Joseph Smith 1826


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I was just going to post the same link, interesting read, although the right side was chopped off and I had to guess the last 6 letters of every line! ;):D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator

Remember that you can't tell us something we don't already know. We've been thinking about these things for years. The link provided is a good one. 

Edited by MormonGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
4 minutes ago, Larry Cotrell said:

I know, I was just curious what the common view on this was.

Just making sure. Like every other LDS, we've all experienced people who think they can shatter our faith by telling us this or that about Smith that they think is obscure or unknown. Glad you aren't one of those people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Larry Cotrell said:

I know, I was just curious what the common view on this was.

Oh, my view of Joseph is similar to my view of Old Testament prophets.  Error-prone, fallible humans, sometimes sinful, sometimes worldly agenda-driven, who were called by God to do whatever it is God called them to do.

On the scale of scumbag to noble, I think the balance of evidence places Joseph on the noble end of things - certainly relative to some of the OT folks.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Larry Cotrell said:

I have heard that Joseph Smith was arrested in 1826 for glass-looking, an occult practice. Here is the document:

Image result for Joseph Smith 1826 trial

I will keep my opinions out of this but I was wondering what LDS people thought.

He was a fallible person subject to the whims of youth and local practices that included magic and glass looking. I have always had a so what attitude.  If you are looking for perfection in JS you won't find it.

Plus it was only a misdemeanor, who care he was arrested fro far worse charges later in life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Remember that you can't tell us something we don't already know. We've been thinking about these things for years. The link provided is a good one. 

Agreed. Many people visiting the forum have come and gone with their attempts to "shock and awe" us. It gets repetitively boring and most are blatantly obvious in their attempts to "school" us about our own beliefs. <_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

Agreed. Many people visiting the forum have come and gone with their attempts to "shock and awe" us. It gets repetitively boring and most are blatantly obvious in their attempts to "school" us about our own beliefs. <_<

 

21 minutes ago, Larry Cotrell said:

I know, I was just curious what the common view on this was.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of JS, he is my 4th (5x removed)  cousin, so naturally anyone in my family tree is always instantly the most interesting to me. What is the best biography on him any of you have read? I would like to read a great,  thorough, fair, and accurate history of him. But there are so many! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Larry Cotrell said:

I know, I was just curious what the common view on this was.

The common view is probably more along the lines of

Quote

Wait, what?

My experience is that most saints know Joseph through his revelations in the Doctrine & Covenants and his account in the Joseph Smith-History. Most will not be able to tell you the name of his dog or horse, let alone his many experiences interacting with the law*.

 

*I should clarify that I'm not just talking about Bainbridge, Missouri, and Carthage; but also civil suits, bankruptcy, city charters, and so forth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Amym73 said:

Speaking of JS, he is my 4th (5x removed)  cousin, so naturally anyone in my family tree is always instantly the most interesting to me. What is the best biography on him any of you have read? I would like to read a great,  thorough, fair, and accurate history of him. But there are so many! 

Rough Stone Rolling can be a bit dry and academic if you aren't used to, well, dry and academic works.

If you'd like something a bit more narrative, you can read The History of Joseph Smith by His Mother. It might not be as fair as what you're looking for, but we might all be kinder if more histories were written by mothers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Amym73 said:

Speaking of JS, he is my 4th (5x removed)  cousin, so naturally anyone in my family tree is always instantly the most interesting to me. What is the best biography on him any of you have read? I would like to read a great,  thorough, fair, and accurate history of him. But there are so many! 

He is my 4th cousin 7X removed. :)  I have ancestors that have written about him in their journals from back in his day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Larry Cotrell said:

I have heard that Joseph Smith was arrested in 1826 for glass-looking, an occult practice. Here is the document:

Image result for Joseph Smith 1826 trial

I will keep my opinions out of this but I was wondering what LDS people thought.

As I understand it, there is ambiguity as to what the charge was and whether Smith was convicted.  Conviction for fraud would bother me more than "glass looking" (that was even a civil crime?  Seriously?) or "disorderly conduct"; but a fraud conviction doesn't seem to have been the case.

As for the theological implications of Smith's "glass looking":  there are definitely a lot of ways one can go wrong with this sort of thing--enormous potential for deception, as I think the Bible shows --and as far as I know the modern church strongly discourages lay members from dabbling in such things.  But to me, in Smith's case the key is understanding that Smith's ability to "scry" (which he and his family openly ascribed to God, as other accounts of the Bainbridge trial make clear) put him in a mindset where he believed in a God who could and would communicate with Christians in a very direct and personal manner, during a time when most of Christendom was busily developing theories about why God should just keep His mouth shut and let humankind run the world on their own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Larry Cotrell said:

I know, I was just curious what the common view on this was.

That's fine with me, but I'm interested: Have you formed a view on it?  If so, could you share the impact that link I posted had on your view?

(Not trying to bait you into saying something to get you booted, I'm just wondering if you read the link, and if so, how thoroughly.)

Edited by NeuroTypical
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

That's fine with me, but I'm interested: Have you formed a view on it?  If so, could you share the impact that link I posted had on your view?

(Not trying to bait you into saying something to get you booted, I'm just wondering if you read the link, and if so, how thoroughly.)

Only because you asked, my personal opinion is that Christians should not get involved occult practices (I think we would all agree on that). As someone pointed out earlier, many Old Testament people such as Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and David all sinned and made terrible choices at some point in their life (except Jesus, who lived a perfect life). The problem I have with it is when these occult influences start to seep into things he was doing in his relationship with God as mentioned here

8 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

But to me, in Smith's case the key is understanding that Smith's ability to "scry" (which he and his family openly ascribed to God, as other accounts of the Bainbridge trial make clear) put him in a mindset where he believed in a God who could and would communicate with Christians in a very direct and personal manner, during a time when most of Christendom was busily developing theories about why God should just keep His mouth shut and let humankind run the world on their own.

I really don't care at all that he got a misdemeanor. What bothers me is that he is using "occult practices" to communicate with God.

I understand what I said is controversial and I would not have shared this unless I was asked to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Larry Cotrell said:

I really don't care at all that he got a misdemeanor. What bothers me is that he is using "occult practices" to communicate with God.

I understand what I said is controversial and I would not have shared this unless I was asked to.

This is a case of presentism..

Read the history of the time... such practices were not considered "occult practices"  and lets face it your are using "occult practices" as a short cut for saying it was of the Devil

If you read their statements both Joseph Smith (Senior and Junior) viewed it as a gift from God... Not unlike someone might be really Strong, or really Intelligent and they were concerned about using such a gift wisely.

Unless you wish to consider any use of Strength, Intelligence or anything else someone might currently think is a gift of God as "occult practices" you are being a bit hypocritical of your stance

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, pam said:

He is my 4th cousin 7X removed. :)  I have ancestors that have written about him in their journals from back in his day.

:) We might be relatives then! Really? That is really really awesome!! Maybe I should be looking for Journals of the people in my tree!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share