Can we have a "real" discussion about Joseph Smith and Polygamy?

[Doc]

Originally Posted by Billyray

I am sure that is how the FLDS fathers feel today when they "offer" their young daughters to full grown men.

I know you would like to equate the two, but it is/was not the same. If you cannot figure out the difference, then perhaps further discussion if fruitless.

Doc

~

[maklelan]

Originally Posted by Billyray

If you have (or had) a 14 year old daughter, would you have any problem with her marrying a 38 year old man (if there were no legal restrictions)?

This is a pretty blatant appeal to emotions, and it signals to me the debate has concluded. That is, of course, unless you have anything factual to add.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by maklelan

This is a pretty blatant appeal to emotions, and it signals to me the debate has concluded. That is, of course, unless you have anything factual to add.

Excuse me for pointing this out...but sorta like your appeal to the warm-fuzzy as the ultimate EMOTIONAL proof that Mormonism is true?

[Billyray]

Originally Posted by maklelan

This is a pretty blatant appeal to emotions, and it signals to me the debate has concluded. That is, of course, unless you have anything factual to add.

I agree with you that this is an emotional issue. The fact that a full grown man who is already married with multiple wives marries a 14 year old girl. Then he has the nerve to lie about having more than one wife. Probably the thing that makes it more emotional is the fact that people stand behind this guy and revere him as a man of God as best noted in the song "Praise to the Man".



". . .Be humble and patient in all circumstances of life; we shall then triumph more gloriously. What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one."
LDS History of the Church 6:411 May 1844

[maklelan]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Excuse me for pointing this out...but sorta like your appeal to the warm-fuzzy as the ultimate EMOTIONAL proof that Mormonism is true?

Can you point to an example where I appealed to any warm fuzzies at all as emotional proof for Mormonism? If not, I can't see how this is a relevant reply.

[maklelan]

Originally Posted by Billyray

I agree with you that this is an emotional issue. The fact that a full grown man who is already married with multiple wives marries a 14 year old girl. Then he has the nerve to lie about having more than one wife. Probably the thing that makes it more emotional is the fact that people stand behind this guy and revere him as a man of God as best noted in the song "Praise to the Man".



". . .Be humble and patient in all circumstances of life; we shall then triumph more gloriously. What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one."
LDS History of the Church 6:411 May 1844

Continued appeals to emotion. Yes, I'm aware that you feel strongly about this, but that has little to do with a logical debate. If you insist on ignoring logic in favor of fallacious appeals to fallacy, the debate is already over.

[Father_JD]

uh, didn't you end the debate by appealing to your EMOTIONAL WARM-FUZZY in your past replies??

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by maklelan

Can you point to an example where I appealed to any warm fuzzies at all as emotional proof for Mormonism? If not, I can't see how this is a relevant reply.

You admitted as such when you replied, "Oh, that really made my testimony crumble" or words to that effect.

The ONLY reason you believe a conclusively proven HOAX called, "The Book O'Abraham" is "scripture" is BECAUSE OF YOUR EMOTIONAL WARM FUZZY.

Otherwise, you'd KNOW, UNDERSTAND, and RECOGNIZE a FRAUD when you see one.

[maklelan]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

You admitted as such when you replied, "Oh, that really made my testimony crumble" or words to that effect.

That's about the worst attempt I've ever seen to support an insupportable ***ertion.

Originally Posted by Father_JD

The ONLY reason you believe a conclusively proven HOAX called, "The Book O'Abraham" is "scripture" is BECAUSE OF YOUR EMOTIONAL WARM FUZZY.

Otherwise, you'd KNOW, UNDERSTAND, and RECOGNIZE a FRAUD when you see one.

You ***erted that I fallaciously appealed to warm fuzzies in an argument. I've never done that. You were wrong. Case closed, and debate over.

[Father_JD]

You made the comment about your "testmony" being STILL INTACT.

You implied that the "testimony" is at least one reason you hold these hoaxes to be TRUE.

