Consequences of not being forthcoming with history

[Scottie]

Anyone been following the Joseph Smith Ancestry DNA tests thread over on the Z?

If we are having this much difficulty in our technologically advanced day and age at even finding one "ancestor" of Joseph Smith from his supposed "wifes" with signed affidavits...

Then they expect us to beleive we are going to find DNA marks from 600BC.

What does one have to do with the other??????

[Zakuska]

DNA is DNA it speeks truth.

Yet with signed affidavits that these people where infact his ancestors. DNA evidence proves other wise.

In other words... how reliable is DNA evidence?

[Scottie]

I no longer have any sympathy whatsoever for people who expect the Church to teach them every little detail of Church history, to explore every controversy that every prophet and apostle has ever undergone. Church is long enough and we don't get to cover enough material as it is!

Go home, read a book. As was said before, the antis derive most of their material from the Church's own dusty records. Read them for yourself, in the proper context, easily available from such bastions of anti-Church activity as BYU or LDS Infobase. Unless you're a paraplegic imprisoned in solitary confinement within a hole in the Burmese jungle, you can with just a little effort, perform this task.

Stop being so "shocked." It is getting annoying.

The. Church. Is. Hiding. Nothing.

It seems to me as though JS and polygamy is the ONE thing that people keep finding that disturbs them.

Can't the church just start teaching this ONE thing?

I don't think we are asking for every little tidbit of information here...just this ONE little fact.

Obviously it is being glossed over, if not downright hidden from the Church Mormons.

[Rollo Tomasi]

[quote name='D. Charles Pyle, 32

[Scottie]

DNA is DNA it speeks truth.

Yet with signed affidavits that these people where infact his ancestors.  DNA evidence proves other wise.

In other words... how reliable is DNA evidence?

I think I would question the affidavids before I would DNA evidence...

I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure they can determine a person's parents from DNA with a pretty good degree of accuracy.

As far as DNA evidence as evidence against the BoM, I'm with you 100%. I don't see anything show-stopping there. Too many holes.

[USU78]

{snip}

That said, however, I think the Church bears some of the blame for avoiding (or at least downplaying) embarrassing events and doctrines in its past.

{snip to end}

Emerson said:

A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

RT . . . consistent to a fault . . . will of course take the foregoing "but" clause to extremes of worst-possible-light spinnery.

{sigh}

[Zakuska]

You forget one minor detail:

"We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory."

Whats going to happen if we start teaching it?

[rameumptom]

I wonder how quickly the church would grow if we restructured the Discussions to talk about all the skeletons in the Closet rather than Christ and his Modern Restoration efforts?

It is nice to know your goal is growth, not truth.

Our goal is to teach the saving truths. Whether the Pearly Gates swing or slide open is of little interest to me, except in a philosophical discussion.

Discussing history is interesting to many (obviously it is most interesting to anti-Mormons that can't get enough of it), but that is NOT why I joined the LDS Church. It didn't shock me to know Joseph was a polygamist. Why? I learned about it in my second year as a member, in seminary class. We discussed the issues Emma Smith had with polygamy, as she pushed Eliza R Snow down some steps one day for being one of Joseph's wives. We even looked at a copy of the Nauvoo Expositor and the claims it made about Joseph and Polygamy.

It didn't phase me. Why not? Because I don't have a testimony of the history of the Church. I only have a testimony of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I don't have a testimony of the history of the Bible, either. But I do have a testimony of the doctrines it teaches.

I belong to a church with mortal/human prophets. As long as they are acceptable in God's eyes, they are acceptable in my eyes. And if God can accept Moses after he annihilated entire cities, Abraham after being a polygamist and child sacrificer, Peter after denying the Christ, etc., then he can surely accept Joseph Smith for his flaws.

Now, if you are an atheist and believe none of this stuff, then I just have to fall back on my spiritual witness that keeps me safe in the knowledge and witness I have.

