...and still Ash has no evidence supporting Mesoamerica...

[_Ceeboo]

Winner by TKO in the 2nd round and STILL champion of the world.........................................TruthDancer!!




Peace,
Ceeboo

[_truth dancer]

Hi Kish,

But I do firmly believe that the view that Joseph Smith was some kind of rapist, pedophile, or shameless rogue is very one-sided (not to mention distorted) and disregards a lot of evidence to the contrary.

Just to be clear I do not think Joseph Smith was a rapist or pedophile... shameless rogue, hmmmm, I'll think about this one. :-)

I do think Joseph Smith had serious issues with power, authority, and sex and was really no different than the many other cult and religious leaders who take advantage of their position and power. It seems when religion dictates extreme power in a leader, some not so honorable stuff goes on.

Shameless rogue? Yes, I do have to agree with this. There was a lot of manipulating, coercing, and just flat out disgusting stuff that went down... Joseph Smith doesn't get a free pass from me! :-) I really do not see him caring about much these girls and women; it seemed ALL about himself.

Just the way I see it. :-)

~td~

Cee.... LOL! ;-)

[_Kishkumen]

I do think Joseph Smith had serious issues with power, authority, and sex and was really no different than the many other cult and religious leaders who take advantage of their position and power. It seems when religion dictates extreme power in a leader, some not so honorable stuff goes on.

Shameless rogue? Yes, I do have to agree with this. There was a lot of manipulating, coercing, and just flat out disgusting stuff that went down... Joseph Smith doesn't get a free pass from me! :-) I really do not see him caring about much these girls and women; it seemed ALL about himself.

Just the way I see it.

Yeah, I just don't buy the whole trope of the sexually exploitative cult leader any longer. I think there is some truth to it, but I think it is much more complicated than people allow for. I started to distrust it in the case of David Koresh, then came Wayne Bent, and now I am having difficulty sustaining the cartoonish vision of arch-villain cult leaders. My view is that there are primal, biological, and community-formation issues at play here that the leaders and their followers are not consciously cognizant of. I think our lurid fascination with the whole thing says as much about us as anything.

Still, I understand your view of Smith's issues with power, authority, maybe a certain narcissism, and the manipulation of others. And don't get me wrong, I don't condone Smith's polygamy.

[_Ceeboo]

Hey Kish,

Yeah, I just don't buy the whole trope of the sexually exploitative cult leader any longer. I think there is some truth to it, but I think it is much more complicated than people allow for. I started to distrust it in the case of David Koresh, then came Wayne Bent, and now I am having difficulty sustaining the cartoonish vision of arch-villain cult leaders. My view is that there are primal, biological, and community-formation issues at play here that the leaders and their followers are not consciously cognizant of. I think our lurid fascination with the whole thing says as much about us as anything.

Perhaps I am not understanding you. (Perhaps I am?)

Could you elaborate a little in regards to what you don't buy about people like Bent?

Thanks and peace,
Ceeboo

[_Quasimodo]

Well, he might have just knocked 'em up and let Bennett perform the abortions. Sometimes I think there is a tendency to reach too far in denying Smith any credit for virtue or humanity. I just don't buy it.

An interesting topic. Maybe it's the sources I've been reading, but I can't recall any historical stories that document kind or virtuous actions on the part of Joseph Smith.

Lots of negative stuff and of course the official stories of his chats with God, etc., but no accounts of Joseph Smith being selfless and helpful to others.

I would like to hear some if any exist.

[_Kishkumen]

Perhaps I am not understanding you. (Perhaps I am?)

Could you elaborate a little in regards to what you don't buy about people like Bent?

Thanks and peace,
Ceeboo

I am not convinced that these people are nothing more than cynical manipulators, and that they do not really believe in what they teach. I think that the disturbing truth is they do believe and feel a spiritual conviction. It is a comforting fiction to believe otherwise. If someone living next door thinks and acts in ways that depart too far from the norm, then I have a great deal of built-in motivation to conclude that he is crazy, demon-possessed, etc. To accept that he might be essentially like me, but with radically different values, beliefs, and views is too difficult and threatening.

