Joseph Smith Died In A "shoot-out"

[Daniel Peterson]

He died shortly after he discharged a pistol into a crowd that was firing upon him. They fought with guns and he fought back with a gun. What pray tell...do you define as a gunfight..that does not fit within that parameter.

your defense of his reputation is no less baseless and no more credible..than my "percieved" attack.

It is misleading to characterize as a gunfight (implying that the odds were remotely close to even) a situation in which four men, none convicted of any crime and two of them not even charged with a crime, are assaulted while locked in prison by a heavily armed mob with painted faces -- even if two of them (to the presumed shock and irritation of those hoping to murder them in completely cold blood, without any resistance) happen to have small, primitive pistols with them and the other two have (shudder) a cane.

The mob didn't "fight" with guns. They murdered with guns. It wasn't a "fight." It was a mob lynching.

The reason anti-Mormons like to characterize the murders that occurred at Carthage Jail as having occurred during a "gunfight" -- which, incidentally, if it were really true, would greatly lessen the guilt of the murderers -- is that it allows them to pretend that Joseph Smith was equally guilty for the events of that day and that his death, while perhaps slightly regrettable, was understandable . . . in view of his participation in a "gunfight."

This is a low and despicable thing to do, in my opinion.

The event of 27 June 1844 was a premeditated double murder, pure and simple -- and, had it not taken longer than planned, probably would have been a quadruple homicide.

It is, in my view, simply disgusting for you and others on this thread to insinuate that, well, Joseph really brought it on himself, that he may have been lusting in an unchristlike way after vengeance, that he doesn't really deserve the title of martyr, that it would be pure speculation to suppose that he might have been seeking to defend his brother and his innocent friends, that he could have done this better, that he should have done that, that it would be mere speculation to imagine that Joseph had any redeeming qualities on that day.

Anti-Mormons murdered Joseph and Hyrum. Period.

It's repulsive, now, to see some critics seek to murder their reputation, even as regards that day. It would be fitting and proper for you to express your abhorrence of that act of double homicide and attempted double homicide and then to fall silent. As it is, instead, you seek to denigrate the behavior of its victims.

[Deborah]

the simplest definition of martyr is "a person who willingly suffers death rather than renounce his or her religion." Had Joseph renounced his beliefs and his role as a prophet you can bet that none of the persecution would have continued against him and he would not have ended up in jail with a mob eager to destroy him.

This definition cannot be applied to Muslim suicide bombers because no one is asking them to renounce their faith. In fact they are demanding by their actions that others renounce theirs.

Joan of Arc was a warrior yet she was also a martyr because she refused to renounce her faith and her visions.

You can twist the words all you want but the meaning is very simple and does apply to the Prophet Joseph.

[urroner]

No Im not.

You are asking me a question based on my previous question.

That's anwering a ? with a ?

I don't respond to those.

But I could ask you a ? then you could..instead of answering, ask me a ?....then I could instead of answering, ask you a ? and so on.

If you would prefer that...lemme know, and I'll ask you the same one again.

You make accusation that JS wasn't Christ-like when he defended himself, but that doesn't make any sense to me, so I was simply asking you why it wasn't Christ-like to do so, but instead of using JS as the subject of the request, I used you or somebody you can relate to. I'm just trying to see if you hold one standard of what it takes to be Christ-like for those whom you disagree with while holding another standard for those whom you agree with. I just wanted to see if you are consistent in this area. So, as far as I can tell, you tend towards the former and not the latter, though I might be totally wrong.

For example, when you said that it wasn't Christ-like when JS used violence, I asked you if it was Christ-like for the ancient Hebrews used violence to destroy whole cities under the command of God. I can't see how you can simply condemn JS for using violence and yet turn a blind eye to those ancient Jews.

Actually, in this thread, it seems to me that you only want to question us and cast aspersions upon our beliefs while avoiding exposing your own beliefs to any type of scrutiny.

[maklelan]

Striking out in an act of vengance is not a good thing.

You must be joking. Do you really want to insist that all forms of attack are expressions of vengeance?

[urroner]

You must be joking. Do you really want to insist that all forms of attack are expressions of vengeance?

Mak, don't bother questioning Mudcat on his statement, see his response to me in the earlier post. I was trying to get him to clarify his statements so I can better understand where he is coming from.

[Daniel Peterson]

At the risk of venturing into very sensitive and, in fact, offensive territory, perhaps an analogous story will help to express my revulsion at the way some anti-Mormons seek to revise history with regard to the murder of Joseph and Hyrum at Carthage Jail:

Melissa is walking to the bus stop from work, heading home, when she's accosted by an assailant and raped.

