Polygamy And Dishonesty-

[why me]

Did it mention JS had a gun and fired back? Just curious about it. On the web they are saying two men were killed by JS. Is this in the manual?

At 4:00 P.M.the guard at the jail was changed. Frank Worrell, who had threatened Joseph Smith earlier that morning, was then in charge. A few minutes after five, a mob of about one hundred men with blackened faces arrived in town and headed for the jail. The prisoners heard a scuffle downstairs followed by a shout for surrender and three or four shots. The Prophet and the others rushed to the door to fight off the assailants who had ascended the stairs and poked their guns through the half-closed door. John Taylor and Willard Richards attempted to deflect the muskets with their canes. A bullet fired through the panel of the door struck Hyrum in the left side of his face, and he fell, saying, “I am a dead man!” Joseph, leaning over Hyrum exclaimed, “Oh dear, brother Hyrum!” John Taylor said the look of sorrow he saw on Joseph’s face was forever imprinted on his mind. Joseph then stepped to the door, reached around the door casing, and discharged his six-shooter into the crowded hall. Only three of the six chambers fired, wounding three assailants.

http://www.lds.org/manual/church-history-in-the-fulness-of-times-student-manual/chapter-twenty-two-the-martyrdom?lang=eng

[Deborah]

Condescended post there.

Wow, someone is feeling guilty because they didn't pay attention all those years ago!

I know for a fact that many of these things were taught but I never paid attention until later years. We have shown time and again that many of these things were either in the church magazines or in lesson manuals. And why would we teach Primary children about the gun....? Teaching the message of the gospel doesn't require all the little details of history. No church teaches the details of their history. How would they ever have time to teach the Gospel principles?

[DavidB]

Deborah.....I do not feel any guilt.

I also do not need to feel guilt to recognize, your now twice and apparently consistent condescending attitude towards those members of the Church who do not know all the things you know about the Church.

It is the height of arrogance and unrighteous pride the attitude members of Church towards those members of the Church who do not whitewashed aspects of Church history.

[Tacenda]

I think so.

Is this Wade disguised as Why Me? Where did you put Why Me, Wade???

Edited September 14, 2012 by Tacenda

[ERayR]

Did it mention JS had a gun and fired back? Just curious about it. On the web they are saying two men were killed by JS. Is this in the manual?

You are in an upstairs room and surrounded by a large number of armed men with one goal, to kill you and you have a pistol, wouldn't you fire for effect?

[Calm]

Primary children are taught the history of Joseph Smith martyrdom - were are taught all details of the event but for Joseph shooting back - why are all the other historical details taught to children but the gun is left out.

No, it isn't, it is there: http://www.lds.org/manual/primary-5-doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history/lesson-37-joseph-and-hyrum-smith-are-martyred?lang=eng

Only four men remained in Carthage Jail: the Prophet Joseph Smith; his brother Hyrum; and John Taylor and Willard Richards, two of the Apostles. These four men had two guns that had been given to them by friends who visited them. Elder Taylor and Elder Richards also had walking canes.....

The brethren tried to bar the door shut and use their few weapons to drive off the mob. Joseph Smith fired a pistol and John Taylor used his heavy cane to try to knock down the guns of the mob as they were pushed into the room through the door, but there were too many people in the mob for the brethren to defend themselves.

[ERayR]

Condescended post there.

Primary children are taught the history of Joseph Smith martyrdom - were are taught all details of the event but for Joseph shooting back - why are all the other historical details taught to children but the gun is left out.

Primary Children are taught about Hauns Mill, and many other horrible things that happened to the early Saints - all these things are just a history lesson. Children of the Church grow up under the very distinct impression that Joseph Smith and the early Saints did nothing to upset their enemies other than claim a religion.

It is incredibly condescending and a flippant disregard of the person to suggest that it is the lazy member who does not know and that the Church is not for history lessons, yet the Church does teach history and a very whitewashed history..

Then you think the proper approach to teaching all this is that yes it happened but Joseph and the early church members had it coming and deserved what they got? OK

[why me]

At 4:00 P.M.the guard at the jail was changed. Frank Worrell, who had threatened Joseph Smith earlier that morning, was then in charge. A few minutes after five, a mob of about one hundred men with blackened faces arrived in town and headed for the jail. The prisoners heard a scuffle downstairs followed by a shout for surrender and three or four shots. The Prophet and the others rushed to the door to fight off the assailants who had ascended the stairs and poked their guns through the half-closed door. John Taylor and Willard Richards attempted to deflect the muskets with their canes. A bullet fired through the panel of the door struck Hyrum in the left side of his face, and he fell, saying, “I am a dead man!” Joseph, leaning over Hyrum exclaimed, “Oh dear, brother Hyrum!” John Taylor said the look of sorrow he saw on Joseph’s face was forever imprinted on his mind. Joseph then stepped to the door, reached around the door casing, and discharged his six-shooter into the crowded hall. Only three of the six chambers fired, wounding three assailants.

http://www.lds.org/m...tyrdom?lang=eng

It is in the manual. The gun is there. Poor why me, no one reads his posts.