Perhaps in these new discussions, we should discuss the flaws of the prophets and apostles. The documentary hypothesis. The idea that there was no global Flood. The issue of Adam being the first man. The division of languages in the days of the Tower of Babel. Animal sacrifice ought to go over well with our PETA fans. Then we can talk about how early Christians believed in docetism, adoptionism, and separationism, so they can pick which Christ they wish to believe in. And of course, then we can go into the controversies of Trinitarianism versus the Godhead.

I can see how all of that wonderful history is going to make lots of converts to Christ's church. By the way, since this history is so important to anti-Mormons, I'd like to know how many of their churches spend time on history? How many discuss these issues indepth with their parishioners in the above paragraph? Or do they just ignore these issues and teach according to what they believe will get their congregants to heaven?

Ooops! Did I note a double standard here????

[Scottie]

Rameumptum,

The bottom line is this...Faithful LDS members are finding out that JS practiced polygamy by means other than the church. MANY of these members are disturbed by this. Some of those many are leaving the church because of it.

You can debate the whys and hows and who's to blame all you want. But the bottom line still remains the same.

So, will the church step up and do something about this? Or will they continue to fail to reconize it as a problem and keep claiming that "the information is out there if they would just look!"

I honestly think that this one issue causes more dissention than any other problem. Again, I don't know why that is. I don't know why people are ok with BY being a polygamist, but when they find out JS was they feel betrayed. It's a mystery to me.

Just devote 1 more SS lesson to JS and polygamy and I would bet these threads disappear.

[USU78]

{snip}

Faithful LDS members are finding out that JS practiced polygamy by means other than the church.

{snip to end}

That has been demonstrated to be untrue, both in what is explicit and implicit in your assertion.

1. The Church makes all such information available.

2. The Church teaches all such information, although not necessarily where and how often Scott, if he were choosing curricula, would do so.

It's a question of editorial style you're posing here, Scott. Editing must happen. Is disagreement with editorial style fairly a reason for assertions of covering up?

[KevinG]

Objective source for reasons people leave the Church please? I'll save you all time. There is none. I don't even think many who do leave are even honest with themselves, much preferring to blame their circumstance on outside forces or others than take responsibility for failure.

I don't remember doing exit interviews in any of my leadership capacities.

I personally have never known anyone outside of the virtual world that was a fully faithful believer in the authority of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints one day, and whose testimony was suddenly shattered the next because they had never heard that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy in Church.

I do however know several people who have left because of personal worthiness issues or growing tired of pulling along weaker or non-believing spouses.

Given a choice between an active Mormon never having heard of Joseph Smiths plural wives, especially those who grew up in the Church and attended meetings all their life or someone leaving because of a worthiness or personal challenge issue guess where occams handy little shaver ends up cutting?

[Zakuska]

She did what?!

We discussed the issues Emma Smith had with polygamy, as she pushed Eliza R Snow down some steps one day for being one of Joseph's wives.

Ohh... THATS IT.... This CHURCH is soooo false.

This Church is hiding things from me and not being honest.

Emma pushed a pregnant girl down the stairs! And why did she do it? Because the Church told her to!

My Bishop didn't give me a calling I wanted. He must not be super man in those magic undaroos after all!

Im outta her! Wheres my exit papers.

[Zakuska]

Just devote 1 more SS lesson to JS and polygamy and I would bet these threads disappear.

I wouldn't hold my breath if I where you!

If it werent this they'de find something else as an excuse to leave.

[Scottie]

{snip}

Faithful LDS members are finding out that JS practiced polygamy by means other than the church. 

{snip to end}

That has been demonstrated to be untrue, both in what is explicit and implicit in your assertion.

1. The Church makes all such information available.

2. The Church teaches all such information, although not necessarily where and how often Scott, if he were choosing curricula, would do so.

It's a question of editorial style you're posing here, Scott. Editing must happen. Is disagreement with editorial style fairly a reason for assertions of covering up?

Yes, it is all available. Nobody denies this.

Question: Do you believe it is a problem?

Due to the reactions I get when I tell people that JS practiced polygamy and the posts I see here about how disturbed people are, I would say that it is a problem.

