What kind of person was joseph smith. . .REALLY?

[Christian]

History paints him as a scoundrel, a thief, a petty conman, an adulterer, and liar, someone who tried to shoot his way out of jail.

Mormons 'pretty him up' drastically, making him sound like he could walk on water, a 'righteous man.'

So what was he. . .REALLY? Please give checkable references.

[Erundur]

Originally Posted by Christian

History paints him as a scoundrel, a thief, a petty conman, an adulterer, and liar, someone who tried to shoot his way out of jail.

No, it's only anti-Mormonism that does that, falsely.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Christian

History paints him as a scoundrel, a thief, a petty conman, an adulterer, and liar, someone who tried to shoot his way out of jail.

Mormons 'pretty him up' drastically, making him sound like he could walk on water, a 'righteous man.'

So what was he. . .REALLY? Please give checkable references.

Well said.

And I note no one would dare say different

[Phoenix]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Well said.

And I note no one would dare say different

I dare, and many others definitely dare, so you are wrong.

[alanmolstad]

Talk is cheap, but anytime you want to really challenge the conclusions that CHRISTIAN posted above?....feel free...

What conclusions about the Mormon founder Joe Smith did CHRISTIAN post?
Let me quote:

"scoundrel,....

a thief,....

a petty conman,....

an adulterer, ....

and liar, ....

someone who tried to shoot his way out of jail....."

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

Talk is cheap, but anytime you want to really challenge the conclusions that CHRISTIAN posted above?....feel free...

What conclusions about the Mormon founder Joe Smith did CHRISTIAN post?
Let me quote:

"scoundrel,....

a thief,....

a petty conman,....

an adulterer, ....

and liar, ....

someone who tried to shoot his way out of jail....."

Yes we're all well aware of Christians, and your opinion of Joseph Smith and his (an your) willingness to believe ANY story painting him in the worst possible light, and disregarding mountains of positive history regarding his character. (And he's completely en***led to his opinions and beliefs, as you are as well) I'm not sure what that "proves", but again you're both en***led to draw whatever conclusions you choose to, and makes sense if all you choose to regard are stories offered by anti-Mormon sources.

And yes....I completely dare to say different...and will.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Christian

History paints him as a scoundrel, a thief, a petty conman, an adulterer, and liar, someone who tried to shoot his way out of jail.

Mormons 'pretty him up' drastically, making him sound like he could walk on water, a 'righteous man.'

So what was he. . .REALLY? Please give checkable references.

They do seem unable to address such charges...mostly they just stick to going after the messenger. ..
We have yet to see someone say he was not guilty of such....


Take the charge he was guilty of adultery. .
Was he or was he not guilty of adultery?

Now I dont fall for any of that **** like , "Oh honest Emma,God says it's ok" cuz, that just sounds like something a guy thinks up when he gets caught dipping his pen in the wrong inkwell.


You have to look at the historical record and see what the facts are...
What are the facts?
Did he cheat on his wife?

Well...it's like this, If we wanted to know if he actually cheated on his wife...all we have to ask and answer is one question -

"Was Mr Zipper involved? "




Yes or no?

[alanmolstad]

so we have our answer to that charge that CHRISTIAN has listed...


the next charge we can look at and view the historical record is....

Was The Mormon Founder Joe Smith, a "a petty conman"?






what does the court records tell us?

[theway]

Originally Posted by Christian

History paints him as a scoundrel, a thief, a petty conman, an adulterer, and liar, someone who tried to shoot his way out of jail.

Mormons 'pretty him up' drastically, making him sound like he could walk on water, a 'righteous man.'

So what was he. . .REALLY? Please give checkable references.

Really? And what "History" paints him as any of these things outside of AntiMormon History?
American History actually named him the most influential religious leader in the Americas in the last 200 years.

The only person's history which has been written here today, is yours....
After all, according to actual history based on known evidence and events, which is correct?

1 Your statement that Joseph "tried to shoot his way out of jail".

2 Or that Joseph tried to defend himself against armed murderers who tried to break INTO jail?

Good thing there is real history so we can know who the liers really are.

[MickeyS]

Now I dont fall for any of that **** like , "Oh honest Emma,God says it's ok" cuz, that just sounds like something a guy thinks up when he gets caught dipping his pen in the wrong inkwell.

I believe that may say more about your character than his if that's all you think about. It's just an observance. You nor anyone else can tell God who is and isn't guilty of adultery, especially if the actions that cause you to suspect were by His command. And people who are married to each other cannot commit adultery, again especially when the marriage was sanctioned by God Himself. You can draw whatever conclusion you like all day long, it does not mean it's fact simply because you said it. You will have it all completely explained to you eventually to where you won't be able to deny or argue.

