King Follett Sermon question-all persecution ought to cease

[the_last_gunslinger]

I've been carrying on several religious themed discussions on another religious forum, one which is primarily evangelical in nature. It's been pretty fun and I think I've done a pretty good job of representing my faith well and have been able to thoroughly answer many queries put forth by other members.

One member in particular, however, is bound and determined that he can disprove Joseph Smith's prophethood merely by looking at his own words. He quoted over and over again something he said, and looking up the quote, I see it came from the King Follett discourse. Below is the paragraph from which it was taken. The bolded part is what this person quoted.

I will prove that the world is wrong, by showing what God is. I am going to inquire after God; for I want you all to know Him, and to be familiar with Him; and if I am bringing you to a knowledge of Him, all persecutions against me ought to cease. You will then know that I am His servant; for I speak as one having authority.

He contends that since persecution didn't cease, and since Joseph Smith was gunned down a short time later, this proves him to be a false prophet by his own admission. He makes the connection that we will know Joseph is a servant of God because persecution against him will cease.

What do you guys make of such an assertion? I'm usually pretty good at debate, but for some reason, I'm having some trouble formulating a response to this particular query, partly because I've never heard it before and partly because I'm just not seeing his point exactly.

Any input will be thoroughly enjoyed.

[Guest]

Well, obviously, the people of Missouri at the time did not gain a knowledge of Him.

[SoaringEagle]

I look at the word "ought" as an expectation. Anatess brought up a good point. The expectation is that after gaining a knowledge of Him the persecutions against Joseph Smith would cease.

ought

[ awt ]

1.be morally right: indicates that somebody has a duty or obligation to do something or that it is morally right to do something

2.be important: indicates that something is important or a good idea

3.be probable: indicates probability or expectation

Just my 2 cents...

[Just_A_Guy]

It's not a prophecy, it's an ironic statement. Smith and his audience knew very well that the most vicious of his persecutors had no interest in any knowledge of God whatsoever. I imagine that when the sermon was given, this statement elicited a number of wry smiles among the Nauvoo saints.

[whirlieking]

I've been carrying on several religious themed discussions on another religious forum, one which is primarily evangelical in nature. It's been pretty fun and I think I've done a pretty good job of representing my faith well and have been able to thoroughly answer many queries put forth by other members.

One member in particular, however, is bound and determined that he can disprove Joseph Smith's prophethood merely by looking at his own words. He quoted over and over again something he said, and looking up the quote, I see it came from the King Follett discourse. Below is the paragraph from which it was taken. The bolded part is what this person quoted.

He contends that since persecution didn't cease, and since Joseph Smith was gunned down a short time later, this proves him to be a false prophet by his own admission. He makes the connection that we will know Joseph is a servant of God because persecution against him will cease.

What do you guys make of such an assertion? I'm usually pretty good at debate, but for some reason, I'm having some trouble formulating a response to this particular query, partly because I've never heard it before and partly because I'm just not seeing his point exactly.

Any input will be thoroughly enjoyed.

One major issue that you have to evaluate is the source of where it was written. I was just looking at another question from the KFD but I went to a site that has the 7 recorded versions of the talk next to each other. And the one that is most often quoted doesnt quite match up to the meaning presented in the others, of which they agreed. So that is one thing to look at.

And as to the quote, Joseph merely said "ought." doesnt mean they will but they should because his teaching would be right. To me that is just boldness on another level, but when the Bible reads of Christ that He spoke as one having authority, I believe that Joseph was doing the same.

The phrase that also comes afterwards "you will then know" is a 2nd person statement as opposed to the 3rd person reference to the persecutions. So he is speaking directly to that congregation and it seems to me that he is talking to the phrase before the persecution one. That if you understand what he is saying, then you will know that he is a prophet of God.

That is how I see it and its clear to me. That individual pulled his quote out of context.