You can bury your head all you want, but IT IS A PROBLEM!!!

[USU78]

{snip}

You can bury your head all you want, but IT IS A PROBLEM!!!

And you can keep asserting such till Bossie comes marching home, but, in my experience and the experience of most folks hereabouts, it ain't a problem . . . except perhaps in retrospect upon reflection by the already departed that that was the sine qua non of departure.

Not credible, my dear Scott. Simply not credible.

[KevinG]

Part of the problem here may be that several posters not mainstream "chapel" LDS like to present information in denial of Josephs practice.

RLDS-CoC

other Mormonite groups

LDS who take issue with the issue

all present alternate theories.

For an outsider (to whom all Mormons look alike on the internet) this can present the appearance of confusion among the masses.

[Zakuska]

except perhaps in retrospect upon reflection by the already departed that that was the sine qua non of departure.

I think we are missing some data here though.

Where they told as the RLDs maintain that Joseph Smith didn't practiced Polygamy? And then Found out that he Did.

Beings how D&C 132 is cannonized and published by the LDS A don't see where this could be a probelm.

Perhaps if someone actually did their reading before hand they would have some questions that could be answered in class. After teaching Elders Qurom. Let me tell you... participaction is greatly appreciated.

If more people participated in class and brought out points that maybe the instructor hasn't it helps as well.

[Scottie]

{snip}

You can bury your head all you want, but IT IS A PROBLEM!!!

And you can keep asserting such till Bossie comes marching home, but, in my experience and the experience of most folks hereabouts, it ain't a problem . . . except perhaps in retrospect upon reflection by the already departed that that was the sine qua non of departure.

Not credible, my dear Scott. Simply not credible.

I would have to say that you are right.

In my little world I have observed it to be a problem. All the posts I see here and the reaction I get from people when I tell them are but a miniscule subset of the LDS population.

Perhaps the vast majority of Church Mormons wouldn't give a rats hind end when they found out about JS. My experience has shown me otherwise, but, as I said, that is too small a sample to base such a broad generalization.

My apologies.

[noel00]

On LDS.org there is a section of Joseph Smith since its the 200th Anniversary of his birth. There is a section on Joseph and Emma with some quotes of his feelings towards her. NOWWHERE can I find anything about his other wives. Did he writes letters of love to them? Did he make them feel special? My wife knows where I am all the time, did Emma know where Joseph was?. Did he visit his other wives without her knowledge? How did Zina Huntington feel, being married to Smith while living with Lyn Jacobs and having his children?

[Deborah]

After I joined the church at age 14, I heard some things I questioned, like polygamy. But because I already had a powerful spiritual experience in finding the church, it didn't affect my testimony. I decided that I would understand some things at a later time. And I did.

Missionaries are sent out to show people gospel truths not to give history lessons. The fact is many people already associate Mormons with polygamy so I don't think it's as big a shock as some like to make out. I think it's so funny that the anit-Mormon's are more hung up on the polygamy issue than the faithful members of the church. You might ask why that is. I think it's because they want something to hang their lack of faithfulness on and justify their apostasy and rebellion.

History is fascinating to study, but people need to be careful to study it in the context of the times and surrounding events. I think it's disgusting to condemn good men who accomplished great things, whether Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, or our nation's Founding Fathers, because of personal human weaknesses. To me the foibles of ordinary men makes the extraordinary things they accomplished even more amazing and our focus should be on the good they accomplished. How many of you want your lives examined under a microscope, especially by people who do not know anything about you but are only going by what they read or hear which may or many not be factual or presented in its proper context.

[awyatt]

On LDS.org there is a section of Joseph Smith since its the 200th Anniversary of his birth. There is a section on Joseph and Emma with some quotes of his feelings towards her. NOWWHERE can I find anything about his other wives. Did he writes letters of love to them? Did he make them feel special? My wife knows where I am all the time, did Emma know where Joseph was?. Did he visit his other wives without her knowledge? How did Zina Huntington feel, being married to Smith while living with Lyn Jacobs and having his children?