Take the charge he was guilty of adultery. .
If wanted to know if he actually cheated on his wife...all you have to ask is one question
"Was Mr Zipper involved? ".........

But if you would like to go by your simple standard, was "Mr Zipper" involved...then the answer is "No" since the zipper wasn't even around until the turn of the century. So, your first claim is a solid "No" on all sides.

[Christian]

Originally Posted by Phoenix

I dare, and many others definitely dare, so you are wrong.

You are welcome to your OPINION. Just like belly ****ons, most everyone has opinions. The mormon version of joe smith is a very whitewashed one in my opinion. You obviously believe the whitewash.

[Christian]

mickey posted:

Now I dont fall for any of that **** like , "Oh honest Emma,God says it's ok" cuz, that just sounds like something a guy thinks up when he gets caught dipping his pen in the wrong inkwell.

I believe that may say more about your character than his if that's all you think about. It's just an observance. You nor anyone else can tell God who is and isn't guilty of adultery, especially if the actions that cause you to suspect were by His command.

ANYONE can say 'golly gee, GOD told me to commit adultery with that woman. The God of the Bible cannot lie or contradict himself. When women are married to their husbands, God does NOT tell mickey to 'marry' them. That would make him AND THEM adulterers. According to GOD, marriage is the making of ONE FLESH by one man and one woman.

Joe smith was an adulterous letch.

And people who are married to each other cannot commit adultery, again especially when the marriage was sanctioned by God Himself. You can draw whatever conclusion you like all day long, it does not mean it's fact simply because you said it. You will have it all completely explained to you eventually to where you won't be able to deny or argue.

What makes our statements TRUE is how God views marriage ACCORDING TO GOD IN THE BIBLE. Will you tell YOUR wife that God told you that you should have intercourse with that fifteen year old?

Yer 'prophet was an adulterer and an letch. You and he can lie all you want, blame it on God if you want, but that doesn't make it true.

[Christian]

mickey posted:

Now I dont fall for any of that **** like , "Oh honest Emma,God says it's ok" cuz, that just sounds like something a guy thinks up when he gets caught dipping his pen in the wrong inkwell.

I believe that may say more about your character than his if that's all you think about. It's just an observance. You nor anyone else can tell God who is and isn't guilty of adultery, especially if the actions that cause you to suspect were by His command.

ANYONE can say 'golly gee, GOD told me to commit adultery with that woman. The God of the Bible cannot lie or contradict himself. When women are married to their husbands, God does NOT tell mickey to 'marry' them. That would make him AND THEM adulterers. According to GOD, marriage is the making of ONE FLESH by one man and one woman.

Joe smith was an adulterous letch.

And people who are married to each other cannot commit adultery, again especially when the marriage was sanctioned by God Himself. You can draw whatever conclusion you like all day long, it does not mean it's fact simply because you said it. You will have it all completely explained to you eventually to where you won't be able to deny or argue.

What makes our statements TRUE is how God views marriage ACCORDING TO GOD IN THE BIBLE. Will you tell YOUR wife that God told you that you should have intercourse with that fifteen year old?

Yer 'prophet was an adulterer and an letch. You and he can lie all you want, blame it on God if you want, but that doesn't make your whitewashed 'prophet' become true.

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by Christian

ANYONE can say 'golly gee, GOD told me to commit adultery with that woman. The God of the Bible cannot lie or contradict himself. When women are married to their husbands, God does NOT tell mickey to 'marry' them. That would make him AND THEM adulterers. According to GOD, marriage is the making of ONE FLESH by one man and one woman

Yes, but at various times in the Bible God condoned polygamy, as you are well
aware. If God gives a prophet (or ANYONE) a commandment, he must fulfill it. And Emma was also well aware that her husband was a prophet of God. The commandment served its purposes, and I believe we are witnessing one of the purposes here, and that is to test faith. BTW...God does not condone polygamy anymore. But you are en***led to your opinions, everybody has them. You are also en***led to your interpretation of who God is and what He can and can't do, we have free agency. I would only caution you before you start making those demands of Him.

Will you tell YOUR wife that God told you that you should have intercourse with that fifteen year old?

First of all, since I'm a woman, I will never HAVE a wife in the first place as one thing God has NEVER condoned is ****sexuality. Secondly, if you're speaking of Helen Mar Kimball (as I've continually explained to Alan) that was not a marriage for TIME & eternity, but a sealing for eternity only to quite literally join the Smith and Kimball family in the eternities. There were both kinds...in the sealings for eternity only, there could be no relations or it would have been adultery. Again, you are en***led to your opinions and ***umptions, but I know you will never find PROOF that Joseph had relations with Helen, so you are clearly making ***umptions.

[Christian]

mickey posted:

Yes, but at various times in the Bible God condoned polygamy, as you are well
aware.

