Joseph Smith Was Not A Martyr

[Humanistheart]

Where did you get your definition?

Joseph Smith was supposed to be in protective custody. Two hundred of his enemies, people who hated him for no other reason than that they didn't like his religious beliefs...

If you can prove that he was killed for his religious beliefs, and that he in fact held them, I'd agree with you. Did he have enemies because he was founding a new religion or because of all the people he'd cheated? Or some other reason? Historically, what do the records show?

 

[LittleNipper]

Off the top of my head, I think there's cases of both (as well as cases of men having trouble in non-polygamous marriages), but what does that have to do with anything? Was polygamy moral or not?

I believe it was never what GOD intended; however, HE allowed it. He had bigger fish to fry.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I just noticed this:

Last time I checked, humans only have 2 cheeks.

I count four.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I believe it was never waht GOD intended; however, HE allowed it. He had bigger fish to fry.

And while he allowed it, it was moral, right?

 

[Humanistheart]

I believe it was never waht GOD intended; however, HE allowed it. He had bigger fish to fry.

So god allowed it because he, a sopposedly all powerful all knowing timeless diety, didn't have time to address it?

LittleNipper, consider the irony that after your leangthy comparission of the bible and the BoM (well, mostly just claims that the bible is gods word really) you have come to the same conclusion that the mormons did. They had polygamy for a time, then when the time was right to end it, god commanded it to be so.

 

[Katzpur]

I agree that a martyr is anyone who dies for any faith. One may ask if Joseph Smith actually died for his faith or the compunction to marry again and again.

My personal feeling is that as long as the Mormon faith stuck with additional scriptures, and angels speaking to Joseph Smith, that there was little trouble. The problems started as Joseph Smith began trying to redefine matrimonial laws in the United States in ways that seemed to reflect those of some Arabian nabobs.

Victorian conservatives were not the least bit impressed with Smith's appitite for what must have seemed to even the "sailors" of that day as nothing short of womanizing. The very similar thing is happening again today as some homosexuals and liberals are again trying to redefine marital laws to suit tastes in sexual persuits. I might add that people in America at that time were for more versed in the Bible that most people today. And interestingly the Shakers, who were very influencial at that time, were against co-habitation and marriage. They considered sex at the very least a distraction.

Joseph Smith, on the other hand, seems to indicate that to be a prophet one needed more sexual diversion ---- or at least several wives to be spiritual.

Little Nipper, the issue was not polygamy. Not even a non-Mormon source would say it was. Seriously, you need to do some research before just throwing stuff out there and hoping people will believe you.

 

[Katzpur]

They had no civil law in place telling them what they needed to abide to.

There were no civil laws in America at that time prohibiting polygamy either, LittleNipper. They were not established until some time later.

 

[challupa]

True and education also allows people to learn more about the foolishness of those that disregard a God and twist and pervert ancient writings into something it was not to be. That same educating also leads further to the realization from those who think logically that creation takes a creator and that its illogical to think otherwise.

Never met anyone that taught or practiced the act of selling their daughter and of course I know the same for slaves.

As far as children are concerned, never met anyone that has taught or practiced stoning their children. But considering the lack of moral life practiced in front of the present youth by their parents, some means of punishment is needed. Kids killing kids, promiscuous teenagers with bulging pregnacy rates, rank disrespect for adults etc.......

Well then, you are not following the directives of your bible. It is an absolute must to know how to sell your daughter, own slaves and when to stone your unruly child. Get with the program will ya!

 

[challupa]

I know what the Bible says. Problem with those that don't believe, they are the ones that pick up the Bible like you and find little tidbits they think is great thread material, and jump on it as if they have found the lepricaun at the end of the rainbow. From your post its easy to see that you are biblically illiterate. Here's some learning for you. We are the NT church and are not instructed to follow the law of the OT. This will help you not look so illiterate in the future..

Okay so that is your interpretation. Jesus came to fulfill the law which means he agreed with the laws of the OT. You are obviously picking and choosing what you like and don't like. Maybe you're the illiterate one?

Your opinion of who has a monopoly on God is useless dribble considering you don't believe in one. The rest I just dismiss. Its more useless opinions. Here is a good clue for future posts. Your opinion holds no kind of truth. Its just that, an opinion..

Your opinion is just that too, opinion.

I admit nothing. In your foolishness you do not understand the difference between things learned about God and things that are practiced by Gods commands..

This made no sense. Try rewording it.

If you got a magic book, you might ought to use it since you have nothing else. I am always amazed by atheist. They never stop and think that our society is governed by morals that are outlined in the Bible. You know, don't murder, don't steal, don't lie, don't cheat. Amazing. Same morals that have been passed down for last 5-6,000 years. Problem is you have no way of proving that they did not originate from the Bible. Good part for me is I don't have to worry about proving if they did or not either.

Our society is not run by christian morals. Those values were around a long time before christianity poked it's head up. They are common sense guidelines for society to get along and survive. The bible is one book of thousands that only dates back to a few hundred years after christ. The Jewish book, your OT, is only about 500 years older than that. The Vedas are much older than your book or the Jewish book and they had already figured these values out. How do you figure that could have happened? You do not have a monopoly on anything.

