Did Js Anticipate His Own Death?

[inquiringmind]

What does this mean?

"...the life of my sevant is in my hand: therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them"?

[Deborah]

Great, no wonder my fonts wouldn't behave from replying to his post.

Good luck on your CFR, mine remain unanswered.

Yeah it seems once you give a response with documentation you never hear from him again.

[inquiringmind]

Is 3 Nephi 21:10-11 saying that Joseph wouldn't be killed by his enemies?

But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marredbecause of them. Yet I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil. Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant.

[Pahoran]

Is 3 Nephi 21:10-11 saying that Joseph wouldn't be killed by his enemies?

But behold, the life of my servant shall be in my hand; therefore they shall not hurt him, although he shall be marred because of them. Yet I will heal him, for I will show unto them that my wisdom is greater than the cunning of the devil. Therefore it shall come to pass that whosoever will not believe in my words, who am Jesus Christ, which the Father shall cause him to bring forth unto the Gentiles, and shall give unto him power that he shall bring them forth unto the Gentiles, (it shall be done even as Moses said) they shall be cut off from among my people who are of the covenant.

No.

If you take "hurt" as to literally mean "inflict no physical pain or harm," then that would seem to contradict "shall be marred." "Hurt" therefore seems to refer to something other than the servant's physical wellbeing.

If we take it as referring to Joseph, it may be saying nothing more than that he would live to finish his work.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Xander]

I was able to find an online reference to the jailer's remark:

In a letter dated July 10, 1844, one of the jailers wrote that Smith, expecting the Nauvoo Legion, said "Don't trouble yourself, they've come to rescue me."

[Ares]

Comments that were primarily arguments about each others posting style or personal comments were deleted.

From now on if the posts are not approproate they will be removed even if there is content in them. I'm not sorting througha pile of horse manure on the slim hope of finding a pony underneath.

[Ares]

Xander - here are your quotes for the CFR without your personal jabs included:

"The messengers presented Emma's letter, told of the posse's threats on the city, and the governor's reassurances of safety if they submitted. Finally they accused Joseph of cowardice. " (Leonard J. Arrington, The Mormon Experience, p.79)

"Joseph Smith fled across the Mississipi River with his brother Hyrum accompanied by Orrin Porter Rockwell. Rockwell then returned to Nauvoo but was persuaded by Emma Smith to carry a note from her to JS. He was accompanied by Reynolds Cahoon. Cahoon told Smith of Governor Ford's promise of safety and accused Joseph of cowardice. The prophet and his older brother agreed to return (they had originally planned to flee to the Rocky Mountains with Rockwell as their guide)" - Orrin Porter Rockwell: Man of God, Son of Thunder. p 126. Also, Rockwell, by Lee Nelson, p.169.

At 1pm Emma sent over O.P. Rockwell, requestion him to entreat of Joseph to come back. Reynolds Cahoon accompanied him with a letter which Emma had written to the same effect, and she insisted that Cahoon should persuade Joseph to come back and give himself up. When they went over they found Joseph, Hyrum and Willard in a room by themselves, having flour and other provisions on the floor ready for packaging. Reynolds Cahoon , L. D. Wasson and Hiram Kimball accused Joseph of cowardice for wishing to leave the people, adding that their prosperity would be destroyed, and they left without house or home - like the fable, when the wolves came the shepherd ran from the flock and left the sheep to be devoured. To which Joseph replied, ' If my life is of no value to my friends, it is of none to myself.' Joseph said to Rockwell, 'What shall I do?' Porter replied, 'You are the oldest and ought to know best; and as you make your bed I will lay with you.' Joseph then turned to Hyrum, who was talking with Cahoon, and said, 'Brother Hyrum, you are the oldest, what shall we do?' Hyrum said, 'Let us go back and give ourselves up, and see the thing out.' (Millenial Star, Volume 24, p 333.)

Next time I won't be particular about deleting the whole thing - content or not if you persist in using degrading and contentious langugage towards other posters. Despite your protests you are not being singled out other than your historical and current practice of making personal and off topic remarks. - Ares

[Xander]

Yeah it seems once you give a response with documentation you never hear from him again.

Deborah, your comment is uncalled for. You have no basis for such an attack. I've provided references every time I've been asked to provide. Every time.

[Deborah]

Deborah, your comment is uncalled for. You have no basis for such an attack. I've provided references every time I've been asked to provide. Every time.

This isn't about you providing references; it's about others providing references which you ignore.

