Joseph Smith - Prophet of God

[DeepShadow]

Actually, what I said was, "so-called scripture which has been shown to be a hoax".

I was thinking of the Book of Abraham when I wrote that. You jumped to a confusion my furbal dispensing friend.

Indeed I did. Now that the claim has been clarified, would you like to substantiate it? I'd prefer to do that in another thread, so we can discuss it, and that way it doesn't derail this thread with niggling details such as whether the ink was red or black.

That's an invitation to debate, but I tried to make it nicer. Did it work?

 

[KingM]

Oh, I understand now. So you really don't care what lds believe, just why they believe it.

What? Of course I care what LDS believe. I'm just not discussing that at this moment, rather looking at the why.

Personally, think the real reason most of them believe in the church is the same reason most Catholics believe in their church or why most people who are Muslims are Muslim. Because they were born into the church. Most people stick with the church of their parents.

 

[robtex]

I am going through this thread, and nobody has bothered to qualify what a prophet is? Just so I can understand, as a reader, what are the constraints necessary to become a prophet? Furthermore within that context if the posters can identify if they themselves are prophets and if not, how they could determine how another one is? You guys are debating prophets and seem to have some "agreement" on the quality's that are needed to be one, but for us lay people could you tell us specifically what separates a prophet from a non-prophet and using those constraints apply them to J. Smith?

 

[Popeyesays]

I am going through this thread, and nobody has bothered to qualify what a prophet is? Just so I can understand, as a reader, what are the constraints necessary to become a prophet? Furthermore within that context if the posters can identify if they themselves are prophets and if not, how they could determine how another one is? You guys are debating prophets and seem to have some "agreement" on the quality's that are needed to be one, but for us lay people could you tell us specifically what separates a prophet from a non-prophet and using those constraints apply them to J. Smith?

I think it's a matter of what kind of prophet are yuu discussing.

I postulate two and use the Qur'an's term for two seperate kinds of prophet: Nabi and Rasuli--"lesser, and greater"--"major" and "minor.

Regards,

Scott

 

[KingM]

I am going through this thread, and nobody has bothered to qualify what a prophet is? Just so I can understand, as a reader, what are the constraints necessary to become a prophet? Furthermore within that context if the posters can identify if they themselves are prophets and if not, how they could determine how another one is? You guys are debating prophets and seem to have some "agreement" on the quality's that are needed to be one, but for us lay people could you tell us specifically what separates a prophet from a non-prophet and using those constraints apply them to J. Smith?

There's another thread I started on this just the other day. I had a hard time pinning down what makes an LDS leader a prophet, but the LDS did give some opinions and beliefs that were helpful to the discussion.

 

[Bathsheba]

Indeed I did. Now that the claim has been clarified, would you like to substantiate it? I'd prefer to do that in another thread, so we can discuss it, and that way it doesn't derail this thread with niggling details such as whether the ink was red or black.

That's an invitation to debate, but I tried to make it nicer. Did it work?

Debating this with you would be like drilling holes in my shin bones for future pencil holder use. While I may end up with some derived utility, the cost is likely to extend beyond the benefit. While the debate might serve your sense of honor and fair play (because I did after all say that the Book of Abraham was shown to be a hoax) it wouldn't give me any pleasure. Sheesh, imagine it from my point of view, jesus isn't real.

It is too easy for me to win this argument. If jesus isn't real then he didn't grow any fruit trees. Without the existence of jesus then the probability that jesus produced the Book of Abraham (via Smith) is pretty low. It is more likely that Smith wrote the Book of Abraham.

I already have the necessary arguments for the validity of the Book of Abraham here (assuming we are going to pretend jesus is magic).
http://www.fairlds.org/apol/ai125.html
http://farms.byu.edu/publications/bookofabraham.php?selection=abr&cat=boa

I doubt you have anything substantial to add, but hey, I could be wrong about that. Do you know if you have anything substantial to add? Give it to me in point form and I'll check it against the apologetics. For every point on your list already made by the spin team I will give you one furbal plug (just because I am contrary that way).

You have obviously studied the issue, in your estimation, what is the probability that the Book of Abraham is legit (you know, based on your scientific assessment of the evidence)?

This question speaks to the OP in terms of evaluating Smith as a true prophet. What we are doing is looking for nice firm ripe fruit.

 

[Bishka]

This question speaks to the OP in terms of evaluating Smith as a true prophet. What we are doing is looking for nice firm ripe fruit.

How about the fact that members of the LDS Church believe that families are actually important, we have a good health code, we give to the poor and the needy, etc.

What are you really looking for?

 

[KingM]

How about the fact that members of the LDS Church believe that families are actually important, we have a good health code, we give to the poor and the needy, etc.
What are you really looking for?