[why me]

Is this Wade disguised as Why Me? Where did you put Why Me, Wade???

I am in his trunk waiting to sit on his knee to do our act.

[Tacenda]

I am in his trunk waiting to sit on his knee to do our act.

[DBMormon]

Sorry if the legalese bothers you, but maybe it's time to grow up and live in an adult world where there are, sometimes, very bad people who want to do you harm. Abimelech and Abraham's Pharaoh were two such people. The guys trying to get to JSJr were also such people.

uncalled for

-1

[DBMormon]

Deborah.....I do not feel any guilt.

I also do not need to feel guilt to recognize, your now twice and apparently consistent condescending attitude towards those members of the Church who do not know all the things you know about the Church.

It is the height of arrogance and unrighteous pride the attitude members of Church towards those members of the Church who do not whitewashed aspects of Church history.

While I agree the information is available, they won't encounter much of it in the three hour block. For many members they feel the church will give them all truth so they do not feel compelled to look for more truth outside of church. They are happy reading scriptures, studying lessons, and they do not dig deeper. Why is this group treated like 2nd class citizens? they are not. In fact they make up, I bet, 70 -80 % of active members, especially the over 45 age group.

I think it is fair for them to think they have an expectation of being taught all known truth about doctrine and church history through the church, though I also agree it is not a realistic expectation. But the last thing I would do is treat them as the problem. I would rather explain why they felt that way and show them kindly why it is unrealistic.

Edited September 14, 2012 by DBMormon

[DavidB]

No, it isn't, it is there: http://www.lds.org/manual/primary-5-doctrine-and-covenants-and-church-history/lesson-37-joseph-and-hyrum-smith-are-martyred?lang=eng

That certainly proves your point from 1997 on.

Do the.manuals from the 50, 60, 70, and 80's have the same information?

Edited September 14, 2012 by DavidB

[Calm]

My memory tells me as a teacher and librarian there wasn't much of a change so I would be surprised it if wasn't from the previous manuals which were, IIRC, about 20 years old at least by the time they were retired (I remember using them in the 80s). Don't know about before that, but since there is nothing to be ashamed about, why not?

(I knew I was saving those old manuals for a reason...why did I ever dump them just because we were moving and I hadn't touched them for ten years or more.)

Edited September 14, 2012 by calmoriah

[Deborah]

I think it is fair for them to think they have an expectation of being taught all known truth about doctrine and church history through the church, though I also agree it is not a realistic expectation. But the last thing I would do is treat them as the problem. I would rather explain why they felt that way and show them kindly why it is unrealistic.

Sigh. No one is treating them as the problem. And in fact most of these people will never care about learning more nor have any problems if they do. What is very irritating are those who come out and attack the church for doing something which you agree is not realistic. I find this disingenuous.

I find that people who get upset at something new are those looking for an excuse to be upset. Just my experience, because I know many others who learn something totally new and though it might take them by surprise they take it in stride and try to learn more.

[Deborah]

I also do not need to feel guilt to recognize, your now twice and apparently consistent condescending attitude towards those members of the Church who do not know all the things you know about the Church.

Good grief, if I know things now it's because I sought them out and read and studied. I certainly didn't wait to be spoon fed. Anyone can do the same thing. In fact I know many young people who have a great deal more knowledge than I do because they put in the effort to study.

[DBMormon]

Sigh. No one is treating them as the problem. And in fact most of these people will never care about learning more nor have any problems if they do. What is very irritating are those who come out and attack the church for doing something which you agree is not realistic. I find this disingenuous.

I find that people who get upset at something new are those looking for an excuse to be upset. Just my experience, because I know many others who learn something totally new and though it might take them by surprise they take it in stride and try to learn more.

And some people don't fit your sterotype. And while you are a 100% right that those that linger on the problems or struggle with new info may as a majority be wanting to find a problem, not all fit this mold.

