The Truth about Mormons

[JakeStarkey]

The fact is, Joseph did have multiple legal wives. I don't know any husband who doesn't have sex with his wife. It's really no big deal because you can't always judge people of the 19th century by the societal standards of the 21st century. Their age is irrelevant because they were of legal age at the time. You can't judge two consenting adults of their time period who desire to get married. 14 is as random a number as 18 is today. A line has to be drawn by the lawmakers of each society at some point. There was no 18 year old line at the time. Women in those days were grown up long before they hit puberty. Decisions to marry were entirely made by the husband, wife and parents of each. Not by the state.

Learn history and it will serve you well to understand context of times.

Thank you for your statement concerning Joseph Smith's sexual activity.

Present-ism is not a defense against JS's behavior back then. Yes, he can and is judged by his behavior, with the same validity of judgment for the murderers at Mountain Meadows in southwest Utah Territory (Mormon militia mass murdered more than 120 men, women, children, and infants in 1857).

The 14-year olds were in the care of Smith and his wife, and they could not consent. And, yes, the state was the defining law in the matter, not family or church.

Oh please. Your ignorance is amazing. Not only do you not know about acceptable social norms of the time but you don't even know that Joseph wasn't alive during the mountain meadows massacre. You could at least have accused Brigham Young of that. At least that would have figured in to the correct lifespan. Anywhoo, you have exposed yourself as lacking in knowledge and have been fed a line by some disgruntled anti-mormons. I have already fully explained the mountain meadows massacre dozens of times. I refer you to the facts located in the pre-20th page section of this thread. It's already been dealt with. you ought to read up and stop being so presumptuous as to think you are the only one who dared ask such a bold question. Realize the rest of us are way ahead of you. Not behind.

Joseph Smith has nothing to be ashamed of in his marriages. you are way out of context.

Personal attack and snot-blowing is not helpful, elder. We will have to agree to not agree, and, hopefully, we can do it agreeably. My knowledge is much more in depth and balanced than yours. Go consult with Treavor Holyoak, Blair Hodges, and Louis Midgley. You are way in over your head.

I am glad that you believe. I believe that you believe. But Bushman and Compton and Hardy would chuckle at you. I can't imagine what Bagley and Bringhurst would say.

So let's be nice to each other, and we can discuss peacefully where we agree and where we disagree about the LDS church.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Your statement is useless. Smith was sexually active with women not his wife, and, yes, that behavior does change matters.

Either you are lying or you are ignorant about Smith's sexual relations. I have given you adequate sources in Compton and Bushman, accepted by almost all historians pro and con who write on Mormonism. You have offered nothing.

Testimonies are personal not universal, thus the messenger's behavior must be examined.

Present-ism is not a defense of Smith's sexual escapades in the 19th century.

It has been documented and admitted by Joseph that he had multiple wives. What is heresay and not fact is these sexual escapades you speak of.
I simply do not believe them. I have studied his life and character in great detail and he simply is not the kind of person to have such escapades. For every person you have accusing Joseph of extra-marital affairs(and there are not many) you will have 10,000 others who will vouch for his character.

It's nothing more than a he said she said type of a deal with a lot more positives than negative testimonies of Joseph Smith. Draw your own conclusions about the man. I've drawn mine.

Adultery was a felony in his day and was tried and acquitted on all accounts ever brought before him. He was never convicted of any crime...Ever.Some of those were adultery.

There is therefore no proof of his affairs. It seems highly unlikely that he would even have time for them if you knew how busy he was.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So when you go swimming can you take the magic underwear off?

If you have more than one wife like JSmith, can you have them naked in a big bed all at the same time? Cuz I'd be into that.

You are not allowed to have more than one wife in the present day church.

So you're saying also that JSmith was chosen by god but then lived the rest of his life in sin?

No he did not live the rest of his life in sin.

Some of the Restorationist Branches of the RLDS Church (now the Community of Christ) believe exactly that he lived the last few years of his life in sin.

