Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 345678 LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 180

Thread: Joseph Smith's First Fraud Conviction

  1. #151
    BrianH
    Guest

    Default

    ...and you accuse ME of plagiarism?



    What we have here is MORE evidence of the Mormon's programmed knee-**** reaction: simply paste in plagiarized boilerplate from their mind-control masters at LD$ HQ.

    Meanwhile your unidentified, plagiarized source commits the fallacy of the argument from silence. Just because McGuire did NOT provide ADDITIONAL documentation, does not mean that the original documentation is false.

    -BH

    .

  2. #152
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Hey genius, how about I documented in the very first post the following:

    "Reinventing Mormonism: To Remake or Redo"
    Larry C. Porter


    Did you even read beyond the ***le. Hmmm, gl***es maybe would help.
    The only one I know who plagiarizes talking points and ideas is you good buddy.

  3. #153
    BrianH
    Guest

    Default

    Okay your identified boilerplate source commits the fallacy of an argument from silence.

    Either way, you still face the substantial problem of answering this question:

    Do YOU think that Joseph Smith had a magic rock in the hat jammed over his face or not?

    -BH

    .

  4. #154
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianH View Post
    Okay your identified boilerplate source commits the fallacy of an argument from silence.

    Either way, you still face the substantial problem of answering this question:

    Do YOU think that Joseph Smith had a magic rock in the hat jammed over his face or not?

    -BH

    .
    Thank you for the apology,

  5. #155
    BrianH
    Guest

    Default

    Your welcome.

    Thank you for living down to my expectations and ignoring the question. You continue to help me show the vacuity of Mormonism.

    -BH

    .

  6. #156
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianH View Post
    Your welcome.

    Thank you for living down to my expectations and ignoring the question. You continue to help me show the vacuity of Mormonism.

    -BH

    .
    Again, thank you for the laughs. I pretty much answered all the questions.
    Not my problem any more, did you find anything in my answers that you specifically disagree with.

    R.

  7. #157
    BrianH
    Guest

    Default

    I pretty much answered all the questions.
    No you did not. The only question I asked you was: Do you or do you NOT think that Joseph Smith had a little pet magic rock in the hat jammed over his face?

    (mod edit) you literally CANNOT answer that question without exposing the silly supers***ion that lies at the very heart of your entire religion.

    But I doubt it.

    -BH

    .

  8. #158
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianH View Post
    No you did not. The only question I asked you was: Do you or do you NOT think that Joseph Smith had a little pet magic rock in the hat jammed over his face?

    (mod edit) you literally CANNOT answer that question without exposing the silly supers***ion that lies at the very heart of your entire religion.

    But I doubt it.

    -BH

    .
    How about me giving you something you're a pro at, my own deflection. When you can start answering our re****als and being specific, I will gladly answer the above question, Hmmm, how about it good buddy.

  9. #159
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Anything in my last re****al you disagree with?

    R.


    Anything in my re****als you disagree with? Your deflection is not going to allow me to me distracted from asking you why you can't be specific about what you disagree with in my re****als. I will answer your question only if you have the courtesy to quit deflecting and show what you disagree with in my re****al.

    R.
    Last edited by Richard; 06-23-2009 at 07:37 AM.

  10. #160
    BrianH
    Guest

    Default

    I made that clear.

    Why can you not answer this simple question: Do you or do you NOT think that Joseph Smith had a magic rock in his hat with which he claimed to have access to the supernatural?

    We both know the reason why you cannot answer that. But you won't face that reason head on: Cuz yer 'a-sceeerd of it.

    -BH

  11. #161
    John T
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fig-bearing Thistle View Post
    I have no ego to damage. I'm simply a believer, and so I see from a different paradigm. I am not posturing himself by hurling venomous pejoratives.
    I am glad for that, fig, but it seems that some one else is doing it with snarky remarks and put downs...