"How awful!" exclaims Diane when she hears the news. "Poor Melissa!"

"She was stupid to walk that way," says Bob. "I'm not sure that she deserves the title of victim. Maybe idiot would be better."

"And did you see the way she was dressed?" demands Eric. "She's scarcely innocent in this."

"She apparently tried to run from him," observes Billy. "That probably just made things worse. The guy may only have been following her, but, when she ran, she forced the issue. In fact, I think she should have turned and confronted him. He probably would have backed off."

"Yeah," agrees Bob. "It was hopeless for her to try to outrun him, anyway. He was much faster than she was. She got his adrenalin pumping, and the rest is history. It was like stirring a hornet's nest. Stupid girl."

"She tried to use Mace on him, too," Billy comments. "Can you imagine how angry that must have made him?"

"Anyway," offers Zeke, "who says she didn't enjoy it?"

"I've had about enough of this," interjects Diane, angrily. "You have no reason at all to suggest that she enjoyed it! What a repulsive suggestion."

"Well, lots of people enjoy having sex," counters Zeke. "Why wouldn't she?"

"You call that 'having sex'?" Diane responds, incredulously. "It was rape, for heaven's sake."

"Did they, or did they not, engage in sexual intercourse?" comes Zeke's cool reply.

"Well of course, technically speaking," says Diane. "But it was coerced. Women don't enjoy being raped."

"You have no basis," replies Zeke, "for declaring what was in her mind. Your claim that she didn't enjoy it is just as baseless as, and no more credible than, my claim that she did."

[LeSellers]

He dropped the hammer on all 6 cylinders, ...

It may have been effective in slowing them down for a little bit -- I can't help feeling that it was equally or more effective in causing the mob to increase their volley of fire.

Sorry, that doesn't stand up in the face of the events.

As soon as the "hopeless" resistance made itself known, the Carthage Yellows fell back down the stairs and did not return. Their assault, forty or more muskets and rifles against a six-shooter and a couple of canes, resumed only through the open window and ceased on the (erroneous) cry "The Mormons are coming!"

The entire mob dissolved into the woods when they thought there was any chance of their coming under fire or retribution.

If a single pistol like the pepperbox and a vague threat of retaliation were enough to chase them off, I feel more than justified in labeling them the Carthage Yellows, rather than Greys.

Dan Jones relates that the Yellows' leadership bragged that they had gone to too much trouble to get Joseph to Carthage (which, by implication, included publishing the _Nauvoo_Expositor_ as a lure) for them to allow him to leave the jail alive. It was a trap. Joseph knew it ("if my life has no value...").

His trip to Carthage was filled with foreboding ("If you had such a farm ..."), and even his order to disarm the Legion was an omen of his assassination. He knew he was about to die. He had the means to avoid that, either by escape or by open warfare (the Nauvoo Legion was better armed than most of the militias in Illinois, and had more, and better trained members), but he chose not to avail himself of either.

If Joseph was not a martyr, the word suffers from a serious lack of utility.

Lehi

[Bernard Gui]

Praise to his memr'y he died as a martyr!

Death cannot conquer the hero again!

Millions shall know Brother Joseph again!

Bernard

[LifeOnaPlate]

Im sure you believe which ever side reinforces your previous beliefs about JS.

That's odd, I'd say the same for you.

[LifeOnaPlate]

Millions shall know Brother Joseph again!

Bernard

Here, here!

[Mudcat]

But is striking out to defend oneself and ones family a good thing or a bad thing?

Also, why is it that in the eyes of several Evangelicals on this board that Joseph Smith was not righteous in any way when he attempted to to defend his friends and himself in what seemed to be a hopeless cause? They all seem to believe that he should have just let the mob kill himself?

I think defending friends and family is a good thing?

If the cause was hopeless....then defense is useless.... Im not questioning the actions of JS in the Carthage Jail.

The question has always been in my mind of the intent of his actions.

...was JS firing into the mob as a hopeless act of defense (was he basically trying to draw the enemy fire upon himself and hopefully spare the remaining two friends in the jail)?

....or was JS firing into the mob because (even though his situation was hopeless) they had killed his brother and he wanted to exact some sort of vengance upon those who murdered his brother?

....I don't think we can trully ascertain the intent of his actions....but their are those on this post that have declared what his intent was....on both sides of this issue.

As to wether JS should have surrendered to the mob (and his slaughter) ...or he should have fought back. I don't know.

To me, I would think if he had surrendered himself, his brother might have lived as well as the other two. The argument has been made that all four in jail could have died if that happened...maybe so.