Some Restorationists believe that Joseph Smith had only relationships with Emma Smith, his only legal wife.

 

[Truthspeaker]

For the record -- I think the modern LDS church is no better and no worse than any other Christian denomination. If they claim "Christ is Lord and Savior", they are no better or worse, in my opinion, than the Catholic or the Protestant or the Evangelical who claims the same. Where I differ is that no credible proof exists that the LDS Church is the "one true church having sole authority to act in God's name here on earth." In other words, the LDS Church is not the Kingdom of God on earth.

That's fine. you have drawn your conclusion on our church. If you ever become inquisitive enough to know why we claim what we claim, my door is always open.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your statement is useless. Smith was sexually active with women not his wife, and, yes, that behavior does change matters.

Either you are lying or you are ignorant about Smith's sexual relations. I have given you adequate sources in Compton and Bushman, accepted by almost all historians pro and con who write on Mormonism. You have offered nothing.

Testimonies are personal not universal, thus the messenger's behavior must be examined.

Present-ism is not a defense of Smith's sexual escapades in the 19th century.

It has been documented and admitted by Joseph that he had multiple wives. What is heresay and not fact is these sexual escapades you speak of.
I simply do not believe them. I have studied his life and character in great detail and he simply is not the kind of person to have such escapades. For every person you have accusing Joseph of extra-marital affairs(and there are not many) you will have 10,000 others who will vouch for his character.

It's nothing more than a he said she said type of a deal with a lot more positives than negative testimonies of Joseph Smith. Draw your own conclusions about the man. I've drawn mine.

Adultery was a felony in his day and was tried and acquitted on all accounts ever brought before him. He was never convicted of any crime...Ever.Some of those were adultery.

There is therefore no proof of his affairs. It seems highly unlikely that he would even have time for them if you knew how busy he was.

All sexual activity with a woman not Emma was adultery now and then. That he was not convicted means nothing more than he was not convicted. He can still be tried in the court of public opinion on the evidence. And very competent historians, temple goers like yourself, and professionals in Mormon studies, such as Bushman and Compton, do believe JS had such relationships. Whether you believe them is immaterial.

 

[JakeStarkey]

For the record -- I think the modern LDS church is no better and no worse than any other Christian denomination. If they claim "Christ is Lord and Savior", they are no better or worse, in my opinion, than the Catholic or the Protestant or the Evangelical who claims the same. Where I differ is that no credible proof exists that the LDS Church is the "one true church having sole authority to act in God's name here on earth." In other words, the LDS Church is not the Kingdom of God on earth.

That's fine. you have drawn your conclusion on our church. If you ever become inquisitive enough to know why we claim what we claim, my door is always open.

Thank you for your invitation.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Thank you for your statement concerning Joseph Smith's sexual activity.

Present-ism is not a defense against JS's behavior back then. Yes, he can and is judged by his behavior, with the same validity of judgment for the murderers at Mountain Meadows in southwest Utah Territory (Mormon militia mass murdered more than 120 men, women, children, and infants in 1857).

The 14-year olds were in the care of Smith and his wife, and they could not consent. And, yes, the state was the defining law in the matter, not family or church.

Oh please. Your ignorance is amazing. Not only do you not know about acceptable social norms of the time but you don't even know that Joseph wasn't alive during the mountain meadows massacre. You could at least have accused Brigham Young of that. At least that would have figured in to the correct lifespan. Anywhoo, you have exposed yourself as lacking in knowledge and have been fed a line by some disgruntled anti-mormons. I have already fully explained the mountain meadows massacre dozens of times. I refer you to the facts located in the pre-20th page section of this thread. It's already been dealt with. you ought to read up and stop being so presumptuous as to think you are the only one who dared ask such a bold question. Realize the rest of us are way ahead of you. Not behind.

Joseph Smith has nothing to be ashamed of in his marriages. you are way out of context.

