Simon Belmont wrote:
What would be, in your opinion, the end which justified Joseph Smith's means?
Lying and making things up like the Book of Mormon or Book of Abraham. Their is more then enough evidence that he did just that. Remember lying for the Lord doctrine.
Right, this is option 2. Really, truly believing, but being wrong.
Actually no. Your option 2 has Joseph with a major mental disorder which is not a part of the pious fraud theory.
Even if you are correct, human nature dictates that in order to preserve his life, he will resort to anything, especially telling his captors what he believes they want to hear, If other methods have not worked. It is basic fight or flight.
A bit simplistic and incorrect. By this logic even if Joseph or anyone else did see God they would say they made it up in order to save his life. Sure some people do say what ever to save their life, and major fraudsters are more likely(not all mind you) to say what ever to save their life, but we are talking about a pious fraud. Your also forgetting that Joseph wasn't given these options, and even at Carthage they were not asking for a confession(their desire to kill him wasn't solely based on religious reasons). He was most likely trying to use the masonic distress in hopes they could be rescued. I would have done the same.
Not to the extend Joseph Smith did.
We are talking about option 1 fraudsters, which I don't think Joseph was, and I think we could find a number who have suffered and died for their frauds. I'm sure none of them wanted to.
So now we have a group of pious frauds?
There is the possibility a few others may have been involved
And if they were unaware, then there would not be witnesses.
Not really. People can be tricked. There is some evidence that the witnesses saw with their spiritual eyes. Memory can also play a factor as well as how we are able to justify or convince ourselves of things. I have a relative who is very good at this, not to mention all those apologists :)
Actual frauds do not flourish into world-wide religions. For example: Heaven's Gate, Branch Davidians, etc.
I hope you only kidding, but I think you may be serious. You really need to control your bias and get out and learn a lot more about human nature and the world around you. How about Scientology or JW. Oh BYW I would agree with Heaven's gate, because suicide cults never seem to be able to hold onto their members
I stand by Martin Harris. He was a good, but confused, man. I have read church materials as well as critical materials (works by the Tanners, Fawn Brodie, etc.)
I think he was a good man, and confused is right. I would also add gullible to that list.
Okay, but surely you can admit that there a lot of things people find hard to be God-sanctioned (much of the Old Testament, for example).
Sure, further evdience of being man-made. Remember, in the beginning Man created God in his own Image
Perhaps, but it is too easy to forget all of the good things about Joseph. Having read "The Joseph Smith Papers," it is amazing the love he had for his friends and neighbors.
Sure their are good things about Joseph. I'm interested in the good and bad when evaluating his claims. I think he did love those he viewed loyal to him, and family was extremely important to him.
I disagree. I think he has asked for faith numerous times in the Bible especially.
Wrong. You already said God won't talk to us all, so we are left with only those claiming to represent God. I would think you would realize why this kind of faith being asked of us is not good.