Millions Shall Know

[Gervin]

Good grief. You two are amazing.

Anyway, Tom Sharp was intimately involved not only in the agitation prior to the murder but in the planning of the action. It's possible that his motivations were utterly different from those of the mob -- perhaps they were concerned about Mormon-inflicted damage to the fragile ecosystem of the upper Mississippi, and imagined that eliminating two randomly chosen Mormons and seriously wounding a third would lessen Nauvoo's environmental impact -- but that seems unlikely.

Oh, get over yourself. You shouldn't be responding to this anyway because you've got to leave town towmorrow and besides you're writing a book. All I asked for was a source that supports your statement that the mob thought they had ended Mormonism by killing Joseph Smith. That's it. This would be some statement or statements attributed to the mob after the killing that they expected the Mormon religion to end. That's it.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Oh, get over yourself. You shouldn't be responding to this anyway because you've got to leave town towmorrow and besides you're writing a book. All I asked for was a source that supports your statement that the mob thought they had ended Mormonism by killing Joseph Smith. That's it. This would be some statement or statements attributed to the mob after the killing that they expected the Mormon religion to end. That's it.

I already gave you some quotes. You didn't care to give them any thought. Try this one:

www.Google.com

Thanks!

[Daniel Peterson]

Oh, get over yourself. You shouldn't be responding to this anyway because you've got to leave town towmorrow and besides you're writing a book.

Careful. Someday your face might actually freeze in that dismissive sneer. (I knew somebody in California to whom something like that happened during an argument.) And wouldn't that be embarrassing!

All I asked for was a source that supports your statement that the mob thought they had ended Mormonism by killing Joseph Smith. That's it. This would be some statement or statements attributed to the mob after the killing that they expected the Mormon religion to end. That's it.

And you asked so respectfully, too!

[Skylla]

Oh, get over yourself. You shouldn't be responding to this anyway because you've got to leave town towmorrow and besides you're writing a book. All I asked for was a source that supports your statement that the mob thought they had ended Mormonism by killing Joseph Smith. That's it. This would be some statement or statements attributed to the mob after the killing that they expected the Mormon religion to end. That's it.

Stop the personal jabs and keep it on the topic.

Skylla

[Gervin]

Careful. Someday your face might actually freeze in that dismissive sneer.

No, I'm quite safe, thank you, because I limit myself to reading only one or two of your posts a month.

And you asked so respectfully, too!

And you sounded so sure of yourself in knowing the mob mentality or (perhaps) the motivation of every member in the mob.

The question was asked and answered. This is your last warning. Stop the sneering or you are suspended. = mods

[Scott Lloyd]

No, I'm quite safe, thank you, because I limit myself to reading only one or two of your posts a month.

And you sounded so sure of yourself in knowing the mob mentality or (perhaps) the motivation of every member in the mob.

The question was asked and answered. This is your last warning. Stop the sneering or you are suspended. = mods

Hey Gervin, my post to Jaybear was directed to you as much as to him. Care to repond?

[Mormon Vader]

This might be an appropriate place to point out the prophecy of the angel Moroni who, when visiting the young Joseph Smith, said,

Nowhere has that prophecy had a clearer fulfillment than in Internet message boards such as this one.

How does it feel fulfilling prophecy?

For all the arguments against JS (and there are a lot of them) this is a prophecy that is still in the process of being fulfilled (not all people know of him yet).

It truly is an amazing prophecy, and I don't know how anyone can say it is not being fulfilled...

[charity]

I also have a testimony of the prophetic calling of Joseph Smith. My favorite line in "Praise to the Man" is "Millions shall know Brother Joseph again." I look forward to being one of those millions.

[Jaybear]

Sharp was one of the men tried for the murder of the prophet and the patriarch. He is said to have been part of the mob, and certainly incited much of the furor over the "Mormon question" as some called it. He said something to the effect of "cut off the head, the body dies." I invite you to research it, as Dr. Petey and I have, at least slightly, to find the sources. I'd be happy to provide you with more if I had unlimited time to search out proofs that individual members of the mob thought killing the smith brothers would end Mormonism. I think the examples I cited are pretty good, thanks. So much for the effort, eh?

Let's try this: Why did the mob kill the Smith's? Did they think it would STRENGTHEN the Mormon church?