[maklelan]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

You made the comment about your "testmony" being STILL INTACT.

You implied that the "testimony" is at least one reason you hold these hoaxes to be TRUE.

My own personal convictions have nothing whatsoever to do with this thread or with a debate of empirical evidence. This is a maddeningly asinine red herring.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by maklelan

My own personal convictions have nothing whatsoever to do with this thread or with a debate of empirical evidence. This is a maddeningly asinine red herring.

Nonsense. Your "testimony" has EVERYTHING to do with ANYTHING "Mormon". You're blind to the EVIDENCE that the BOA is a total HOAX BECAUSE of your warm-fuzzy.

Your knowledge of Hebrew is virtually WORTHLESS because you can't even exegete the ENGLISH.

[maklelan]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Nonsense. Your "testimony" has EVERYTHING to do with ANYTHING "Mormon". You're blind to the EVIDENCE that the BOA is a total HOAX BECAUSE of your warm-fuzzy.

Your knowledge of Hebrew is virtually WORTHLESS because you can't even exegete the ENGLISH.

Add something besides "Nu-uh!" or I'm done with you. Since you obviously can't add anything of any substance whatsoever, make your petty little insult so you can rub your ego one last time and I can put you on ignore. I know your bigotry and ignorance leave you no choice.

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Are you that obtuse that you can't see it...even beginning in the Garden of Eden with the creation of Adam and Eve,NOT Adam and Eve,and Susie,and Wendy,and Elizabeth,and Nancy, and Jennifer, et al.????

When the Pharisees came tempting Jesus and asked "Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? " in answer to their question regarding the subject of divorce not polygamy he replied "Have ye not read,that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,For this cause shall a man leave father and mother,and shall cleave to his wife:and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Or from such verses is that "a man shall leave his family and cleave to his WIFE (notice,SINGULAR) and the two become one flesh"????

When Jesus quoted "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother,and shall cleave unto his wife:and they shall be one flesh" this was only in reference to adultery. Moses married Zipporah and the Ethiopian woman without negating the idea of his being "one flesh" with both of his wives.

God,speaking through a prophet (Nathan) said to David "I gave thee thy master's wives into thy bosom and if that had been too little,I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things." (2 Samuel 12:8) God not only gave David his wives but if David had wanted more wives,He would have given David even more if he had not sinned by committing adultery. Polygamy in the Old Testament however this was not the case at the time of the New Testament.

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

And how do I prove a "negative," M.? How do I prove that God did NOT command polygamy given the absence of such a command?

Do tell us, OK?

All I am asking you to do is prove biblically that "He created woman for man...NOT women for man." You can prove scripturally your own argument that this was the original plan of God can you not?

[maklelan]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Nonsense. Your "testimony" has EVERYTHING to do with ANYTHING "Mormon". You're blind to the EVIDENCE that the BOA is a total HOAX BECAUSE of your warm-fuzzy.

Your knowledge of Hebrew is virtually WORTHLESS because you can't even exegete the ENGLISH.

Zing! I see you're totally incapable of adding anything of any substance whatsoever to this forum. I'm not interested in wasting my time just to take part in your little ego-rubbing. You're on ignore.

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

I DO have a knowledge of it...that's just one reason I reject it as "scripture".

You have said previously that you had no need to read what you categorized as spurious screed.

Originally Posted by Father_JD

You've never demonstrated error on my part,M. Mormonism's soteriology is faith + WORKS.

This is pretty difficult as you don't care what citations that I bring to the table since your interpretation of what I argued supersedes this.

Originally Posted by Father_JD

I don't care what citations you bring to the table...you yourself have CONTRADICTED your own spurious screed when it comes to faith and works. I merely parroted back to you your own words, summarizing them.

In other words don't bother me with the facts as I have already made up my mind.

Originally Posted by Father_JD

I refuse to dignify your forum name 'cause you're NO messenger of Jehovah...so what alternative name would be acceptable to you? Gory for "Egor"? Tooster for "Gentoo"??

How about what you are calling me now?