[DBMormon]

Good grief, if I know things now it's because I sought them out and read and studied. I certainly didn't wait to be spoon fed. Anyone can do the same thing. In fact I know many young people who have a great deal more knowledge than I do because they put in the effort to study.

again many don't though. 70-80 % of the members I know who are worthy, have temple recommends and live serving God, do not take time to be aware of all the issues. Shame on them?.... maybe. I tend to think those who love to read, study, learn new info and won't quit till they get answers makes up a very small minority of the church, and world for that matter. Maybe all of us researchers and study'rs are the chosen ones..... maybe there are more important venues to spend one's energy then reading the intricate details of the council of 50. who knows

[KevinG]

That certainly proves your point from 1997 on.

Do the.manuals from the 50, 60, 70, and 80's have the same information?

The pepper box pistol in the Church museum of History is at eye level for any 6 year old.

And that is as legitimate an answer as this exercise in moving the goal posts deserves.

[KevinG]

DB- some of us have been around the boards long enough to be able to tell a genuine questioner from trolling. Give us a bit of credit that we're not going to bash someone who comes here with a genuine question.

Tacenda for example who gets a lot of her sources from anti-Mormon sites. She's treated pretty well.

When someone claims we don't teach it and we show we do. Then they claim we don't teach it early on in primary, then we show we do. Then they claim we probably didn't do it before the internet. I start thinking "trolling" rather than "concerned member". When the same person who shows an abundance of attitude about the responses they are given complains about the attitude of church members I start thinking "you get what you give".

[ERayR]

again many don't though. 70-80 % of the members I know who are worthy, have temple recommends and live serving God, do not take time to be aware of all the issues. Shame on them?.... maybe. I tend to think those who love to read, study, learn new info and won't quit till they get answers makes up a very small minority of the church, and world for that matter. Maybe all of us researchers and study'rs are the chosen ones..... maybe there are more important venues to spend one's energy then reading the intricate details of the council of 50. who knows

To me it is simple if you want to know you seek information. If you don't seek information then you can not blame someone else for not knowing.

[Deborah]

again many don't though.

So? Why do you say shame on them? Most of them are busy raising their families. Certainly when I was dealing with 4 children the last thing on my mind was studying church history. I don't think it's necessary to do more than read and study the scriptures and most people will never care for more. But then no one should start whining when they decide they should have known more and no one told them.

Do I wish we could cover more in our church classes? Of course. However, what do you sacrifice and what is more important? Learning those principles of the gospel that will exalt and lift you or learning the little tidbits of our history which are certainly fascinating but not necessary for salvation, unless of course you let those things undermine your testimony.

[DBMormon]

The pepper box pistol in the Church museum of History is at eye level for any 6 year old.

And that is as legitimate an answer as this exercise in moving the goal posts deserves.

I agree,

David it would be impossible to cover every mundane detail to be covered at church (I used to feel the same way, and argued it here). If we covered Polyandry, Book of Abraham, Masons, Pistol at carthage, Greek Psalter, kinderhook, peep stones, age of earth, evolution, ect.... (and repeat every four years so everyone gets it.) When would we cover the atonement and when would we teach things that the spirit could bear witness of as a gospel truth? Wade Englund once asked me to lay out a plan to accomplish that...... not as easy as critics make it sound

[ERayR]

So? Why do you say shame on them? Most of them are busy raising their families. Certainly when I was dealing with 4 children the last thing on my mind was studying church history. I don't think it's necessary to do more than read and study the scriptures and most people will never care for more. But then no one should start whining when they decide they should have known more and no one told them.

Do I wish we could cover more in our church classes? Of course. However, what do you sacrifice and what is more important? Learning those principles of the gospel that will exalt and lift you or learning the little tidbits of our history which are certainly fascinating but not necessary for salvation, unless of course you let those things undermine your testimony.

I agree with you but I don't hear you complaining that someone didn't spoon feed you. What I hear is you lamenting that you didn't have more time to study, not blaming the church for not telling you.

[DBMormon]

DB- some of us have been around the boards long enough to be able to tell a genuine questioner from trolling. Give us a bit of credit that we're not going to bash someone who comes here with a genuine question.

Tacenda for example who gets a lot of her sources from anti-Mormon sites. She's treated pretty well.

When someone claims we don't teach it and we show we do. Then they claim we don't teach it early on in primary, then we show we do. Then they claim we probably didn't do it before the internet. I start thinking "trolling" rather than "concerned member". When the same person who shows an abundance of attitude about the responses they are given complains about the attitude of church members I start thinking "you get what you give".

Kevin, some here may be capable of telling the difference........ but

Go look at my first thread, way too many here made a false assumption where you say the difference should have been known. I was told I was trolling.... wasn't the case.

Maybe posters here would be better to acknowledge they can not tell the difference between a frustrated hurt member clinging to what is left of his testimony and a critic trolling the site....