stemelbow Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 If memory serves, it was the "60 Minutes" report in which Mike Wallace interviewed President Hinckley. Thanks. That may suggest the phrase could have originated with him.
Scott Lloyd Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 It get's better. A photograph of the pistol was published in institute manuals, the tour at Carthage walks through Joseph and Hyrum shooting back down the stairs, and (saving the best for last) the pepper box pistol itself is displayed prominently in a case, in the first room of the Church History Museum in Salt Lake City. Having people say the pistol is "hidden history" is one of my favorite arguments.Not to nitpick an otherwise fine post, but that pistol is not there at the moment. The museum has been closed for a year-long renovation and the installation of a new Church history exhibit. I have been assured though, that the pistol will again be displayed when the museum reopens this autumn. 1
KevinG Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 Not to nitpick an otherwise fine post, but that pistol is not there at the moment. The museum has been closed for a year-long renovation and the installation of a new Church history exhibit. I have been assured though, that the pistol will again be displayed when the museum reopens this autumn. Well there you go. The Church hiding its history again!!! 1
Scott Lloyd Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 Thanks. That may suggest the phrase could have originated with him.It's vintage Steve. By the way, he is a former colleague of mine. We worked together on the editorial page of the Daily Universe, the student newspaper at BYU. I have been saddened by the course he later took.
KevinG Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) It's vintage Steve. By the way, he is a former colleague of mine. We worked together on the editorial page of the Daily Universe, the student newspaper at BYU. I have been saddened by the course he later took. Are you partially to blame for the President Kimball "Save the Birdies" cartoon? Inquiring minds want to know. (Full disclosure - I was a graduate student with Marcus Martins, and a teaching assistant for Lee Perry, and we talked about "stuff") Edited March 11, 2015 by KevinG
stemelbow Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 It get's better. A photograph of the pistol was published in institute manuals, the tour at Carthage walks through Joseph and Hyrum shooting back down the stairs, and (saving the best for last) the pepper box pistol itself is displayed prominently in a case, in the first room of the Church History Museum in Salt Lake City. Having people say the pistol is "hidden history" is one of my favorite arguments. A decade ago or so while traveling around Nauvoo I stopped by the jail for a tour. I asked about Joseph's firing back at the mob and the tour guides had no clue what I was talking about. Can't completely fault the Church for that, but it was odd that some details, which pretty much everyone whose looked into the history of the event knows about, were not known about my the tour guides. Don't know if it's been corrected but the guides should be given appropriate information so they aren't surprised when people ask questions.
stemelbow Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 It's vintage Steve. By the way, he is a former colleague of mine. We worked together on the editorial page of the Daily Universe, the student newspaper at BYU. I have been saddened by the course he later took. Oh cool. So you knew him before he left the Church?
Scott Lloyd Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) Are you partially to blame for the President Kimball "Save the Birdies" cartoon? Inquiring minds want to know. (Full disclosure - I was a graduate student with Marcus Martins, and a teaching assistant for Lee Perry, and we talked about "stuff")Yeah, I was assistant editorial page editor when Pat Bagley (who today works for the Tribune, by the way) came up with that. President Kimball had given a general conference address in which he quoted the words to "Don't Kill the LIttle Birds." The cartoon showed a deer standing up with his front leg and hoof around the shoulder of a deer hunter and holding an open copy of Conference Reports in front of them. The caption read, "And then he said, 'Don't shoot the little birdies.' And then -- and this is the part I like best -- ...." By directive of one of the faculty advisers, the caption was shortened to "And this is the part I like best." The adviser was afraid "Don't shoot the little birdies" would be demeaning to President Kimball. Incidentally, Lee Perry was a resident assistant in the dorm where I lived during my freshman year, though I doubt he remembers me today. Edited March 11, 2015 by Scott Lloyd 1
Scott Lloyd Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) Oh cool. So you knew him before he left the Church?I knew him when he was a faithful member and adoring grandson of the president of the Quorum of the Twelve at at the time, Ezra Taft Benson. Edited March 11, 2015 by Scott Lloyd
stemelbow Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 I knew him when he was a faithful member and adoring grandson of the Church president at the time, Ezra Taft Benson. Interesting I worked for a cousin (I believe) of his. he too left the Church and seemed to have similar feelings towards the Church.
