Scott Lloyd Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) 8 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said: Welp, they finally got us LoudMouth! They've been trying for nearly 200 years, since one of the seminal foundational events of this alleged "Church of Jesus Christ" was announced throughout the nearby precincts. We should have known it was too good to last! Oh, well! Will the last person to leave the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints please turn out the lights? Misspelled names on mission calls, a few drops of cream, faulty math ... if someone is simply looking to find fault with the Church of Jesus Christ and/or with its leaders, one excuse is as good as another. Kenngo, my good man, at long last have you learned nothing from the faultfinders? Thomas B. Marsh got a bad rap over the milk strippings episode and has been slandered by the Church all these years. Never mind that he publicly confessed wrongdoing in his apostasy and, in abject humility, sought readmission to the Church of Jesus Christ. As penance you are condemned to listen to six hours of whining Dehlin/Reel podcasts. Edited January 23, 2019 by Scott Lloyd 2
Scott Lloyd Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 5 hours ago, cinepro said: That is appalling. I demand nothing less than a 3-hour podcast discussing this issue. I hope it warms your shoulders.
Anijen Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 "2000 years" often was just meant as a seperator from then and now. We didn't lose our testimony if the math was not precise, in fact, we knew it wasn't. Same as saying the days since Adam has been "6000 years," pretty sure, that's not exactly accurate either. Numbers can have multiple meanings, e.g. A Centurion was in charge of 100 men. I lose no sleep if one day his charge fell to 88 men or from time to time exceeded 100. Besides IIRC there is rounding up and down in math...
JAHS Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 12 minutes ago, Anijen said: "2000 years" often was just meant as a seperator from then and now. We didn't lose our testimony if the math was not precise, in fact, we knew it wasn't. Same as saying the days since Adam has been "6000 years," pretty sure, that's not exactly accurate either. Numbers can have multiple meanings, e.g. A Centurion was in charge of 100 men. I lose no sleep if one day his charge fell to 88 men or from time to time exceeded 100. Besides IIRC there is rounding up and down in math... ONE THOUSAND "This number serves mainly to magnify or embellish that with which it is associated.the number one thousand evokes images of "power, strength, and magnitude. Anytime it occurs, by itself or as a multiple of another number, it symbolizes greatness and vastness. It traditionally represents a "multitude" or that which is "incalculable." Thus, this number may be used in scripture without literal intent, but rather in an effort to highlight an event or numerical symbol with which it is associated." (Information taken from "The Lost Language of Symbolism" by Alonzo L. Gaskill)
Kenngo1969 Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 47 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Kenngo, my good man, at long last have you learned nothing from the faultfinders? Thomas B. Marsh got a bad rap over the milk strippings episode and has been slandered by the Church all these years. Never mind that he publicly confessed wrongdoing in his apostasy and, in abject humility, sought readmission to the Church of Jesus Christ. As penance you are condemned to listen to six hours of whining Dehlin/Reel podcasts. Okay. Meekly and humbly, I will accept the punishment that the powers-that-be see fit to impose upon me. (Can I at least multi-task while ... uhhh, listening ... to the podcasts? )
SouthernMo Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 54 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Kenngo, my good man, at long last have you learned nothing from the faultfinders? Thomas B. Marsh got a bad rap over the milk strippings episode and has been slandered by the Church all these years. Never mind that he publicly confessed wrongdoing in his apostasy and, in abject humility, sought readmission to the Church of Jesus Christ. As penance you are condemned to listen to six hours of whining Dehlin/Reel podcasts. Your point is apt, but you know the Thomas B. Marsh milk stripping stories is not true, right? His departure from the church had a far more serious reasoning.
