Martyrs Don'T Fight Back...

[Jaybear]

And why is it that you prefer that definition? Because it, in your opinion, excludes Joseph Smith?

You could not be more wrong.

Its because its what I think of when I hear the term martyr.

If you were raised Mormon, and have been told all your life that Smith was a martyr, then I would expect that you would have a different broader understanding of the term.

However, I also associate the concept of martrydom with religious zealotry. See 911. So your assumption that my intent is to insult Smith by saying he was not a martyr is simply wrong.

[thesometimesaint]

Jaybear:

So martyrs can fight back, they can flee, can defend family and friends, can have friends and family bring arms. But JS can't be a martyr because...?

Ps. I was not raised in the Church. I'm a long time convert.

Edited September 30, 2011 by thesometimesaint

[Ares]

Any more personal insults or unduly confrontational posts will result in the offender being a martyr on this thread.

[frankenstein]

I think the problem with posts like this is they are based in deepseeded disagreement. I am reminded of a time with when I helped some people with reading, I pronounced "the" as "thee", the persons I was helping said "You said it wrong it's "thu". I finally said whatever.

Does it really matter if JS is a martry? It does not matter one dadgum blasted bit. Joseph Smith being a martry does not make the Gospel of Jesus Christ true. Joseph Smith not being a martry does not prove Catholic/Protestant religions as being true.

One's testimony should rest solely on the witness of the Holy Ghost that the tenants of the Gospel are true, basing a testimony on anything else is build on a sandy foundation.

[seriously honestly]

Critics of Joseph Smith make a huge deal over the fact, that he fled over the Mississippi and went into hiding after another round of trumped up charges were made against him. Calling him a coward, a traitor and what not. We all know that he bravely went back to Nauvoo and Carthage to face the charges.

Critics make an even bigger bru-ha-ha when the line "like a lamb to the slaughter" is attributed to this modern day Prophet of God, and the shrill crys can be heard from the pit... "Ole' Jo Smith the Mormon pedophile died in a Nuclear reactive Quake 4 style gib fest trying to take as many Saintly Christian pastors just doing their Christian duty down to hell with him as he could."

So I propose a test case for comparison, how do Christians Martyrs go like lambs to the slaughter?

One pretty recent and infamous Christian Martyr was Thomas Becket, The Arch bishop of Canterbury, The see of the Anglican church.

The story goes that there was a power struggle going on between Church/Rome and State/England. The King wants to unite his kingdom both secularly and religiously so he appoints his best friend Thomas as the new Arch Bishop of Canterbury. But Becket fought for church rights and wanted to serve God not the king. And wouldn't bow to the king, So the kings men bring him into account for himself. The king demanded Becket's loyalty, but Becket stood his ground. So the king stripped him of all his wealth along with his whole family and exiled them to France. They were there for six years.

Well with pressure applied by the Pope, the king finally relented and Becket returned to Canterbury in triumph... and promptly excommunicated 3 Bishops who had taken the Kings side. These Bishops on Christmas day then go and complain to the King and the king storms out of this court in a rage, cursing Thomas as he went. 4 Barons heard the king cursing and took an oath to avenge the kings honor, probably to score brownie points with the King.

So the stage is set. The 4 knights go to arrest Becket in his "Palace", but because they have no signed edict from the King he refuses to go with them. The knights leave for a moment, and Thomas monk's begin locking down the Abby and trying to skirt him out the back door to flee from the men. But the men returned wearing their full armor with swords in hand. Becket almost gets out but decides to turn and have a show down with the four knights instead and to protect his friends. And the rest is History.

You can watch this BBC special on the event here (its based on eye witness accounts):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cenyvBf52Vg&feature=related

Now the interesting part you will want to notice is that, Thomas doesn't go down like the typical Christian Martyr we are always hearing critics of the Church boast about. (ie Like a dumb sheep before the shearers, saying not a word).

He goes down provoking his attackers, shoving one of them to the ground and defending his friends.

Only then are the fatal blows to his head delivered.

Ahhh...I don't concider him to be a martyr at all. Sorry.

[stemelbow]

Jaybear,

is somebody who suffers persecution and death for refusing to renounce, or accept, a belief or cause, usually religious.

That's the definition of martyr you prefer, Jaybear. Now there is something ambiguous in your words here. I can't figure out if you truly think Joseph was not persecuted or was not killed because of his beliefs. It appears your bolding of "refusing to renounce" must mean something. Are you saying if he renounced his religion he still would have been killed? Are you saying that he really didn't have a choice to renounce?

I post my questions to you because I'm trying to decypher your comments. it was weird to me to see you quote a word's definition saying that's what you prefer and then without acknowledging it say the word can't apply to a case that fits the definition. I mean as it is, i don't care if you call him a martyr or not. its just weird that you would do that, so i ask, for clarification's sake, if for nothing else.

