Joseph Smith--the best 'wing man' Brigham Young ever had

[I Have Questions]

Warren Jeff's taking multiple wives and Joseph Smith doing the same is just that, a fact. It happened. But it didn't stop there in the case of Joseph Smith and the succeeding prophets and the rise of the CofJCofLDS. Much more came from that small nucleus of believers in 1830. To the point that there are temples throughout the world administering ordinances of salvation/exaltation.

If number of temples is your chosen measure of God’s hand then Hinduism is way more true than Mormonism.

Hinduism is one of the oldest religions, and one of the most prone to use temples as part of their worship. Hindu temples dot the landscape of the Asian subcontinent of India, with approximately two million in that part of the world alone.

Hinduism has way more fruit.

Then you’ve got Scientology doing quite well. So is that equally a sign that L. Ron Hubbard was divinely inspired?

[malkie]

Thank you.

As long as you believe in the individual, and in the god that supposedly gave the individual licence, you can make it whatever you want by non-civil standards. It's still hard to square that with supposed respect for civil law - other than a cafeteria type of respect.

However, that forces you to pick and choose which of the claimants to believe, when none of them can prove that they are telling the "truth". This is why, as others have pointed out, you could, for example choose to believe that Warren Jeffs was justified by god in taking multiple "wives", but Joseph Smith was not. Viewed from outside it's a purely arbitrary choice.

ETA: I think it's worth highlighting the fact that Warren Jeffs and Joseph Smith were praying to exactly the same god. Or, if you disagree about this statement, please explain how you came to the conclusion that they are not the same.

That's always been an interesting conundrum for me. How can people get answers that they claim came from God but are often a direct contradiction to each other. In looking at Warren Jeffs vs. Joseph Smith my main focus would be 'what came of it'. I've mentioned this before, but I'll say it again...the fruits matter. What has come forth from the purported revelations/prayers of Joseph Smith are something way different than whatever fruits (there were none) that came from the revelations of Warren Jeffs. William Strang, William Smith and others. The fruits, in my opinion, don't lie. For the LDS Church to be in the position that it is in today with ALL the criticism that has been thrown its way is a miracle in its own way.

Joseph Smith was not a perfect man. I don't know many people that would argue otherwise. What matters is if the church that he organized has God's stamp of approval on it. I believe it does. Messiness is just part and parcel of the human experience in and out of the church. This thing we call revelation...and I know you won't like me saying this again...has many moving parts. It's not a 'silver platter' thing as some would like to think. The example of the lost car keys doesn't do justice to the complexity of what revelation MAY entail from one situation to the next.

Warren Jeff's taking multiple wives and Joseph Smith doing the same is just that, a fact. It happened. But it didn't stop there in the case of Joseph Smith and the succeeding prophets and the rise of the CofJCofLDS. Much more came from that small nucleus of believers in 1830. To the point that there are temples throughout the world administering ordinances of salvation/exaltation.

That's a big deal.

Regards,
MG

Are you arguing that the end justifies the means? Or that having a large, wealthy organization is a sign of your god's approval, or what?

What if it doesn't stop "there" in the case of Jeffs? What would it take for you to be convinced that he was a "true" prophet?

"How can people get answers that they claim came from God but are often a direct contradiction to each other."

I would suggest that if two people get contradictory answers from the same god, then:

• one is mistaken, or
• one is lying, or
• both are mistaken, or
• both are lying, or
• that god does not exist

When more than two people are getting different answers, then it suggests to me that the god they are claiming to get answers from does not exist, or, at best, is an author of confusion.

I find it interesting that, in my opinion, the FLDS have a better claim to be following the early LDS prophets than the modern LDS church has. At least they have more faith, and the guts to not wimp out on polygamy, as the LDS did. I think that's a big deal!

[I Have Questions]

That's always been an interesting conundrum for me. How can people get answers that they claim came from God but are often a direct contradiction to each other. In looking at Warren Jeffs vs. Joseph Smith my main focus would be 'what came of it'. I've mentioned this before, but I'll say it again...the fruits matter. What has come forth from the purported revelations/prayers of Joseph Smith are something way different than whatever fruits (there were none) that came from the revelations of Warren Jeffs. William Strang, William Smith and others. The fruits, in my opinion, don't lie. For the LDS Church to be in the position that it is in today with ALL the criticism that has been thrown its way is a miracle in its own way.