Scott Lloyd Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 43 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said: Okay. Meekly and humbly, I will accept the punishment that the powers-that-be see fit to impose upon me. (Can I at least multi-task while ... uhhh, listening ... to the podcasts? ) Maybe listen to three hours of Dehlin and three hours of Reel simultaneously? Not as if you’d miss anything valuable in so doing. 1
Kenngo1969 Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) 12 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Maybe listen to three hours of Dehlin and three hours of Reel simultaneously? Not as if you’d miss anything valuable in so doing. Can I listen to them sped up, so they sound like Alvin and the Chipmunks? (At least that might be somewhat entertaining ... ) Edited January 23, 2019 by Kenngo1969 1
Kenngo1969 Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) 50 minutes ago, SouthernMo said: Your point is apt, but you know the Thomas B. Marsh milk stripping stories is not true, right? His departure from the church had a far more serious reasoning. I don't necessarily blame Brother Marsh for wanting to come strongly to the defense of his wife's honor, but, silly me, I don't really see any reason to question what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has put forth about the episode, especially since it includes the assessment of Brother Marsh himself (though, to be fair and in the interest of full disclosure, Brother Marsh's remarks don't address the "milk strippings" episode directly). https://www.lds.org/study/manual/revelations-in-context/the-faith-and-fall-of-thomas-marsh?lang=eng Edited January 23, 2019 by Kenngo1969
Calm Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 52 minutes ago, SouthernMo said: Your point is apt, but you know the Thomas B. Marsh milk stripping stories is not true, right? His departure from the church had a far more serious reasoning. Are you saying the milk strippings interaction never happened or it was only part of the story? 2
Hamba Tuhan Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said: I don't really see any reason to question what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has put forth about the episode, especially since it includes the assessment of Brother Marsh himself. I actually really love his explanation: Quote I have frequently wanted to know how my apostasy began, and I have come to the conclusion that I must have lost the Spirit of the Lord out of my heart. The next question is, "How and when did you lose the Spirit?" I became jealous of the Prophet, and then I saw double, and overlooked everything that was right, and spent all my time in looking for the evil; and then, when the Devil began to lead me, it was easy for the carnal mind to rise up, which is anger, jealousy, and wrath. I could feel it within me; I felt angry and wrathful; and the Spirit of the Lord being gone, as the Scriptures say, I was blinded, and I thought I saw a beam in brother Joseph's eye, but it was nothing but a mote, and my own eye was filled with the beam; but I thought I saw a beam in his, and I wanted to get it out; and, as brother Heber says, I got mad, and I wanted everybody else to be mad. It both sounds and feels quite 'familiar' in light of a number of recent 'high-profile' apostasies. Or just a quick trip through r/exmormon ... Edited January 23, 2019 by Hamba Tuhan 2
Calm Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said: I don't necessarily blame Brother Marsh for wanting to come strongly to the defense of his wife's honor, but, silly me, I don't really see any reason to question what the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has put forth about the episode, especially since it includes the assessment of Brother Marsh himself (though, to be fair and in the interest of full disclosure, Brother Marsh's remarks don't address the "milk strippings" episode directly). https://www.lds.org/study/manual/revelations-in-context/the-faith-and-fall-of-thomas-marsh?lang=eng However, it is often referred to in the past without the addition that his apparently primary reason was dissatisfaction with the violence, etc: Quote Thomas B. Marsh was another favored associate of the Prophet Joseph. Over this pulpit in the April 1984 general conference, President Hinckley reminded us that Brother Marsh was serving as the President of the Quorum of the Twelve when he chose to disregard the decisions of the First Presidency and other Church leaders in a dispute between his wife and another woman over some milk strippings.17 When, as did the prodigal son, he finally “came to himself,”18 he wrote to Heber C. Kimball, who had been his associate in the Quorum of the Twelve, stating: https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1996/04/the-prophetic-voice?lang=eng