THank you for responding to the inquiry. Do you have a source for the quote, which if accurate is quite probative as to his motive.

As for your question, its somewhat misleading. The mob didn't kill JS. He was killed in a gunfight, by one or several members of the mob. More important, who organized the mob, and was their purpose. Did they gather and go to the jail with the intent to lynch JS, or for some other purposes?

Good grief. You two are amazing.

I genuinely don't understand your grief. JS made many enemies, for many reasons. You made a factual assertion bearing on the motives of those directly participating in JS's murder. I don't think its unreasonable to ask that you shed some light on your assertion.

Scott: Is Gervin (and are you) limiting his definition of "mob" to 200 men? Is he thus excluding any instigators/agitators/leaders/supporters who weren't actually on the scene? That's a rather unreasonable standard, don't you think?

Scott, I would agree with you. I presume someone organized the mob, whether or not they were present, their motives in doing so would be relevant.

[Scott Lloyd]

How does it feel fulfilling prophecy?

For all the arguments against JS (and there are a lot of them) this is a prophecy that is still in the process of being fulfilled (not all people know of him yet).

It truly is an amazing prophecy, and I don't know how anyone can say it is not being fulfilled...

The phrase "among all people" could be interpreted in terms of pervasiveness. That is to say, knowledge of Joseph Smith is pretty much universally accessible these days. Every good dictionary and encyclopedia -- in the English language at least -- has an entry for him, I dare say. And the Internet goes everywhere; hence, the name "Worldwide Web."

[Gervin]

Marvin S. Hill, a Professor of American History at Brigham Young University, wrote an article entitled "Carthage Conspiracy Reconsidered: A Second Look at the Murder of Joseph and Hyrum Smith" in which he presents an interesting account of the political, religious, and economic sentiments of the day and how they all factored into the mob mentality surrounding Smith's murder. While the religious aspects of the Mormon church were certainly of concern to many members of the community, a region-wide disdain for Jos Smith and his theocratic aspirations was far and away the topic of newspapers, politicians, and citizens. Hill reports that the The Sagamo Jounal, in 1842, wrote:

"So long as MR. SMITH keeps near the sanctuary and prophecies of religion, he is guiltless of offence, but when he enters upon the duties of a civil office of the State, and as lieutenant General speaks to his friends who he KNOWS AS PROPHET he cannot command, and uses the religious influence he possesses under the military garb he has acquired, he becomes a dangerous man, and must look to the consequences.

The editor urged the prophet to give up his military title and stick to religion. He added with foreboding, "we do assure him upon an honest belief, that his situation in Illinois, is far more dangerous than ever it was in Missouri, if he undertakes to take Mohamet's part ... and play the warrior and prophet." He warned the Mormon people of the dangerous precipice to which they had been led and begged them to "shun it.""

I don't believe the mob mentality directed at killing Joseph Smith assumed that Mormonism would end with his death. I don't believe it was the intent beforehand or the expectation after the fact. Again, if there are quotes or research that indicates otherwise, I'd be interested.

[Scott Lloyd]

As for your question, its somewhat misleading. The mob didn't kill JS. He was killed in a gunfight, by one or several members of the mob. More important, who organized the mob, and was their purpose. Did they gather and go to the jail with the intent to lynch JS, or for some other purposes?

The term "gunfight" is in itself misleading, as it implies a fair chance on both sides. That is hardly the case.

Michael Ash has written on this subject here: http://www.mormonfortress.com/gun1.html

Two hundred armed ruffians attacking four men, one of them armed with a notoriously unreliable "pepperbox" pistol is hardly a "gunfight." Would you call it a "gunfight" if the pistol hadn't been smuggled in? Why does such a measly defense make such a difference in your characterization of the event?

And the mob did storm the jail and overcome the guard, making each of them who took part complicit in the crimes.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Marvin S. Hill, a Professor of American History at Brigham Young University, wrote an article entitled "Carthage Conspiracy Reconsidered: A Second Look at the Murder of Joseph and Hyrum Smith" in which he presents an interesting account of the political, religious, and economic sentiments of the day and how they all factored into the mob mentality surround Smith's murder. While the religious aspects of the Mormon church were certainly concern to many members of the community, a region-wide disdain for Jos Smith and his theocratic aspirations were far and away the topic of newspapers, politicians, and citizens. Hill reports that the The Sagamo Jounal, in 1842, wrote:

"So long as MR. SMITH keeps near the sanctuary and prophecies of religion, he is guiltless of offence, but when he enters upon the duties of a civil office of the State, and as lieutenant General speaks to his friends who he KNOWS AS PROPHET he cannot command, and uses the religious influence he possesses under the military garb he has acquired, he becomes a dangerous man, and must look to the consequences.

