"Drastic Measures Were Called For"

[_mentalgymnast]

Shades and beefcalf, I'm referring to any personal writings . . . of Joseph Smith or his scribes where he as a matter of fact says that he is perpetuating a fraud.

Do we have any personal writings of Bernie Madoff from before he got caught where he as a matter of fact says that he is perpetuating a fraud?

Do we have any personal writings of Mark Hofmann from before he got caught where he as a matter of fact says that he is perpetuating a fraud?

Not that I know of. But neither do we have any personal writings (correspondence, newspaper clippings, journal entries, meeting minutes, etc.) which demonstrate directly or even indirectly that they were true believers in their con and that what they were doing was right. Or condoned/authorized by God.

We do for Joseph Smith.

Regards,
MG

[_mentalgymnast]

Shades and beefcalf, I'm referring to any personal writings (correspondence, newspaper clippings, journal entries, meeting minutes, etc.) of Joseph Smith or his scribes where he as a matter of fact says that he is perpetuating a fraud. His personal correspondence and other journal entries, etc., show that he was sincere and believed in his mission being from God.

I think his letter to Nancy Rigdon, while not an example of him admitting outright that he is a fraud, does well to inform us of his true nature. As does his outright deception in denying the facts of the letter when confronted by the poor girl's father and his 2nd-in-command, Sydney Ridgon.

http://www.i4m.com/think/history/smith_letter.htm

You're right. No evidence in this letter that directly or indirectly shows that he is acting as a fraudster. He does have some strong beliefs and/or feelings about the nature of God though. Some of them quite at odds with what some would be willing to accept.

Regards,
MG

[_Fence Sitter]

MG:
That's a possibility. When all is said and done, however, Emma died having received the ordinance of baptism and having been sealed to her husband and receiving her second anointing. Anything that remains to be sorted out with Emma will happen out of our mortal view. We can only hyperventilate or hypothesize.

Regards,
MG

I am sure that Emma will be quite happy in the eternities as one of several hundred women who have been sealed to Joseph Smith. It always seemed in her nature to want to share him with other women.

[_beastie]

Not that I know of. But neither do we have any personal writings (correspondence, newspaper clippings, journal entries, meeting minutes, etc.) which demonstrate directly or even indirectly that they were true believers in their con and that what they were doing was right. Or condoned/authorized by God.

We do for Joseph Smith.

Regards,
MG

Given the fact that multitudes of people, including those any sane person would regard as obviously deluded, have acted as if they were true believers in their con and what they were doing was right and condoned by God, this observation is irrelevant.

[_beefcalf]

mentalgymnast,

So, permit me to ask you what you think Smith's reason was for lying to Sydney Rigdon about the letter he had written to Nancy?

If the facts and circumstances surrounding polygamy, and especially Smith's practice thereof, were truly and factually commanded of God, why would Smith feel compelled to lie about it? And to Sydney Rigdon, of all people?

Why would God suffer that Rigdon could be so high in his one true church on Earth, while at the same time stand in defiance of God in the matter of accepting the doctrine of Polygamy?

[_Dr. Shades]

. . . neither do we have any personal writings (correspondence, newspaper clippings, journal entries, meeting minutes, etc.) which demonstrate directly or even indirectly that they were true believers in their con and that what they were doing was right. Or condoned/authorized by God.

We do for Joseph Smith.

As we do for the Reverend Sun Myung Moon, for David Koresh, and for Marshall Applewhite. If memory serves, we do for Jim Jones as well.

By your logic, they must be prophets, too.

[_Joseph]

Could you point me towards something Joseph Smith said that could act as the "smoking gun" demonstrating that he was perpetuating a fraud?
**************************

Zelph, the great white lamanite warrior?

Teaching the Word of Wisdom and then riding through the street of Nauvoo smoking a cigar?

Publicly denying polygamy/plural marriage while being 'married' to more than 20 women?

Face it, joe was a liar, a cheat and a con-man.

[_Mad Viking]

In a conference talk October a year ago in Jeffery Holland claimed he knew Joseph Smith would not have read the Book of Mormon (and thereby mock God) in Carthage if it were a fraud knowing they were to die soon—proving to Holland it indeed is not a fraud. I have argued that Joseph Smith actually didn't he would die that June 27th— but even if he did, I think history has shown that people will do just about anything to keep the illusion going, even with their backs against the wall.

Could you point me towards something Joseph Smith said that could act as the "smoking gun" demonstrating that he was perpetuating a fraud? You're willing to chalk up Elder Holland's conclusions as being suspect without so much as a blink of the eye. Concluding, off hand and as of a matter of fact, that Elder Holland is mistaken and that "history shows" this or that does not have any evidential value in showing that Joseph Smith was a fraud and knew it. So where's the beef?

Show that Joseph Smith was perpetuating an illusion vs. acting with integrity and sincerity. He should have given himself away somewhere in his writings. Come up with something, say, as interesting as Elder Holland's example you referenced.