Quote Thomas B. Marsh, the first President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in this dispensation, elected to take offense over an issue as inconsequential as milk strippings (see Deseret News, Apr. 16, 1856, 44). Brigham Young, on the other hand, was severely and publicly rebuked by the Prophet Joseph Smith, but he chose not to take offense (see Truman G. Madsen, “Hugh B. Brown—Youthful Veteran,” New Era, Apr. 1976, 16). In many instances, choosing to be offended is a symptom of a much deeper and more serious spiritual malady. Thomas B. Marsh allowed himself to be acted upon, and the eventual results were apostasy and misery. Brigham Young was an agent who exercised his agency and acted in accordance with correct principles, and he became a mighty instrument in the hands of the Lord. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2006/10/and-nothing-shall-offend-them?lang=eng This has his anger over the strippings being the cause of his swearing out the affidavit: Quote “Marsh, not being satisfied, took an appeal to the First Presidency of the Church, and Joseph and his counselors had to sit upon the case, and they approved the decision of the High Council. “This little affair,” Brother Smith continues, “kicked up a considerable breeze, and Thomas B. Marsh then declared that he would sustain the character of his wife even if he had to go to hell for it. “The then President of the Twelve Apostles, the man who should have been the first to do justice and cause reparation to be made for wrong, committed by any member of the family, took that position, and what next? He went before a magistrate and swore that the ‘Mormons’ were hostile towards the state of Missouri. “That affidavit brought from the government of Missouri an exterminating order, which drove some 15,000 Saints from their homes and habitations, and some thousands perished through suffering the exposure consequent on this state of affairs.” (Journal of Discourses, 3:283–84.) Such is George A. Smith’s account. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1984/04/small-acts-lead-to-great-consequences?lang=eng Quote Elder Thomas B. Marsh, who sided with his wife through all of this, became angrier with each successive decision—so angry, in fact, that he went before a magistrate and swore that the Mormons were hostile toward the state of Missouri. His affidavit led to—or at least was a factor in—Governor Lilburn Boggs’s cruel extermination order, which resulted in over 15,000 Saints being driven from their homes, with all the terrible suffering and consequent death that followed. All of this occurred because of a disagreement over the exchange of milk and cream. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2009/10/school-thy-feelings-o-my-brother?lang=eng Edited January 23, 2019 by Calm 1
SouthernMo Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 8 minutes ago, Calm said: Are you saying the milk strippings interaction never happened or it was only part of the story? From what I understand, his departure from the church had nothing to do with milk strippings. I’m not aware whether or not there was any substance to that story. Thomas Marsh was vehemently opposed to church members proactively attacking those who persecuted and attacked the Mormons. From what I have read, his opposition to this tactic was the reason for his departure from the church.
Calm Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) 2 hours ago, SouthernMo said: From what I understand, his departure from the church had nothing to do with milk strippings. I’m not aware whether or not there was any substance to that story. Thomas Marsh was vehemently opposed to church members proactively attacking those who persecuted and attacked the Mormons. From what I have read, his opposition to this tactic was the reason for his departure from the church. I agree. [edit: may have changed my mind in the sense being upset at the embarrassment and resentment of the strippings discipline of his wife may not have been out of character, see Cook article I link to below...story is even more complicated than I tjought] As far as I know George A Smith is the source of the story [I was ignorant, see corrections below]. If there were as many appeals, perhaps there is a record of it. This would appear to confirm there was some difficulty involving his wife, though that may be a result of hearing the story from George A Smith a year previously (would HCK have been present at the time of the conflict or was he on a mission or elsewhere?): Quote _____________________________ Thomas B. Marsh Receives a Revelation President Heber C. Kimball, July 12, 1857 Journal of Discourses, Vol.5, p.28, [After the strippings of milk experience, Thomas B. Marsh was angery at the Prophet Joseph