KevinG Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 A decade ago or so while traveling around Nauvoo I stopped by the jail for a tour. I asked about Joseph's firing back at the mob and the tour guides had no clue what I was talking about. Can't completely fault the Church for that, but it was odd that some details, which pretty much everyone whose looked into the history of the event knows about, were not known about my the tour guides. Don't know if it's been corrected but the guides should be given appropriate information so they aren't surprised when people ask questions. I was fortunate to get a historian and retired professor as a guide when I took two troops of Boy Scouts in the 1990s. I suppose you get what you get when you use volunteers to run a church history museum! (Frankly that applies to the whole church organization.) 1
why me Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 I read his article in the Herald Journal this morning. I thought he was very straightforward and sincere. Who are we to know what his family is really going through. I have been out of the church since 2008 and it is still not easy. He would know more than anyone on this board (as well has Pres. King) what is really going on and the affect it has had. When do we quit judging?? It is so not your place to judge...or for John to judge others..not until we all have the truth. Believe me, my friends and family do NOT know the truth..it really is pay, pray and obey.I have seen you make this claim before about us judging others. And yet, john is also judging, is he not? John is a public figure within mormonism who has judged the church not true among other things about mormonism. Thus, we,,the people can judge his intent in making an appeal. It is really that simple. And may I had, he made his appeal public in the media. Why? This all could have been done privately without the media and without kate kelly. I find your post rather passive aggressive in judging us for 'judging'. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 Interesting I worked for a cousin (I believe) of his. he too left the Church and seemed to have similar feelings towards the Church.By the way, I hope you noticed I corrected my post. President Benson was not Church president at the time; he was president of the Quorum of the Twelve. 1
why me Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) Aren't you the one who fussed over not knowing and only learning later that Joseph Smith was given a pistol by a friend while confined in Carthage Jail? Call me judgmental, but that's a silly thing to leave the Church over.Especially,since it is in the D and C teacher's manual to be taught to the people who attended sunday school. An interesting sidenote when that lesson was taught by the sunday school teacher in my ward, she told the class that she never knew about the pistol and yet, here it is in the manual, a manual that was at least 30 years old. She was surprised to read it in the manual. The church did not hide that fact, but it seems that past teachers never had time to teach it.That being said, people leave the church over the strangest things, espeically when they become influenced by critic interpretations of past events. Edited March 11, 2015 by why me
carbon dioxide Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 A decade ago or so while traveling around Nauvoo I stopped by the jail for a tour. I asked about Joseph's firing back at the mob and the tour guides had no clue what I was talking about. Can't completely fault the Church for that, but it was odd that some details, which pretty much everyone whose looked into the history of the event knows about, were not known about my the tour guides. Don't know if it's been corrected but the guides should be given appropriate information so they aren't surprised when people ask questions.I was watching a video on that subject in Church and in that Church video, they totally bypassed that point in the events where Joseph shoots back. Adding 3 or 4 seconds would have been no expense and it would be more accurate to the events that happened. This is the stuff the Church needs to stop doing.
Scott Lloyd Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 I was fortunate to get a historian and retired professor as a guide when I took two troops of Boy Scouts in the 1990s. I suppose you get what you get when you use volunteers to run a church history museum! (Frankly that applies to the whole church organization.)My first visit to Carthage was memorable in more respects than one. It was in the winter of 1996. I was there for the observance of the sesquicentennial of the exodus of the Mormons from Nauvoo in 1846. While I was going into the visitors center, legendary LDS scholar Daniel H. Ludlow drove up with his wife. It was just the three of us there for the tour. Brother Ludllow and I knew each other well because, before his retirement, he had been in charge of Church Correlation Review, and thus, we had interacted on a weekly basis for a number of years, as he scrutinized the content of each issue of the Church News. I remarked on the fortunate timing: I could be there when he could explain things to me. He responded, "Oh, I'm going to keep silent; I want to hear what they say," meaning the tour guides. Afterward, we went over to a diner on the public square in downtown Carthage (near the Hamilton Hotel, important in Church history). Daniel bought me lunch. It was the first time I had ever tasted catfish. 2
ksfisher Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 My first visit to Carthage was memorable in more respects than one. It was in the winter of 1996. I was there for the observance of the sesquicentennial of the exodus of the Mormons from Nauvoo in 1846. While I was going into the visitors center, legendary LDS scholar Daniel H. Ludlow drove up with his wife. It was just the three of us there for the tour. Brother Ludllow and I knew each other well because, before his retirement, he had been in charge of Church Correlation Review, and thus, we had interacted on a weekly basis for a number of years, as he scrutinized the content of each issue of the Church News. I remarked on the fortunate timing: I could be there when he could explain things to me. He responded, "Oh, I'm going to keep silent; I want to hear what they say," meaning the tour guides. Afterward, we went over to a diner on the public square in downtown Carthage (near the Hamilton Hotel, important in Church history). Daniel bought me lunch. It was the first time I had ever tasted catfish. A tour of a historic LDS church site with Daniel Ludlow, and all you got out of it was catfish? 3
ksfisher Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 I was watching a video on that subject in Church and in that Church video, they totally bypassed that point in the events where Joseph shoots back. Adding 3 or 4 seconds would have been no expense and it would be more accurate to the events that happened. This is the stuff the Church needs to stop doing. Is it really that important to the story? Whether he shot back or didn't, or even if he had a gun or not seems like tertiary details that don't add to the story, and may even distract from the main message. Historical videos (or books or whatever), regardless of who puts them out, are never 100% accurate. 1
Mystery Meat Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 I am about 30. I have known Joseph Smith had access and used a pistol since at least the age of 14. Honestly, it was probably long before that. This is one of those pieces of history that blows my mind when I hear people getting worked up about. The ordeal with Orson Hyde I can understand, this...not so much. 3
Garden Girl Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 Is it really that important to the story? Whether he shot back or didn't, or even if he had a gun or not seems like tertiary details that don't add to the story, and may even distract from the main message. Historical videos (or books or whatever), regardless of who puts them out, are never 100% accurate. Hello ksfisher...This is one part of the story that I think could have been added, i.e., something like... As the mob approached the door, heavily armed with rifles, the only defense Joseph and his companions had available was a small, six shot pepperbox pistol that had been smuggled in to them. As the rifles were fired through the door, Joseph blindly fired the pistol into the mob, slightly wounding two men.... (The pistol was smuggled in to Joseph... otherwise they would have been completely unarmed... as it was, the pistol was of little use in protecting against the mob.) GG
ksfisher Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 Hello ksfisher...This is one part of the story that I think could have been added, i.e., something like... As the mob approached the door, heavily armed with rifles, the only defense Joseph and his companions had available was a small, six shot pepperbox pistol that had been smuggled in to them. As the rifles were fired through the door, Joseph blindly fired the pistol into the mob, slightly wounding two men.... (The pistol was smuggled in to Joseph... otherwise they would have been completely unarmed... as it was, the pistol was of little use in protecting against the mob.) GG I know that it could be added, but why? Does it really add anything to the story? There are a lot of details left out between the time when Joseph left for Carthage and when he died, why does this one need to be added?
