Joseph Smith, was he a smooth liar?

[Tango]

Sydney Rigdon: A Portrait of Religious excess by Van Wagoner p 296 from George W. Robinson to James Arlington Bennett 7/27/1842, cited in Bennett, p246

When Sidney confronted Smith at the Rigdon home, the enraged father demanded an explanation of the prophet

[kolipoki09]

How many other times has such a bold lie taken place, if the above is true of course? I can name another time with Smith publicly denying the practice of polygamy. Any others?

Here are some.

http://www.fairlds.org/Misc/Polygamy_Prophets_and_Prevarication.html#head09

[SkepticTheist]

Only those who are overly idealistic, who don't have comprehension of complexity in difficult circumstance attribute fundamental dishonesty to "lying" under those difficult and messy circumstances. More often conundrums in real life force people into situations that are less than ideal. Anyone who understands the circumstances of Nauvoo polygamy can see precisely a very messy circumstance where the Lord commanded Joseph Smith to do one thing, which, if he would have done it openly, would have gotten him lynched instantly. And since he did it secretly to fulfill the commandment, and lied to cover it up, it only postponed the inevitable. To carry out the commandment, one way or another meant certain death. Does that justify lying? Well, you have to answer that yourself. The point is, circumstances life are seldom as simple as some people would like.

This provided those who listened to the Spirit of the Lord with an Abrahamic trial, and those who fought against it because of their false traditions, they participated in the slaying of the Lord's prophet, and thought rationally that they were justified in doing it.

How many other times has such a bold lie taken place, if the above is true of course? I can name another time with Smith publicly denying the practice of polygamy. Any others?

[Monster]

Only those who are overly idealistic, who don't have comprehension of complexity in difficult circumstance attribute fundamental dishonesty to "lying" under those difficult and messy circumstances. More often conundrums in real life force people into situations that are less than ideal. Anyone who understands the circumstances of Nauvoo polygamy can see precisely a very messy circumstance where the Lord commanded Joseph Smith to do one thing, which, if he would have done it openly, would have gotten him lynched instantly. And since he did it secretly to fulfill the commandment, and lied to cover it up, it only postponed the inevitable. To carry out the commandment, one way or another meant certain death. Does that justify lying? Well, you have to answer that yourself. The point is, circumstances life are seldom as simple as some people would like.

This provided those who listened to the Spirit of the Lord with an Abrahamic trial, and those who fought against it because of their false traditions, they participated in the slaying of the Lord's prophet, and thought rationally that they were justified in doing it.

Or simply Joseph made it up and that is why it was so messy. Besides lying for the Lord is still lying. Any god that would put a servant in such a situation is not the loving God Mormons claim he is.

[zelder]

How many other times has such a bold lie taken place, if the above is true of course? I can name another time with Smith publicly denying the practice of polygamy. Any others?

What is the story behind this quote? Where can I read up on it?

EDIT

Nevermind, I found it.

[SkepticTheist]

That same "loving God" had Jesus murdered and commanded Joshua to commit genocide. He certainly is not the loving God Jews or Christans claim him to be by your logic.

But of course, you probably hadn't thought about the doctrinal difficulties with how that type of stuff exists outside of Mormonism just as much.

Or simply Joseph made it up and that is why it was so messy. Besides lying for the Lord is still lying. Any god that would put a servant in such a situation is not the loving God Mormons claim he is.

[bookofmormontruth]

From George W. Robinson to James Arlington Bennett 7/27/1842, cited in Bennett, p246

What kind of citation is that?

How many other times has such a bold lie taken place, if the above is true of course? I can name another time with Smith publicly denying the practice of polygamy. Any others?

If you don't know if the "above" is true then why post it? You can find this quote all over the anti-Mormon boards (in the last 2 days) that spew their vial for Joseph Smith. So yes, you will believe that Joseph Smith was a "smooth liar" when you read this spiritual pornography from those who lie in wait to deceive.

Reminds of the supposed "love letters" to Sarah Ann that Joseph Smith "hid" from Emma (Letters). Anti-Mormons only extracted small portions of the letter which I am sure they did the exact same thing in Wagoner's book.

Glad to see you enjoy and support your anti-Mormon mills though. They definitely help weed out the tares.

[AmorLibertas]

That same "loving God" had Jesus murdered and commanded Joshua to commit genocide. He certainly is not the loving God Jews or Christans claim him to be by your logic.

But of course, you probably hadn't thought about the doctrinal difficulties with how that type of stuff exists outside of Mormonism just as much.

With friends like the Judeo-Christian God, who needs enemies?

[Avatar4321]

What the heck is a smooth liar? Shouldn't we establish that before any discussion can honestly take place?

[jskains]

Noah was a drunk.... And?

[kolipoki09]

What kind of citation is that?

If you don't know if the "above" is true then why post it? You can find this quote all over the anti-Mormon boards (in the last 2 days) that spew their vial for Joseph Smith. So yes, you will believe that Joseph Smith was a "smooth liar" when you read this spiritual pornography from those who lie in wait to deceive.