Joseph Smith was not a perfect man. I don't know many people that would argue otherwise. What matters is if the church that he organized has God's stamp of approval on it. I believe it does. Messiness is just part and parcel of the human experience in and out of the church. This thing we call revelation...and I know you won't like me saying this again...has many moving parts. It's not a 'silver platter' thing as some would like to think. The example of the lost car keys doesn't do justice to the complexity of what revelation MAY entail from one situation to the next.

Warren Jeff's taking multiple wives and Joseph Smith doing the same is just that, a fact. It happened. But it didn't stop there in the case of Joseph Smith and the succeeding prophets and the rise of the CofJCofLDS. Much more came from that small nucleus of believers in 1830. To the point that there are temples throughout the world administering ordinances of salvation/exaltation.

That's a big deal.

Regards,
MG

Are you arguing that the end justifies the means? Or that having a large, wealthy organization is a sign of your god's approval, or what?

What if it doesn't stop "there" in the case of Jeffs? What would it take for you to be convinced that he was a "true" prophet?

I can answer that. It would take MG being born and raised in that religious tradition. Nothing more, nothing less.

“How can people get answers that they claim came from God but are often a direct contradiction to each other."

I would suggest that if two people get contradictory answers from the same god, then:

• one is mistaken, or
• one is lying, or
• both are mistaken, or
• both are lying, or
• that god does not exist

When more than two people are getting different answers, then it suggests to me that the god they are claiming to get answers from does not exist, or, at best, is an author of confusion.

I find it interesting that, in my opinion, the FLDS have a better claim to be following the early LDS prophets than the modern LDS church has. At least they have more faith, and the guts to not wimp out on polygamy, as the LDS did. I think that's a big deal!

Yes, the SLC LDS sect sacrificed its uniqueness in favour of becoming more popular. They went for a money grab, and were very successful to be fair.

[MG 2.0]

Earlier I mentioned that there were some posters that I have chosen to put on ignore. I gave reasons then why when I did so. As a result, my participation is curtailed to the point where I respond only to those that at this point in time (and after a lot of thought) I believe are serious 'seekers' and/or 'friendly's' rather than those that simply have an agenda to tear down the church or its members. I cannot spend the time or bandwidth or emotional/intellectual resources going the rounds with those that continue to rehash past grievances/grudges.

As a result, there may be some things said that might be designed to come my way that don't get read. It is what it is.

I have enjoyed being able to interact in a civil fashion with some posters recently. Morley and malkie come to mind. That is the way it ought to be. That is all I have time and energy for.

There is only one of me and I have other things that interest me. But I do find interacting with some folks interesting and informative. And I don't mind the pushback if done appropriately.

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

Earlier I mentioned that there were some posters that I have chosen to put on ignore. I gave reasons then why when I did so. As a result, my participation is curtailed to the point where I respond only to those that at this point in time (and after a lot of thought) I believe are serious 'seekers' and/or 'friendly's' rather than those that simply have an agenda to tear down the church or its members. I cannot spend the time or bandwidth or emotional/intellectual resources going the rounds with those that continue to rehash past grievances/grudges.

As a result, there may be some things said that might be designed to come my way that don't get read. It is what it is.

I have enjoyed being able to interact in a civil fashion with some posters recently. Morley and malkie come to mind. That is the way it ought to be. That is all I have time and energy for.

There is only one of me and I have other things that interest me. But I do find interacting with some folks interesting and informative. And I don't mind the pushback if done appropriately.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

That's always been an interesting conundrum for me. How can people get answers that they claim came from God but are often a direct contradiction to each other. In looking at Warren Jeffs vs. Joseph Smith my main focus would be 'what came of it'. I've mentioned this before, but I'll say it again...the fruits matter. What has come forth from the purported revelations/prayers of Joseph Smith are something way different than whatever fruits (there were none) that came from the revelations of Warren Jeffs. William Strang, William Smith and others. The fruits, in my opinion, don't lie. For the LDS Church to be in the position that it is in today with ALL the criticism that has been thrown its way is a miracle in its own way.

