Great question - "Why are facts Anti-Mormon?"

[Guest]

Retracted Comment, God bless the Mormons and the other Christians here that dislike Atheists!

[_Dr. Shades]

[MODERATOR NOTE: I apologize for not having the time to split ldsfaqs's posts individually. Forgive the thread reassignment.

Nevertheless, ldsfaqs won't be posting any attack posts in the Celestial Forum ever again.]

[_ldsfaqs]

That's the thing, the actual facts of the history don't say he was found guilty of anything.

It was a "hearing" or examination, not actually a trial, and he was simply acquitted because some said he sucked and some said he did what he claimed.

This "found guilty" claim is nothing but anti-mormon fantasy repeated as if fact and truth.

Read for yourself. http://www.fairlds.org/fair-conferences ... seph-smith

http://en.fairmormon.org/Joseph_Smith/L ... al/Con_man

Further, even if he was found guilty (which he wasn't) like there has never been an innocent man brought to trial and/or found guilty?

Christ anyone??? And many many more.....

Hmmm...and yet, regardless of wether one agree's with FAIR's conclusion about the 'guilty' verdict or not, everyone seems in agreement that Joseph did use the seer stone in the 1820's for 'something' unrelated to the Book of Mormon or religion .

And what good, normal and healthy youth or young man growing up in small town America or otherwise never had an interest in "Treasure Hunting", especially if his family were struggling to get by???

Joseph a young man discovering his prophetic gifts by trying to use them to find treasure is an "evidence" of his calling, not a ding against it.

[_ldsfaqs]

[MODERATOR NOTE: I apologize for not having the time to split ldsfaqs's posts individually. Forgive the thread reassignment.

Nevertheless, ldsfaqs won't be posting any attack posts in the Celestial Forum ever again.]

Again, what "attacks" are those???

I've given lengthy address explaining the actual facts of an issue debunking ACTUAL attacks, and yet you call my posts "attacks"???

I'm pretty much the only one on this forum who actually posts any substance on the Church itself correcting the falsehoods cherry picked using no thought or substance, while most of the rest here simply give their little ATTACK ONE LINERS.... Just like above.

And you call my posts "attacks"???

[Guest]

...

[_PrickKicker]

[MODERATOR NOTE: I apologize for not having the time to split ldsfaqs's posts individually. Forgive the thread reassignment.

Nevertheless, ldsfaqs won't be posting any attack posts in the Celestial Forum ever again.]

Again, what "attacks" are those???

I've given lengthy address explaining the actual facts of an issue debunking ACTUAL attacks, and yet you call my posts "attacks"???

I'm pretty much the only one on this forum who actually posts any substance on the Church itself correcting the falsehoods cherry picked using no thought or substance, while most of the rest here simply give their little ATTACK ONE LINERS.... Just like above.

And you call my posts "attacks"???

Hmm,
Not sure what's going on on this board lately, I seem to have been restricted from posting too?

No proper explanation has been given?

Other than my posts not being Scholarly???

[_Drifting]

Joseph a young man discovering his prophetic gifts by trying to use them to find treasure is an "evidence" of his calling, not a ding against it.

When he attempted to sell the Book of Mormon copyright for money, was that evidence of his calling or a ding against it?

[_Chap]

ldsfaqs, I know you don't like answering challenges but could you provide some references from "official" sources that emphatically state that people such as Joseph Smith practiced polyandry or that he even had more than 30 wives. Remember, "official" publications of the Mormon Church are relatively few...you can include teaching manuals, the monthly church magazine, and the Church News as "official" publications.

I shouldn't have to provide quotes for such "obvious" facts. ...

Go on though. Give it a try. Just one current official church publication that says that Joseph Smith had more than thirty wives.

The thing is, ldsfaqs, that if you don't provide even one single example, there may be some innocent lurkers reading this thread who begin to suspect that you can't do it.

[_Gaia]

ldsfaqs, I know you don't like answering challenges but could you provide some references from "official" sources that emphatically state that people such as Joseph Smith practiced polyandry or that he even had more than 30 wives. Remember, "official" publications of the Mormon Church are relatively few...you can include teaching manuals, the monthly church magazine, and the Church News as "official" publications.

I shouldn't have to provide quotes for such "obvious" facts. Even most anti-mormons know that our materials do and have in fact mentioned Joseph's Polygamy (I prefer to call it Plural Marriage Sealings, because he didn't actually practice Polygamy). You're not much of an expert and so much better educated anti-mormon/ex-mormon than us Mormons if even you don't know this...... Maybe you should get a little more educated before opening your mouth with anti-mormon propaganda that is blatantly false?

Yes, Polyandry has rarely been mentioned, because after all it was even more rare in the Church.

Further, as a Mormon I don't require these subjects to be shoved down my mouth every year because after all they are no longer practices of the Church. I guess in your mind the Church should also teach the details of "Animal Sacrifice", even though it's current doctrine is in the higher law???

GAIA:

- So the answer to Albion's question is, "NO, i cannot provide any such references."

OK, got it.

[_Robert F Smith]

http://open.salon.com/blog/postmormongirl/2012/10/04/why_are_facts_anti-mormon

When will the Mormon Church stop labeling historical fact as anti-Mormon?

Probably at about the same time as the Mormon haters stop labeling fact as fantasy,

Bear in mind, however, that history is not facts, but rather the interpretation of facts.