Reminds of the supposed "love letters" to Sarah Ann that Joseph Smith "hid" from Emma (Letters). Anti-Mormons only extracted small portions of the letter which I am sure they did the exact same thing in Wagoner's book.

Glad to see you enjoy and support your anti-Mormon mills though. They definitely help weed out the tares.

I would hesitate to call the late Richard S. Van Wagoner an "anti-Mormon," anymore than I would feel comfortable referring to D. Michael Quinn or Sterling W. McMurrin as "anti-Mormons." Yes, they were/are intellectuals who voiced criticisms of historical and contemporary Mormonism, but each of us is a critic to some extent. There is always something we may not feel all-together comfortable with, or that we'd like to tweak.

I would suggest reading Van Wagoner's book before taking an affirmative stand on its purported truth or falsehood. Not long ago I critiqued one of Van Wagoner's footnotes that claimed that Thomas B. Marsh never recanted his 1838 affidavit against the Church. Is he wrong on some things? Sure. Does that mean he hates the Church and ought to be dismissed as a result? I don't think so.

[SkepticTheist]

Well, I would respond to that but there is no point.

With friends like the Judeo-Christian God, who needs enemies?

[bookofmormontruth]

I would hesitate to call the late Richard S. Van Wagoner an "anti-Mormon," anymore than I would feel comfortable referring to D. Michael Quinn or Sterling W. McMurrin as "anti-Mormons." Yes, they were/are intellectuals who voiced criticisms of historical and contemporary Mormonism, but each of us is a critic to some extent. There is always something we may not feel all-together comfortable with, or that we'd like to tweak.

I would suggest reading Van Wagoner's book before taking an affirmative stand on its purported truth or falsehood. Not long ago I critiqued one of Van Wagoner's footnotes that claimed that Thomas B. Marsh never recanted his 1838 affidavit against the Church. Is he wrong on some things? Sure. Does that mean he hates the Church and ought to be dismissed as a result? I don't think so.

I never said or claimed that he was an anti-Mormon. Please read more carefully in what I actually stated. Thanks

[Deborah]

I can't repeat enough what I previously said about Liars and what it means in God's terms:

In Genesis 26 we read about Isaac:

7And the men of the place asked him of his wife; and he said, She is my sister: for he feared to say, She is my wife; lest, said he, the men of the place should kill me for Rebekah; because she was fair to look upon.

8And it came to pass, when he had been there a long time, that Abimelech king of the Philistines looked out at a window, and saw, and, behold, Isaac was sporting with Rebekah his wife.

9And Abimelech called Isaac, and said, Behold, of a surety she is thy wife: and how saidst thou, She is my sister? And Isaac said unto him, Because I said, Lest I die for her.

God blessed Isaac and he was made wealthy. I don't know how many times I have to repeat that lying to protect ones own or another's life is not the same as being a Liar in scriptural terms, or in bearing false witness, which does harm to an innocent party. Scriptures define liars as "He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." (1 John 2:4) and "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son." (1 John 2:24.)

I want someone to show me in scriptures where a man who lies to save a life, even his own, is condemned. Even Peter, who denied knowing Jesus, wasn't condemned, because God knew it wasn't denying Christ per se but denying he knew Jesus, the man, for fear of his life. It is interesting that both Peter and Joseph Smith dedicated their lives in service to God and Christ and in the end gave their lives.

[kolipoki09]

I never said or claimed that he was an anti-Mormon. Please read more carefully in what I actually stated. Thanks

As far as I understood you, it appeared that you were equating the use of Van Wagoner's source as evidence of anti-Mormon hostility. I apologize for the misunderstanding.

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

I can't repeat enough what I previously said about Liars and what it means in God's terms:

In Genesis 26 we read about Isaac:

God blessed Isaac and he was made wealthy. I don't know how many times I have to repeat that lying to protect ones own or another's life is not the same as being a Liar in scriptural terms, or in bearing false witness, which does harm to an innocent party. Scriptures define liars as "He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him." (1 John 2:4) and "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son." (1 John 2:24.)

I want someone to show me in scriptures where a man who lies to save a life, even his own, is condemned. Even Peter, who denied knowing Jesus, wasn't condemned, because God knew it wasn't denying Christ per se but denying he knew Jesus, the man, for fear of his life. It is interesting that both Peter and Joseph Smith dedicated their lives in service to God and Christ and in the end gave their lives.

Excellent post. I think you have just shown Tango's huge double standard.

Tango's response "Well those men were in the bible so it is OK".

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Ah, the famous Nancy Rigdon letter...

http://restorationbookstore.org/articles/nopoligamy/jsfp-visionarticles/bennett6letter.htm

[cinepro]

Noah was a drunk.... And?

...And a terrible appraiser of the size of the planet.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Ah, the famous Nancy Rigdon letter...

http://restorationbo...nett6letter.htm

How did John C. Bennett get a hold of a private letter supposedly written by Joseph? Maybe because, hmmm, he was the author.

[Minos]

Automatic generated message

This topic has been closed by a moderator.

Reason: Do NOT call anyone a liar let alone a beloved LDS leader. Take a break Tango.

Thank you,

Mormon Dialogue & Discussion Board Staff