Joseph Smith was not a perfect man. I don't know many people that would argue otherwise. What matters is if the church that he organized has God's stamp of approval on it. I believe it does. Messiness is just part and parcel of the human experience in and out of the church. This thing we call revelation...and I know you won't like me saying this again...has many moving parts. It's not a 'silver platter' thing as some would like to think. The example of the lost car keys doesn't do justice to the complexity of what revelation MAY entail from one situation to the next.

Warren Jeff's taking multiple wives and Joseph Smith doing the same is just that, a fact. It happened. But it didn't stop there in the case of Joseph Smith and the succeeding prophets and the rise of the CofJCofLDS. Much more came from that small nucleus of believers in 1830. To the point that there are temples throughout the world administering ordinances of salvation/exaltation.

That's a big deal.

Regards,
MG

Are you arguing that the end justifies the means? Or that having a large, wealthy organization is a sign of your god's approval, or what?

What if it doesn't stop "there" in the case of Jeffs? What would it take for you to be convinced that he was a "true" prophet?

"How can people get answers that they claim came from God but are often a direct contradiction to each other."

I would suggest that if two people get contradictory answers from the same god, then:

• one is mistaken, or
• one is lying, or
• both are mistaken, or
• both are lying, or
• that god does not exist

When more than two people are getting different answers, then it suggests to me that the god they are claiming to get answers from does not exist, or, at best, is an author of confusion.

I find it interesting that, in my opinion, the FLDS have a better claim to be following the early LDS prophets than the modern LDS church has. At least they have more faith, and the guts to not wimp out on polygamy, as the LDS did. I think that's a big deal!

I hear what you're attempting to try and prove...I just don't think it holds any water. I think size does matter in regard to the fruits of the Restoration churches that spawned from the first church in Kirtland. On another thread I explained why.

viewtopic.php?p=2909549#p2909549

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

Are you arguing that the end justifies the means? Or that having a large, wealthy organization is a sign of your god's approval, or what?

What if it doesn't stop "there" in the case of Jeffs? What would it take for you to be convinced that he was a "true" prophet?

I can answer that. It would take MG being born and raised in that religious tradition. Nothing more, nothing less.

“How can people get answers that they claim came from God but are often a direct contradiction to each other."

I would suggest that if two people get contradictory answers from the same god, then:

• one is mistaken, or
• one is lying, or
• both are mistaken, or
• both are lying, or
• that god does not exist

When more than two people are getting different answers, then it suggests to me that the god they are claiming to get answers from does not exist, or, at best, is an author of confusion.

I find it interesting that, in my opinion, the FLDS have a better claim to be following the early LDS prophets than the modern LDS church has. At least they have more faith, and the guts to not wimp out on polygamy, as the LDS did. I think that's a big deal!

Yes, the SLC LDS sect sacrificed its uniqueness in favour of becoming more popular. They went for a money grab, and were very successful to be fair.

They also isolated themselves in a location where their leaders directed them to kill off native inhabitants. They are successful in making money because they take advantage of and skirt the rules other people follow.

[malkie]

Are you arguing that the end justifies the means? Or that having a large, wealthy organization is a sign of your god's approval, or what?

What if it doesn't stop "there" in the case of Jeffs? What would it take for you to be convinced that he was a "true" prophet?

"How can people get answers that they claim came from God but are often a direct contradiction to each other."

I would suggest that if two people get contradictory answers from the same god, then:

• one is mistaken, or
• one is lying, or
• both are mistaken, or
• both are lying, or
• that god does not exist

When more than two people are getting different answers, then it suggests to me that the god they are claiming to get answers from does not exist, or, at best, is an author of confusion.

I find it interesting that, in my opinion, the FLDS have a better claim to be following the early LDS prophets than the modern LDS church has. At least they have more faith, and the guts to not wimp out on polygamy, as the LDS did. I think that's a big deal!