  12. #162
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    Anything in my re****als you disagree with? Your deflection is not going to allow me to me distracted from asking you why you can't be specific about what you disagree with in my re****als. I will answer your question only if you have the courtesy to quit deflecting and show what you disagree with in my re****al. I posted three pages of re****als, and you failed to address anything in there that refutes everything your OP states. Hmmm, your silence is golden, further proof of your inability to debate beyond your plagiarized ideas, research, thoughts and talking points.

    R.
    Last edited by Richard; 06-23-2009 at 07:44 AM.

  13. #163
    BrianH
    Guest

    Default

    Anything in my re****als you disagree with?
    I already answerd that question.

    Why can you not answer my question? This is no "defelction" Richard; nor is it "silence". This is a DIRECT address to the issue here which IS the subject of Smith's claim to be able to use a magic rock to receive supernatural revelations about buried gold (whether Spanish treasure or the one golden copy of the one book supposedly produced by an entire civilization).

    Did Smith have a magic rock in his hat or not?

    -BH

    .

  14. #164
    BrianH
    Guest

    Default

    You don't seem to understand the basic issue here, Stem.

    While we have documented sources regarding the trial and conviction of your "prophet", we could even ignore that record and arrive at the same TRUTH. Try to understand this instead of submitting to your conditioning and rejecting it without even actually THINKING about it: The charge was that Smith defruaded (the modern term) Josiah Stowell by CLAIMING to have a magic rock in his hat by which he could receive supernatural revelations concerning buried golden treasures. EVEN IF there was no conviction in court, the testimony of all relevant witnesses supports that claim. More importantly, your whole religion is based on Smith's claim that he DID posess this magic rock and the ability to use it. EVEN YOU YOURSELF believe that Smith really did have a magic rock in the hat jammed over his face.

    Since YOU AGREE with Smith's claims AND the claims of Smith's accuers (that Smith made this claim - the claim that YOU beleive) and since YOU EVEN AGREE that Smith was telling the TRUTH, its difficult to understand why the opinion of any court would matter to you.

    -BH

    .

  15. #165
    Richard
    Guest

    Default

    [QUOTE=BrianH;20954]I already answerd that question.

    Hmmm, after three pages of re****als, and well documented the following post was:

    Brian deflected with the following: "Do you deny that Joseph Smith was a gl***-looking money digger?"
    Interesting that you need to ***, when the facts show plainly you never once responded to anything I posted, so again we see you have no clue to the word DEFLECTION.

  16. #166
    BrianH
    Guest

    Default

    Interesting that you need to ***, when the facts show plainly you never once responded to anything I posted, so again we see you have no clue to the word DEFLECTION
    I most certainly did respond and that is no l ie

    The issue here REALLY IS the veracity of Smith's claim to have a magic rock by which he could use his supernatural powers to receive revelations about buried golden treasures. That is not a "deflection" Richard - it is the VERY HEART OF THE ISSUE of this thread.

    So since you won't answer the key question here, I will do it for you: YOU obviously beleive that Smith DID have a magic rock by means of which he could receive revelations about buried golden treasures, even though you won't publicly admit it. But how could you even be a Mormon if you did NOT think that Smith had such a rock and alleged supernatural abilities?

    -BH

    .
    Last edited by BrianH; 06-23-2009 at 09:38 AM.

  17. #167
    stemelbow
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianH View Post
    Oh C'mawn Stem, we both know that YOU would not grant any credibility to anything or anyone that shows your "prophet" was really just a two-bit occult con man. I have not personally gone to the court house and examined the record, if that is what you mean. But I DID document my sources. Apparently YOU cannot do that much.
    Your sources do not support your claim. And you haven't even tried to support such. this has nothing to do with me, Brian. it only has to do with your claims. I challenged them and you resorted to whining about me again. I know how you do things, but I just had to make that clear for anyone else interested.