Regards,
MG

You've missed the point completely (unless I have). Runtu's post was not meant to demonstrate that Joseph Smith was a fraud, but to demonstrate that some people will go to great lengths to defend a fraud. Apologists (and aparantly general authorities) assert the opposite. They claim that Joseph's own behavior demonstrates that he had not perpeturated a fraud by asserting that no one perpetuatting a fraud would go to the lengths that Joseph did. Runtu and some other posters have shown that human behavior in some cases is quite to the contrary. This argument does not prove Joseph was a fraud. It does make quick work of the defense that Elder Holland proposed.

FOR EXAMPLE: I've heard many a believer state something akin to, "If Joseph knew it was a fraud, he would not have given up his life. He would have admitted it to save his life. People don't do that type of thing for something they know is a fraud."

Clearly, based on this dicussion, this is not a valid argument (although, I've demonstrated in the recent past to not be extremely adept at formulating arguments). People are indeed willing to die or kill rather than be exposed as a fraud.

[_Molok]

Could you point me towards something Joseph Smith said that could act as the "smoking gun" demonstrating that he was perpetuating a fraud? You're willing to chalk up Elder Holland's conclusions as being suspect without so much as a blink of the eye. Concluding, off hand and as of a matter of fact, that Elder Holland is mistaken and that "history shows" this or that does not have any evidential value in showing that Joseph Smith was a fraud and knew it. So where's the beef?

Show that Joseph Smith was perpetuating an illusion vs. acting with integrity and sincerity. He should have given himself away somewhere in his writings. Come up with something, say, as interesting as Elder Holland's example you referenced.

Regards,
MG

You've missed the point completely (unless I have). Runtu's post was not meant to demonstrate that Joseph Smith was a fraud, but to demonstrate that some people will go to great lengths to defend a fraud. Apologists (and aparantly general authorities) assert the opposite. They claim that Joseph's own behavior demonstrates that he had not perpeturated a fraud by asserting that no one perpetuatting a fraud would go to the lengths that Joseph did. Runtu and some other posters have shown that human behavior in some cases is quite to the contrary. This argument does not prove Joseph was a fraud. It does make quick work of the defense that Elder Holland proposed.

FOR EXAMPLE: I've heard many a believer state something akin to, "If Joseph knew it was a fraud, he would not have given up his life. He would have admitted it to save his life. People don't do that type of thing for something they know is a fraud."

Clearly, based on this dicussion, this is not a valid argument (although, I've demonstrated in the recent past to not be extremely adept at formulating arguments). People are indeed willing to die or kill rather than be exposed as a fraud.

Not to mention, Joseph didn't die because people thought he made up the Book of Mormon. Even if he had confessed to the mob that he was a fraud, I very much doubt that would have saved his life.

[_badseed]

Could you point me towards something Joseph Smith said that could act as the "smoking gun" demonstrating that he was perpetuating a fraud? You're willing to chalk up Elder Holland's conclusions as being suspect without so much as a blink of the eye. Concluding, off hand and as of a matter of fact, that Elder Holland is mistaken and that "history shows" this or that does not have any evidential value in showing that Joseph Smith was a fraud and knew it. So where's the beef?

Show that Joseph Smith was perpetuating an illusion vs. acting with integrity and sincerity. He should have given himself away somewhere in his writings. Come up with something, say, as interesting as Elder Holland's example you referenced.

Regards,
MG

There are things I think show that Joseph Smith likely (at least at times) knowingly perpetuated fraud but that wasn't the point of my post. My point really was that Holland has no way of knowing if Joseph @ Carthage would or would not lie/steal/cheat/kill to perpetuate any fraud/illusion he might have created when faced with death. There is no way to know.

Disregard all of that, and tell me whether in this hour of death these two men would enter the presence of their Eternal Judge quoting from and finding solace in a book which, if not the very word of God, would brand them as imposters and charlatans until the end of time? They would not do that! They were willing to die rather than deny the divine origin and the eternal truthfulness of the Book of Mormon.

Throughout history there are cases of people in very similar situations doing the exact opposite of what Holland claims. Some people will come clean when backed against the wall. Some double down their bets and will continue the game, thinking they will somehow pull it off only to go down in flames.

Certainly Joseph claimed to be true believer but then so did Mark Hoffman during his time as a forger. We now know he was an atheist by the age of 14 or so but still maintained the lifestyle and appearance of faithful LDS for a host of reasons— one being that it allowed him to more easily deal in LDS forgeries.

My point was that things like the Hoffman story make me realize that people can do some unexpected and sometimes drastic things to protect the myth they have created and I personally see no way that Elder Holland can be sure that Joseph Smith wasn't doing that exactly at Carthage and elsewhere.

Apparently, Mark Hoffman was the kind to double-down and take 'drastic measures.' I personally think Joseph Smith likely was too. The evidence supporting why I think that is perhaps another discussion.