thews wrote:You admire Joseph Smith for his accomplishments, constantly stating what people would or wouldn't do if he was a "fraudster". While you attend Catholic mass and spin all the things that don't make sense, what you fail to acknowledge is that joseph Smith was a false prophet of God. In choosing what one aligns themselves with regarding religion, you're so all over the map it's hard to define. Where do you stand whyme? Was Joseph Smith a prophet of God and do you follow his teachings?
I am a victim of postmodernism. I think that the Book of Mormon is a hard nut to crack and the witnesses are also. Both speak volumes for Joseph Smith and his story. Also, looking at Mormon history there is much to admire. A strong people united by faith struggling through intense persecution is the american spirit of never give up. And joseph smith could have thrown in the towel at any time if he were a fraudster. But his life resembles a man who had a mission in life and he attempted to do that mission with all his heart and soul. And that is admirable and shows true intent.
I keep an open mind in matters faith. But the Mormon story is hard to crack...many have tried and all have failed. And yes, I tend to do my own thing in both faiths. And I can admire both.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
why me wrote: And joseph smith could have thrown in the towel at any time if he were a fraudster. But his life resembles a man who had a mission in life and he attempted to do that mission with all his heart and soul. And that is admirable and shows true intent.
You could be describing Warren Jeffs. Do you admire him too?
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
Drifting wrote:Brigham Young said you are damned if you deny polygamy.
"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned," (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, p. 266). Also, "The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy," (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, p. 269).
Brigham Young made these statements when he was Prophet and with full knowledge of the content of D&C 132. Was he wrong?
Brigham Young said many things throughout his life. And I tend not to cherry pick this or that about what he said or did't say. I think that for his time frame, it was true. He was working in a different time line than today. And we need to take this into consideration when discussing about what a church leader said.
But I can say this: Brigham was an american hero and apart of american frontier history. He embodied the pioneer spirt by going west for a better life for himself and for the members. And those that followed him were brave and couragous. Studying US history about brigham in high school one had the impression that the Mormons were brave people.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
why me wrote: And joseph smith could have thrown in the towel at any time if he were a fraudster. But his life resembles a man who had a mission in life and he attempted to do that mission with all his heart and soul. And that is admirable and shows true intent.
You could be describing Warren Jeffs. Do you admire him too?
It can also describe teddy roosevelt and many others in amercan history.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
why me wrote: And joseph smith could have thrown in the towel at any time if he were a fraudster. But his life resembles a man who had a mission in life and he attempted to do that mission with all his heart and soul. And that is admirable and shows true intent.
You could be describing Warren Jeffs. Do you admire him too?
Since you have quoted whyme - and your comparison with Warren Jeffs makes it worthwhile - I'd like to make the obvious point in response to his habitual inanity above.
What the blazes would Joseph Smith have done if he had 'thrown in the towel'?
How else was he to make a living? He was never a successful farmer in his own right, though he had earned money as a day-laborer. Early in the setting up of his new church he had emphasized that as the prophet he should live off members' donations and cease manual work. His career as a practitioner of 'glass looking' had not been a success, and had landed him in court. He had no marketable skills at all, apart from the ones he used to function as a sect leader. Maybe he could have tried selling snake oil?
No, right up to the final crisis, his position as church leader was infinitely preferable in power, status and social and sexual gratification to anything else that was open to him. Even when the crisis was upon him, the alternative to going to Carthage would almost certainly have been to attempt flight with a small band of followers rather than simply saying "OK guys, I'm not really a prophet" - which might in any case have led to his assassination by disappointed and cheated Mormons (other than those ex-Mormons who may have joined in the murder that did in fact take place).
Zadok: I did not have a faith crisis. I discovered that the Church was having a truth crisis. Maksutov: That's the problem with this supernatural stuff, it doesn't really solve anything. It's a placeholder for ignorance.
Chap wrote: Since you have quoted whyme - and your comparison with Warren Jeffs makes it worthwhile - I'd like to make the obvious point in response to his habitual inanity above.