Personal attack and snot-blowing is not helpful, elder. We will have to agree to not agree, and, hopefully, we can do it agreeably. My knowledge is much more in depth and balanced than yours. Go consult with Treavor Holyoak, Blair Hodges, and Louis Midgley. You are way in over your head.

I am glad that you believe. I believe that you believe. But Bushman and Compton and Hardy would chuckle at you. I can't imagine what Bagley and Bringhurst would say.

So let's be nice to each other, and we can discuss peacefully where we agree and where we disagree about the LDS church.

Au Contraire, my friend. Every wave that has come against the church has not destroyed it. It's the beach that will always be there while the waves constanty try to destroy it.

I certainly didn't attack you or blow any snot. I simply stated that you are ignorant. You are lacking knowledge. You may know the writings of those authors better than I do but there's nothing you can say, I am sure, that will discredit the Prophet Joseph. So please, bring up your deep dark secrets and let all of Joseph's "dirty laundry" come to the forefront. I'd be pleased to hear something I haven't heard yet.

 

[HUGGY]

For the record -- I think the modern LDS church is no better and no worse than any other Christian denomination. If they claim "Christ is Lord and Savior", they are no better or worse, in my opinion, than the Catholic or the Protestant or the Evangelical who claims the same. Where I differ is that no credible proof exists that the LDS Church is the "one true church having sole authority to act in God's name here on earth." In other words, the LDS Church is not the Kingdom of God on earth.

That's fine. you have drawn your conclusion on our church. If you ever become inquisitive enough to know why we claim what we claim, my door is always open.

Thank you for your invitation.

If you ever become inquisitive enough to know why we claim what we claim, my door is always open.

Mine also...

 

[Truthspeaker]

Your statement is useless. Smith was sexually active with women not his wife, and, yes, that behavior does change matters.

Either you are lying or you are ignorant about Smith's sexual relations. I have given you adequate sources in Compton and Bushman, accepted by almost all historians pro and con who write on Mormonism. You have offered nothing.

Testimonies are personal not universal, thus the messenger's behavior must be examined.

Present-ism is not a defense of Smith's sexual escapades in the 19th century.

It has been documented and admitted by Joseph that he had multiple wives. What is heresay and not fact is these sexual escapades you speak of.
I simply do not believe them. I have studied his life and character in great detail and he simply is not the kind of person to have such escapades. For every person you have accusing Joseph of extra-marital affairs(and there are not many) you will have 10,000 others who will vouch for his character.

It's nothing more than a he said she said type of a deal with a lot more positives than negative testimonies of Joseph Smith. Draw your own conclusions about the man. I've drawn mine.

Adultery was a felony in his day and was tried and acquitted on all accounts ever brought before him. He was never convicted of any crime...Ever.Some of those were adultery.

There is therefore no proof of his affairs. It seems highly unlikely that he would even have time for them if you knew how busy he was.

All sexual activity with a woman not Emma was adultery now and then. That he was not convicted means nothing more than he was not convicted. He can still be tried in the court of public opinion on the evidence. And very competent historians, temple goers like yourself, and professionals in Mormon studies, such as Bushman and Compton, do believe JS had such relationships. Whether you believe them is immaterial.

I have never denied he had sexual relationships with his wives. I'm sure he did. but when you are married, it is not adultery see the definition of Adultery:

adultery - Definition [ə-dŭĺtə-rē, -trē]
(n.) Voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a partner other than the lawful spouse.

Dictionary.com · The American Heritage® Dictionary

Therefore the adultery argument doesn't fly by definition.

The court of public opinion proves nothing. It's just a consensus of opinions. It only proves the prophecy given to Joseph by the Angel Moroni is fulfilled. When 14 years old, a nobody, in backwoods New York, completely un-famous, was told that good and evil should be spoken of him throughout all the world. This has already happened and continues to happen.