[Zakuska]

Jaybear,

That's the definition of martyr you prefer, Jaybear. Now there is something ambiguous in your words here. I can't figure out if you truly think Joseph was not persecuted or was not killed because of his beliefs. It appears your bolding of "refusing to renounce" must mean something. Are you saying if he renounced his religion he still would have been killed? Are you saying that he really didn't have a choice to renounce?

I post my questions to you because I'm trying to decypher your comments. it was weird to me to see you quote a word's definition saying that's what you prefer and then without acknowledging it say the word can't apply to a case that fits the definition. I mean as it is, i don't care if you call him a martyr or not. its just weird that you would do that, so i ask, for clarification's sake, if for nothing else.

Joseph Smith would fit the bill of Jaybears definition, when asked to renounce his visions by his father inlaw and jilted suiter Coal or leave the Methodist church he refused to renounce his vision and had his name stricken from the roles.

But of course JS just isn't a Marytr... just because he couldn't be. Thats the only real reason.

Edited September 30, 2011 by Zakuska

[LeSellers]

Does it really matter if JS is a martry? It does not matter one dadgum blasted bit. Joseph Smith being a martry does not make the Gospel of Jesus Christ true. Joseph Smith not being a martry does not prove Catholic/Protestant religions as being true.

It matters a great deal.

1 To seal the testimony of this book and the Book of Mormon, we announce the martyrdom of Joseph Smith the Prophet, ... 3 Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, ... like most of the Lord’s anointed in ancient times, has sealed his mission and his works with his own blood;

39 Many have marveled because of his death; but it was needful that he should seal his testimony with his blood, that he might be honored and the wicked might be condemned.

You are right that his being a martyr has no effect on the truthiness of the Catholic or Protestant religions, but it is a powerful force in demonstrating that the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ is true. That’s why Satan and his minions are so, pardon the expression, he11-bent on undermining that testimony.

Joseph and Hyrum were martyrs in the highest and truest senses of the word. Their blood will testify against all those who fight against the work God called them to do, from E. D. Howe and Hurlbut, through Thomas Sharpe and Robert Smith, to those around us today.

Lehi

[Zakuska]

Ahhh...I don't concider him to be a martyr at all. Sorry.

Who Becket or Joseph Smith? Or niether?

The church of Canterbury would disagree with you. They have a whole set of stained glass windows depicting the episode and 3 months after his death the Pope sainted him.

[KevinG]

It is interesting to juxtapose this discussion with the Christian minister facing death for apostacy in Iran. According to these definitions does his legal appeal (fighting back in the courts) discount his status as potential martyr?

[seriously honestly]

Who Becket or Joseph Smith? Or niether?

The church of Canterbury would disagree with you. They have a whole set of stained glass windows depicting the episode and 3 months after his death the Pope sainted him.

Niether.

That's ok if they disagree with me, but Becket wasn't killed because he was Catholic, and he wasn't faced with a "recant or die" option (not that it was ok to kill him)

[seriously honestly]

One pretty recent and infamous Christian Martyr was Thomas Becket, The Arch bishop of Canterbury, The see of the Anglican church.

And did you really mean "infamous"? I'm not at all trying to insult your intelligence; I see a lot of people misuse this word, so I always wonder if they really mean it.

Edited September 30, 2011 by seriously honestly

[Zakuska]

Niether.

That's ok if they disagree with me, but Becket wasn't killed because he was Catholic, and he wasn't faced with a "recant or die" option (not that it was ok to kill him)

Your right, he was killed because of a political power struggle he had with the King of England. Intrestingly... Joseph Smith had just announced his run for president on a platform of buying freedom for all the southern slaves with the sale of Pulbic lands. So it could be argued that yes he did die fightning for a cause. And is just as worthy of the Title.

[Zakuska]

And why "infamous"?

If you watch the video on youtube. from the start (this is part 2 so you have to click on the right side to see the first part) the BBC is who claimed him infamous.

[seriously honestly]

If you watch the video on youtube. from the start (this is part 2 so you have to click on the right side to see the first part) the BBC is who claimed him infamous.

I admit, I have not yet watched the video...

[seriously honestly]

Your right, he was killed because of a political power struggle he had with the King of England. Intrestingly... Joseph Smith had just announced his run for president on a platform of buying freedom for all the southern slaves with the sale of Pulbic lands. So it could be argued that yes he did die fightning for a cause. And is just as worthy of the Title.

If that is the case (as I believe it is), then he shouldn't be considered a martry for his faith.

[thesometimesaint]

seriously honestly:

I guess by your overly tight definite those early Christians weren't martyrs either. They didn't die for their religion. They died for disagreeing with the Roman Emperors lions.

[Zakuska]

If that is the case (as I believe it is), then he shouldn't be considered a martry for his faith.

