Second Thoughts

[_Bond...James Bond]

"to thine own self..." Who said, why and under what circumstances? BUT it does call You to look at your priorities and values.

That's Shakespeare's Hamlet, Act 1 Scene 3 near the beginning. Look for a long solioque by a character named Polonius if you're interested.

The context was Polonius giving advice to his son about being careful at college. Other famous sayings like "neither a borrower or a lender be" come from this scene. It's a fairly famous part of the play. Not as famous as "to be or not to be" but still.


edit: in the play it should be noted that Laertes (the son) doesn't do this but instead listen's to the advice of the evil character (Claudius) to the detriment of most of the characters

Bond

[_Ray A]

So entertain my inquiry Ray, You believe the Book of Mormon to be the divine word of a God? Do you believe that Joe was not a charlatan? So you believe that one book authored(in part) by old Joe to be divine, but what about the other books that he wrote like the Book of Abraham, Moses, D&C???

It is what I believe, yes. I believe that for people in a spiritual frame of mind (who want to live that way) it's a real spiritual booster. Now don't get me wrong, I am no holy man, I live a very worldly life now and wouldn't qualify to be a Mormon, much less go to the temple. But I cannot forget how the Book of Mormon was my anchor in stronger times. It gave me the strength to resist temptation and to live a far better life. So to me it's not a fraud, and I believe it came to Joseph Smith through a process of automatic writing, not translation. However, for all those who consider it a fraud, that's their choice. I don't try to convince them otherwise. I don't contribute to FARMS or any apologetics.

"Joe" was not a charlatan, in my opinion. Dan Vogel has outlined how he believes Joseph Smith was a "pious fraud". I've had some discussions with Dan about this, and he has said that painting Joseph Smith as an outright fraud is too simplistic. It does not account for other aspects of his character. If anything I think Joseph had some delusions and misconceptions, and he was far from perfect, but I do not believe that he deliberately set out to deceive people. I think he really believed in what he was doing. To give an example, I knew a lady in 1981 who predicted that the second coming would occur in 1992. She was adamant that this was a specific revelation to her. I believed she was wrong, and told her so. In December 1992, after I was out of the church, I wrote her and asked if she still believed her prophecy. She wrote back saying, "1992 is not over yet". Would you say she was a fraud? I think she believed this until ten seconds before midnight on December 31st 1992. The "fraud" labels are sometimes too explicit and thrown about flippantly, especially in the religious arena.

I don't feel about the other standard works as I do about the Book of Mormon. I like selected portions of the D&C, and also believe that section 121 is inspired. I think if Joseph had stopped with the Book of Mormon that would have been sufficient. That to me, is "pure Mormonism". I am with David Whitmer on this. I believe the church evolved into a religious bureaucracy, which was criticised even by Nibley. From sacred grove to sacral power structure.

I am also not an apologist for anything. I have my personal beliefs in regard to the Book of Mormon, and I keep them to myself (unless when asked questions like these). Remember too that the RLDS do not believe the Book of Mormon is history, yet they have a fairly vibrant spiritual community who are not over-zealous. Believe it or not, people can find worth in a book that isn't literal history. I think too that the cause of all the disaffection in Mormonism comes from this literalism, and from either re-writing history or by acts of omission, for example there are records that state Moroni appeared to Joseph Smith in a dream. This would explain how he could have this vision while sleeping in a roomfull of his siblings, but it's not something you're going to hear widely discussed in Sunday School, because they don't want to hear it. The mind becomes attuned only to what builds faith in the literalism. And that is the problem. I don't believe Mormonism is the "only true religion", but I don't believe it is as demonic as some portray it. I'm not angry about giving 13 years of my life to it. I'm not angry "they" didn't give me the full picture. I studied and discovered the facts for myself. In 1975 I was a "religious seeker", and did not have a critical mind because I was searching for "religious truth". I could have, but didn't go to libraries to check up and see if what the missionaries told me was true. I could have gotten hold on Tanner materials then if I wanted, but I had different needs then, and was not interested. I did this eight years after I joined. So was that the church's fault. If you think so, you are really kidding yourself. There is something called personal accountability for our lives and our choices. When the student is ready, the teacher will appear.