The real issue is that you don't like polygamy. You think that those who are polygamous are scum of society. But do you really know these people you condemn. Are you in the judgment seat of God to deal out damnation?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Oh please. Your ignorance is amazing. Not only do you not know about acceptable social norms of the time but you don't even know that Joseph wasn't alive during the mountain meadows massacre. You could at least have accused Brigham Young of that. At least that would have figured in to the correct lifespan. Anywhoo, you have exposed yourself as lacking in knowledge and have been fed a line by some disgruntled anti-mormons. I have already fully explained the mountain meadows massacre dozens of times. I refer you to the facts located in the pre-20th page section of this thread. It's already been dealt with. you ought to read up and stop being so presumptuous as to think you are the only one who dared ask such a bold question. Realize the rest of us are way ahead of you. Not behind.

Joseph Smith has nothing to be ashamed of in his marriages. you are way out of context.

Personal attack and snot-blowing is not helpful, elder. We will have to agree to not agree, and, hopefully, we can do it agreeably. My knowledge is much more in depth and balanced than yours. Go consult with Treavor Holyoak, Blair Hodges, and Louis Midgley. You are way in over your head.

I am glad that you believe. I believe that you believe. But Bushman and Compton and Hardy would chuckle at you. I can't imagine what Bagley and Bringhurst would say.

So let's be nice to each other, and we can discuss peacefully where we agree and where we disagree about the LDS church.

Au Contraire, my friend. Every wave that has come against the church has not destroyed it. It's the beach that will always be there while the waves constanty try to destroy it.

I certainly didn't attack you or blow any snot. I simply stated that you are ignorant. You are lacking knowledge. You may know the writings of those authors better than I do but there's nothing you can say, I am sure, that will discredit the Prophet Joseph. So please, bring up your deep dark secrets and let all of Joseph's "dirty laundry" come to the forefront. I'd be pleased to hear something I haven't heard yet.

You are wrong, but you are a True Believer, so that is to be expected.

We can be nice to each other, I think. And I have enjoyed much of your material.

I am curious with what you disagree about what I posted on Mountain Meadows: not argumentive, just curious.

 

[Truthspeaker]

That's fine. you have drawn your conclusion on our church. If you ever become inquisitive enough to know why we claim what we claim, my door is always open.

Thank you for your invitation.

If you ever become inquisitive enough to know why we claim what we claim, my door is always open.

Mine also...

What are your claims Huggy?

 

[Truthspeaker]

You are wrong, but you are a True Believer, so that is to be expected.

We can be nice to each other, I think. And I have enjoyed much of your material.

I am curious with what you disagree about what I posted on Mountain Meadows: not argumentive, just curious.

You said that Joseph was responsible for the Mountain Meadows Massacre. But he was slain long before the event happened. How could he have ordered such a thing?

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are wrong, but you are a True Believer, so that is to be expected.

We can be nice to each other, I think. And I have enjoyed much of your material.

I am curious with what you disagree about what I posted on Mountain Meadows: not argumentive, just curious.

You said that Joseph was responsible for the Mountain Meadows Massacre. But he was slain long before the event happened. How could he have ordered such a thing?

Either you read me wrong or I wrote wrong. Yes, he died thirteen years and some months before the dastardly deed on the meadows. No, I was talking about the principle of present-ism. Yes, we can judge the perps at MMM. Yes, we can judge JS and his activities. Our standards today do not preclude judgment of other eras. But we have to be aware of the big differences.

For instance, no one in 1860 in America could possibly envision our 21st century culture of diversity and striving for tolerance. But just because they can't see "us" today, does not mean that African American chattel slavery was right. It wasn't. But let me add, that if you and I were born in South Carolina in 1830, a pretty good chance would have it that we would have been fighting against Old Glory.

 

[Avatar4321]

Your statement is useless. Smith was sexually active with women not his wife, and, yes, that behavior does change matters.

Either you are lying or you are ignorant about Smith's sexual relations. I have given you adequate sources in Compton and Bushman, accepted by almost all historians pro and con who write on Mormonism. You have offered nothing.

