Yahoo Bot wrote:I think the Church had the ultimate response to Sarah by living well, prospering in spite of her, and seeing her grandchildren return to the Church and become apostles and prophets. Yes indeed.
By this measure, the Catholic church had the ultimate response: a corrupt organization amassing enormous wealth, gathering billions of sheeplike believers, hamstringing their own society while covering up all manner of crimes, and becoming only more and more corrupt as it ages. Oh, and they did some good along the way.
By all means, let us be proud the LDS church has followed a similiar path.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
I'm a little mystified that anyone would doubt Sarah's claim about Joseph, especially since Joseph is on record as having done the same with the wives of other apostles.
What part of this story seems unbelievable? Do you also doubt the claims of Martha Brotherton and Nancy Rigdon? Or do you only believe the claims of the women who accepted Joseph's proposals?
On 20 July sworn statements by prominent Nauvoo citizens affirming that Joseph Smith was of "high moral character" and not guilty of any of Bennett's accusations were published in The Wasp, a Mormon Nauvoo newspaper. Orson Pratt was one of three prominent Nauvoo citizens who refused to sign the resolution. The other two, Sidney Rigdon and his son-in-law George W. Robinson, were feuding with Joseph Smith over the Prophet's polygamous proposals to Rigdon's daughter Nancy. Like Sarah Pratt, Martha Brotherton and Nancy Rigdon also suffered slanderous attacks because they exposed the Church's private polygamy posture. The Wasp, for example, on 27 August 1842 denounced "John C. Bennett, the pimp and file leader of such mean harlots as Martha H. Brotherton and her predecessors from old Jezebel." Orson Hyde attempted to blacken Nancy Rigdon's character by saying her conduct was "notorious in this city" where she was "regarded generally, little, if any better, than a public prostitute," defending the Prophet's actions toward Nancy as efforts to "reprove and reclaim her if possible" (Hyde 1845, 27-29).
zeezrom wrote: Maybe he refused because he had some sense of integrity left in him...
I think Zee that it would be good to look at these people as human beings who once lived and experienced life with all its joys, happiness, anger, bitterness etc. Everyone lived their life. They also had emotions and complications. But one thing that I know: the LDS church did not fall apart. Rather, it grew and became a successful church. And that says much. What sarah said or didn't say is not important. What is important is that the church was successful. And that says a lot about all involved.
The early members were not studid or brainwashed.
I intend to lay a foundation that will revolutionize the whole world. Joseph Smith We are “to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, to provide for the widow, to dry up the tear of the orphan, to comfort the afflicted, whether in this church, or in any other, or in no church at all…” Joseph Smith
"Sarah M. Pratt: The Shaping of An Apostate" Richard S. Van Wagoner
I've previously offered observations about Van Wagoner, whom I think is an optometrist. I've previously offered my experience chasing his sources.
Sarah's story is not made more compelling simply because it appears to match others which the SL Tribune had long been circulating before hers appeared.
zeezrom wrote: while the allegation that Joseph accused Sarah of adultery is serious and troubling and I would love to explore this further, I can't get past the 57-yr old marrying a 16-yr old girl. What!! I'm at a loss of words. I guess BY and others did this too. I just never really looked at it for what it is. Old men sleeping with young girls in the name of religion.
I'm at a loss here. Why would the church not apologize for this?! Why would they not get up and say - sorry, big mistake. Incredible.
I need to take another look at all the prophets and apostles in regards to marrying young girls.
I keep hearing, "But look at the fruit of Joseph Smith - what great work he started."
Yeah...
Orson Pratt, an already married man, was in clear violation of Doc. & Cov. Section 42:22-24, when he decided to have sexual relations with a girl at least 40 years younger than him. Here is this Doc. & Cov. Passage:
Doctrine And Covenants Section 42:22-24:
22 Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and none else. 23 And he that looketh upon a woman to lust after her shall deny the faith, and shall not have the Spirit; and if he repents not he shall be cast out. 24 Thou shalt not commit adultery; and he that committeth adultery, and repenteth not, shall be cast out.
Orson Pratt clearly committed the sin of adultery.
"And I've said it before, you want to know what Joseph Smith looked like in Nauvoo, just look at Trump." - Fence Sitter
why me wrote:I think Zee that it would be good to look at these people as human beings who once lived and experienced life with all its joys, happiness, anger, bitterness etc. Everyone lived their life.
I've decided to do just that. They were normal people - nothing special about them. Some messed up, lied, and tricked. They are just people. I'm not judging them but only recognizing their error. The church does not recognize their error but rather call it God's will. BS.
I've decided not to care that other Mormons do not look at me as a human being. They look at me as unworthy because I'm doing something else with tithing money, wearing (awesome) Hanes, and not participating in silly masonic rituals any more. I'm good with it. I have felt the true love of Christ and know I can stand up for what I believe and know my relationship with God is personal. I don't have to worry that my daughter might end up getting married on the beach because I know that getting sealed in the temple doesn't give you special power nor does it please God more. God cares about the heart.
It is quite obvious Orson and others messed up big time by taking advantage of these girls. Am I judging them? Not really, I'm seeing what it was - a messed up religion.
Oh for shame, how the mortals put the blame on us gods, for they say evils come from us, but it is they, rather, who by their own recklessness win sorrow beyond what is given... Zeus (1178 BC)
why me wrote:But one thing that I know: the LDS church did not fall apart. Rather, it grew and became a successful church. And that says much. What sarah said or didn't say is not important. What is important is that the church was successful. And that says a lot about all involved.
It says as much as all the thousands of other successful religions the world has seen. Success is not dependent on truth or good behavior from it's leaders.
The early members were not studid or brainwashed.
Are the Hindu followers stupid or brainwashed? How about the Muslims? Pick any religion you want.