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Oh,BTW...I'm NOT wrong...I p****d your little soteriological framework. You haven't proven ME wrong,but have demonstrated to all lurkers that you're either:

1. Dishonest...or

2. Confused.

Which is it?

How about the third alternative that your parsing of my soteriological framework is in error?

Originally Posted by Father_JD

When they can read your own comments and deduce from them that you believe salvation is:

Faith + WORKS...and lots of works at that.

But with your vehement denials that that's what you believe,you come across either confused or purposely dishonest. Context determines meaning and it's clear you're one or the other.

I would suggest that you pick up the Book of Mormon and prove that it teaches the doctrine of "Faith + WORKS...and lots of works at that."

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post

I DO have a knowledge of it...that's just one reason I reject it as "scripture".

You have said previously that you had no need to read what you categorized as spurious screed.

I have no need to re-read it. I've read all 500+ boring pages of it several times when I was LDS. Take out all of the "And it came to p***"s and it might have been only a mere 120 boring pages to read.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post

You've never demonstrated error on my part,M. Mormonism's soteriology is faith + WORKS.

This is pretty difficult as you don't care what citations that I bring to the table since your interpretation of what I argued supersedes this.

I had to spoon-feed your own words back to you, showing you you firmly believe in a soteriology of faith + WORKS.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post

I don't care what citations you bring to the table...you yourself have CONTRADICTED your own spurious screed when it comes to faith and works. I merely parroted back to you your own words, summarizing them.

In other words don't bother me with the facts as I have already made up my mind.

LOL. What I've presented are the FACTS. I thought LDS weren't supposed to smoke...especially THAT kind of "cigarette" which appears you've been taking deep draughts of.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post

I refuse to dignify your forum name 'cause you're NO messenger of Jehovah...so what alternative name would be acceptable to you? Gory for "Egor"? Tooster for "Gentoo"??

How about what you are calling me now?

The DECEIVED one??




Quote:
Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post


Oh,BTW...I'm NOT wrong...I p****d your little soteriological framework. You haven't proven ME wrong,but have demonstrated to all lurkers that you're either:

1. Dishonest...or

2. Confused.

Which is it?

How about the third alternative that your parsing of my soteriological framework?

There is no third.


Originally Posted by Father_JD View Post

When they can read your own comments and deduce from them that you believe salvation is:

Faith + WORKS...and lots of works at that.

But with your vehement denials that that's what you believe,you come across either confused or purposely dishonest. Context determines meaning and it's clear you're one or the other.

I would suggest that you pick up the Book of Mormon and prove that it teaches the doctrine of "Faith + WORKS...and lots of works at that."

"You are saved by faith AFTER ALL YOU CAN DO". That's WORKS...or have you re-defined that as well?

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle

JD, our works are only a manifestation of our faith and belief in the Savior's own words.

I guess I should just parrot the notion that you believe that simply uttering the words "Lord, Lord" are sufficient for you to be saved.

Great. I think I'll do that.

Now that's REALLY interesting, figster. You affirm salvation BY FAITH (our works are only a manifestation of our faith...)

and THEN contradict yourself:

"simply uttering the words...are sufficient for you to be save"

which MEANS WORKS SAVE ONE.

Of course one who is TRULY saved will manifest the reality of the "new birth" by DOING WORKS...but the works do NOT justify one forensically in God's sight.

[Mesenja]

Enough talk Father JD. Prove your argument from the Book of Mormon.

Originally Posted by Father_JD

I have no need to re-read it. I've read all 500+ boring pages of it several times when I was LDS. Take out all of the "And it came to p***"s and it might have been only a mere 120 boring pages to read.

So now you are saying that you have read it. Before you had no reason to read it as it was a hoax. The bottom line is that you've proven by your statements in this thread that you've obviously forgotten everything that you've read.

Originally Posted by Father_JD

You've never demonstrated error on my part,M. Mormonism's soteriology is faith + WORKS.

Then you are able to show us from the Book of Mormon that this is the case.

