Our leaders

[_Boaz & Lidia]

I don't buy the "God said" excuse whether it comes from David Koresh, The House of Yahway prophet, Joseph Smith or anyone else. :-(

Well I agree that anytime anyone says God says we better be petty sure about it.

I'm sure there were non-believers who thought highly of Brigham Young and Joseph Smith... but it seems to me that the majority of folks didn't care much for them. It seems to me even Joseph Smith knew he was not well liked by gentiles, no? Were the LDS believers not often forced out of town because they were not liked?

There are lots of reasons the saints were driven out of places other than the leaders being scoundrals. And they may not have been liked for other reasons. Religous bigotyr comes to mind. Were the Jews in Germany during WWII treated the way they were because they were scoundrels. Were they disliked justifiably? I think you walk a dangerous path here.

You and Orrin Hatch disgust me.

Please stop comparing the early Mormon cult with the Jews. K? One was clearly and undeniably persecuted and the other was not.

Compare them to the FLDS. IF you believe the early Mormons were persecuted then you must feel the same about the FLDS.

But please stop using the Jews for your LDS gain. Stop comparing them to early Mormons and stop necro dunking them.

[_bcspace]

'In those days spirits were brave, the stakes were high, men were real men, women were real women and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were real small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri.'

[Guest]

..Is this a process where the scoundrels gave it a start, and the men with integrity moved them aside and stepped into the leadership positions?

These verses come to mind (parenthisis added):

12 For there are many yet on the earth among all sects, parties, and denominations (including Mormonism), who are blinded by the subtle craftiness of men (Joseph Smith, et al.), whereby they lie in wait to deceive, and who are only kept from the truth because they know not where to find it—
13 Therefore, that we should waste and wear out our lives in bringing to light all the hidden things of darkness (the actual history of the Mormon church), wherein we know them; and they are truly manifest from heaven—

(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 123:12 - 13)

Good men, bad men. What's the difference? It doesn't matter. No passes. Isn't it only right to take responsibility for what we now know and act upon it? Otherwise when will the madness stop?

Someday our children will ask us, "when did you know such things..?"

The follow up will be the endictment against us: "Then why didn't you ever tell us?"

(edited for spelling)

[_Jason Bourne]

You and Orrin Hatch disgust me.

WEll that is fine. You disgust me quite often as well. So turn about is fair play.

Please stop comparing the early Mormon cult with the Jews. K? One was clearly and undeniably persecuted and the other was not.

The example I used was valid. Read it again. I asked TD if driving a group out of town was justifiable because the people did not like them. The example was spot on. And while I do not think Mormons were persecuted like Jews were they were persecuted. Only an idiot thinks otherwise.

Compare them to the FLDS. IF you believe the early Mormons were persecuted then you must feel the same about the FLDS.

Not the same.

But please stop using the Jews for your LDS gain. Stop comparing them to early Mormons and stop necro dunking them.

Go have beer boaz. You need to calm down

[_Yoda]

I have a feeling Boaz had already had one too many when he started posting. ;)

[_Trevor]

The example I used was valid. Read it again. I asked TD if driving a group out of town was justifiable because the people did not like them. The example was spot on. And while I do not think Mormons were persecuted like Jews were they were persecuted. Only an idiot thinks otherwise.

Of course, a mitigating factor is the fact that Mormons threatened and attacked others as well.

[_truth dancer]

The example I used was valid. Read it again. I asked TD if driving a group out of town was justifiable because the people did not like them. The example was spot on. And while I do not think Mormons were persecuted like Jews were they were persecuted. Only an idiot thinks otherwise.

Hi Jason,

My point was not that the Saints should not have been driven out, but that they WERE driven out because they were not well liked. It was supporting evidence for my impression.

I was stating that I do not think Joseph Smith & Co, were considered honorable, honest, moral men by people other than their followers.

I could be wrong and am open to learning but this is my impression.

I don't think people should be driven out of town for their beliefs, and I understand why some gentiles may have been worried about what was going on.

NOT THAT I WOULD DRIVE ANYONE OUT OF MY TOWN OR NEIGHBORHOOD... (reread this if necessary). However, I would probably move if my neighbors decided to start a commune or did some wife swapping thing, or took middle school girls as wives, or started an army etc. etc.

My point is I can see why there are those who were uncomfortable with what was going on.. again NOT THAT I WOULD DRIVE ANYONE OUT.
~dancer~

[_Inconceivable]

The example I used was valid. Read it again. I asked TD if driving a group out of town was justifiable because the people did not like them. The example was spot on. And while I do not think Mormons were persecuted like Jews were they were persecuted. Only an idiot thinks otherwise.

Of course, a mitigating factor is the fact that Mormons threatened and attacked others as well.

The Mormons were not exterminated - it never happened.

Kind of a stretch to compare genocide with several corrupt men being lynched/murdered in isolated incidences due to accusations of immorality (among other things which apparently were true). Justifiable behavior by the mob? no.

However, is the value of 1 or a few Mormons equal to lives of 6 million of another faith? Is that what the Mormon prophets meant by the "best blood of the 19th century"?