For example, when you said that it wasn't Christ-like when JS used violence, I asked you if it was Christ-like for the ancient Hebrews used violence to destroy whole cities under the command of God. I can't see how you can simply condemn JS for using violence and yet turn a blind eye to those ancient Jews.

Actually, in this thread, it seems to me that you only want to question us and cast aspersions upon our beliefs while avoiding exposing your own beliefs to any type of scrutiny.

My original quote

Striking out in an act of vengance is not a good thing.

The fact of the matter...is that you..nor I ...can ascertain the intent of JS when he fired.

I was trying to imply that if JS shot out in vengance..instead of defense, I could not find his action Christ-like.

The only act in the NT...in which Christ or the Apostles attempted to kill someone..was with Peter and the Sword. Christ restored that mans ear...if he had approved of Peters action..would he have done so?

Im not turning a blind eye to the ancient Jews...God told them what to do and they did it. Im sorry Im not able to put JS on the same pedestal with Hebrews who were commanded to take cities by God. I don't think the two issues are relative.

[urroner]

Mudcat,

While I agree that while in this life, I can't truly know what was going through JS's head when he fired at the mob who were attacking him, I choose to believe that he was doing in self defense of the people with him and himself. I choose not to look at this incident with an unbiased eye and state that I don't have a dog in the fight.

But, we all have to make certain judgments on certain items and beliefs for which we don't have all the necessary info. This is called faith.

Suppose a Jew was to ask you to stop making the necessary judgments about Christ since you really don't know what was going on in Christ's head during his life and when he died on the cross. Would you be willing to lay aside your beliefs on Christ because you lack the necessary intellectual knowledge. In the Jew's mind, he could believe that all Christ was was a rabbel rouser who got carried away with a Messiah complex and in the end was killed because of this mental problem. Would you be willing to lay aside your faith in Christ for this argument.

Now, I'm not saying that JS is equivalent to Christ, but what I am saying is that sometimes it good to be a fence sitter when there isn't enough info, but then again there are times when we have to get off the fence and make a decision even though we don't have sufficent info.

Battery on laptop is running low.

Found the power cord for laptop.

We base our faith on Jesus Christ and upon his Apostles because of what is written in the scriptures, but how can we intellectually know if there really was a Christ and if there was a Jesus who claimed to be the Messiah 2,000 years ago, how can we know that he was the Son of God, of any of the miracles he performed, of the Atonement, of his resurrection, that the scriptures are a true statements of these facts, or that God even exists? Is an intellectual knowledge of these things even necessary for our faith in Christ? When is a leap of faith necessary in our spiritual lives?

EDIT: I'm moving this to a new thread.

[MormonMason]

Mudcat,

While I agree that while in this life, I can't truly know what was going through JS's head when he fired at the mob who were attacking him, I choose to believe that he was doing in self defense of the people with him and himself.

...

Eyewitness accounts for those in the room say that he calmly pulled the pepper-box from his pocket, walked to the door and began firing into the mob around the door frame. There did not appear to be malice or anger in his actions. When the gun was discharged, he dropped it and went to the window where he gave the sign of distress--which would have gone unheeded, even if there were Masons in the mob, because the Nauvoo Lodges were declared clandestine by the current Grand Master and because no Blue Lodge Mason would have been obligated to save another if there was greater chance of losing his own life in the attempt (this would have been different had the Nauvoo Lodges not been declared clandestine and had there been Scottish Rite Masons, who are obligated to save another even at peril of life)--and then went out the window. This had the effect of immediately sending the mob back outside after him.

The facts is this case show that both Hyrum and Joseph Smith were wanted dead. There also would not have been any desire for Mormon witnesses to the deed. Joseph Smith's actions caused them to back off at first and then they rushed back up to finish the killing spree. Joseph Smith's going out the window had the effect of sending the mob back outside after him and distracting the mob from their intent in killing them all. At that moment someone shouted that the Mormons were coming and the mob ran off and the whole city of Carthage was gripped with fear for several days afterward even though none came. I know this latter information because of a personal letter I read from the non-Mormon jailer himself, who also confirmed the details of jumping out the window and the resultant surprise, as well as Joseph's being alive at the time the mob fired outside for the last time. This same information agrees with at least two other non-Mormon witnesses to what happened and stated that Joseph Smith was believed and/or seen to sit up before several persons in the mob shot again.

The evidence that is there from several outside and out of the range of full vision of those inside the jail is that Joseph Smith's life was ended outside on the ground, perjuries in some of the courtroom testimony notwithstanding. In either case, Joseph and Hyrum Smith died as a martyr just as some of those in Foxe's Book of the Martyrs did. He was a martyr. End of story.