Maybe you could point me to a religion that doesn't believe that families are important, that doesn't believe that one should take care of one's body and doesn't believe in giving to the poor and needy.

 

[Bathsheba]

How about the fact that members of the LDS Church believe that families are actually important, we have a good health code, we give to the poor and the needy, etc.

Again, I gotta say, big whoop. Feel great about yourself for being a Mormon, knock yourself out. If you really believe in it then it shouldn’t matter what other people carry on about. All these things might convince you that your church is the only true church. And if you do think your church is the only true church then maybe it is OK for you to go around saying everybody is a fake, which would seem to be a consistent approach. But do you really think it is OK to say that every other church is an abomination in the eyes of God? You seem to have such a big problem with other people being critical of your religion but yet your religion is uber critical other religions. Do you remember what the chief fruit broker claimed (that’s joseph smith if you haven’t been following along)? “I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: "they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof." http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,104-1-3-4,00.html You need to put yourself in the other persons shoes. They don’t believe god said any of that stuff. They believe ole Joe said that stuff. That’s how they hear it, Smith is saying to all of Christendom – you are all wrong!

What are you doing here, why do you hang around when you know people are going to respond to the outrageous Mormon claims? You might want to cherry pick the message but it aint that easy. Buck up - put your shoulder to the wheel beckysoup. Haven’t your heard, it’s war! Did you think it was going to be easy? Don’t you realize that Satan is a mean SOB and he wants to own your soul? This is it sister, it’s on! Now take heed, the General Authorities have warned repeatedly against the evils of the Internet (and quite recently I’m told), are you sure you are following your leaders? Some LDS probably think this advice doesn’t apply to them because their testimonies are unshakable, but I wonder if they really know the cost of participating in this den of contention. No doubt they rely on the arm of flesh.

 

[Sunstone]

Again, I gotta say, big whoop. Feel great about yourself for being a Mormon, knock yourself out. If you really believe in it then it shouldn’t matter what other people carry on about. All these things might convince you that your church is the only true church. And if you do think your church is the only true church then maybe it is OK for you to go around saying everybody is a fake, which would seem to be a consistent approach. But do you really think it is OK to say that every other church is an abomination in the eyes of God? You seem to have such a big problem with other people being critical of your religion but yet your religion is uber critical other religions. Do you remember what the chief fruit broker claimed (that’s joseph smith if you haven’t been following along)? “I was answered that I must join none of them, for they were all wrong; and the Personage who addressed me said that all their creeds were an abomination in his sight; that those professors were all corrupt; that: "they draw near to me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me, they teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof." http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,104-1-3-4,00.html You need to put yourself in the other persons shoes. They don’t believe god said any of that stuff. They believe ole Joe said that stuff. That’s how they hear it, Smith is saying to all of Christendom – you are all wrong!

What are you doing here, why do you hang around when you know people are going to respond to the outrageous Mormon claims? You might want to cherry pick the message but it aint that easy. Buck up - put your shoulder to the wheel beckysoup. Haven’t your heard, it’s war! Did you think it was going to be easy? Don’t you realize that Satan is a mean SOB and he wants to own your soul? This is it sister, it’s on! Now take heed, the General Authorities have warned repeatedly against the evils of the Internet (and quite recently I’m told), are you sure you are following your leaders? Some LDS probably think this advice doesn’t apply to them because their testimonies are unshakable, but I wonder if they really know the cost of participating in this den of contention. No doubt they rely on the arm of flesh.

I think you don't know Becky, Bathsheba. She's far from thinking her "church is the only true church". Besides which, she's quite good at thinking for herself, rather than swallowing dogma whole. You've misjudge her.

 

[Bathsheba]

I think you don't know Becky, Bathsheba. She's far from thinking her "church is the only true church". Besides which, she's quite good at thinking for herself, rather than swallowing dogma whole. You've misjudge her.

I appreciate the feedback. Sounds like I jumped the gun.

 

[Bishka]

All these things might convince you that your church is the only true church.

I believe it is the only Church with the fullness of the truth, but that is not saying that other Churches/faiths/religion/etc have truth. I believe most other beliefs have truth in them.

And if you do think your church is the only true church then maybe it is OK for you to go around saying everybody is a fake, which would seem to be a consistent approach.

You accuse me of something I've never done.

Smith is saying to all of Christendom – you are all wrong!

He's also said that it is the responsibility of the Latter-day Saint to: "Receive truth, let it come from whence it may." (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, pg. 313). This is something I've always lived by.

What are you doing here, why do you hang around when you know people are going to respond to the outrageous Mormon claims?