The editor urged the prophet to give up his military title and stick to religion. He added with foreboding, "we do assure him upon an honest belief, that his situation in Illinois, is far more dangerous than ever it was in Missouri, if he undertakes to take Mohamet's part ... and play the warrior and prophet." He warned the Mormon people of the dangerous precipice to which they had been led and begged them to "shun it.""

I don't believe there was a mob mentality that by killing Joseph Smith, Mormonism would end. Again, if there are quotes or research that indicates otherwise, I'd be interested in knowing about.

I've given you several examples in this very thread.

http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index.php...mp;p=1208211901

I see evidence from the political, social, religious, atmospheres that indicate people wanted to stop Joseph Smith at all costs; they called for his murder. Thomas Sharp literally called for his murder. The "mob" wasn't just a friendly rabble who wanted to gawk in at the prophet and see him in jail; they had painted black faces; they were there to stop Joe Smith and the Mormons. Sharp and Ford both believed the killing of the Smith brothers would incite Nauvoo to a fever pitch, thus bringing on a full-scale war; Sharp wanted it, Ford doesn't seem to have wanted it; he had the weapons removed from the Nauvoo Legion. The fact that Joseph Smith is till a topic of great religious debate in the WORLD fulfills the prophecy that his name would be known for good and evil.

I refer you also to Carthage Conspiracy as well as Rough Stone Rolling for more information.

[Scott Lloyd]

Marvin S. Hill, a Professor of American History at Brigham Young University, wrote an article entitled "Carthage Conspiracy Reconsidered: A Second Look at the Murder of Joseph and Hyrum Smith" in which he presents an interesting account of the political, religious, and economic sentiments of the day and how they all factored into the mob mentality surround Smith's murder. While the religious aspects of the Mormon church were certainly concern to many members of the community, a region-wide disdain for Jos Smith and his theocratic aspirations were far and away the topic of newspapers, politicians, and citizens. Hill reports that the The Sagamo Jounal, in 1842, wrote:

"So long as MR. SMITH keeps near the sanctuary and prophecies of religion, he is guiltless of offence, but when he enters upon the duties of a civil office of the State, and as lieutenant General speaks to his friends who he KNOWS AS PROPHET he cannot command, and uses the religious influence he possesses under the military garb he has acquired, he becomes a dangerous man, and must look to the consequences.

The editor urged the prophet to give up his military title and stick to religion. He added with foreboding, "we do assure him upon an honest belief, that his situation in Illinois, is far more dangerous than ever it was in Missouri, if he undertakes to take Mohamet's part ... and play the warrior and prophet." He warned the Mormon people of the dangerous precipice to which they had been led and begged them to "shun it.""

I don't believe there was a mob mentality that by killing Joseph Smith, Mormonism would end. Again, if there are quotes or research that indicates otherwise, I'd be interested in knowing about.

The newspaper editorial comes across as a lame excuse for religious bigotry. The editor objects to Joseph's self-characterization as a prophet. That is a matter of religious doctrine, not politics. And the other things mentioned (civil office, militia appointment, etc.) stem from efforts by the Church at self-preservation after it had repeatedly been denied the right to exist as a distinctive religious body.

This was very much about religion.

And you have sidestepped my question. If this was all about enmity toward Joseph, why did oppression of the Church resume almost immediately after his martyrdom?

[consiglieri]

Since the mob consisted of around 200 men I would hope there were some statements to that effect ... if the destruction of Mormonism was their desired effect. Perhaps someone with some familiarity with "historical literature" who isn't busy writing a book at this moment can provide some source statements.

I think their accounts consisted mostly of denials.

As in, when one was asked after the trial whether he had participated in the mob that killed Joe Smith, "The jury thought not."

It's a response to Christopher Hitchens's bestselling god is Not Great. With Bill Hamblin. I'm having a great time.

Then you must not be God.