NOT ONCE in Christ's church.

If God gives a prophet (or ANYONE) a commandment, he must fulfill it. And Emma was also well aware that her husband was a prophet of God. The commandment served its purposes, and I believe we are witnessing one of the purposes here, and that is to test faith. BTW...God does not condone polygamy anymore.

Talking out of both sides of your mouth, are you? You mean that just because Utah wouldn't be allowed statehood, your godlet changed his mind?

But you are en***led to your opinions, everybody has them. You are also en***led to your interpretation of who God is and what He can and can't do, we have free agency.

No we don't. God chose those HE chose before the beginnings of the worlds (Ephesians 1 tells you about it). Neither can you willy-nilly 'choose' to have faith in Jesus Christ according to John 6:44 and John 6:65. So IF you decide to 'interpret' God to be anything OTHER than what He is. . .you will go to Hell.

I would only caution you before you start making those demands of Him.

I've made NO demands on God. I have only reported what the BIBLE says. After all, GOD has already spoken. It is not a thing to worry about when I report what HE said.

Will you tell YOUR wife that God told you that you should have intercourse with that fifteen year old?

First of all, since I'm a woman, I will never HAVE a wife in the first place as one thing God has NEVER condoned is ****sexuality.

So if your hubby (if you have one) comes home with a fifteen-year-old girl and wants to have sex with her, that is just fine for you? I don't believe it would be. . .

BTW you should have taken the moniker 'minny.' Mickey is a BOY mouse name.

Secondly, if you're speaking of Helen Mar Kimball (as I've continually explained to Alan) that was not a marriage for TIME & eternity, but a sealing for eternity only to quite literally join the Smith and Kimball family in the eternities. There were both kinds...in the sealings for eternity only, there could be no relations or it would have been adultery.

Do you make that up as you go?

Again, you are en***led to your opinions and ***umptions, but I know you will never find PROOF that Joseph had relations with Helen, so you are clearly making ***umptions.

No, I am believing GOD when HE told us:

Gen 2:24
24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.
NKJV

BY DEFINITION, they weren't 'married' unless they were joined sexually.

Your lecherous 'prophet' would be called a 'sl_t' if he were a woman.

[MickeyS]

If they were ONLY sealed they weren't married for time but eternity only, meaning no sex. Sad you don't understand the concept. Carry on with your insults if it makes you feel like a "Christian". Btw...my first names Dawn, middle name Michelle....Mickey was a much better nickname than Donald, but thank you for feeling you need to ridicule and insult where you can.

Plus, I have stated a few times in my comments that I'm female...I don't know what to tell you if you're not reading my responses

[Christian]

mickey posted:

If they were ONLY sealed they weren't married for time but eternity only, meaning no sex.

NOT according to the BIBLE. GOD placed sex as the consummation of marriage, period. Your pretense that joe the letch smith didn't have sex with these other women is a pathetic joke.

Sorry michelle, but I didn't see your comments anywhere in previous posts that you are female. I'll try to remember that. I am old though, so I might forget. . .

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by Christian

mickey posted:

If they were ONLY sealed they weren't married for time but eternity only, meaning no sex.

CHRISTIAN, did you notice the word "IF"that Mickey posted at the start of the quote?

"If"......

They have to always start every defense of Joe Smith with the word "If" because they don't want to say anything for sure as far as the appe***e Smith had for bedding younger and younger girls goes.

When I see Mickey use the word "If" it reminds me of another Mormon lady that used to post comments on this forum all the time in defense of Smith.

She used to state very flatly that all the Christians that said that Smith had other wives were telling lies.


This is why Mickey and other Mormons when they read that Smith "married" a underage child they will rush to try to put a better spin on that by saying that "Not all the marriages were sexual".

(And yes, it is a rather pathetic attempt to make what are clearly the acts of a child molester look better.)


But in the end...
In the end its a moot point because a normal person if they think about it, will realize that none of us should be part of a religion that has to spend so much time defending it's founder against the rather strong charges that he was an adulterer, a conman, and a child molester.

In the end also the use of the word "If" hints that a person knows what we all know too.....the Elephant in the middle of the Mormon Temple that no one wants to talk about is that there is yet a great possibility of more information to slip out one day about the nature of Smith's sexual actives with children ....



By the way,
That one Mormon lady who used to come here so often and defend the official teaching at the time that Smith only had one wife?
What happened to her you might ask?

Well, when that official story collapsed (and the Mormon church back-tracked and had to admit the truth about the many different women that Smith was married to), well that was apparently the last straw for the Mormon lady, and she stopped showing up here.

Too embarr***ed I would guess...

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

CHRISTIAN, did you notice the word "IF"that Mickey posted at the start of the quote?

"If"......