[Doctor Ninja]

Xander - here are your quotes for the CFR without your personal jabs included:

"The messengers presented Emma's letter, told of the posse's threats on the city, and the governor's reassurances of safety if they submitted. Finally they accused Joseph of cowardice. " (Leonard J. Arrington, The Mormon Experience, p.79)

"Joseph Smith fled across the Mississipi River with his brother Hyrum accompanied by Orrin Porter Rockwell. Rockwell then returned to Nauvoo but was persuaded by Emma Smith to carry a note from her to JS. He was accompanied by Reynolds Cahoon. Cahoon told Smith of Governor Ford's promise of safety and accused Joseph of cowardice. The prophet and his older brother agreed to return (they had originally planned to flee to the Rocky Mountains with Rockwell as their guide)" - Orrin Porter Rockwell: Man of God, Son of Thunder. p 126. Also, Rockwell, by Lee Nelson, p.169.

At 1pm Emma sent over O.P. Rockwell, requestion him to entreat of Joseph to come back. Reynolds Cahoon accompanied him with a letter which Emma had written to the same effect, and she insisted that Cahoon should persuade Joseph to come back and give himself up. When they went over they found Joseph, Hyrum and Willard in a room by themselves, having flour and other provisions on the floor ready for packaging. Reynolds Cahoon , L. D. Wasson and Hiram Kimball accused Joseph of cowardice for wishing to leave the people, adding that their prosperity would be destroyed, and they left without house or home - like the fable, when the wolves came the shepherd ran from the flock and left the sheep to be devoured. To which Joseph replied, ' If my life is of no value to my friends, it is of none to myself.' Joseph said to Rockwell, 'What shall I do?' Porter replied, 'You are the oldest and ought to know best; and as you make your bed I will lay with you.' Joseph then turned to Hyrum, who was talking with Cahoon, and said, 'Brother Hyrum, you are the oldest, what shall we do?' Hyrum said, 'Let us go back and give ourselves up, and see the thing out.' (Millenial Star, Volume 24, p 333.)

Next time I won't be particular about deleting the whole thing - content or not if you persist in using degrading and contentious langugage towards other posters. Despite your protests you are not being singled out other than your historical and current practice of making personal and off topic remarks. - Ares

This is your round about way in attacking Joseph Smith's character.

He is "accused of cowardice" (3 secondary source quotes with 3 different stories) and therefore was a coward in your eyes. Why else would you even bring this up? Do tell us how this was relevant?

Your desperate attempt to assassinate Joseph Smith's character is a far cry from the topic of the OP.

I am not speaking these things because I see a neglect. I do not see it; but I know there is a good feeling among this people. This people are willing to do any thing under heaven they are counselled [counseled] to do. There never was a more obedient people on the face of the earth. I love them. My brethren love them. They are willing when the time comes to give their lives for them; but we do not want to give them away foolishly. I suppose some might think we were cowards. I tell you it is not so, and there need not any one call us cowards. Was Joseph a coward? Was Hyrum a coward? No; but if they had gone into the wilderness, a great many would have called them cowards.

They gave themselves up because the people said they were cowards; but they were not. They were willing to stand by their brethren, and if you call us cowards we will do as they do, (if we are a mind to) This is the reason; but if you will call us cowards, so be it; we have not acted the cowardly part yet. We have stood and fought; we have stood our ground and saved the sheep, and none have gone away but goats. Goats have not got any wool; they may give a little milk; but its poor stuff. This is true. Those who have gone away they are goats. We have got the sheep, and they are good sheep; they like the salt that they get from the good shepherd; they know it is good. They huddle together here every Sabbath, and if there is no shepherd here to feed them, they come here, to the stamping ground, because they love to come here. Why? Because they feel so well to get together. That shows they are of one heart and mind. Elder H.C. Kimball. Times and Seasons "Truth Will Prevail". Volume VI. No. 14. Aug 1, 1845.

Did they flee into the wilderness as "cowards"? No, they surrendered their lives to their enemies (which you already knew) and you therefore have absolutely no grounds to bring this ad hominem into this topic. The sheep know and recognize this truth.

[Doctor Ninja]

I was able to find an online reference to the jailer's remark:

In a letter dated July 10, 1844, one of the jailers wrote that Smith, expecting the Nauvoo Legion, said "Don't trouble yourself, they've come to rescue me."