I hear what you're attempting to try and prove...I just don't think it holds any water. I think size does matter in regard to the fruits of the Restoration churches that spawned from the first church in Kirtland. On another thread I explained why.

viewtopic.php?p=2909549#p2909549

Regards,
MG

You think so. Clearly the FLDS would disagree with your choice of this specific criterion, at this time, right? But if the Mormon god has chosen the FLDS, and if size really does matter, then the FLDS can grow to whatever size is required.

Anyway, as a relatively small Christian organization, you're dwarfed by other Christian churches.

What? You think we should stick to sects of Mormonism? Why? If size really does matter, you should expand your horizons. Clearly, the restoration churches are small fry.

Do we even need to consider only Christian churches?
===============
On the other topic, different people claiming to get different answers from supposedly the same god is still an issue - a big issue, a huge issue, even. "Gott mit uns" in WW II is a good example in that the Christians among the allies were convinced that the very same "gott" was with them.

Perhaps the god in question is just a really poor communicator. But I still think that the most reasonable solution to the problem is that there is no god at the other side of the conversation. If you were to choose to believe that, instead of choosing to believe in the Mormon god, all sorts of problems would disappear.

A bit off topic, perhaps. Here's an interesting para from wikipedia that I came across while looking for information on the religious beliefs of leading Nazis:

While a small minority of historians accept [his] publicly stated views as genuine expressions of his spirituality, the vast majority believe that Hitler was skeptical of religion and anti-Christian, but recognized that he could only be elected and preserve his political power if he feigned a commitment to and belief in Christianity, which the overwhelming majority of Germans believed in.

Religious aspects of Nazism

I think I can see a parallel in today's US politics.

[I Have Questions]

One wonders at what point in time the SLC LDS sect became big enough to be considered true…compared to the much larger religious sects that MG considers not true, even though by his metric, size, they must be more true.

[MG 2.0]

I hear what you're attempting to try and prove...I just don't think it holds any water. I think size does matter in regard to the fruits of the Restoration churches that spawned from the first church in Kirtland. On another thread I explained why.

viewtopic.php?p=2909549#p2909549

Regards,
MG

You think so. Clearly the FLDS would disagree with your choice of this specific criterion, at this time, right? But if the Mormon god has chosen the FLDS, and if size really does matter, then the FLDS can grow to whatever size is required.

I haven't seen any evidence of this ever happening. Of course, you are free to believe that it could.

Anyway, as a relatively small Christian organization, you're dwarfed by other Christian churches.

You seemingly brushed off the size/influence/international factor quickly.

What I said was that the CofJCofLDS is the largest...by far...of the Restoration churches. Why you don't see that as an indicator of the 'fruits of the restoration/gospel' is illogical. Especially in view of some of the scriptural prophecy that seems to point towards influence and size having some degree of importance. You might think that before Christ comes that there would be a church upon the earth with an international influence. At least to the degree that Christianity is allowed to grow and have any influence.

What? You think we should stick to sects of Mormonism? Why? If size really does matter, you should expand your horizons. Clearly, the restoration churches are small fry.

If God appeared to Joseph Smith and promised him that an important work would be done through him that would have influence throughout the world, again, I would posit that the CofJCofLDS comes much closer to fitting the bill than any other restoration movement/church.

Do we even need to consider only Christian churches?

I suppose that would depend on whether or not Jesus was the Son of God and lives today. Views on this range all over the place.

On the other topic, different people claiming to get different answers from supposedly the same god is still an issue - a big issue, a huge issue, even. "Gott mit uns" in WW II is a good example in that the Christians among the allies were convinced that the very same "gott" was with them.

Perhaps the god in question is just a really poor communicator. But I still think that the most reasonable solution to the problem is that there is no god at the other side of the conversation. If you were to choose to believe that, instead of choosing to believe in the Mormon god, all sorts of problems would disappear.

That's interesting. So, God has called prophets and directs His work through them, and you call God a poor communicator? I think what you might be saying is that if that communication doesn't happen in the fashion/way that you would like/dictate or think it ought to that it doesn't happen at all?

Regards,
MG