    Logical fallacy alert: Argument from silence (a Mormon favorite).
    Oh brian. I am asking you to support your claim that Smith himself claimed he coudl find treasure for Stowell. You are th eone who said he claimed such. You did not say that his accusers said he claimed...you said what he himself claimed. Shall I quote you? That's not an argument from silence, that's merely asking for you to support your claim.

    I have already pointed out that Smith's accusers are the ones who attributed that claim to him.
    Then you also said Smith himself said he could find treasures through divination.

    His conviction proves that the court found in their favor. The lame excuse that it was the VICTIM who perpetrated the fraud on himself is only further manifestation of the utterly pathetic condition of the LDS apologetic. The only remaining question (and the question you aer avoiding) is: do YOU think that Smith actually had the magical occult divination powers he claimed he had.
    There ya go again...saying he claimed he had those powers. So support your claim. Or did you actually mean to say "that his accusers said he had"?

    1.) Smith did not just do things that others do not approve of. He was in the process of bilking some easily foold simpleton out of his rare cash by claiming to have a magic rock in his hat - the same trick he pulled when he "translated" the Book of Mormon.
    Okay...prove your claim. That he was bilking Stowell out of cash. Support your claim.

    2.) Despite your best effort to blame ME, my "forgiveness" is not the issue here. The issue here is the fact that your "prophet" was convicted TWICE for fraud, and this one time in particular for claiming to have the same kind of occult magic powers by which he supposedly "translated" your scriptures.
    Your quoted source has been shown to be suspect, Brian. did you read what Richard provided in response? So your claim of a fraud conviction is inconclusive and most of the evidence suggests there was no such conviction.

    love,
    stem

  18. #168
    BrianH
    Guest

    Default

    Your sources do not support your claim. And you haven't even tried to support such. this has nothing to do with me, Brian. it only has to do with your claims. I challenged them and you resorted to whining about me again. I know how you do things, but I just had to make that clear for anyone else interested.
    You are off in a world of your own, Stem. The FACTS show that Smith claimed to have a magic rock in his hat with which he could supernaturally divine the secret locations of buried golden treasure. Since you actually BELIEVE this claim of Smith's your objections to the evidence is moot.

    Oh brian. I am asking you to support your claim that Smith himself claimed he coudl find treasure for Stowell. You are th eone who said he claimed such. You did not say that his accusers said he claimed...you said what he himself claimed. Shall I quote you? That's not an argument from silence, that's merely asking for you to support your claim.
    And in the process, of this challenge you are committing the easily identified fallacy of arguing from silence: IGNORING all of the existing evidence while asking for evidence from a single source. Stem, TRY your best to actually THINK about this. Do you honestly think that Stowell told SMITH, that he (Smith) had a magic rock in his hat with which he could receive supernatural revelations about the location of golden treasures??? Please at least TRY to get real.

    Then you also said Smith himself said he could find treasures through divination.
    Had you bothered to read the court record in the OP you would have seen that when Smith was examined he himself testified that he could "determine where hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth were" and he further claimed that he had been stone-gazing and finding treasures and money for "three years." (see Charles Marshall, "The Original Prophet," Fraser's Magazine #7, February 1873 at p. 229); It is also rightly and easily inferred from Smith's behaviors and the behaviors and claims of his accusers and victims. Secondly, unless you can offer a better explanation of how Smith ended up BOTH, using his alleged magic rock in searching for golden treasures and was even hired by Stowell to do exactly that, your little game here will remain as transparent as it is now.

    Okay...prove your claim. That he was bilking Stowell out of cash. Support your claim
    I already have. Its in the OP that you apparently never even bothered to read. And I have been busy digging up even MORE evidence (in the form of testimonies from those intimate with Smith, such as his own wife as recorded in MORMON sources) that further support the fact that Smith was bilking people out of their meager frontier cash with his little magic rock trick. Some of my new finds are listed below. They come from a book called "Early Mormon Documents" by Dan Vogel. But before we review some of these I find it very odd that you are making such a stink about this since YOUR WHOLE RELIGION is based on revelations supposedly received by Smith using his magic rock in the hat trick. Your disputation of these fact is therefore extremely odd. Don't you WANT us to think that Smith REALLY DID have a magic rock in his hat? If you are actually disputing that, then what are we to make of the BoM witnesses, scribes and even Smith's own wife that clearly and unmistakably describe him using his little magic rock in the hat trick to "translate" the BoM????? Were the BoM witnesses L YING?