[_just me]

Kish, you've turned this thread into a fascinating one.

I was just thinking recently that Joseph Smith basically made an opportunity for men and women to live out their biological agenda. Polygamy for men and hypergamy for women.
While I do believe that Smith abused power and often groomed his younger or more vulnerable victims (wives, if you wish), I think that for many of the older people this was a way to do what they were biologically driven to do anyway.

To say men could spread their seed with as many women who would accept and women could leave their current partner for the best seed they could get was really revolutionary in a way. It was especially revolutionary to allow women to "marry-up" without much stigma.

The bad things that happened were the manipulation, spiritual abuse, lack of caring for ones wives and child brides (I'm talking age 10-14). There are records of women dying from lack of care and commiting suicide from despair. The darker side is what angers me.

I do think that it is a bad model for a community. It is unsustainable just doing the math and it seems that STD's and genetic defects would eventually wipe the community out. Although, I do see that our current society practices both to one degree or another, just without the legal polygamous marriage part....and God threatening to destroy non-compliant women. ;)

[_Kishkumen]

Hey, just me-

Thanks for that. I agree that the costs of a bad system like Mormon polygamy are very high. Certainly it is nothing I would advocate or condone. I am just skeptical of the viewpoint that the people who engage in these behaviors are amoral monsters, and that any religious aspect to it must be a cynical sham. But you are right, the damage was and continues to be serious. I think the tradition of patriarchal manipulation of sex in Mormon culture continues to be a problem even without polygamy. At the same time, I think that larger society exploits a distorted vision of what these things are in order to justify stamping out a threatening group. In short, we become ruthless in enforcing our morality.

[_Obiwan]

Just to clarify for you...

While many of us grew up with the belief that the Book of Mormon was the story of millions of people covering the Americas, (and numerous islands), the current apologetic assertion is that the Book of Mormon is the story of a few hundred to, at max, 1,000 people. The area this group of folk inhabited is perhaps not more than a few acres, maybe ten or so.

Hope this helps.

:-)

~td~

All that indicates is that you had an understanding of LDS scholarship like that of a child, rather than what Mormonism itself was.

Mormonism itself was ALWAYS that a small group of people settled in the America's, AND that by "heritage" not solely by DNA all the peoples of the America's and the Islands were of Lehi. Remember what you Patriarchal Blessing states? Do you really think most Mormons think they are talking LITERAL and DNA there? No they don't, save in special cases, such as those of Aaron or some other unique heritage. Most of us are "adopted", not literal descendent's, at least as the dominate strain. Also, Lehi DNA can still be in all natives of the America's, just not detectable, however enough years have passed for nearly everyone to have Lehi in them literally, not just by heritage alone.

Thus, either way, it is not Mormonism that was the problem, it was YOUR ignorant assumptions.
Mormonism ALWAYS taught both a local AND a hemispheric model, because both simply are the truth per doctrine.

Further, the current "apologetic" is only clarifying for people like you who bring up this strawman. It is not denying that there is a hemispheric component also to Mormon doctrine. Of course, to be fair a couple have gone to far in this, but most of us know very well that BOTH models are actual doctine of the Church and always have been. You thinking about the issue like a child does is not our problem.

One other thing, you are also wrong in your numbers. Yes, the "initial" group that settle was small, and immediately increased to a 100-1000 or so, but the actual "peoples" the locals who aligned themselves with Nephi or the Lamanites numbered WAY MORE. See how you don't get really ANYTHING right or accurate, and then misrepresent us by it? :(

[_Obiwan]

Hey Cee....

Yes, Baker is cool. :-)

But, just so you know, Baker's post is pretty much identical to the apologetic response addressing this topic. No, I am not kidding.

:-)

~td~

Actually you would be wrong and another example of your all's LIES of Mormonism.
We don't say this at all.

The Nephites/Lamanites became the political powers of the area.... and this is not surprising given their intelligence, knowledge, skills, etc. Local more primative tribes peoples would have latched on to them, hence the quick increase in numbers. THIS is our "actual" apologetic contrary to your lies.