Because I like to stand up for what I believe them and correct them on any inconsistencies or possible false ideas that they have about the member of my faith and our doctrine, why is that such a problem?

 

[Bishka]

I appreciate the feedback. Sounds like I jumped the gun.

You've misjudged most of the LDS members. You seem to think we are sheep. While there are some that are, most of us think and act for ourselves and decide what we believe to be true.

Most people think we are like that, because they've encountered the unfortunate few who act like it.

 

[Bathsheba]

You've misjudged most of the LDS members. You seem to think we are sheep.

Well, that is probably true, jesus did refer to you as his sheep.

What does the Mormon church say is the first law of heaven?

 

[Bishka]

Well, that is probably true, jesus did refer to you as his sheep.

That doesn't mean we can't question.

 

[KingM]

That doesn't mean we can't question.

Is that a bit of a goatish attitude I detect?

BTW, I can't watch your avatar without feeling sorry for Stumpy the Giraffe.

 

[Aqualung]

What? Of course I care what LDS believe. I'm just not discussing that at this moment, rather looking at the why.

Fair enough. "So, you're not really dealing with what they believe, but why they believe it." I shall try to be more precise in my future dealings with you.

 

[DeepShadow]

Well, that is probably true, jesus did refer to you as his sheep.

Which only shows the danger of beating a metaphor to death.

What does the Mormon church say is the first law of heaven?

Love.

 

[Polaris]

The good fruits produced by this tree include a worldwide church [Where does it say in the scriptures that the size of a church was an indication of its truthfulness.

I said nothing about the size of the church in reference to numbers, I was pointing out the global reach of the church. The scriptures teach that the gospel will be preached in all the world... we're getting there.

In any event, it's not worldwide, as it is non-existent in the Middle East, India, or China, which have half the world's population. Not to mention that it's roughly 1% the size of the Catholic Church.

Non-existant in the Middle East, India, and China? Better check your facts.

that is active and dilligent in the preaching of salvation through Christ [like a thousand other sects], the establishment of additional scripture that further clarifies the doctrines of the gospel [other churches have extra scripture too], the providing of relief to the poor and the needy [again, not unique at all, and from above it looks like the church does little relief for its size], and the rearing of families with strong moral values [again, like most other conservative churches]

That's fine but most other Christian churches don't claim to be led by a living prophet?

 

[Polaris]

If Polaris was intellectually honest and consistent with his reasoning, one would only have to prove that one of Smiths claims was fraudulent and then Polaris would have to conclude that Smith was "evil" and not true prophet.

If that's how you interpret Christ's teaching. I would take a little more broad and cumulative view. You can undoubtedly find and claim "evil" fruit from any man -- no one is perfect, but what I'm concerned with the the cumulative body of their work.

Wrong, the OP states: "The good fruits produced by this tree include a worldwide church [A Mormon "worldwide church" is quite a stretch; there are some pretty significant countries in which the church doesn't exist]

You're getting pretty nit-picky here. I would consider any organization that has representation in over 160 countries a worldwide organization.

that is active and dilligent in the preaching of salvation through Christ [and the Mormons declare that every other church is an abomination to God]

That's flat out wrong. If you're going to present what Mormon's declare at least you could do so accurately. I assume you're referring to Joseph's account concerning the First Vision where the Lord said "their creeds were an abomination in his sight". There's a big difference.

the establishment of additional scripture that further clarifies the doctrines of the gospel [so-called scripture which has been shown to be a hoax],

You can prove that?

and the rearing of families with strong moral values just to name a few." [Why is it assumed that Mormon moral values are the prefered values. I find some Mormon so-called moral values immoral.]

Who said anything about "Mormon" moral values?

Where do you stand, did Joseph produce good fruit or not? Because according to Polaris "All honest seekers of truth must at least consider with sincerity the ... fruits of the prophet Joseph Smith."

You're drawing a distinction between the fruits of Joseph and the fruits of Christ which may not necessarily be there. Because Joseph was a prophet called by Jesus Christ, to restore His church, and preach His gospel, the fruits of Joseph Smith will be the fruits of Jesus Christ, assuming he was indeed a true prophet of Christ.

It is not my intent to prove that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, but to point out the consistency with which his call and efforts match the teachings of Amos, Paul, and Christ himself to the point that... (from the OP)

All honest seekers of truth must at least consider with sincerity the mission and fruits of the prophet Joseph Smith. Either Joseph was indeed a true prophet or he was a deceiptful fraud.

If he was a true prophet then the doctrines and authority that he restored are pure and true.

If he was not a true prophet...
- either the major fruits of his labor must be evil
- or somehow good fruit came from a corrupt tree despite what Christ taught

So where do you stand?