Smith. He prayed and received a revelation telling him what to do. The following is Heber C. Kimball's account of that revelation.] How can you find out whether brother Brigham is called of God, except you have a revelation from God? And then some are not fully satisfied, but will doubt the revelation that God has given them. You think you would not. I have known many who have. Oliver Cowdery received revelations and wrote them; so did David Whitmer, and so did Thomas B. Marsh. About the time he was preparing to leave this Church, he received a revelation in the Printing Office. He retired to himself, and prayed, and was humble, and God gave him a revelation, and he wrote it. There were from three to five pages of it; and when he came out, he read it to brother Brigham and me. In it God told him what to do, and that was to sustain brother Joseph and to believe that what brother Joseph had said was true. But no; he took a course to sustain his wife and oppose the Prophet of God, and she led him away. What!--sustain a woman, a wife, in preference to sustaining the Prophet Joseph, brother Brigham, and his brethren! Your religion is vain when you take that course. Well, my wife may say, "If you will sustain Brigham in preference to me, I will leave you." I should reply, "Leave, and be damned!" and that very quickly. That is a part of my religion--"Leave quickly, you poor snoop." http://emp.byui.edu/satterfieldb/quotes/ThomasBMarsh.htm Also from this last link: Quote Can I have it? Something seems to say within yes O then hasten and signify it by writing the word yes to me & then O Joy I shall be content. I have met with G[eorge] W. Harris and reconsiliation has taken place with us [this reconcilation has reference to the disagreement over the strippings. The case involved Elizabeth Marsh and Lucinda Morgan Harris, wife of George W. Harris], and when that was accomplished I was so overjoyed that I was constrained to say in my heart truely this is an evidence that the Lord loves me after all my rebellion & my sins. Add-on: Kimball was the one who passed on Marsh's letter that spoke of the reconciliation with Marsh, so it sounds like he would be likely to be familiar with the story. Edited January 23, 2019 by Calm 2
Calm Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) More to the story, Marsh may not have been all that humble in returning, explaining BY's reaction more: https://www.standard.net/lifestyle/faith/the-prodigal-mormon-apostle-thomas-b-marsh/article_9a02e128-31c3-502b-aff8-360c3056a9ed.html Quote Hamer describes Young as “uncharitable” in his remarks. Perhaps that’s true, but there’s more context to this historical tale, as Van Wagoner and Walker note in their Sunstone article. Prior to the reunion and speeches at the Bowery, Marsh had sent Young what he claimed was a revelation from God. It read in part, as the Sunstone piece records, “Behold I say unto thee Brigham Young! Where is the servant of the Lord, Thomas Marsh, Chief of the 12 to whom the Lord gave the keys of the Kingdom? from whom they have not been taken, who was driven out from among you because of the iniquity of his brethren who hunted for his blood but did not obtain it because his life was hid with Christ in god, because he had made the Lord, who was the God of David, his habitation …” The letter from Marsh to Young also claimed that God wanted Young, as well as himself, to be part of a “Supreme Council” in which “they shale obtain the word of the Lord through the mouth of Thomas ...” Quote “Chief of the Twelve” 1856. During six weeks of paralysis from a massive stroke, Marsh experienced a change of heart and sent a “revelation” to President Brigham Young: “Behold I say unto thee Brigham Young! Where is the servant of the Lord, Thomas Marsh, Chief of the 12 to whom the Lord gave the keys of the kingdom? from whom they have not been taken, who was driven out from among you because of the iniquity of his brethren who hunted for his blood. … Now if ye would prosper in the land which the Lord, thy god hath given thee ye shale spedily take with thee two wise & faithful servants of the Lord and go to the land of Missouri and inquire in the County Howard for his son Edward Marsh, who will, if ye are prudent direct you to his father; but if ye act not discretely he will fear lest ye seek the life of his father, and withhold from thee the desired information. Behold ye shale take with you means for his conveyance … confer with him in a kind and friendly manner and he shall rejoice and be glad to see you … he will accompany you and ye shale bring him to this land even to your chief City.” http://signaturebookslibrary.org/karl-g-maeser/ Edited January 23, 2019 by Calm 2
