Joseph Smith's Memory

[_Darth J]

I see no proof that she attempted to murder her husband

Okay, so your take is that the Prophet Brigham Young was a liar.

and her great great great grand daughter seems not have found anything of this either or else it would have been in the article.

It is right in that very interview that Emma claimed Joseph never practiced plural marriage, and yet that little tidbit did not make it into the Ensign article, either. Perhaps you could venture a guess as to why that is?

[_Darth J]

So in your opinion, referencing the faith-promoting cherry-picked statements quoted by a fourth-generation descendant of Emma is somehow a valid appeal to authority as to whether Emma Smith accepted the revelation on plural marriage, and whether Brigham Young accused her of being a damn liar who tried to kill Joseph.

Richard Bushman writes of the poisoning accusation:

Through the late fall and winter of 1843 and 1844, Joseph and Emma's relationship broke down only once. During Sunday dinner on November 5, Joseph became ill, rushed to the door, and vomited so violently that he dislocated his jaw. "Every symptom of poison," Richards noted in Joseph's diary. That night at the prayer meeting, Richards, wrote in code that Joseph and Emma did not dress in the usual special clothing, a sign they were too much at odds to participate. The next day, Richards wrote that Joseph was "busy with domestic concerns." Years later, in the anti-Emma atmosphere of Utah, Brigham Young spoke of a meeting where Joseph accused his wife of slipping poison into his coffee. Brigham interpreted Emma's refusal to answer as an admission of guilt.. Though there probably was an argument, the poisoning accusation was unfounded. Joseph was susceptible to vomiting anyway. He had even dislocated his jaw while vomiting once before; and five weeks after the 1843 dinner episode, he was sick again, vomiting more violently than ever. During this last bout, Joseph said gratefully, "My wife waited on me.

Such is life. Bad blood can spread a false rumor. Such are human beings, imperfect. Next problem?

Why Me, you have already made it clear that you feel that Brigham Young was a liar, to the point that he was willing to slander the wife of Joseph Smith in front of the Church. Since you feel that Brigham Young was willing to lie to promote an agenda, there really isn't anything left to be said about the truth claims of the LDS Church. You have conceded the point.

[_Darth J]

Just a point of clarification, Why Me.

You asserted that the reason Emma did not follow the Brighamite branch of Mormonism is because of polygamy and exhaustion over being persecuted. But then you quote this from your Ensign article:

When asked many years later why she didn’t go west, she simply replied, “I had a home here, I didn’t know what lay out there.”

I would hate readers of the board to get the impression that you have no coherent position, but are merely flailing about with random ad hoc excuses. So perhaps you would like to explain the basis for your assertion, particularly when that is not the reason that Emma is said to have given.

Just a suggestion, but your explanation might include why, if she was exhausted from persecution, she remained behind instead of fleeing from it.

[_Uncle Dale]

It is right in that very interview that Emma claimed Joseph never practiced plural marriage, and yet that little tidbit did not make it into the Ensign article, either. Perhaps you could venture a guess as to why that is?

Perhaps it would be useful at this point to solicit the
experiences of somebody whose heritage has been
RLDS, and who was an observant member of that
church for most of his/her adult life.

Such a member grew up hearing that Sister Emma told
the truth about her husband... and that is why the
RLDS Church had to be established -- to carry forth
The truth of the patriarchal priesthood (i.e. only a
descendant of Joseph Smith, sr. could rightfully
hold the Presidency) -- and the truth of monogamy
(i.e. All the Smith men were faithful monogamists,
because they obeyed God's commandments).

How would such a member feel about Emma Smith,
when confronted by LDS proponents who argued
that Emma was a liar about both of these tenets,
and that she knew damn well that she was lying,
when she helped her oldest son found the RLDS
Church at Amboy, on April 6,1860?

???


I suppose I might be able to cite the reaction of
one such Reorganite here, if asked to do so.

UD

[_Cicero]

I suppose I might be able to cite the reaction of
one such Reorganite here, if asked to do so.

UD

I have had the opportunity to ask that exact same question a few times, but I'd love to hear your response.

[_MCB]

Obviously, Dale, we are waiting for you to expostulate on the matter.

[_Darth J]

Perhaps it would be useful at this point to solicit the
experiences of somebody whose heritage has been
RLDS, and who was an observant member of that
church for most of his/her adult life.

I would very much like know about those experiences, Uncle Dale.

However, I certainly hope you are not suggesting that members of the LDS Church are solipsistic. Certainly, the consistent behavior of the LDS Church and its members would not warrant such a conclusion.

[_Uncle Dale]

I suppose I might be able to cite the reaction of
one such Reorganite here, if asked to do so.

UD

I have had the opportunity to ask that exact same question a few times, but I'd love to hear your response.

In my own case, it was followed by years of arguing
against such Mormons. --- and by constantly going
back to high-level RLDS leaders for reassurance.

Until the day arrived when an RLDS apostle confided
to me in private, that our leaders had been lying
about these supposed facts since 1860 -- and that
the President of the Q12, Jason Briggs, had confronted
the First Presidency about these lies as early as 1886.

Suddenly the Mormon polemicists seemed much more
believable. Emma was indeed a terrible liar, and
the Prophet Brigham Young had been correct, in the
1860s, when he announced from the podium of
General Conference, in Salt Lake City, that he could
produce confirming witnesses from the very audience
that was then attending his doctrinal address.

Oh we'll --we all lie, sooner or later. Hopefully most
of us do not extend those lies to the point of our
starting false churches and promising false salvation
to gullible saintly dupes.

UD

[_MCB]

The least they could have done was claim Joseph Smith to have been a fallen prophet. Would have gotten them out of a tight doctrinal corner much more easily. My respect for RLDS has taken a mighty tumble.

[_Joe Geisner]

In examining Smith's ability to dictate the Book of Mormon, I found his letters to Newell Knight and the Colesville Saints an interesting window into Smith's King James vernacular.

The two letters are conveniently found:

http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSumma ... ember-1830

http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSumma ... ugust-1830