Here is the source (below) for your quote: "Don't trouble yourself....they've come to rescue me."12] (notice the ... contextomy)

Dr. Quinn, D. Michael (1992). "On Being a Mormon Historian (And Its Aftermath)". In Smith, George D.. Faithful History: Essays on Writing Mormon History. Salt Lake City: Signature Books. pp. 141.

Yet, no where do we find this quote in the provided source.

Even with your personal jab about my "lacking basic research skills", I found no reference for this quote on page 141 which ironically has the topic "Faithful History/Secular Religion". The quote is not found under the heading "On Being a Mormon Historian (And its Aftermath) either. In fact it isn't found anywhere in Quinn's and Smith's book! My link

Why is that Kevin Graham?

But do a google search for "Don't trouble yourself ... they've come to rescue me." and see what type of websites promote this made up quote. Can anyone guess?

Yes, I am fully aware that you have stated that you are not an "anti-Mormon", but then why do use their same tactics?

[Xander]

This isn't about you providing references; it's about others providing references which you ignore.

Deborah, as soon as you or anyone else replies with references that actually refute anything I've said, I'll be happy to respond. I have little time as it is, so I'm not inclined to go down bunny trails for kicks. So far it seems you've not understood much of anything I've said. So I'll repeat. Joseph Smith's family, along with some of the twelve apostles, chose not to follow Brigham Young. This proves my point that the process of succession was not at all understood by most people.IT makes no sense to say that the general membership knew the system better than some of the apostles.

All you did was ignore these facts while throwing out an Ensign article which is, of course, going to share information favorable to Brigham Young's claim. However, this is beside the point. I'm not arguing who should have succeeded Smith. My point is that many people didn't know what to do at the time of Joseph and Hyrum's deaths. It was believed by many that the next in line would be the oldest living brother, but he was poisoned shortly afterward. The system you insist was so well known, was obviously not well known to Joseph Smith's immediate family and a few of the apostles, including Sidney Rigdon, who was quickly excommunicated by the four or five apostles who were there. You ignore all of this, and it seems you didn't even read your own source. That Ensign article concedes my point when it refers to the "Saints’ concerns about who would lead them." You make it sound like there was never any uncertainty whatsoever.

Most people followed Brigham Young for lack of a better option. He was charismatic and had all the leadership qualities they needed in that time of desperation. They didn't follow him because it was such a no-brainer based on an established line of succession. Brigham Young had to give a speech and debate Rigdon in order to win the hearts and minds of those who were listening. But even this didn't prevent the Church from splitting up into several factions.

And now for ninja.

This is your round about way in attacking Joseph Smith's character.

I am merely citing your own Church history. I thought this was common knowledge. I've heard this discussed on numerous occasions when I was active in the Church. It was discussed on my mission as well. You accused me of lying and spouting anti-Mormonism. I have now been vindicated. My sources aren't anti-Mormon, and I haven't lied.

He is "accused of cowardice" (3 secondary source quotes with 3 different stories)and therefore was a coward in your eyes

I never said he was a coward. Why don't you do yourself a favor and stop psychoanalyzing what I say and trying to demonize me at every turn. This isn't about me. It is about your baseless claim that I have been lying all this time. You wanted your references, and now you've got them.

Why else would you even bring this up? Do tell us how this was relevant?

It was in direct response to your assertion that Smith's martyrdom was "prophetic." I was pointing out that Joseph Smith, according to the historical record, was trying to flee not only the city, but the entire region. His own followers accused him of cowardice, and it was at that point he decided to turn around; well, actually it was Hyrum who decided.

You and Deborah are not understanding the arguments. The argument isn't about whether or not Joseph Smith was a coward. I'm not interested in that argument and I don't blame him for being scared considering the situation he was in. My argument is simply that his followers believed he was a coward, and this is what prompted him to consider returning back. This is a fact. This is what led to your accusations against me, saying I was lying and relying on anti-Mormon sources. I think I've sufficiently proved your accusations are baseless.

Yet, no where do we find this quote in the provided source.

I don't have this particular book, so I cannot verify the exact page number. I suppose the author of that wiki article cited the wrong page, but I cannot say for sure. He/she may have cited the wrong book by Quinn. It happens. But I didn't write the article nor was my argument based on it. I only provided this online reference because I came across it in a google search, and it served the purpose of proving I wasn't just making stuff up. I still intend to look up the exact reference later when I get settled in here.

But do a google search for "Don't trouble yourself ... they've come to rescue me." and see what type of websites promote this made up quote. Can anyone guess?