And how, pray tell, does ANY of this contribute to things being hidden? Would knowing Zina's feelings make anyone more faithful or less faithful? (We do know Zina's feelings, as she recorded them in later years. Yet, those critical refuse to accept them.)

How will "disclosing" any of this information make the critics less critical, the naive less naive, the unwilling more willing, or the faithful more faithful? The information is out there, and those who are interested will find it--those who aren't interested won't give a hoot and will continue to be ignorant, blissful, or ignorantly blissful. If, at some later time in their lives they become interested, they will either learn and accept it, or they will learn it and say "why was this hidden" (regardless of the fact that it wasn't).

Move on, folks.

-Allen

[charity]

I think Rollo and others who have the same out of whack views ("I think the Church bears some of the blame for avoiding (or at least downplaying) embarrassing events and doctrines in its past) are skating on thin ice.

Mark 8:38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

[Kenngo1969]

She did what?!

We discussed the issues Emma Smith had with polygamy, as she pushed Eliza R Snow down some steps one day for being one of Joseph's wives.

Ohh... THATS IT.... This CHURCH is soooo false.

This Church is hiding things from me and not being honest.

Emma pushed a pregnant girl down the stairs! And why did she do it? Because the Church told her to!

My Bishop didn't give me a calling I wanted. He must not be super man in those magic undaroos after all!

Im outta her! Wheres my exit papers.

Ken Spearheads the Next "Op" of the "Strengthening the Members" Committee: Okey-dokey boys, gether 'round and gear up! We got ourselves another runner! Rifles? Check! Ammo? Check! Tasers? Check! OC? Check! Flash-bang grenades? Check! Call out the dogs, and mobilize the copters with the search lights! I want a hard-target search of every building, every ranch house, every outhouse, every hen house, and every doghouse in this area! He kin run, but he cain't hide! He's ours, boys! Jist give it time, and he's ours!

[Neighbor]

"Withhold the truth in unrighteousness"? It isn't right to uphold following Hitlers ideals in part without knowing that he murdered more than a million innocent people, yet there are those who only want to hear the good things about him and not the whole story. I say this as an example, not to claim that Joseph Smith Jr. is a Hitler.

One very important thing is that God's people not lie. God said that, not me. What matters is that the truth is spoken with love, but it still has to be the truth, not against the truth.

A recent example is how the Church treated Grant Palmer, whose crime was to realize that there are issues hidden, and he seemed to think LDS are honest people and deserve to know the truth. Yet, what happened to Mr. Palmer when he wrote a book about how he was trying to make the most of some bad things? He was held up for Church discipline. As he said during his radio interview in SLC before the 'hearing' - "I don't know how to repent of the truth."

As a non member, who has seen many things about the man, Joseph Smith Jr., and other leaders in your Church, yes, many things are a stumbling block to me, as I can believe fully in Jesus Christ, but not Joseph Smith. So, if we all desire to serve our Lord Jesus Christ, by Jesus own words, God seeks those who worship Him in spirit and truth. There is no lie of the truth. The longer you deny the truth it will fester and infect more people who should be focusing their faith in Jesus Christ anyway.

I think Mormon leadership has a real problem with 'true honesty' vs 'faith building honesty'.

Early Mormons never heard about the 'first vision', yet now LDS leaders have said that your entire religion and Church rests upon believing it. How can that be if the gospel is about Jesus Christ? and of Jesus Christ? that He was born of a virgin, the only begotten Son of God, preached the gospel, died on the cross, and was resurrected that we might believe in Him, obey Him, trust Him, and let Him be our teacher by word and Spirit? It should be about Jesus fulfilling the very word of God, not about whether or not Joseph saw anything. Our faith has to be in Jesus.

Why put a stumbling block in the way of brethren? If that is done, certainly the judgement of God will not remain idle if people don't repent.

[Neighbor]

Kennego, I most certainly don't find your remark one bit funny. Members who dared to speak the truth were sometimes killed or dismembered.

I find your remark to be quite disgusting in fact, and totally out of the character of one possessing the promised Holy Spirit. "By their fruits ye shall know them."