What the blazes would Joseph Smith have done if he had 'thrown in the towel'?
How else was he to make a living? He was never a successful farmer in his own right, though he had earned money as a day-laborer. Early in the setting up of his new church he had emphasized that as the prophet he should live off members' donations and cease manual work. His career as a practitioner of 'glass looking' had not been a success, and had landed him in court. He had no marketable skills at all, apart from the ones he used to function as a sect leader. Maybe he could have tried selling snake oil?
No, right up to the final crisis, his position as church leader was infinitely preferable in power, status and social and sexual gratification to anything else that was open to him. Even when the crisis was upon him, the alternative to going to Carthage would almost certainly have been to attempt flight with a small band of followers rather than simply saying "OK guys, I'm not really a prophet" - which might in any case have led to his assassination by disappointed and cheated Mormons (other than those ex-Mormons who may have joined in the murder that did in fact take place).
Excellent point, Chap. Joseph had a good thing going - all the sex, money and property he wanted. Where else would he have gone?
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.
why me wrote:You could be describing Warren Jeffs. Do you admire him too?
It can also describe teddy roosevelt and many others in amercan history.[/quote][/quote]
What the heck are you referring to?
(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.
Drifting wrote:Brigham Young said you are damned if you deny polygamy.
"Now if any of you will deny the plurality of wives, and continue to do so, I promise that you will be damned," (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, p. 266). Also, "The only men who become Gods, even the Sons of God, are those who enter into polygamy," (Journal of Discourses, vol. 11, p. 269).
Brigham Young made these statements when he was Prophet and with full knowledge of the content of D&C 132. Was he wrong?
Maybe, somtimes prophets are wrong. However, he could possibly be right if there were men with wives willing to share and single women willing to join the family but the husband not wanting to take on the added responsibility.
I seriously doubt that BY believed that every male in the church was damed if he didn't have more than one wife. That's just stupid. The idea is not supported by scripture and on top of that, it's an impossible numbers game. Either BY was wrong or there is more to the story that what is being presented.
Zelder wrote:I seriously doubt that BY believed that every male in the church was damned if he didn't have more than one wife. That's just stupid. The idea is not supported by scripture and on top of that, it's an impossible numbers game. Either BY was wrong or there is more to the story that what is being presented.
This isn't so hard to understand if Brigham Young never expected all men in the church to achieve exaltation. In my readings of the early church under BY and that Q12, it seems that they believed that only the elite amongst them would achieve godhood. This was one of the underpinnings of BY's ruling that a woman who wanted to "upgrade" to a man with a higher priesthood and higher authority could do so, if her husband was willing to let her go, and that no divorce was required. If both men were equally to be rewarded, or achieve equal destinies in the life to come, the teaching makes a lot less sense.
Mormonism ceased being a compelling topic for me when I finally came to terms with its transformation from a personality cult into a combination of a real estate company, a SuperPac, and Westboro Baptist Church. - Kishkumen
Zelder wrote:I seriously doubt that BY believed that every male in the church was damned if he didn't have more than one wife. That's just stupid. The idea is not supported by scripture and on top of that, it's an impossible numbers game. Either BY was wrong or there is more to the story that what is being presented.
This isn't so hard to understand if Brigham Young never expected all men in the church to achieve exaltation. In my readings of the early church under BY and that Q12, it seems that they believed that only the elite amongst them would achieve godhood. This was one of the underpinnings of BY's ruling that a woman who wanted to "upgrade" to a man with a higher priesthood and higher authority could do so, if her husband was willing to let her go, and that no divorce was required. If both men were equally to be rewarded, or achieve equal destinies in the life to come, the teaching makes a lot less sense.
I agree. I think the BY DID believe that only men who had plural wives would enter into the highest degree of glory in the CK. It allowed him to have even more power. Men could only take more than one wife if they had the blessing of the First Presidency to do so. Basically, BY put himself in a position to play God.