[Pahoran]

Marvin S. Hill, a Professor of American History at Brigham Young University, wrote an article entitled "Carthage Conspiracy Reconsidered: A Second Look at the Murder of Joseph and Hyrum Smith" in which he presents an interesting account of the political, religious, and economic sentiments of the day and how they all factored into the mob mentality surrounding Smith's murder. While the religious aspects of the Mormon church were certainly of concern to many members of the community, a region-wide disdain for Jos Smith and his theocratic aspirations was far and away the topic of newspapers, politicians, and citizens. Hill reports that the The Sagamo Jounal, in 1842, wrote:

"So long as MR. SMITH keeps near the sanctuary and prophecies of religion, he is guiltless of offence, but when he enters upon the duties of a civil office of the State, and as lieutenant General speaks to his friends who he KNOWS AS PROPHET he cannot command, and uses the religious influence he possesses under the military garb he has acquired, he becomes a dangerous man, and must look to the consequences.

The editor urged the prophet to give up his military title and stick to religion. He added with foreboding, "we do assure him upon an honest belief, that his situation in Illinois, is far more dangerous than ever it was in Missouri, if he undertakes to take Mohamet's part ... and play the warrior and prophet." He warned the Mormon people of the dangerous precipice to which they had been led and begged them to "shun it.""

I don't believe the mob mentality directed at killing Joseph Smith assumed that Mormonism would end with his death. I don't believe it was the intent beforehand or the expectation after the fact. Again, if there are quotes or research that indicates otherwise, I'd be interested.

Oddly enough, Gervin, the opinion of one editor who was not part of the mob, written two years before the martyrdom, does not have very much to do with the opinions or motivations of the perpetrators.

Did you not actually know that?

You've been provided with quotes that indicate otherwise. You don't seem particularly interested in them at all.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Daniel Peterson]

As for your question, its somewhat misleading. The mob didn't kill JS. He was killed in a gunfight, by one or several members of the mob. More important, who organized the mob, and was their purpose. Did they gather and go to the jail with the intent to lynch JS, or for some other purposes?

Relative to the above, and in view of today's being the anniversary of a signal event in the history of anti-Mormonism, here's something I published some years back in the FARMS Review regarding comments made in some Southern Baptist Convention materials by my friend Rev. Dennis Wright, formerly of Utah Missions Inc.:

In the view of Rev. Wright, who is an ordained minister in the Southern Baptist Convention, not even the murder of Joseph Smith was undeserved. He goes further, in this regard, than did the experts at the SBC's Denominational Summit on Mormonism, which was held in North Carolina on the one hundred and fifty-third anniversary of the Prophet's death. "Smith was killed while escaping jail," they said, untruthfully. Responding to some remarks made by President Gordon B. Hinckley, Pastor Wright notes that

the deaths of Joseph and Hyrum on June 27, 1844, didn't occur until after Joseph had fired upon the so-called "mob" with a pistol that had been secreted to him while in jail and had killed one man and injured several others.

"Rage and persecution" may have followed the Mormons to Illinois, but the Saints of that day brought most of it upon themselves!

Rev. Wright is wrong about Hyrum's death, which occurred immediately prior to Joseph's drawing the pistol. But he is almost certainly correct in his claim that Joseph's firing of the pistol took place while Joseph was still alive. His description of the events at Carthage represents an important and novel historical reconstruction, and it is vital that we understand it with precision. Apparently, Rev. Wright feels that Joseph Smith was obligedâ??though he was unjustly imprisoned and had not yet been tried, let alone convicted of anything, much less convicted of a capital offenseâ??to allow "the so-called 'mob'" to butcher not only himself and his brother Hyrum but his two friends, Willard Richards and John Taylor, whose only crime was that they had come to visit the prisoners. (John Taylor was, in fact, severely wounded by "the so-called 'mob.'")