Edited February 14, 2014 by whirlieking

[Anddenex]

"and if I am bringing you to a knowledge of Him, all persecutions against me ought to cease. You will then know that I am His servant; for I speak as one having authority."

He contends that since persecution didn't cease, and since Joseph Smith was gunned down a short time later, this proves him to be a false prophet by his own admission. He makes the connection that we will know Joseph is a servant of God because persecution against him will cease.

It appears this individual is conflating two ideas which are separate. As another individual pointed out, this wasn't a prophecy.

The connection he is making is already false and evidence of sophistry. Joseph Smith's words are in perfect parallelism with Acts 5: 36-39,

36 For before these days rose up Theudas, boasting himself to be somebody; to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves: who was slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered, and brought to nought.

37 After this man rose up Judas of Galilee in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished; and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed.

38 And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:

39 But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.

Joseph Smith spoke as one with authority, when he died his followers did not disperse. He clearly made a statement, if I am from God (his prophet) and I am bringing you to Christ, then all persecutions should cease, "lest haply ye be found even to fight against God."

Unlike Theudas and Judas, even after Joseph Smith's death, and even the pronunciations, "Thus ends Mormonism" -- have been proven to be false -- and Mormonism is still strong and continually growing. Joseph Smith, surely knew, even after his statement, the persecution would not cease.

[Palerider]

I think he is reading more into it than he should.

[Traveler]

I've been carrying on several religious themed discussions on another religious forum, one which is primarily evangelical in nature. It's been pretty fun and I think I've done a pretty good job of representing my faith well and have been able to thoroughly answer many queries put forth by other members.

One member in particular, however, is bound and determined that he can disprove Joseph Smith's prophethood merely by looking at his own words. He quoted over and over again something he said, and looking up the quote, I see it came from the King Follett discourse. Below is the paragraph from which it was taken. The bolded part is what this person quoted.

He contends that since persecution didn't cease, and since Joseph Smith was gunned down a short time later, this proves him to be a false prophet by his own admission. He makes the connection that we will know Joseph is a servant of God because persecution against him will cease.

What do you guys make of such an assertion? I'm usually pretty good at debate, but for some reason, I'm having some trouble formulating a response to this particular query, partly because I've never heard it before and partly because I'm just not seeing his point exactly.

Any input will be thoroughly enjoyed.

The quote is 100% accurate and without question a prophesy - just not to be understood as the world understand such things.

First off - If someone understands G-d - there is no reason for them to be concerned with persecuting Joseph Smith. G-d is not about that and a honest person that knows G-d will not persecute anyone.

The second part is that if someone does not understand G-d and follows the teaching of Joseph Smith they will again have not reason to persecute anyone - let alone Joseph Smith.

The statement is a no brainer - the closer individuals become to G-d the less they will be involved in persecuting - anyone. The statement is prophetic and without question separating the sheep from the goats or those from the left and right side at the Day of Judgment. Those that love and know G-d will not seek to persecute Joseph Smith, nor will they persecute Mohammad, Hindus, Jews or whatever.

In the day of Jesus the element considered the most worthy of persecution were the Samaritans. Yet Jesus used a Samaritan as the example of a “Good Disciple”.

Persecution is a sign of Satan’s influence – not the influence of G-d.

The Traveler

[mirkwood]

I went out and perused some of the sites out there affiliated to the topic. Seriously, why do people pretend to be LDS. Do they really think it will change our minds?

[gfchase]

I went out and perused some of the sites out there affiliated to the topic. Seriously, why do people pretend to be LDS. Do they really think it will change our minds?

I am not sure what you mean by "pretend to be LDS". We are not all in the same place in living our religion. We learn line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little as we strive to live and keep the principles of the gospel. We all sin and come short of the glory of God. As for changing your mind, only you can do that. I have found that when a persons mind is made up, it does little good to confuse them with facts.