    Perhaps you are just unaware of the testimonies of Smith's family, accomplices, and witnesses regarding his channeling of the BoM. Any way, in answer to your self-refuting questions See:

    - Lucy Smith on Smith’s claimed facility with magic in, “Joseph the Prophet”, pp 89-99 and 91-92. Also see Emma Smitih letter to Mrs. Pilgrim, 27 March 1876, RLDS Library-Archievs. Also see Richard S. Van Wagoner and Stephen C. Walker, “Joseph Smith: The Gift of Seeing” in the LDS journal Dialog, 15, #2 (Summer 1982), pp. 48-68.

    Several other sources also report that Smith used his golden treasure seeking magic stone, not only to "translate" (actually channel) the BoM but also to find the buried golden BoM plates. Check out Martin Harris, Interview in Tiffany's Monthly 5 (August 1859): 163, 169, as cited in Vogel, Early Mormon Documents 2:302, 309; and the Henry Harris, Statement, ca. 1833, also in Vogel 2:76.

    Joseph's own mother, records that Stowell came to her son quote>>"on account of having heard that he [Smith] possessed certain keys, by which he could discern things invisible to the natural eye."<<unquote (Lucy Smith, Biographical Sketches, 91-92; also in Vogel's, Early Mormon Documents 1:309-10.)

    In answer to your earlier question about how much money Smith was paid, according to SMith's later recollection, he was paid fourteen dollars a month for his services. See "Joseph Smith, Answers to Questions," Elders' Journal, 1 (July 1838): p. 43; in Vogel at 1:53.

    Your quoted source has been shown to be suspect, Brian. did you read what Richard provided in response? So your claim of a fraud conviction is inconclusive and most of the evidence suggests there was no such conviction.
    EVEN IF there was no conviction (which would have been due to this being a sort of "preliminary hearing", the evidence and the testimony of Smith's own family as recorded elsewhere shows that he DID pretend to have a magic rock in his hat. In fact, your whole religion is based on the use of that rock-in-the-hat trick. So your pretense to disputing this claim is really desperate.

    Did Joseph Smith use his magic rock to "translate" the BoM or not, Stem? If so, then you have no real case here, since you have accepted and agree with Smith's accusers. If NOT, well ...where did Smith ever study "Reformed Egyptian" such that he could have "translated" the BoM WITHOUT his little pet rock?

    -BH

    .

  19. #169
    stemelbow
    Guest

    Default

    BrianH,

    Had you bothered to read the court record in the OP you would have seen that when Smith was examined he himself testified that he could "determine where hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth were" and he further claimed that he had been stone-gazing and finding treasures and money for "three years."
    It wasn't your claim that another party said Smith claimed such, you claimed Smith himself did. Oh well, if you meant that another claimed Smith did, then whatever.

    love,
    stem

  20. #170
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianH View Post
    Joseph Smith’s First of Two Fraud Convictions

    On March 20, 1826, Joseph Smith, Jr. was brought before the local judge (Justice Neely) in Bainbridge, New York on the charge of being a “disorderly person”. The charge was a catch-all term of art for vagrants, con artists and other undesirables who’s alleged “crimes” were not specifically coded in numbered statutes. Many documents are coming to light that inform us of the truth and the details of this highly revealing event in the life of Joseph Smith. The source of all that we know about Smith’s trial and conviction include the arrest warrants, court transcripts and legal bills from four separate charges filed against Smith. These original sources are documented in the following publications:
    [INDENT]“The History of Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania” by Emily C. Blackman (Philadelphia: Claxton, Remsen & Haffelfinger, 1873)


    Smith and his father, with several other "money-diggers" boarded at my house while they were employed in digging for a mine that they supposed had been opened and worked by the Spaniards, many years since. Young Smith gave the "money-diggers" great encouragement, at first, but when they had arrived in digging, to near the place where he had stated an immense treasure would be found—he said the enchantment was so powerful that he could not see. They then became discouraged, and soon after dispersed. This took place about the 17th of November, 1825; and one of the company gave me his note for $12[.]68 for his board, which is still unpaid.

