Joseph Smith: A Virtuous Man - Mormon Women Stand

[_BrotherofJared]

If Joseph Smith had indeed been committing adultery, we can be sure that the Lord would have removed him from his office as prophet, seer, and revelator.

Carthage Jail
June 27, 1844

....he got "removed"

I'm having trouble with this post. Who are you quoting? It seems from the quote, the only thing the speaker was worried about was adultery, so all the rest of his message is correct?

[_BrotherofJared]

The truth is, yes, of course, there are writings that suggest that Joseph Smith committed all kinds of evil, including the evil that we understand to be second only to murder, adultery (Alma 39:5). This “historical evidence” has been taken from the enemies of Joseph Smith and the enemies of the truth.

So, the Church and lds.org are the enemies of Joseph Smith and the enemies of truth...who knew.

Assuming that the church is admitting that he committed adultery or any other kinds of evils, which they aren't.

[_BrotherofJared]

Diane Robertson is obviously an enlightened LDS, schooled up and skilled in the art of denial. Ignoring the facts is always easier than trying to reconcile those facts that are incongruent with the myths one holds dear.

Assuming you have the facts, you might be right.

[_BrotherofJared]

Well, this is unfortunate. I'm sure the author is really struggling, and it points to the fact that many long-time faithful members just don't know about this information.

I admit that there are a LOT of Mormons that are willing to accept Joseph without investigating as the author in the blog stated that they just shelve it for later review (if that ever comes around). But there are a lot who research it, in depth and still are unaffected by the accusations. There are also a lot who are affected. I'd say 50% don't care, 20% look and stay and 20% are offended and leave. That leaves 10% unknown. And these are the active ones.

I got caught off guard about 30 years ago and it bothered me for sometime. I felt I had been intentionally deceived. After some time of mulling it over, I decided to research the issue further. That has been my process ever since. I have yet to find any compelling evidence that cannot be easily explained. Certainly no "scientific" evidence works. Science changes like weather. What we know is fact today becomes a fallacy tomorrow and then there is grabbing evidence that suits your needs but isn't the whole picture.

On the part of Joseph and his many wives. I was surprised that a claim was made that most Mormons didn't know about that. That didn't make sense because it was the number one statement non-Mormons would ask when they found out I was a Mormon, "how many wives do you have?" Research has shown that RLDS held to the claim that Joseph Smith didn't practice polygamy and it was all Brigham Young, but that ignores the ongoing troubles that Joseph constantly faced concerning the issue prior to his murder. So, for me, it wasn't an issue that Joseph practiced polygamy. As long as he didn't have sex with the "for-eternity only" wives, then I was fine with the whole concept.

An atheist wouldn't buy any of it anyway, so I wouldn't be worried about them, but Christians revere Abraham and Moses and have no problem with them having more than one wife, but assume Joseph was a fallen prophet or not a prophet because he did. It just doesn't make sense to me.

[_BrotherofJared]

I enjoyed this. Everything about this is hilarious. First, a doctored second-hand quote telling women to know their place. Classic. Then a laundry list of scripturally-unsupported and contradictory claims defining doctrine. Not a word about prayer, holy ghost, or the spirit though. You can know something someone says is true because:

1) It falls within the purview of their self-proclaimed authority.

2) This person falls within some arbitrary definition of "worthy" that isn't given.

3) What they say is in agreement with the scriptures, nevermind the numerous condemnations of polygamy though, or that Joseph didn't follow his own rules.

4) Edify or instruct? You mean like the movie Braveheart?

5) Oh, so something can only be true if it reinforces whatever it is that you happen to already believe, strengthening your commitment to those dubious beliefs? Yeah, that sounds like an attitude which is conducive to revelation and inspired discernment.

This whole thing would get to the point a lot quicker if it simply read, "Be Stupid."

But it's okay for you to "doctor" or mis-represent the statements.

[_karl61]

Well, this is unfortunate. I'm sure the author is really struggling, and it points to the fact that many long-time faithful members just don't know about this information.

I admit that there are a LOT of Mormons that are willing to accept Joseph without investigating as the author in the blog stated that they just shelve it for later review (if that ever comes around). But there are a lot who research it, in depth and still are unaffected by the accusations. There are also a lot who are affected. I'd say 50% don't care, 20% look and stay and 20% are offended and leave. That leaves 10% unknown. And these are the active ones.

I got caught off guard about 30 years ago and it bothered me for sometime. I felt I had been intentionally deceived. After some time of mulling it over, I decided to research the issue further. That has been my process ever since. I have yet to find any compelling evidence that cannot be easily explained. Certainly no "scientific" evidence works. Science changes like weather. What we know is fact today becomes a fallacy tomorrow and then there is grabbing evidence that suits your needs but isn't the whole picture.

On the part of Joseph and his many wives. I was surprised that a claim was made that most Mormons didn't know about that. That didn't make sense because it was the number one statement non-Mormons would ask when they found out I was a Mormon, "how many wives do you have?" Research has shown that RLDS held to the claim that Joseph Smith didn't practice polygamy and it was all Brigham Young, but that ignores the ongoing troubles that Joseph constantly faced concerning the issue prior to his murder. So, for me, it wasn't an issue that Joseph practiced polygamy. As long as he didn't have sex with the "for-eternity only" wives, then I was fine with the whole concept.

An atheist wouldn't buy any of it anyway, so I wouldn't be worried about them, but Christians revere Abraham and Moses and have no problem with them having more than one wife, but assume Joseph was a fallen prophet or not a prophet because he did. It just doesn't make sense to me.

Brother of Jared, When you fly on a commercial jet liner, what rules of science that it operates upon continues to change.

[_Dr. Shades]

Certainly no "scientific" evidence works. Science changes like weather. What we know is fact today becomes a fallacy tomorrow and then there is grabbing evidence that suits your needs but isn't the whole picture.

Which changes more often: Scientific evidence, or religious evidence?

[_Tobin]

Well, this is unfortunate. I'm sure the author is really struggling, and it points to the fact that many long-time faithful members just don't know about this information.

I admit that there are a LOT of Mormons that are willing to accept Joseph without investigating as the author in the blog stated that they just shelve it for later review (if that ever comes around). But there are a lot who research it, in depth and still are unaffected by the accusations. There are also a lot who are affected. I'd say 50% don't care, 20% look and stay and 20% are offended and leave. That leaves 10% unknown. And these are the active ones.

I smell a rat. Who wants to make a bet he made up those numbers?

BrotherofJared, I predict you won't last long on this forum. At least the critics will have someone to shoot at for a while. Have fun with this one you evil critics.

[Guest]

[Which changes more often: Scientific evidence, or religious evidence?

It's a loaded question...Mickey Rooney, a life time gambler on the horses, was once asked..."have you ever lost betting on the ponies?" he replied..." only once...although I have spent a life time trying to win it back?"

The only tangible "proof" of God we have is that we are here...science however will spend lifetimes trying to prove or disprove our existence.

Edit...by the way...your avatar is disgusting...unless you are a Kiss fan.

[_Finn the human]

Does science change? Yes! And isn't it wonderful brothers and sisters? Why would you want to be fooled by some self proclaimed authority? Let us base our inferences on the best available evidence. In the name of Carl Sagan amen.