Oh but he is considered a Marytr. You can read more about him here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Becket

Theres an Altar and shrine in the Cathedral dedicated to him on the spot where he died. (scroll half way down)

Theres a Candel which burns 24/7 on the spot where his sarcofagus used to be (Scoll a little further)

His sarcophagus was removed and burned and the ashes strewn to the wind by Henry the VIII the great-great-...-grandson of King Henry II who's knights had killed Becket.

[JAHS]

Most Christians would agree that Jesus would be considered a martyr, and of course he was the perfect representation of a martyr. However when he and the apostles were at the garden of gethsemane, Peter drew a sword and smote off the ear of the high priest's servant (Matthew 26:51; Mark 14:47 Luke 22:50; John 18:10) as they were coming to take Jesus away to eventually be crucified. This was a sword that Jesus had allowed the apostles to bring with them from the upper room (Luke 22:38) to be used for defense. So because he took measures to defend himself does that violate the deffinition of a martyr?

[KevinG]

The difinition of martyr - like the meaning behind other symbols, belongs to the people who claim ownership.

Arguing that Joseph Smith is not a martyr is as sensible as non-mormons claiming the inverted pentagram on the Nauvoo Temple is a satanic symbol instead of a reminder of Christ as the designers intended.

[Jaybear]

Jaybear,

That's the definition of martyr you prefer, Jaybear. Now there is something ambiguous in your words here. I can't figure out if you truly think Joseph was not persecuted or was not killed because of his beliefs. It appears your bolding of "refusing to renounce" must mean something. Are you saying if he renounced his religion he still would have been killed? Are you saying that he really didn't have a choice to renounce?

I post my questions to you because I'm trying to decypher your comments. it was weird to me to see you quote a word's definition saying that's what you prefer and then without acknowledging it say the word can't apply to a case that fits the definition. I mean as it is, i don't care if you call him a martyr or not. its just weird that you would do that, so i ask, for clarification's sake, if for nothing else.

My comments were not ambiguous. The definitions

I provided was clear.

Its not complicated. Joseph Smith was not given the choice to renounce his visions/faith and live.

Joseph Smith would fit the bill of Jaybears definition, when asked to renounce his visions by his father inlaw and jilted suiter Coal or leave the Methodist church he refused to renounce his vision and had his name stricken from the roles.

If you consider being asked to leave the Methodist church to be "persecution," then I suppose yes he was a martyr. But I don't equate excommunication with persecution.

ZAK: But of course JS just isn't a Marytr... just because he couldn't be. Thats the only real reason.

As I said before, I associate the concept of martyrdom with religious zealotry. See 911. So your assumption that my intent is to insult Smith by saying he was not a martyr is simply wrong.

[frankenstein]

It matters a great deal.

You are right that his being a martyr has no effect on the truthiness of the Catholic or Protestant religions, but it is a powerful force in demonstrating that the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ is true. That’s why Satan and his minions are so, pardon the expression, he11-bent on undermining that testimony.

Joseph and Hyrum were martyrs in the highest and truest senses of the word. Their blood will testify against all those who fight against the work God called them to do, from E. D. Howe and Hurlbut, through Thomas Sharpe and Robert Smith, to those around us today.

Lehi

The D&C verse could easily be said of anyone who died for their cause. Jihadist martry theirselves often, praises are spoken of them.

[KevinG]

The D&C verse could easily be said of anyone who died for their cause. Jihadist martry theirselves often, praises are spoken of them.

Not all martyrs are martyrs for a good cause.

[Zakuska]

As I said before, I associate the concept of martyrdom with religious zealotry. See 911. So your assumption that my intent is to insult Smith by saying he was not a martyr is simply wrong.

And theres the rub Jaybear.

You consider the Jihadists, Marytrs because they flew planes into the towers in the name of religion. You also consider Good Christians like Becket a Marytr even though he died fighting not because of his faith but because he refused arrest and being brought before the King to answer for his actions.

What would Joseph Smith have to have done in your perspective to deserve the title Martyr? Died trying to shoot and killed every last Missourian? That would have been "religious zealotry" in your eyes?

You are trying to have your cake and eat it too Jaybear.

Edited September 30, 2011 by Zakuska

[KevinG]

Perhaps Jaybear is simply trying to protect Brother Joseph's image given the recent negative connotations of martyrs to Jihad?

Of course it couldn't be that denying Brother Joseph the title of martyr has anything to do with the age old anti-mormon canard that he deserved what he got because he unloaded a pepper-box pistol into a hallway of bloodthirsty armed men sworn to destroy him.

Did you know despite pictures of that pistol in our seminary and instutute materials, and its prominent display in the Church museum of history (turn right from the front entrance into the first exhibit - its right there) we Mormons hide the fact that Joseph was armed at his death?