Rev. Wright's revised version of the events in Carthage seems to run along the following lines: The wily criminal lunatic Joseph Smith, who had remained quiet throughout his captivity, deliberately chose the very time when the peace-loving Carthage Greysâ??fully armed and with traditional blackened facesâ??were innocently gathered about the jail for their annual June 27th Militia Picnic. Frolicking with their weapons and calling out the death threats that customarily accompanied that grand holiday in frontier Illinoisâ??it was a simpler time, and June 27th had not yet been commercializedâ??the proto-Gandhian Greys had merely been playing the venerable party game known among these gentle rustics as "Eat Hot Lead, Mormon Scum!" Then, wholly without provocation, Joseph Smith opened fire on the revelers, using the "pepperbox" pistol that Cyrus Wheelock had smuggled into his cell. Naive historians, both Latter-day Saints and others, have always assumed that Joseph's action had something to do with the fact that his brother Hyrum had just been shot to death. (Presumably, Hyrum was killed by a stray bullet from a local hunter, or perhaps from an evil Mormon assassin.) Rev. Wright, however, cannot be taken in by such sophistries. When Joseph continued to shoot at them as they mounted the jail's interior staircase bearing a peace offering of cookies and punch, they had no choice. They killed him and his (already dead) brother in self-defense. It is true that they also shot John Taylor at least four times. But then, he had been very naughty to them with his cane, and needed to be taught a lesson.

The passage comes from Daniel C. Peterson, "What Certain Baptists Think They Know about the Restored Gospel," in FARMS Review 10/1 (1998):

http://farms.byu.edu/publications/reviewvo...10&number=1

Incidentally, and to my considerable regret, there appears to me to be no reliable evidence that Joseph actually managed to kill any member of the mob. I don't believe that he did.

I genuinely don't understand your grief. JS made many enemies, for many reasons. You made a factual assertion bearing on the motives of those directly participating in JS's murder. I don't think its unreasonable to ask that you shed some light on your assertion.

To anybody who had bothered to read much about the situation, my statement would scarcely be either novel or controversial.

[Jaybear]

The term "gunfight" is in itself misleading, as it implies a fair chance on both sides. That is hardly the case.

Not really. While the term "duel" would imply a fair chance, I suspect most gunfights are one sided event.

For what its worth, I don't subscribe to the notion that someone that is killed in a gunfight, cannot be considered a martyr.

While I understand that you considered JS a martyr, and this is your prerogative, personally, I have trouble applying the concept to JS, because he not only died having publicly renounced the doctrine of polygamy, but arrested for having suppressed those that would expose his teaching.

When I think of the term martyr, I think of the early Christians, who chose to face the Lions rather than publicly renounce their belief in Jesus' divinity.

Scott: "And the mob did storm the jail and overcome the guard, making each of them who took part complicit in the crimes."

Yes, I agree. But culpability and motives are different issues.

[Jaybear]

To anybody who had bothered to read much about the situation, my statement would scarcely be either novel or controversial.

Well then I guess I owe you an apology. I am sorry that my ignorance caused you grief. Please forgive me.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Not really. While the term "duel" would imply a fair chance, I suspect most gunfights are one sided event.

For what its worth, I don't subscribe to the notion that someone that is killed in a gunfight, cannot be considered a martyr.

While I understand that you considered JS a martyr, and this is your prerogative, personally, I have trouble applying the concept to JS, because he not only died having publicly renounced the doctrine of polygamy, but arrested for having suppressed those that would expose his teaching.

When I think of the term martyr, I think of the early Christians, who chose to face the Lions rather than publicly renounce their belief in Jesus' divinity.

Scott: "And the mob did storm the jail and overcome the guard, making each of them who took part complicit in the crimes."

Yes, I agree. But culpability and motives are different issues.

DCP: Nicely done, I laughed out loud.

Jaybear: Did you know Jesus wasn't a martyr either? Just ask Pilate, go ask Caiaphas for the true story of Jesus' "alleged" martyrdom.

Well then I guess I owe you an apology. I am sorry that my ignorance caused you grief. Please forgive me.

If only this was sincere.

[Jaybear]

Jaybear: Did you know Jesus wasn't a martyr either? Just ask Pilate, go ask Caiaphas for the true story of Jesus' "alleged" martyrdom.

Sorry, but I don't see the analogy? I understand that you would take offense that I don't share your opinion that JS was a martyr, though none was intended, but I see no reason to bring Jesus into the conversation.

What alleged or questionable facts are out there that would raise doubt as to Jesus' status as a martyr?

[LifeOnaPlate]

Sorry, but I don't see the analogy? I understand that you would take offense that I don't share your opinion that JS was a martyr, though none was intended, but I see no reason to bring Jesus into the conversation.

What alleged or questionable facts are out there that would raise doubt as to Jesus' status as a martyr?