    The court record of Smith’s trial resulting in his first fraud conviction follows:

    Warrant issued upon written complaint upon oath of Peter G. Bridgeman, who informed that one Joseph Smith of Bainbridge was a disorderly person and an imposter. Prisoner brought before Court March 20, 1826.

    Prisoner examined: says that he came from the town of Palmyra, and had been at the house of Josiah Stowel in Bainbridge most of time since; had small part of time been employed in looking for mines, but the major part had been employed by said Stowel on his farm, and going to school. That he had a certain stone which he had occasionally look at to determine where hidden treasures in the bowels of the earth were; that he professed to tell in this manner where gold mines were at a distance under ground, and had looked for Mr. Stowel several times, and had informed him where he could find these treasures, and Mr. Stowel had been engaged in digging for them. That at Palmyra he pretended to tell by looking at this stone where coined money was buried in Pennsylvania and while at Palmyra had frequently ascertained in that way where lost property was of various kinds; that he had occasionally been in the habit of looking through this stone to find lost property for three years, but of late had pretty much given it up on account of its injuring his health, especially his eyes, making them sore; that he did not solicit business of this kind, and had always declined having anything to do with this business.

    Josiah Stowel sworn: says that prisoner had been at his house something like five months; had been employed by him to work on farm part of time; that he pretended to have skill of telling where hidden treasures in the earth were by means of looking through a certain stone; that prisoner had looked for him sometimes; once to tell him about money buried in Bend Mountain in Pennsylvania, once for gold on Monument Hill, and once for a salt spring; and that he positively knew that the prisoner could tell, and did possess the art of seeing those valuable treasures through the medium of said stone; that he found the [word illegible] at Bend and Monument Hill as prisoner represented it; that prisoner had looked through said stone for Deacon Attleton for a mine, did not exactly find it but got a p- [word unfinished] of ore which resembled gold, he thinks; that prisoner had told by means of this stone where a Mr. Bacon had buried money; that he and prisoner had been in search of it; that prisoner had said it was in a certain root of a stump five feet from the surface of the earth, and with it would be found a tail feather; that said Stowel and prisoner thereupon commenced digging, found a tail feather, but money was gone; that he supposed the money moved down. That prisoner did offer his services; that he never deceived him; that prisoner looked through stone and described Josiah Stowel’s house and outhouses, while at Palmyra at Simpson Stowel’s, correctly; that he had told about a painted tree, with a man’s head painted upon it, by means of said stone. That he had been in company with prisoner digging for gold, and had the most implicit faith in prisoner’s skill.

    Arad Stowel sworn: says that he went to see whether prisoner could convince him that he possessed the skill he professed to have, upon which prisoner laid a book upon a white cloth, and proposed looking through another stone which was white and transparent, hold the stone to the candle, turn his head to look, and read. The deception appeared so palpable that witness went off disgusted.

    McMaster sworn: says he went with Arad Stowel, and likewise came away disgusted. Prisoner pretended to him that he could discover objects at a distance by holding this white stone to the sun or candle; that prisoner rather declined looking into a hat at his dark colored stone, as he said that it hurt his eyes.