Testimonies are personal not universal, thus the messenger's behavior must be examined.

Present-ism is not a defense of Smith's sexual escapades in the 19th century.

So basically you have nothing.

There is zero evidence that Joseph had any sexual relations with anyone other than Emma. You're refusal provide anything suggests you dont understand what you are even claiming.

You cant deal with the message so you attack the messenger.

 

[Truthspeaker]

You are wrong, but you are a True Believer, so that is to be expected.

We can be nice to each other, I think. And I have enjoyed much of your material.

I am curious with what you disagree about what I posted on Mountain Meadows: not argumentive, just curious.

You said that Joseph was responsible for the Mountain Meadows Massacre. But he was slain long before the event happened. How could he have ordered such a thing?

No, I was talking about the principle of present-ism. Yes, we can judge the perps at MMM. Yes, we can judge JS and his activities. Our standards today do not preclude judgment of other eras. But we have to be aware of the big differences.

For instance, no one in 1860 in America could possibly envision our 21st century culture of diversity and striving for tolerance. But just because they can't see "us" today, does not mean that African American chattel slavery was right. It wasn't. But let me add, that if you and I were born in South Carolina in 1830, a pretty good chance would have it that we would have been fighting against Old Glory.

I agree with you on moral constants that last throughout the ages. Slavery is wrong no matter what. Adultery is wrong no matter what. But what you are debating is that polygamy in and of itself is wrong. I would disagree with that. I don't think polygamists are bad people simply because they are polygamists. Today such people get a bad rap because of what you see extremists on TV doing. But if the husband is committed to his wives, loves them and cares for them and they reciprocate, who of us is qualified to say their marriage is sinful? Polygamy has all too often been abused by domineering husbands who abuse the women and sometimes illegal girls involved and give the practice a bad name. There are many people today in polygamous communities who are good honorable people throughout the world. Culture differences between them and western society in general have caused ignorance and hatred for polygamous communities.

Murder is always wrong. the perpetrators of the MMM were punished according to the law and the church separately.

Age of marriage is definitely a cultural decision. It is irresponsible to assume 18 as the perrenial legal age for all time. Women in the early years of the US were commonly married by the age of 14 and sometimes younger. The maturity of the woman in the eyes of the parents giving the daughter away was the deciding factor for being "of age." Certainly you would find 14 year olds far more motherly than most 21 year olds today. They were culturally trained for motherhood and housekeeping from birth and were taught that this was their primary responsibility in life and most women DESIRED this at the time. What a novel idea! Women actually wanted to get married. And they were considered undesirable or "old maids" if unmarried by 20! A foreign concept to today's hard charging girl power movement.

Cultures are different in different times. Joseph did nothing illegal by marrying women who by today's standards would be considered underage. But the laws of the land of the day allowed individuals to make their own choices.

 

[Truthspeaker]

You are wrong, but you are a True Believer, so that is to be expected.

We can be nice to each other, I think. And I have enjoyed much of your material.

I am curious with what you disagree about what I posted on Mountain Meadows: not argumentive, just curious.

You said that Joseph was responsible for the Mountain Meadows Massacre. But he was slain long before the event happened. How could he have ordered such a thing?

Either you read me wrong or I wrote wrong. Yes, he died thirteen years and some months before the dastardly deed on the meadows. No, I was talking about the principle of present-ism. Yes, we can judge the perps at MMM. Yes, we can judge JS and his activities. Our standards today do not preclude judgment of other eras. But we have to be aware of the big differences.

For instance, no one in 1860 in America could possibly envision our 21st century culture of diversity and striving for tolerance. But just because they can't see "us" today, does not mean that African American chattel slavery was right. It wasn't. But let me add, that if you and I were born in South Carolina in 1830, a pretty good chance would have it that we would have been fighting against Old Glory.