Okrahomer Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 16 minutes ago, Calm said: I agree. As far as I know George A Smith is the source of the story. If there were as many appeals, perhaps there is a record of it. This would appear to confirm there was some difficulty involving his wife, though that may be a result of hearing the story from George A Smith a year previously (would HCK have been present at the time of the conflict or was he on a mission or elsewhere?): http://emp.byui.edu/satterfieldb/quotes/ThomasBMarsh.htm Also from this last link: George Albert Smith was apparently not the only source—Henry Bigler also mentioned it in his diary. See footnote 22 here. 2
Calm Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) It is also confirmed in Henry Bigler's journal in the Church archives (found it cited in Lyndon Cook's article, but the quote is from the link that doesn't have the footnotes) Quote Henry William Bigler, a witness who attended the trial presided over by Bishop Edward Partridge, added that during the hearing "[Mrs. Marsh] called on God and angels to witness her [p.18] innocence. At this time the Prophet jumped up and said, `Sister Marsh, if you say that, you lie like the devil.'"21 Reluctant Apostle copied here, might be a copyright issue: http://1857massacre.com/MMM/danites_p13.htm https://byustudies.byu.edu/file/1544/download?token=W6KMm00- looks like Okra beat me to it Edited January 23, 2019 by Calm 2
Okrahomer Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 2 minutes ago, Calm said: looks like Okra beat me to it Inconceivable!! 🤓 1
The Nehor Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 I too appreciate a fine cheese and thus can sympathize with the Marsh family. 2
Kenngo1969 Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 51 minutes ago, Calm said: ... looks like Okra beat me to it 48 minutes ago, Okrahomer said: Inconceivable!! 🤓 1
Kenngo1969 Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 24 minutes ago, The Nehor said: I too appreciate a fine cheese and thus can sympathize with the Marsh family. It goes great with crackers and whine wine (ummm, sans alcohol, of course )
Kenngo1969 Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 1 hour ago, SouthernMo said: From what I understand, his departure from the church had nothing to do with milk strippings. I’m not aware whether or not there was any substance to that story. Thomas Marsh was vehemently opposed to church members proactively attacking those who persecuted and attacked the Mormons. From what I have read, his opposition to this tactic was the reason for his departure from the church. And yet it was Thomas B. Marsh's actions which, at least in part, led to the expulsion of the Saints from Missouri.
Calm Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 (edited) 22 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said: And yet it was Thomas B. Marsh's actions which, at least in part, led to the expulsion of the Saints from Missouri. Cook's article from 1980 paints a very different picture of Marsh from those who protest he was solely or even primarily concerned over the violence (and one more in line with his letter to Brigham declaring himself as chief among the apostles) as rather power and influence hungry as well as one of the big property speculators Joseph scolded for covetousness in Missouri. Oliver Cowdery and Phineas Young accused him and others of purposely driving others out of the Church with lies, etc. Vilate Kimball reported apparently that Marsh said he was supposed to be the one to open up Europe. I don't know if Cook's analysis is correct. Like to see his references, but not all are online. Edited January 23, 2019 by Calm 1
Robert F. Smith Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 4 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: If you think substituting "LDS" for "Mormon" gets you off the hook, you're mistaken. Would "CJCLDS culture" work? Or must I say "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints culture"? Not sure how to properly speak to the culture, rather than church as an institution. How are we to coherently refer to the people or ethnicity. At least we could use "Mormon culture" in order to separate the popular culture from the official institution. What sort of substitute terminology exists? 3
Hamba Tuhan Posted January 23, 2019 Posted January 23, 2019 6 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said: Would "CJCLDS culture" work? Or must I say "Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints culture"? I think the culture of the Latter-day Saints can accurately be described as Latter-day Saint culture, and I see nothing wrong with shortening this descriptor to LDS on a message board. The Church's style guide certainly doesn't oppose it, just the use of the abbreviation 'as [a substitute] for the name of the Church, as in ... "LDS Church". 2
Recommended Posts