I'm not going to do your research for you this time; but here's a hint: a lot of Jews didn't like Christ when he was killed. They may have written accounts dealing with his trial, or accusations against him at the time of his death. Maybe a little research will yield some interesting accounts of Jesus' death, and why he was crucified [according to some sources, who fain would refuse him the status of a martyr.]

It's no use debating it with you. Joseph Smith was a martyr, and he died for the gospel of Jesus Christ.

[Scott Lloyd]

Not really. While the term "duel" would imply a fair chance, I suspect most gunfights are one sided event.

Nevertheless, "gunfight" does not convey an accurate impression of what actually happened in this incident.

For what its worth, I don't subscribe to the notion that someone that is killed in a gunfight, cannot be considered a martyr.

Good. Because failure to resist death does not constitute martyrdom; refusal to renounce one's faith, principles or ideals in the face of death threats does.

While I understand that you considered JS a martyr, and this is your prerogative, personally, I have trouble applying the concept to JS, because he not only died having publicly renounced the doctrine of polygamy, but arrested for having suppressed those that would expose his teaching.

Joseph denied false accusations; that is not the same as publicly renouncing the doctrine. And polygamy, at this point, was still a rumor. It was not primarily the cause of the mob enmity. At any point over a long sequence of events, Joseph could have forsaken the religious belief system he espoused and turned to a life of solitude, thus avoiding death at the hands of a mob. He never did.

This makes him very much a martyr by any objective definition.

When I think of the term martyr, I think of the early Christians, who chose to face the Lions rather than publicly renounce their belief in Jesus' divinity.

In effect, Joseph did this. He had escaped across the Mississippi River into Iowa Territory. When he heard that his people feared for their lives, he returned and voluntarily submitted to the authorities at Carthage. He even said, "I am going like a lamb to the slaughter."

Scott: "And the mob did storm the jail and overcome the guard, making each of them who took part complicit in the crimes."

Yes, I agree. But culpability and motives are different issues.

As Daniel noted, the notion that the mob was not motivated by hatred for Joseph and the Church is so contrary to the conventional understanding of history, it is up to you to prove otherwise.

Again, I pose the question that has not yet been answered: If the mob action at Carthage was all about hatred for Joseph, why did the mobs continue to oppress the Church after his murder, culminating in forced exodus of the Church members under the most abject of circumstances from the city they had founded and built?

[LifeOnaPlate]

Nevertheless, "gunfight" does not convey an accurate impression of what actually happened in this incident.

Good. Because failure to resist death does not constitute martyrdom; refusal to renounce one's faith, principles or ideals in the face of death threats does.

Joseph denied false accusations; that is not the same as publicly renouncing the doctrine. And polygamy, at this point, was still a rumor. It was not primarily the cause of the mob enmity. At any point over a long sequence of events, Joseph could have forsaken the religious belief system he espoused and turned to a life of solitude, thus avoiding death at the hands of a mob. He never did.

This makes him very much a martyr by any objective definition.

In effect, Joseph did this. He had escaped across the Mississippi River into Iowa Territory. When he heard that his people feared for their lives, he returned and voluntarily submitted to the authorities at Carthage. He even said, "I am going like a lamb to the slaughter."

As Daniel noted, the notion that the mob was not motivated by hatred for Joseph and the Church is so contrary to the conventional understanding of history, it is up to you to prove otherwise.

Again, I pose the question that has not yet been answered: If the mob action at Carthage was all about hatred for Joseph, why did the mobs continue to oppress the Church after his murder, culminating in their forced exodus under the most abject of circumstances from the city they had founded and built?

Scott: an excellent post, thanks. This is the third or so time you've asked this question. I don't feel like they are interesting in answering it, though, because it pretty much kills their arguments.

[Jaybear]

I'm not going to do your research for you this time; but here's a hint: a lot of Jews didn't like Christ when he was killed. They may have written accounts dealing with his trial, or accusations against him at the time of his death. Maybe a little research will yield some interesting accounts of Jesus' death, and why he was crucified [according to some sources, who fain would refuse him the status of a martyr.]

It's no use debating it with you. Joseph Smith was a martyr, and he died for the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Now, I think I see you point, because Jesus' death and resurrection is considered sacrosanct among Christians, its wrong to examine actual historical accounts, to address the issue objectively and dispassionately.

Jesus was a martyr and JS was a martyr, because to say otherwise is offensive to Christians and Mormons.

Got it.