Jerry

Edited February 16, 2014 by gfchase

[mirkwood]

I was not speaking to anyone on this site. I was speaking about the great number of pseudo LDS on the internet. People who pretend they are LDS and sow half truths and generalizations and out of context quotes to try and get members to leave the LDS church.

[gfchase]

Sorry, I totally misunderstood your post. I have dealt with many of those myself.

Jerry

Edited February 16, 2014 by gfchase

[McLainDow]

People have their agency and they chose not to believe Joseph Smith and murder him. Does that mean he was not a prophet? I fail to see your evangelical friend's logic.

[Blackmarch]

I've been carrying on several religious themed discussions on another religious forum, one which is primarily evangelical in nature. It's been pretty fun and I think I've done a pretty good job of representing my faith well and have been able to thoroughly answer many queries put forth by other members.

One member in particular, however, is bound and determined that he can disprove Joseph Smith's prophethood merely by looking at his own words. He quoted over and over again something he said, and looking up the quote, I see it came from the King Follett discourse. Below is the paragraph from which it was taken. The bolded part is what this person quoted.

He contends that since persecution didn't cease, and since Joseph Smith was gunned down a short time later, this proves him to be a false prophet by his own admission. He makes the connection that we will know Joseph is a servant of God because persecution against him will cease.

What do you guys make of such an assertion? I'm usually pretty good at debate, but for some reason, I'm having some trouble formulating a response to this particular query, partly because I've never heard it before and partly because I'm just not seeing his point exactly.

Any input will be thoroughly enjoyed.

a person has to be brought to a knowledge of God first, those who persecuted and kille dJS did not accept and rejected the knowledge he brought. therefore they were not brought to a knowledge of God, therefore they did not cease their persecutions.

[gfchase]

I've been carrying on several religious themed discussions on another religious forum, one which is primarily evangelical in nature. It's been pretty fun and I think I've done a pretty good job of representing my faith well and have been able to thoroughly answer many queries put forth by other members.

One member in particular, however, is bound and determined that he can disprove Joseph Smith's prophethood merely by looking at his own words. He quoted over and over again something he said, and looking up the quote, I see it came from the King Follett discourse. Below is the paragraph from which it was taken. The bolded part is what this person quoted.

He contends that since persecution didn't cease, and since Joseph Smith was gunned down a short time later, this proves him to be a false prophet by his own admission. He makes the connection that we will know Joseph is a servant of God because persecution against him will cease.

What do you guys make of such an assertion? I'm usually pretty good at debate, but for some reason, I'm having some trouble formulating a response to this particular query, partly because I've never heard it before and partly because I'm just not seeing his point exactly.

Any input will be thoroughly enjoyed.

and if I am bringing you to a knowledge of Him, all persecutions against me ought to cease. You will then know that I am His servant; for I speak as one having authority. As I see it the key words here are "IF", 'YOU' and 'AUGHT'

and IF I am bringing YOU to a knowledge of Him, all persecutions against me AUGHT to cease. You will then know that I am His servant; for I speak as one having authority.

Jerry

Edited February 21, 2014 by gfchase

[Quin]

Dude is using false logic.

JS's statement is If/then.

If this, then that.

IF abc happens, THEN xyz happens.

Reverse logic, though, says if XYZ didn't happen, then ABC didn't happen.

Which is a fallacy.

Doesn't work.

Here's a wiki on it Deductive fallacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They have their own example, but here's my fav:

Sick people take pills (if you're sick, then you take pills)

THEREFORE!!! (False logic coming)

If I don't take pills, then I won't get sick.

Ummmmm.... No.

You can't reverse logic and have it make sense.

Hence the fallacy.

But people do it all the time.

Like in this case.

Where dude is saying the second thing was false, so the first one must be, "by his own admission"

Nope.

That's reverse logic.

Q

[Suzie]

Any input will be thoroughly enjoyed.

The key word is "ought" that clearly indicates the duty to do what is right, obviously Smith's enemies did not think the same.