    Jonathon Thompson: says that prisoner was requested to look for chest of money; did look, and pretended to know where it was; and prisoner, Thompson and Yeomans went in search of it; that Smith arrived at spot first; was at night; that Smith looked in hat while there, and when very dark, and told how the chest was situated. After digging several feet, struck something sounding like a board or plant. Prisoner would not look again, pretending that he was alarmed on account of the circumstances relating to the trunk being buried [which] came all fresh to his mind. That the last time he looked he discovered distinctly the two Indians who buried the trunk, that a quarrel ensued between them, and that one of said Indians was killed by the other, and thrown into the hold beside the trunk, to guard it, as he supposed. Thompson says that he believes in the prisoner’s professed skill; that the board he struck his spade upon was probably the chest, but on account of an enchantment the trunk kept settling away from under them when digging; that notwithstanding they continued constantly removing the dirt, yet the trunk kept about the same distance from them. Says prisoner said that it appeared to him that salt might be found at Bainbridge, and that he is certain that prisoner can divine things by means of said stone. That as evidence of the fact prisoner looked into his hat to tell him about some money witness lost sixteen years ago, and that he described the amn the witness supposed had taken it, and the disposition of the money: And therefore the Court find the Defendant guilty.

    Of this incident, Thomas Ferguson, founder of BYU Archaeology Dept. in recognizing Joseph Smith's fraud conviction said:
    In 1826 Joseph Smith was 21 and at this point was midway between the first vision and 1830 {i.e. between his days as a money-digging con artist and the beginning of his career as a “prophet”}. What a strange time to be convicted of fraud – fraudulently getting money after convincing the victim that he could detect the whereabouts of hidden treasure on the victim’s land. Wow.... It is as genuine and sound as can be – published right in Joseph Smith’s own camp. (speaking to the author on March 13, 1971; and published in “Mormon Mavericks: Essays on Dissenters” by James Bovak, pp. 261-262)
    A "strange time" indeed ...but only for those who cling to the notion that Joseph Smith was NOT an occult con artist. For those of us who recognize the fact that he clearly WAS an occult con artist, Smith, in going forward with his little magic rock to found the Mormon religion was simply living down to our expectations.

    To this day, Mormons continue in Smith's tradition.

    -BH

    .
    I have kinda a hard time keeping track of the events in the above account.

    from what im reading, it was a rip-off of people by claiming to be able to look into a hat with a stone in it and seeing where money was buried, even though there was no money at all?

    how did he get money for ripping people off like this?...

    was he charging people to go dig up on their land?....I dont understand how pretending to be able to know where stuff was buried would pay off?

  21. #171
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    I still dont understand how Smith was making money from his peeping?

  22. #172
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    So Joe Smith would try to get paid money to look in his hat/stone on people's land....???

  23. #173
    alanmolstad
    Guest

    Default

    Im still not very clear on what Joe Smith got caught doing?

    I can guess from the wording of the historical account that Smith was running a scam where he would apporach a land owner and have a story about being able to find lost treasure on his land for a fee......

    If this is correct?...then it is no wonder that Joe came up with the tall-tale about the Mormon Golden Plates!


    The story of the Golden Plates would seem to me to be a clear extension of the basic scam he was running already.

  24. #174
    DannyBoyPoker
    Guest

    Default

    By way of introduction, I'm a lapsed Mormon, but while we are getting along so well let me add that I'm not very religious at all. I think if I were the religious sort, I might well simply be Mormon as I was raised. So, shall we say that I am optimistic about offending everybody. ..

    'EVEN IF there was no conviction (which would have been due to this being a sort of "preliminary hearing", the evidence and the testimony of Smith's own family as recorded elsewhere shows that he DID pretend to have a magic rock in his hat...'

    To this I say, that he didn't PRETEND to have a magic rock in his hat, he DID have a magic rock in his hat. I mean, at the very least, he had a ROCK. In, you know, his HAT. But, you ask, was it MAGIC? This is the real sticky point, right?

    I note this:
    'Why can you not answer this simple question: Do you or do you NOT think that Joseph Smith had a magic rock in his hat with which he claimed to have access to the supernatural?'