[_Who Knows]

"Joe" was not a charlatan, in my opinion. Dan Vogel has outlined how he believes Joseph Smith was a "pious fraud". I've had some discussions with Dan about this, and he has said that painting Joseph Smith as an outright fraud is too simplistic. It does not account for other aspects of his character. If anything I think Joseph had some delusions and misconceptions, and he was far from perfect, but I do not believe that he deliberately set out to deceive people. I think he really believed in what he was doing. To give an example, I knew a lady in 1981 who predicted that the second coming would occur in 1992. She was adamant that this was a specific revelation to her. I believed she was wrong, and told her so. In December 1992, after I was out of the church, I wrote her and asked if she still believed her prophecy. She wrote back saying, "1992 is not over yet". Would you say she was a fraud? I think she believed this until ten seconds before midnight on December 31st 1992. The "fraud" labels are sometimes too explicit and thrown about flippantly, especially in the religious arena.

If she had been previously arrested for treasure digging, and if she started a religion around this prophecy, and convinced people to sign their property over to her, and convinced other women to let her marry their husbands, etc. etc. You get the idea. If she had done all this, yes, i'd consider her a fraud.

Simply believing you've received some sort of prophecy is WAY different that trying to get other people to believe in it, and hand $$ over to you for it.

And how could Joseph Smith NOT be a fraud if he never had actual gold plates? He either had gold plates with ancient american religious writings on them, or he didn't. It's that simple. If he didn't, he was a fraud.

[_Ray A]

If she had been previously arrested for treasure digging, and if she started a religion around this prophecy, and convinced people to sign their property over to her, and convinced other women to let her marry their husbands, etc. etc. You get the idea. If she had done all this, yes, i'd consider her a fraud.

Simply believing you've received some sort of prophecy is WAY different that trying to get other people to believe in it, and hand $$ over to you for it.

And how could Joseph Smith NOT be a fraud if he never had actual gold plates? He either had gold plates with ancient american religious writings on them, or he didn't. It's that simple. If he didn't, he was a fraud.

Actually, she did do some similar things. Like during her marriage she felt God told her to have sex, and a child, with another man. She ended up marrying a 17 year old, her daughter's boyfriend, again because she believed that "God told her" to do this. She had a remarkably convincing manner and could persuade people to believe the sky is purple. I don't think you realise the extent these people genuinely believe in what they're doing. I also suspect that Joseph Smith had bipolar disorder.

[_Runtu]

Actually, she did do some similar things. Like during her marriage she felt God told her to have sex, and a child, with another man. She ended up marrying a 17 year old, her daughter's boyfriend, again because she believed that "God told her" to do this. She had a remarkably convincing manner and could persuade people to believe the sky is purple. I don't think you realise the extent these people genuinely believe in what they're doing. I also suspect that Joseph Smith had bipolar disorder.

I don't know. I still think that the story of the plates tends to work against the piously deluded Joseph Smith.

[_Who Knows]

Actually, she did do some similar things. Like during her marriage she felt God told her to have sex, and a child, with another man. She ended up marrying a 17 year old, her daughter's boyfriend, again because she believed that "God told her" to do this. She had a remarkably convincing manner and could persuade people to believe the sky is purple. I don't think you realise the extent these people genuinely believe in what they're doing. I also suspect that Joseph Smith had bipolar disorder.

Like Runtu says above me, it boils down to the plates. Did he or did he not have them? Do you think he really had ancient gold plates? If he didn't have ancient gold plates, would you still not consider him a fraud?