[urroner]

Eyewitness accounts for those in the room say that he calmly pulled the pepper-box from his pocket, walked to the door and began firing into the mob around the door frame. There did not appear to be malice or anger in his actions. When the gun was discharged, he dropped it and went to the window where he gave the sign of distress--which would have gone unheeded, even if there were Masons in the mob, because the Nauvoo Lodges were declared clandestine by the current Grand Master and because no Blue Lodge Mason would have been obligated to save another if there was greater chance of losing his own life in the attempt (this would have been different had the Nauvoo Lodges not been declared clandestine and had there been Scottish Rite Masons, who are obligated to save another even at peril of life)--and then went out the window. This had the effect of immediately sending the mob back outside after him.

The facts is this case show that both Hyrum and Joseph Smith were wanted dead. There also would not have been any desire for Mormon witnesses to the deed. Joseph Smith's actions caused them to back off at first and then they rushed back up to finish the killing spree. Joseph Smith's going out the window had the effect of sending the mob back outside after him and distracting the mob from their intent in killing them all. At that moment someone shouted that the Mormons were coming and the mob ran off and the whole city of Carthage was gripped with fear for several days afterward even though none came. I know this latter information because of a personal letter I read from the non-Mormon jailer himself, who also confirmed the details of jumping out the window and the resultant surprise, as well as Joseph's being alive at the time the mob fired outside for the last time. This same information agrees with at least two other non-Mormon witnesses to what happened and stated that Joseph Smith was believed and/or seen to sit up before several persons in the mob shot again.

The evidence that is there from several outside and out of the range of full vision of those inside the jail is that Joseph Smith's life was ended outside on the ground, perjuries in some of the courtroom testimony notwithstanding. In either case, Joseph and Hyrum Smith died as a martyr just as some of those in Foxe's Book of the Martyrs did. He was a martyr. End of story.

MM, I believe I have sufficient evidence to believe that JS did this in self defense of his friends and himself. The actions you describe about are some of this evidence, though I can't really say with 100% certainty that i know what was going through his mind, I believe his actions are strong witnesses of what his thoughts were and they don't seem to be saying that his thoughts weren't full of vengence at the time and that he was just lashing out to kill somebody simply because he was angry.

[consiglieri]

Joseph Smith was a brave man who was killed because of his religious beliefs.

Can we agree on at least that much?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

[Mudcat]

Joseph Smith was a brave man who was killed because of his religious beliefs.

Can we agree on at least that much?

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Yes.

[consiglieri]

Yes.

Praise the Lord and pass the buttered peas!

[LifeOnaPlate]

Case closed.

[urroner]

Case closed.

Excuse me, are you a judge? You're not even a egg-suckin' liar lawyer!!!

[LifeOnaPlate]

Excuse me, are you a judge? You're not even a egg-suckin' liar lawyer!!!

As if I'd want to be some pettifogging fool?

[urroner]

As if I'd want to be some pettifogging fool?

Enough of these terrible lawyer jokes. I know some really good ones. I even have a lawyer friend who collects them.

[Zakuska]

Firing the gun bought him time to get out the window. Simple as that. I mean, firing blindly from behind a door jamb inflicting a shoulder wound, grazing another mans cheek, isnt really the actions of some one who was hell bent on exacting vengeance.

[cjcampbell]

Here, here!

I believe the correct phrase is "Hear! Hear!" It is a derivative of "Hear ye! Hear ye!" (See 2 Samuel 20:16)

[MormonMason]

Firing the gun bought him time to get out the window. Simple as that. I mean, firing blindly from behind a door jamb inflicting a shoulder wound, grazing another mans cheek, isnt really the actions of some one who was hell bent on exacting vengeance.

As one who was raised on vengeance and who in his earlier years as a non-member of the Church exacted forms of it on those who harmed family members, I'd say that Joseph's actions are not those of someone with vengeance on his mind. There is an attitude about it, which attitude was not expressed here, in my informed opinion.

He calmly walked to the door and stuck his arm out the door and started firing blindly. There was no "I'm goin' to die anyway so I'm going to take out as many of them with me as I can" heroics there in this case. Fact is, he did not die in a "shoot-out" as has been claimed. The "shoot-out" was over nearly fifteen minutes and at least ten minutes before his death. In all scenarios, no matter where the disagreement elsewhere in the combined testimony, he died outside the prison, unarmed and defenseless, helpless, and quietly. He died as a martyr in the fullest sense. End of story.

[LifeOnaPlate]

I believe the correct phrase is "Hear! Hear!" It is a derivative of "Hear ye! Hear ye!" (See 2 Samuel 20:16)

D'oh! I went with the opposite of what I thought was right, thinking I was surely wrong.