Popular Post Scott Lloyd Posted March 11, 2015 Popular Post Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) Incidentally, one of the reasons given by our antagonists in denying Joseph Smith martyr status is that the early Christian martyrs did not resist the infliction of death as did Joseph Smith. Of course, I always reply that all that is necessary for a person to be a martyr is to refuse to renounce his convictions as a price for being allowed to remain alive. That said, I've been reading the mutli-volume work The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Yesterday, I began to read about the martyrdom of Polycarp. In short, Polycarp did not passively accept the infliction of death. Rather, he fled and hid out from his pursuers, requiring them to hunt him down and capture him after he was betrayed by a servant. Had he not been so old and frail, he might well have physically resisted his captors. So, when anti-Mormons claim that Joseph can't be a martyr because he had a gun and fired back at the thugs who stormed the jail, I say: Buncomb! Joseph was in every whit a martyr. And a heroic one at that, as his resistance deflected the attack of the mob and probably was instrumental in saving the lives of Willard Richards and John Taylor who were in the room with him. HIs jumping from the bedroom window into certain death at the hands of the mobbers gathered below, caused the ones who stormed the jail to leave immediately; otherwise, Elders Taylor and Richards probably wouldn't have survived. Edited to add: Joan of Arc, who is widely regarded as a martyr, did not passively accept death. She resisted capture and, after being imprisoned, attempted several escapes, once jumping from a 70-foot tower and landing on the soft earth of a dry moat. Edited March 11, 2015 by Scott Lloyd 5
carbon dioxide Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 Incidentally, one of the reasons given by our antagonists in denying Joseph Smith martyr status is that the early Christian martyrs did not resist the infliction of death as did Joseph Smith. Of course, I always reply that all that is necessary for a person to be a martyr is to refuse to renounce his convictions as a price for being allowed to remain alive. That said, I'm been reading the mutli-volume work The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Yesterday, I began to read about the martyrdom of Polycarp. In short, Polycarp did not passively accept the infliction of death. Rather, he fled and hid out from his pursuers, requiring them to hunt him down and capture him after he was betrayed by a servant. Had he not been so old and frail, he might well have physically resisted his captors. So, when anti-Mormons claim that Joseph can't be a martyr because he had a gun and fired back at the thugs who stormed the jail, I say: Buncomb! Joseph was in every whit a martyr. And a heroic one at that, as his resistance deflected the attack of the mob and probably was instrumental in saving the lives of Willard Richards and John Taylor who were in the room with him. HIs jumping from the bedroom window into certain death at the hands of the mobbers gathered below, caused the ones who stormed the jail to leave immediately; otherwise, Elders Taylor and Richards probably wouldn't have survived.Muslims who blow themselves up and kill people along the way are also called martyrs as well. The dictionary definition never limits the meaning to a passive action by the martyr. In probably many of the situations that a Christian martyr did not fight back, it probably was because they lacked a means to fight back. Perhaps if an AK-47 suddenly appeared at their feet and they knew how to use it, they would have picked it up and started blasting away.
carbon dioxide Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 Is it really that important to the story? Whether he shot back or didn't, or even if he had a gun or not seems like tertiary details that don't add to the story, and may even distract from the main message. Historical videos (or books or whatever), regardless of who puts them out, are never 100% accurate. It did not need to be added but I am sure other things that were also shown did not need to be added as well. I don't know how it detracts from it. It shows the value and concept of self defense. We can defend our lives and the lives of our loved ones when they are attacked. I did not see the video to be bad, but I was just disappointed that they did not show that part.
Scott Lloyd Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 It did not need to be added but I am sure other things that were also shown did not need to be added as well. I don't know how it detracts from it. It shows the value and concept of self defense. We can defend our lives and the lives of our loved ones when they are attacked. I did not see the video to be bad, but I was just disappointed that they did not show that part. Do you recall the name of the video?
Recommended Posts