They have to always start every defense of Joe Smith with the word "If" because they don't want to say anything for sure as far as the appe***e Smith had for bedding younger and younger girls goes.

When I see Mickey use the word "If" it reminds me of another Mormon lady that used to post comments on this forum all the time in defense of Smith.

She used to state very flatly that all the Christians that said that Smith had other wives were telling lies.


This is why Mickey and other Mormons when they read that Smith "married" a underage child they will rush to try to put a better spin on that by saying that "Not all the marriages were sexual".

(And yes, it is a rather pathetic attempt to make what are clearly the acts of a child molester look better.)


But in the end...
In the end its a moot point because a normal person if they think about it, will realize that none of us should be part of a religion that has to spend so much time defending it's founder against the rather strong charges that he was an adulterer, a conman, and a child molester.

In the end also the use of the word "If" hints that a person knows what we all know too.....the Elephant in the middle of the Mormon Temple that no one wants to talk about is that there is yet a great possibility of more information to slip out one day about the nature of Smith's sexual actives with children ....



By the way,
That one Mormon lady who used to come here so often and defend the official teaching at the time that Smith only had one wife?
What happened to her you might ask?

Well, when that official story collapsed (and the Mormon church back-tracked and had to admit the truth about the many different women that Smith was married to), well that was apparently the last straw for the Mormon lady, and she stopped showing up here.

Too embarr***ed I would guess...

I'm not even reading anything past that first sentence. Let me CLARIFY for you AGAIN Alan

IF YOU SEE ANYBODY THAT WAS SEALED FOR ETERNITY ONLY THAT MEANS NO SEX. No marital relations for TIME (this earth) the sealing is for ETERNITY (after this earth) That's what that sentence CLEARLY means since I have ALREADY stated the Smith/Kimball joining was a sealing only...do I need to explain it AGAIN or do you understand my words?? If you're confused...scroll up, just..a tad...

Secondly, if you're speaking of Helen Mar Kimball (as I've continually explained to Alan) that was not a marriage for TIME & eternity, but a sealing for eternity only to quite literally join the Smith and Kimball family in the eternities. There were both kinds...in the sealings for eternity only, there could be no relations or it would have been adultery.

I had clearly already made it...clear

I'm sorry you wasted all your words...again. Please Alan...please...please give your PROOF that the joining of Joseph and Helen included sex. Please. You surely have it, since you're so positive it happened. Except your ONLY "proof" clearly went out the window since Mr Zipper wasn't involved...so, please, give your OTHER proof...or was that all you had?

[MickeyS]

Christian, you may address me by my username only as per forum rules, thank you

As far as being clear on the female part, I think I'm thinking of things I've said to Alan, so I apologize...however you've been pretty good at reading what I say to Alan anyway, this was my latest affirmation since Mickey said to Alan

"Right....and since I don't imagine me and Apologette having a girls night out anytime soon...my confusion stands."

...but reading some of my past stuff....how could you NOT know I'm a woman?? LOL Man you musta thought I was a wuss bag

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by MickeyS

I'm not even reading anything past that first sentence.....?

how brave of you....



Let me know when we both are suppose to read past the first sentence then.....

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

how brave of you....



Let me know when we both are suppose to read past the first sentence then.....

It's IRRELEVANT Alan...as it had absolutely not one thing to do with what I said....I dare say it was perhaps "unknowingly" dishonest. Though you know very well what I said and what I have said. So, why should I read it? I've read it before, except this time you Included me, so again...completely irrelevant to the conversation except that you love to bring up that "nice Mormon lady" whenever you can.

You kind of remind me of these regulars that used to come into the bar I worked at in a previous life that just had to fit in their same old "glory days" stories even where they don't belong....Awww, bless yer heart, it's funny, really.

Perhaps you would like to read past my first sentence?

Maybe not?

Too embarr***ed I would guess.

[alanmolstad]

Originally Posted by MickeyS

It's IRRELEVANT Alan..

So are we reading past the 1st sentence then, I was not informed that changed?

[MickeyS]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

So are we reading past the 1st sentence then, I was not informed that changed?

Yeah....spoiler alert....everybody's already heard it. So not really much of a spoiler alert then huh lol

[theway]

Originally Posted by alanmolstad

how brave of you....

Let me know when we both are suppose to read past the first sentence then.....

LOL.... What's funny is that I only got to the end of the first or second sentence before I quite reading your nonsense also. I rarely will.
You NEVER provide anything new that hasn't been already debunked or explained years ago. Or you post videos from people like, Walter Martin, who has no credibility or scripture knowledge....

The bottom line is.... You're just plain boring. That is why no one posts here anymore, your rhetoric and rants are just not up to the task of threatening the LDS Church, or at the very least.... Entertaining.