All this proves is that Pro-LDS websites tend to disclose less information than other online resources. Big deal.

[Deborah]

You and Deborah are not understanding the arguments.

It's not a matter of understanding the arguments. It's a matter of what sources you choose to believe. You are right that Emma and Rigdon didn't know what was going on because they were not included in that last Grand Council that Truman Madsen and the Joseph Smith Papers project talk about. Nevertheless the majority of the church chose to follow BY and the Q12. You can argue all you want about who knew what but that doesn't change the fact that the church as a body elected to follow BY and given the history that followed that was the right choice.

[Xander]

It's not a matter of understanding the arguments. It's a matter of what sources you choose to believe.

No, this is wrong. And if you understood the argument, you'd know that this isn't a matter of my sources vs. your sources. Your source doesn't contradict anything I said. In fact, I essentially used your source to make my point.

You are right that Emma and Rigdon didn't know what was going on because they were not included in that last Grand Council that Truman Madsen and the Joseph Smith Papers project talk about.

See, now you're shifting your argument. You initially insisted that the general membership knew which way to go because it was well established. Now you're saying one had to have been included in the last Grand council in order to know what was going on. So you're saying the general membership attended this council, but no one in Joseph Smith's family attended, and neither did the only other member of the First Presidency. In 1976 BYU Studies published Quinn's The Mormon Succession Crisis of 1844:

"A small group of men, most notably the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, had received private instruction from Joseph Smith in the Spring of 1844 concerning the proper mode of succession. These private instructions, however, were unknown to the general membership of the LDS Church. In fact. by the summer of 1844 there was no explicit outline of presidential succession in print. This laid the foundation for a succession crisis among the Latter-Day Saints when Joseph Smith was murdered by a mob on 27 June 1844. Not only did most Mormons have only the haziest concept of what should transpire in the leadership of the LDS Church if the founding prophet were to die, but between 1834 and 1844 Joseph Smith had by word or action established precedents or authority for eight possible methods of succession."

I'd say that supports what I've said all along.

Nevertheless the majority of the church chose to follow BY and the Q12.

Which is beside the point. The reason they followed him was because he presented himself as a better leader in public lecture.

You can argue all you want about who knew what but that doesn't change the fact that the church as a body elected to follow BY and given the history that followed that was the right choice

And you can argue all you want about how many people eventually followed Brigham Young, but this has no bearing on the fact that there was a succession crisis that threatened the Church and people were scared and confused. High ranking leaders who disagreed with BY's claim were excomunicated and Samuel Smith was the most popular candidate before someone poisoned. him. BY won the popular vote but this probably had a lot to do with who he was competing against; Rigdon, a man with a history of mental instability.

[Doctor Ninja]

And now for ninja.

I am merely citing your own Church history. I thought this was common knowledge. I've heard this discussed on numerous occasions when I was active in the Church. It was discussed on my mission as well. You accused me of lying and spouting anti-Mormonism. I have now been vindicated. My sources aren't anti-Mormon, and I haven't lied.

It was in direct response to your assertion that Smith's martyrdom was "prophetic." I was pointing out that Joseph Smith, according to the historical record, was trying to flee not only the city, but the entire region. His own followers accused him of cowardice, and it was at that point he decided to turn around; well, actually it was Hyrum who decided.

You and Deborah are not understanding the arguments. The argument isn't about whether or not Joseph Smith was a coward. I'm not interested in that argument and I don't blame him for being scared considering the situation he was in. My argument is simply that his followers believed he was a coward, and this is what prompted him to consider returning back. This is a fact. This is what led to your accusations against me, saying I was lying and relying on anti-Mormon sources. I think I've sufficiently proved your accusations are baseless.

Again, no relevance with the topic of the OP, at all. You knew Joseph Smith didn't flee so there was no reason to bring up "accusations" of his "cowardice".

I don't have this particular book, so I cannot verify the exact page number. I suppose the author of that wiki article cited the wrong page, but I cannot say for sure. He/she may have cited the wrong book by Quinn. It happens. But I didn't write the article nor was my argument based on it. I only provided this online reference because I came across it in a google search, and it served the purpose of proving I wasn't just making stuff up. I still intend to look up the exact reference later when I get settled in here.

"It happens"?

An embarrassing and pathetic excuse for posting a quote that doesn't exist, yet you had the gall to make a personal jab of my "basic research" skills.