Is that why the comparison between the holocast of 1940's European Jews and a few amoral Mormons that influenced the entire faith perpetuates?

[_Inconceivable]

..I don't think people should be driven out of town for their beliefs, and I understand why some gentiles may have been worried about what was going on.

NOT THAT I WOULD DRIVE ANYONE OUT OF MY TOWN OR NEIGHBORHOOD... (reread this if necessary). However, I would probably move if my neighbors decided to start a commune or did some wife swapping thing, or took middle school girls as wives, or started an army etc. etc.

My point is I can see why there are those who were uncomfortable with what was going on.. again NOT THAT I WOULD DRIVE ANYONE OUT.
~dancer~

I believe that you would prefer to leave rather than drive out a neighbor, TD. Perhaps I would pursue this course as well.

But consider that it was not too far distant in the Union's history that Americans did drive out an oppresive and intimidating regime (represented by the king of England).

The Mormons constituted a formidable voting block which threatened the way of life for many outside of the cult. Mormonism was an immorality particularly to nearly (if not all) Christian religeons at the time. It was a cancer that could potentially corrupt the very fiber of the moral freedoms that their grand parents and great grand parents had fought for. I can understand why the Mormons were seen as they were. Keep in mind, though they denied practicing Mormon adultery, they were doing it and protecting each other from prosecution. It wasn't a secret.

I would have opted for prosecution and imprisonment of the leaders. Unfortunately, Smith was killed and Young took his flock and fled before them to insulate himself and others from the justice that would have come upon them. Please understand, the Mormons fled because they resisted the laws of the land. Smith and other law breakers spending the rest of their lives in prison would have served as a lasting indictment upon the twisted religeon. I believe it would have prevented it to be any more than a blip in an American history book.

- Inc.

[_Sethbag]

Personally, I don't know how anyone can look at the lives of the early leaders and not acknowledge many were scoundrels (putting it nicely).

I think they had minimal standards of morality and decency at best.

Aside from their followers they were certainly not looked upon as men of honor.

They lied, deceived, were unfaithful to their wives, manipulated others for their gain, and on and on.

Wow, you're really on a roll today TD! Talking trash about Joseph Smith on the other thread, calumniating early LDS leaders en masse in this one. I think you'll find an answer to your question about "how anyone can look at the lives of the early leaders and not acknowledge many were scoundrels" by actually looking at their lives. By and large, they were honorable and decent men--something that should be apparent to any fair-minded person.

Sure, Joseph Smith loved children, and I understand he helped a widow now and again. Nobody is saying that they were 100% scoundrel, 100% of the time. But let's look at Joseph Smith for a minute.

1. He cheated on his wife with dozens of women, taking pains to ensure Emma didn't find out about his liaisons, and threatening her with Godly destruction if she wouldn't go along, in the cases she knew about. He told young teenage girls that an angel of the Lord with a drawn sword threatened to kill him if he didn't take more wives, the corollary to which is "if you don't marry me, the angel will kill me, the Prophet of God". He also was a party to the destruction and attempted destruction of womens' characters in cases where they didn't agree with his propositions. In his sex life, Joseph Smith was a scoundrel.

2. He represented to people that a magic rock, viewed within his hat, would reveal to him the location of ancient buried treasure on peoples' property, and that for a fee he would show them where to dig so they could recover it. This was a blatant lie, and he never recovered buried treasure for anyone - but he did take their money. In this "business" dealing, Joseph Smith was a scoundrel.

3. When his followers presented him with some Egyptian papyrus containing a written language he didn't know, rather than say "I don't know", he played the part they believed him for, that of a Seer who could translate ancient languages, by making up stories to explain the documents, and inventing "translations" for them. He was telling his followers exactly what they wanted to hear. They believed he was a Seer and a Translator, and he gave them hidden knowledge and translations. They were made up, but the followers didn't know that. In this deception of his followers he was a scoundrel.

4. This goes along with #3. In other situations Joseph Smith would make stuff up to appease and thrill his followers. It was "baffling with bullsh*t", as the popular saying goes. Take Zelph, for instance. While trudging along in the wilderness with Zion's Camp his followers found an Indian skeleton with an arrow stuck in it. They asked Joseph what it was, believing that he had access to this vast store of ancient knowledge through revelation from God. So he made up a story about Zelph the great white Lamanite, serving under the Prophet Onandagus, known from the Atlantic to the Rocky Mountains, and they just happened to find his remains 1400 years or so later. This was a total crock of shyte, but Joseph was always ready to play the part, and tell people what they wanted to hear. It's the same thing when they found a pile of rocks and Joseph explained it was the very altar built by Adam to offer sacrifice on. He lied to people all the time, and continued the farce, playing the part he'd created for himself - and they bought into it hook, line, and sinker. At least, they did for a time. He also lost a lot of converts over time as people "woke up" to the deceptions and left. It's clear from these inventions and made up stories to fool people that Joseph Smith was a scoundrel.

I'm sure there are a great many more things that could be mentioned more specifically. This suffices for now.