Originally Posted by Father_JD

I had to spoon-feed your own words back to you,showing you you firmly believe in a soteriology of faith + WORKS.

You forgot the fact that you added your own commentary.

Originally Posted by Father_JD

I don't care what citations you bring to the table...you yourself have CONTRADICTED your own spurious screed when it comes to faith and works. I merely parroted back to you your own words, summarizing them.

LOL. What I've presented are the FACTS. I thought LDS weren't supposed to smoke...especially THAT kind of "cigarette" which appears you've been taking deep draughts of.

Yes you presented the facts as you see them FatherJD.

Originally Posted by Father_JD

I refuse to dignify your forum name 'cause you're NO messenger of Jehovah...so what alternative name would be acceptable to you? Gory for "Egor"? Tooster for "Gentoo"??

The DECEIVED one??

Have you forgotten what you yourself agreed to call me already? And of course we can trust your understanding of a book that you now claim that you have read decades ago yet previously denied reading.

Originally Posted by Father_JD

Oh,BTW...I'm NOT wrong...I p****d your little soteriological framework. You haven't proven ME wrong,but have demonstrated to all lurkers that you're either:

1. Dishonest...or

2. Confused.

Which is it?

There is no third.

When they can read your own comments and deduce from them that you believe salvation is:

Faith + WORKS...and lots of works at that.

But with your vehement denials that that's what you believe,you come across either confused or purposely dishonest. Context determines meaning and it's clear you're one or the other.

"You are saved by faith AFTER ALL YOU CAN DO". That's WORKS...or have you re-defined that as well?

Context may determine meaning but all you've shown by your parsing of my quotations is that your commentary and deductions prove that you've understood neither.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

I've read all 500+ boring pages of it several times when I was LDS. Take out all of the "And it came to p***"s and it might have been only a mere 120 boring pages to read.

---Is that a fact--that over 75% of the text consists of "and it came to p***"?

What I've presented are the FACTS.

---Hmmm. I dunno. Almost thou persuadest me to use a search engine, remove all instances of "and it came to p***" and count how many pages remain.

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

---Is that a fact--that over 75% of the text consists of "and it came to p***"?


---Hmmm. I dunno. Almost thou persuadest me to use a search engine, remove all instances of "and it came to p***" and count how many pages remain.

LOL!! Thanks for your returned tongue-in-cheek reply, jeff! It made me smile!!

[Mesenja]

Originally Posted by Jill

Libby, you said:

I do want to believe the best, because I believe Joseph was a prophet, based on a larger picture, not just negatives (or positives) here and there. I know there is a much bigger picture of Joseph that the critics don't, usually, see or present. Focus can make a huge difference in what kind of story you see and tell about this man (or any man, for that matter)..

So can history, Libby. It's from history that we learn the character of Joseph Smith Jr.

Brodie, Fawn. No Man Knows My History.

Fawn Brodie is neither Christian nor Mormon--she's a researcher and biographer. Perhaps your "bigger picture" should include her biography on Joseph Smith--a detailed, documented bio that the Mormon Church has not been able to disprove for more than 30 years.

Joseph Smith was a convicted money-digger.

He admitted to using a "peepstone" to earn a living but decided he couldn't make much money at it.

He married other men's wives. Do you believe God told him to do this?

All these things speak to character--you cannot brush them aside and say, "Oh well . . . that's not the whole story."

Women suffered terribly from the "revelation" of plural marriage--have you read any of their stories?

Try Mary V. Ettie Smith, Fifteen Years Among the Mormons, 1859. She was a close friend of Brigham Young's family.

Fawn Brodie was a Mormon but lost faith in her religion.

[nrajeff]

Originally Posted by Father_JD

LOL!! Thanks for your returned tongue-in-cheek reply, jeff! It made me smile!!

--Tongue-in WHAT now? Say what? What makes you think I was joking?

[Father_JD]

Originally Posted by nrajeff

--Tongue-in WHAT now? Say what? What makes you think I was joking?

Uh...'cause I was joking.