourages making your personal relationship more important than your connection with someone else's relationship with God (e.g. TS Monson's).


The church encourages a personal relationship with God... until that relationship leads the individual into conflict with the prophet/church/Brethren... then the personal relationship with God is kicked to the curb, and the "follow the prophet" mantra starts up.

So, in reality, the church only pays lip service to an individual member's personal relationship with God. And that brings us back to the discussion of claimed authority, unrighteous dominion, and a host of other sins we can lay at Joseph's feet and the feet of every prophet since God removed him from the earth.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Redefined
_Emeritus
Posts: 1083
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 1:06 pm

Re: Joseph Smith Megathread

Post by _Redefined »

I second the pious fraud idea. I know some people would argue that he was delusional, or possibly influenced by some sort of drug, but it is just too consequential that his "visions" were so appropriately timed to his convienience. For instance, when he lusted after a certain female, he would have a vision of an angel with a flaming sword. If he were merely delusional, it wouldn't be so predictable. He knew exactly what he was doing. Master of manipulation.
"Sometimes i feel so isolated, i wanna die."-Rock Mafia--The Big Bang
this one. . .
and this one!
_Simon Belmont

Re: Joseph Smith Megathread

Post by _Simon Belmont »

Trevor wrote:Simon, amice, to which declension does nausea belong? Sigh.


I have much to remember about Latin, which is why I have not been using it as much. :)
_AtticusFinch
_Emeritus
Posts: 392
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:48 am

Re: Joseph Smith Megathread

Post by _AtticusFinch »

He was a fraud. He started early making people believe he could find treasure. He got in trouble with the law and looked for the next scam. He found it in religion.
“What really goes on in the minds of Church leadership who know of the the truth. It would devastate the Church if a top leader were to announce the facts.” Thomas Ferguson, Mormon archaeologist
Post Reply