Give us your list of excuses, label them one by one and take absolutely no responsibility for your source. Blame wiki, blame that you are "too busy" or that you "don't know for sure" or that you have to go through your "impressive" 1600+ books after your move.

If you have to resort to excuses, it is definitely time to close up shop or in the least go back and edit your post stating that this quote doesn't exist.

All this proves is that Pro-LDS websites tend to disclose less information than other online resources. Big deal.

Wrong, but nice try.

A simple google search shows multiple anti-Mormon sites (non pro-LDS) that have this made up quote. This is what anti-Mormons do in their desperation.

Mormon Curtain

Rethinking Mormonism

Mormon Coffee

What it really proves, is that you use the exact anti-Mormon tactics. No one will believe in your "it happens" excuse and therefore you have absolutely no credibility.

Edited July 11, 2011 by Doctor Ninja

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

All this proves is that Pro-LDS websites tend to disclose less information than other online resources. Big deal.

Seriously? That is the best you got?

[Xander]

Again, no relevance with the topic of the OP, at all. You knew Joseph Smith didn't flee so there was no reason to bring up "accusations" of his "cowardice".

He did flee. You see, you cannot refute historical fact with bald assertion. That Joseph Smith tried to flee to the Rocky Mountains is not disputed, even among LDS historians. That you're unaware of this data is beside the point.

"It happens"? An embarrassing and pathetic excuse for posting a quote that doesn't exist, yet you had the gall to make a personal jab of my "basic research" skills.

Why would I feel embarrassed if some unnamed person responsible for a Wiki article, provided the wrong page number? You keep asserting that the quotation doesn't exist, but you've provided no evidence for this. All you're doing is throwing out the usual false accusations that you think you can get away with simply because you're not an "anti-Mormon." That's the irony.

Give us your list of excuses, label them one by one and take absolutely no responsibility for your source.

It isn't "my source" and I don't know why you continue with this false statement. I didn't write this article and this article isn't the source for this information. I provided the link because it was the only thing I could offer at the time and it wasn't "anti-Mormon" in any sense.

Blame wiki, blame that you are "too busy" or that you "don't know for sure" or that you have to go through your "impressive" 1600+ books after your move.

Yes, some of us have a life outside this forum. I just bought a home and we're still moving in. But feel free to beat your chest in the meantime. I've already provided numerous references to refute your false accusation that I was making stuff up, and all you did in response was go back to the drawing board ; once you realized you couldn't refute the references or dismiss them as "anti-Mormon", you decided that you'd just go back to ole faithful, which is to attack me for daring to mention things you weren't aware of., using the excuse that you won't deal with them because they are "off topic."

What it really proves, is that you use the exact anti-Mormon tactics.

The only "tactic" is providing information to which you were completely unaware. That's my only crime here.

No one will believe in your "it happens" excuse and therefore you have absolutely no credibility.

Well it is nice to know you speak for the entire forum. But this isn't an excuse. All you do is call everything anti-Mormon, as if this is some kind of valid refutation. You have not proved anything. All you did was point out that the online version of the said reference, didn't mention the citation. But this was not "my source." As I explained, I merely threw that out there as an online reference. I still plan to dig for the citation when I can, as I said from the start. And I suspect you're going to respond to teh citation ithe same way you dismissed the numerous references above, by making up some lame excuse about how it is all "off topic" and we shouldn't be discussing it because it isn't exactly faith-promoting.

Edited July 11, 2011 by Xander

[Xander]

Seriously? That is the best you got?

What can I say? I present facts that come as a surprise to those who were otherwise oblivious to them. Your only response is to accuse me of lying and discredit it simply because the citation exists on some websites you call "anti-Mormon." But it exists on websites that aren't anti-Mormon as well. Ninja is desperately trying to poison the well so he can avoid having to deal with the facts. Standard apologetic technique.

[Hestia]

Ninja has been warned about personal jabs and is out of the thread.

[Deborah]

No, this is wrong. And if you understood the argument, you'd know that this isn't a matter of my sources vs. your sources. Your source doesn't contradict anything I said. In fact, I essentially used your source to make my point.

Which points out context and how sources are used, and interpreted.

So you're saying the general membership attended this council, but no one in Joseph Smith's family attended, and neither did the only other member of the First Presidency.

No I said that certain people such as Emma and Rigdon did not attend, which I find interesting as a statement of where they were heading; nor did I say that the general membership attended,. However, the general membership met to sustain BY and the Q12 when the issue of succession was presented.