Well Joseph Smith certainly saw a vision of what it would be like today. He was the first to prophesy that Blacks would "rise up against their masters. And be marshalled and disciplined for war." He was the one who said that in God's kingdom "All are alike, both Jew and Gentile, bond and free, black and white. And (God) remembereth the heathen. And none are denied but all are made partakers of salvation.

He also predicted there would be great equality in God's eternal realm and that there would be no poor among them or class differences.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Truthspeaker, I don't care about polygamy. That's between God and the people, not you and me or your General Authorities. What we think about it is irrelevant. What I am talking about is very young girls who were in the charge of Emma and Joseph. The behavior then and now is indefensible. And regardless what Avatar thinks (who has offered no proof at all in defense that JS was sexless except with Emma), JS's behavior with the girls was morally wrong.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Avatar, can't you read: Either you are lying or you are ignorant about Smith's sexual relations. I have given you adequate sources in Compton and Bushman, accepted by almost all historians pro and con who write on Mormonism. You have offered nothing in rebuttal.

Are you one of the recent LDS converts (last twenty years) or a Restorationist? If you are LDS, go find a bornLDS High Councilman in this sixities. He will tell you what was taught in his church fifty years ago about Joseph Smith and his wives.

You must remember that your opinion and testimony is worthless as evidence. And the evidence is in: Joseph boinked with women other than Emma.

 

[Truthspeaker]

Truthspeaker, I don't care about polygamy. That's between God and the people, not you and me or your General Authorities. What we think about it is irrelevant. What I am talking about is very young girls who were in the charge of Emma and Joseph. The behavior then and now is indefensible. And regardless what Avatar thinks (who has offered no proof at all in defense that JS was sexless except with Emma), JS's behavior with the girls was morally wrong.

I don't know what heinous behavior you are talking about. Sex between husband and wife? Be careful when you say girls. They considered themselves women who were legally and lawfully wedded. It may even be the case that the consummation of these marriages did not happen right away, but that is also irrelevant. They were married by consent.

What information do you have to the contrary?

 

[JakeStarkey]

You said that Joseph was responsible for the Mountain Meadows Massacre. But he was slain long before the event happened. How could he have ordered such a thing?

Either you read me wrong or I wrote wrong. Yes, he died thirteen years and some months before the dastardly deed on the meadows. No, I was talking about the principle of present-ism. Yes, we can judge the perps at MMM. Yes, we can judge JS and his activities. Our standards today do not preclude judgment of other eras. But we have to be aware of the big differences.

For instance, no one in 1860 in America could possibly envision our 21st century culture of diversity and striving for tolerance. But just because they can't see "us" today, does not mean that African American chattel slavery was right. It wasn't. But let me add, that if you and I were born in South Carolina in 1830, a pretty good chance would have it that we would have been fighting against Old Glory.

Well Joseph Smith certainly saw a vision of what it would be like today. He was the first to prophesy that Blacks would "rise up against their masters. And be marshalled and disciplined for war." He was the one who said that in God's kingdom "All are alike, both Jew and Gentile, bond and free, black and white. And (God) remembereth the heathen. And none are denied but all are made partakers of salvation.

He also predicted there would be great equality in God's eternal realm and that there would be no poor among them or class differences.

Joseph was following good company, that of the original apostles. Was it not Philip who baptized the black eunuch from Ethiopia, who by heritage (a child of Ham) and by being unsexed (castrated) was not allowed to be a Jew, thus opening the gospel to all?

How amazing that the Jews who excluded eunuchs and the children of Ham would generally exclude themselves from Christianity and thus become victims of Christian hatred and pogroms for almost 2,000 years.

By the by, check race laws in the Nauvoo city statutes. Mayor Smith, while liberal among whites in his day and age, did pronounce some unjust decisions based on race. But, all in all, he was far better on this issue than most whites of the age, and he was light years in front of Brigham Young and John Taylor, stone cold racists completely reflective of the larger American society.