[_Ray A]

Perhaps you should read what Vogel wrote:

My intent in this essay is not to rehash all the evidence on both sides of the prophet/fraud issue, but to accept the challenge of Shipps by suggesting a possible solution to her "prophet puzzle." Unraveling the complexities of Smith's character and motives is itself a complex process, but before the puzzle can be solved, all the pieces, or at least the significant ones, must be gathered and correctly interpreted. However, some important pieces of the puzzle, in my opinion, have been either entirely overlooked or mishandled--pieces which I believe fill out the picture and reveal previously unexposed features of Smith's character. Ultimately, I hope to push our understanding of Joseph Smith beyond a simplistic prophet-or-fraud paradigm to reveal a hopelessly complex, seriously conflicted, and immensely gifted man. Mindful of Marvin S. Hill's warning that those who attempt such endeavors "must write with courage, for no matter what they say many will disagree strongly," I will now--perhaps a little recklessly--pursue my subject.

http://lds-mormon.com/vogel.shtml

[_Who Knows]

Perhaps you should read what Vogel wrote:

I don't want to know what vogel thinks, i want to know what you think. Could Joseph Smith have not had ancient gold plates, but still not be considered a fraud?

How can you genuinely believe you have ancient gold plates, but not have them? Some type of serious psychological disorder is the only thing i can think of.

So I'll grant you this, he was either a fraud, or a schizophrenic. Take your pick.

[_Runtu]

Perhaps you should read what Vogel wrote:

My intent in this essay is not to rehash all the evidence on both sides of the prophet/fraud issue, but to accept the challenge of Shipps by suggesting a possible solution to her "prophet puzzle." Unraveling the complexities of Smith's character and motives is itself a complex process, but before the puzzle can be solved, all the pieces, or at least the significant ones, must be gathered and correctly interpreted. However, some important pieces of the puzzle, in my opinion, have been either entirely overlooked or mishandled--pieces which I believe fill out the picture and reveal previously unexposed features of Smith's character. Ultimately, I hope to push our understanding of Joseph Smith beyond a simplistic prophet-or-fraud paradigm to reveal a hopelessly complex, seriously conflicted, and immensely gifted man. Mindful of Marvin S. Hill's warning that those who attempt such endeavors "must write with courage, for no matter what they say many will disagree strongly," I will now--perhaps a little recklessly--pursue my subject.

http://lds-mormon.com/vogel.shtml

Years ago, Dale Broadhurst said a throwaway line about Joseph trying both to run a scam and build a church at the same time. That to me makes the most sense. I'm pretty sure he knew he was a fraud, but I'm not sure that he wasn't equally convinced that he could use his fraud for good (as well as for the obvious personal gain he got).

I'm also reminded of something I read many years ago in the historical library. A visiting minister reported being in attendance while Joseph preached. After the sermon was over, he reported that Joseph turned to him and said something like, "These dupes will believe anything I tell them." I'm not sure how much credence to give this report, but at least some of the people who knew him echo this view of him.

In the end, I'm not really sure it matters whether he was an unwitting fraud or not. The bottom line is that none of his claims past the BS test. End of story, really.

[_Ray A]

I don't want to know what vogel thinks, i want to know what you think. Could Joseph Smith have not had ancient gold plates, but still not be considered a fraud?

How can you genuinely believe you have ancient gold plates, but not have them? Some type of serious psychological disorder is the only thing i can think of.

So I'll grant you this, he was either a fraud, or a schizophrenic. Take your pick.

I think what Vogel wrote expresses it best, that's why I gave the link. It is not a simplistic matter. What you want to do is reduce my options down to yours, a prophet/fraud dicotomy. If you read the link you will see examples given from the Old Testament as to how people can deceive "in order to achieve greater ends", hence the "pious fraud" term. This is what they believed. I am not excusing this behaviour, but it has to be understood in historical context, also taking into consideration that human beings are not always consistent, and can be motivated by numerous factors, and Joseph Smith felt he had biblical precedents for doing what he did. See the article.