    Simple question. Absolutely I think Joseph Smith had a magic rock in his hat etc. But what is the question that you really want to ask, here? I take it to be whether Mormonism is a total fantasy, right?

    'YOU obviously beleive that Smith DID have a magic rock by means of which he could receive revelations about buried golden treasures, even though you won't publicly admit it.'

    Well, actually, speaking for myself, I think Smith's track record on receiving revelations about buried golden treasures appears to have been poor.

    Also, there's a big biography of Joseph Smith ***led 'Rough Stone Rolling', here's an amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/Joseph-Smith-R.../dp/1400077532

    And, that book was written by a Mormon, so it's basically Mormon Apologetics, as far as its perspective goes. But also, the author is a Harvard PhD. So it's pretty scholarly. As I recall, Joseph Smith's early years including the idea of seer stones and treasure hunting, is generously discussed.

    Here is my point:
    -------------------
    You may think that mental gymnastics would have to be required, for somebody to be Mormon and also not an idiot. But, I submit to you, that this isn't the battle you want to be fighting. I mean, the whole issue here is supposed to be that it's TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE for somebody who is not AN IDIOT to take Mormonism seriously. And frankly, it is you (just, you here being whoever wants to waste time bashing Mormonism in this edifying fashion) who need to realize that you can't **** Mormonism away with the claim that it's so absurd that only idiots could possibly have any time at all for it. I know that you will find my at***ude breathtaking when I add, that people attack Christianity in similar terms. Saying that only idiots could possibly trouble themselves with, for starters, the idea of an afterlife, let alone that Jesus was resurrected like Lazurus. Or, for that matter, that Lazarus was resurrected. Ideas about whether Noah's flood happened, or the Tower of Babel, or really any of the miracle healings, and anything at all in the Bible about the ministering of angels or the idea of prophets, it's all supposedly absurd to the secular world. Don't blame the messenger, here. What I am saying is obviously true.

    But this is how it sounds to a Mormon, when you try to har*** him about his being an idiot to believe in God and Jesus and miracles and all this nonsense that is just a fantasy. I know how it sounds, and also it's insulting, like telling somebody about their mother. Attacking a person's religion is likely to generate contentious angry dispute. Is this how Christians are supposed to spend their time? To me, this is the more interesting question. Not that I don't find early Mormon history interesting, --it's fascinating. Joseph Smith is an interesting figure, actually, warts and all, in my view. So is Brigham Young and company. These were not con artists, even if you think they must have been crazy or something. Which is kind of my view, in brief,..I think they seem to have been pretty nuts. But it's fascinating stuff -- more interesting than if they had just been con artists.

  25. #175
    DannyBoyPoker
    Guest

    Default

    As a separate, briefer post, I'll mention my understanding of 'Joseph Smith's First Fraud Conviction'. There are, actually, no fraud convictions, so 'first fraud conviction' is especially cute. It appears that Joseph Smith's first fraud conviction is supposed to have been in 1826, when indeed Smith was arrested, as I understand. But he didn't give a sworn statement or enter a plea, or have a lawyer. There was no trial, this appears to have been a preliminary hearing and he was discharged. I could add that in only a few more years, Smith did have some trials, for being a disorderly person, and there are court records and all that jazz, his testimony, no dispute about what even the charges were or who filed them (as in the 1826 arrest). But, in these trials he was exonerated. Not that he got through his life without being arrested again, he especially spent one miserable winter in jail in Missouri, though charges were never brought. Actually all of the Mormon leaders had been arrested, and the order was given for them to be executed, but the officer refused to carry out the order, writing that he considered it an unlawful order and would not kill these men in cold blood so help me god etc. It's all very interesting stuff, lots of troubles, lots of excitement in early Mormon history. And of course Smith was killed, in jail, while again awaiting trial, and the charges were juicy stuff, treason and such.

    Why then, do I read, here, about Smith's 'first fraud conviction'? Insisting on putting it that way is, to my eyes, the fraud.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •