Emma As Scribe

[cinepro]

The debate has been had many times. The evidence for both positions is out there. Arguing about it for the 135,627,496,123,567,954 time won't accomplish anything.

 

I apologize, but I missed the previous 135,627,496,123,567,954 conversations, and I'm surprised that there is anyone who still doubts that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy.  Can you summarize the strongest evidence for the position that he didn't?

[The Nehor]

I don't know whether or not he did- thus I don't know whether or not Emma lied. I think it is presumptuous to declare one way or the other as fact.

 

Ummmm........

[BookofMormonLuvr]

I apologize, but I missed the previous 135,627,496,123,567,954 conversations, and I'm surprised that there is anyone who still doubts that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy.  Can you summarize the strongest evidence for the position that he didn't?

http://restorationbookstore.org/jsfp-index.htm

[jkwilliams]

Never mind.

 

If you want to chat and do color commentary please go to the Social Hall. 

[Robert F. Smith]

I don't know whether or not he did- thus I don't know whether or not Emma lied. I think it is presumptuous to declare one way or the other as fact.

Among professional historians, including RLDS historians, it is clear both that Joseph practiced polygamy and that Emma was fully aware of it -- even in her own home -- and got quite upset over it.  Later in life, when it had become a matter of formal dogma within the Reorganization, Emma wanted to put the deep embarrassment behind her, and so lied about it.  It is understandable.  Lots of people lie about such personal matters, including Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby.

[Robert F. Smith]

I recommend consulting Eldon Watson's interesting Book of Mormon translation timeline, which has good info on this subject:

 

http://www.eldenwatson.net/BoM.htm

 

..............................................

Watson has indeed begun a useful effort, but has left out far too many items, and has made estimates which may be inaccurate (if they are even knowable).  However, many details may seem immaterial, and he does present a nice, general outline.

 

For example, Watson's estimate of the date on which the plates were retrieved from their hiding place in a hollow log is Sept 26, only 4 days after taking them from the hill in Manchester, which was not known as Cumorah at that time.  Other sources place that retrieval 10 days after being taken from the hill.  Possible significance?  The plates are taken from the hill at Jewish New Year (Sept 22) and retrieved ten days later on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur, the  holiest day of the Jewish year, in which the Jews are supposed to be protected from harm).  Since there are a host of such Jewish calendar synchronisms in LDS history, these instances seem worth noting.  Yet, following Watson, we would miss a key instance.  He needs to list the full range of available data.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Among professional historians, including RLDS historians, it is clear both that Joseph practiced polygamy and that Emma was fully aware of it -- even in her own home -- and got quite upset over it.  Later in life, when it had become a matter of formal dogma within the Reorganization, Emma wanted to put the deep embarrassment behind her, and so lied about it.  It is understandable.  Lots of people lie about such personal matters, including Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby.

And... they now reject the unique importance of the Restoration and the historicity of the Book of Mormon and its importance also. So you will forgive me if I don't put much stock in their opinions.

Anyhoo, like I said, polygamy discussion are pointless and I refuse to participate.

[Robert F. Smith]

And... they now reject the unique importance of the Restoration and the historicity of the Book of Mormon and its importance also. So you will forgive me if I don't put much stock in their opinions.

Anyhoo, like I said, polygamy discussion are pointless and I refuse to participate.

The shock of having to eat crow on polygamy may have been too much for the Reorganization, which was already reeling from their leaders' published doubts about the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.  Little wonder that they dropped the whole thing and became what is essentially another Protestant denomination.

[why me]

Well, we know she lied about polygamy, but this is understandable.  On the Book of Mormon scribal experience, she may have told the truth or lied.  We just don't know.

If emma lied about the scribal experience, or in other words, she knew that it was a fraud, my respect for her would be nil.  So, we can either see emma as a brave woman who could not accept polygamy or a fraudster who allowed her husband to have relationships with other women and kept the fraud a secret. Which one seems more likely?

[HappyJackWagon]

If emma lied about the scribal experience, or in other words, she knew that it was a fraud, my respect for her would be nil.  So, we can either see emma as a brave woman who could not accept polygamy or a fraudster who allowed her husband to have relationships with other women and kept the fraud a secret. Which one seems more likely?

I don't understand your question. Both are likely. She was a brave woman who could not accept polygamy AND someone who lied about her husband's practice of poygamy.

[Calm]

I believe why me means not that Emma lied about plural marriage and Joseph's involvement with it, but that the option if you don't buy she was telling the truth about what she knew about the translation experience (whether as a scribe or as an observer), that she lied about watching Joseph receive inspiration and knew he hadn't, knew he was a conman in regards to receiving visions, etc. and yet she didn't leave him over having affairs (since obviously she would know God had not commanded Joseph to engage in plural marriage).  It doesn't seem very likely.

 

Since her father was relatively wealthy and didn't like Joseph, it seems likely she had an option of where to go if she did leave Joseph.

Edited August 26, 2015 by calmoriah

[why me]

I believe why me means not that Emma lied about plural marriage and Joseph's involvement with it, but that the option if you don't buy she was telling the truth about what she knew about the translation experience (whether as a scribe or as an observer), that she lied about watching Joseph receive inspiration and knew he hadn't, knew he was a conman in regards to receiving visions, etc. and yet she didn't leave him over having affairs (since obviously she would know God had not commanded Joseph to engage in plural marriage).  It doesn't seem very likely.

Since her father was relatively wealthy and didn't like Joseph, it seems likely she had an option of where to go if she did leave Joseph.

This was my point. If she lied about the translation process, knew her husband was a conman, didn't like polygamy and yet allowed her husband to still marry these women with duress but did not give up the con, and allowed so much suffering among the saints in their persecution etc, she would be a psychopath.

[why me]

I don't understand your question. Both are likely. She was a brave woman who could not accept polygamy AND someone who lied about her husband's practice of poygamy.

If she lied about the translation process, she would be a psychopath of the first order. She would know it was a con and yet, did not give up the con when her hubby was marrying other women. And she allowed the persecution of many saints right up to the arrival to the salt lake valley. She would be a ciminal in such circumstances.

 

However, the 11 witnesses would also be psychos if they lied about the book of mormon experience. And if so, there was something in the air in New York state if so.

Edited August 26, 2015 by why me

[JulieM]

This was my point. If she lied about the translation process, knew her husband was a conman, didn't like polygamy and yet allowed her husband to still marry these women with duress but did not give up the con, and allowed so much suffering among the saints in their persecution etc, she would be a psychopath.

Emma didn't "allow" Joseph to marry all of the women he married. I believe she wanted to be his ONLY wife and it was an embarrassment for her that he was with so many other women. She didn't just tell one little lie about it, she lied to her own (and Joseph's) children for their entire life. I'm not saying that she lied about the translation process as I don't know if anyone could ever prove that.

[Robert F. Smith]

Emma didn't "allow" Joseph to marry all of the women he married. I believe she wanted to be his ONLY wife and it was an embarrassment for her that he was with so many other women. She didn't just tell one little lie about it, she lied to her own (and Joseph's) children for their entire life. I'm not saying that she lied about the translation process as I don't know if anyone could ever prove that.

Yes, and one normally needs a motive to lie about anything.

[why me]

Emma didn't "allow" Joseph to marry all of the women he married. I believe she wanted to be his ONLY wife and it was an embarrassment for her that he was with so many other women. She didn't just tell one little lie about it, she lied to her own (and Joseph's) children for their entire life. I'm not saying that she lied about the translation process as I don't know if anyone could ever prove that.

But this was not my point. Taking my cue from Robert's posts, I was addressing emma possibly lying about being Joseph's scibe. If she lied about being his scribe then she would be a pyschopath because she would have known that her husband was a conman. And since she would have known he was a conman, by even entertaining the notion of the book of mormon and knowing that it was all false, the lying about polygamy is a mute point. Hopefully she would have spilled the beans if it was a con job by her husband, especially when he became a polygamist. But she didn't. So we have an either/or problem. Either she was a psychopath who was in on the fraud and all the suffering that it entailed or she told the truth about the coming forth of the book of mormon.

Edited August 27, 2015 by why me

[ALarson]

But this was not my point. Taking my cue from Robert's posts, I was addressing emma possibly lying about being Joseph's scibe. If she lied about being his scribe then she would be a pyschopath because she would have known that her husband was a conman. And since she would have known he was a conman, by even entertaining the notion of the book of mormon and knowing that it was all false, the lying about polygamy is a mute point. Hopefully she would have spilled the beans if it was a con job by her husband, especially when he became a polygamist. But she didn't. So we have an either/or problem. Either she was a psychopath who was in on the fraud and all the suffering that it entailed or she told the truth about the coming forth of the book of mormon.

Wow, that's pretty extreme!  So, if Emma wasn't entirely accurate or truthful about the translation of the Book of Mormon, then she had to have been a psychopath?  Do you know what a psychopath is?

[why me]

Wow, that's pretty extreme!  So, if Emma wasn't entirely accurate or truthful about the translation of the Book of Mormon, then she had to have been a psychopath?  Do you know what a psychopath is?

Yes. Let me put it this way. If emma lied about helping in the translation process, and if she lied about the book of mormon and how it came about, then she would be a pyschopath. The mormons were certainly a suffering people, being driven from town to town, some facing death. Not to mention the trek out west with BY and the lost of life then. And emma was just outside nauvoo allowing it all to happen, knowing that her husband was a fraudster, if she lied about the book of mormon. What should a person be called if this were true?

[cinepro]

Yes. Let me put it this way. If emma lied about helping in the translation process, and if she lied about the book of mormon and how it came about, then she would be a pyschopath. The mormons were certainly a suffering people, being driven from town to town, some facing death. Not to mention the trek out west with BY and the lost of life then. And emma was just outside nauvoo allowing it all to happen, knowing that her husband was a fraudster, if she lied about the book of mormon. What should a person be called if this were true?

 

I think you're misusing the term "pyschopath," as well as adopting an overly black/white view of the events of Church history and the suffering of the early saints.  It's possible for people to be put into situations where they don't understand everything that is happening around them, or the motivations for the actions of those closest to them.

 

http://i.imgur.com/xpfnv3a.webm

Edited August 27, 2015 by cinepro

[why me]

I think you're misusing the term "pyschopath," as well as adopting an overly black/white view of the events of Church history and the suffering of the early saints.  It's possible for people to be put into situations where they don't understand everything that is happening around them, or the motivations for the actions of those closest to them.

 

http://i.imgur.com/xpfnv3a.webm

I would think that emma would know if it were all a fraud or not. She was there. She claimed to have felt the plates though a cloth. And she gave a description of the translation process. If she lied about it all, I would consider her a psycho because she allowed for the suffering of many human beings who attached themselves to the faith her husband 'founded'. What name would you give to emma if she lied about it? Of course, I don't think that she lied but if she did....what name would be relevant for her?

[HappyJackWagon]

I think you're misusing the term "pyschopath," as well as adopting an overly black/white view of the events of Church history and the suffering of the early saints.  It's possible for people to be put into situations where they don't understand everything that is happening around them, or the motivations for the actions of those closest to them.

 

http://i.imgur.com/xpfnv3a.webm

Psychopath-

noun

1.

a person with a psychopathic personality, which manifests as amoral and antisocial behavior, lack of ability to love or establish meaningful personal relationships, extreme egocentricity, failure to learn from experience, etc.

 

Not sure how this would apply to Emma in any way. I think the word you're looking for is Liar.

She clearly lied about certain things, like JS's polygamy. But don't we all. This is a long ways from being a psychopath. If anything Emma deserves a great deal of compassion, not name calling.

[ALarson]

I would think that emma would know if it were all a fraud or not. She was there. She claimed to have felt the plates though a cloth. And she gave a description of the translation process. If she lied about it all, I would consider her a psycho because she allowed for the suffering of many human beings who attached themselves to the faith her husband 'founded'. What name would you give to emma if she lied about it? Of course, I don't think that she lied but if she did....what name would be relevant for her?

Liar?

 

You are making quite the leap by calling her a psychopath.  

 

And, she very well could have felt "something" under a cloth but there's no way of knowing for sure what that was (no lie there).  And, she also could have described the translation process as best she could and made some mistakes or not been entirely accurate (and still no lie there).  However, most believe she did lie about Joseph's polygamy, but so did he and others tell lies about it.  Are they all psychopaths?

Edited August 28, 2015 by ALarson

[cinepro]

I would think that emma would know if it were all a fraud or not. She was there. She claimed to have felt the plates though a cloth. And she gave a description of the translation process. If she lied about it all, I would consider her a psycho because she allowed for the suffering of many human beings who attached themselves to the faith her husband 'founded'. What name would you give to emma if she lied about it? Of course, I don't think that she lied but if she did....what name would be relevant for her?

 

Then you would be thinking wrong.  People are very close to "frauds" all the time and fail to detect them (sometimes it's harder to see the closer you are to the situation). 

 

She probably did feel plates through a cloth, but there is more than one explanation for a set of cloth-covered plates sitting on a table than the exact one Joseph Smith gave. 

 

And Joseph Smith probably did dictate the Book or Mormon under the conditions described by Emma and others, but that doesn't mean Joseph's explanation for its contents and origin are the only explanation possible.

 

Sure, you can argue that the official version of events is the best one, or the most likely one, or the one that the spirit tells you is true, but that still doesn't make it the only one (thus requiring a choice between "believer" and "psychopath".)

Edited August 28, 2015 by cinepro