 

[Katzpur]

If you can prove that he was killed for his religious beliefs, and that he in fact held them, I'd agree with you. Did he have enemies because he was founding a new religion or because of all the people he'd cheated? Or some other reason? Historically, what do the records show?

Historically? Well, the records show that from the time Joseph was 14 years old and claimed to have spoken with God, he was persecuted, driven from state to state and dragged from his own home to be tarred and feathered. People in general, and ministers in particular, didn't like the idea of an upstart young kid telling them that the brand of Christianity they held to was incomplete and impure, that they had no authority to baptize and that God was displeased by their teachings. When you stop to think about it, that's not really hard to understand. Now if nobody had believed Joseph, the persecution would have likely stopped. People did believe him, though, and the Church he founded grew quickly. The Mormons, persecuted for their beliefs, became very clannish, and the persecution grew. They were misunderstood, but they were also very insular. They voted as a group and this, of course, raised a lot of red flags. On the whole, they weren't hurting anyone. They were law-abiding members of society who kept to themselves and, while outsiders found them to be strange, it would have been possible for both the Mormons and the non-Mormons to live together in peace and harmony had the non-Mormons not hated them so intensely.

Joseph Smith made some very unfortunate financial decisions in his life. He ignored the counsel of people to whom he should have listened. It took the Church quite some time to recover from those decisions, but as far as the 200 men who stormed the jail bent on killing him is concerned, this is the first time I've ever heard anyone come up with the idea that they were doing so because he'd cheated them. Would you be so kind as to provide some details? I'd be interested in knowing the names and situations of the individuals who were a part of the mob that he had cheated.

 

[Humanistheart]

Historically? Well, the records show that from the time Joseph was 14 years old and claimed to have spoken with God, he was persecuted, driven from state to state and dragged from his own home to be tarred and feathered. People in general, and ministers in particular, didn't like the idea of an upstart young kid telling them that the brand of Christianity they held to was incomplete and impure, that they had no authority to baptize and that God was displeased by their teachings. When you stop to think about it, that's not really hard to understand. Now if nobody had believed Joseph, the persecution would have likely stopped. People did believe him, though, and the Church he founded grew quickly. The Mormons, persecuted for their beliefs, became very clannish, and the persecution grew. They were misunderstood, but they were also very insular. They voted as a group and this, of course, raised a lot of red flags. On the whole, they weren't hurting anyone. They were law-abiding members of society who kept to themselves and, while outsiders found them to be strange, it would have been possible for both the Mormons and the non-Mormons to live together in peace and harmony had the non-Mormons not hated them so intensely.

Joseph Smith made some very unfortunate financial decisions in his life. He ignored the counsel of people to whom he should have listened. It took the Church quite some time to recover from those decisions, but as far as the 200 men who stormed the jail bent on killing him is concerned, this is the first time I've ever heard anyone come up with the idea that they were doing so because he'd cheated them. Would you be so kind as to provide some details? I'd be interested in knowing the names and situations of the individuals who were a part of the mob that he had cheated.

Where is your source? I asked for history not for fabled lore.

 

[challupa]

I guess since you want to make claim that I am using the turn the other cheek card you have to play the persecution card? That is a whole new battle right their that the mormons would lose in a heartbeat. The history of Christians is a deep account in persecution.

I do agree that mormons were unduly persecuted, but that is not the subject of this op. As far as the scriptural basis to defend yourself and your family, that's off subject and not proven by you.

I began this thread and have posted several times, that the way Joseph went as a martyr does not match those accounts in history of early Christians. They did not go down fighting, but willingly gave their lives thanking God for letting them be martyrs. I have already posted that this can be verified through Foxes Book of The Martyr's as one example.

In other words, by saying that Joseph wasn't a martyr in the way other old christians were, you can say that Mormons aren't christians. It seems to me that is the whole agenda to this OP. You don't accept Mormons are christians thus the thread. Well get over yourself. They are as christian as you are. Maybe more so because I don't see them attacking your beliefs beginnings!

 

[ljam49]

In other words, by saying that Joseph wasn't a martyr in the way other old christians were, you can say that Mormons aren't christians. It seems to me that is the whole agenda to this OP. You don't accept Mormons are christians thus the thread. Well get over yourself. They are as christian as you are. Maybe more so because I don't see them attacking your beliefs beginnings!

That is not true at all. Even though I don't believe mormons are Christians, I never stated that in one post. This op was to show that by description of historical accounts and what the Bible teaches that Joseph Smith was not a martyr. Its been argued up and down that by a dictionaries definition Joseph was. This is not the factor I was going for to determine that Joseph was a martyr or not. Since you jumped in on the end of this, I can only conclude that you are trolling or you are angry over something said you don't like. If its the second. I am happy to debate what ever proof you may have to prove that Joseph was a martyr.

 

[challupa]

That is not true at all. Even though I don't believe mormons are Christians, I never stated that in one post. This op was to show that by description of historical accounts and what the Bible teaches that Joseph Smith was not a martyr. Its been argued up and down that by a dictionaries definition Joseph was. This is not the factor I was going for to determine that Joseph was a martyr or not. Since you jumped in on the end of this, I can only conclude that you are trolling or you are angry over something said you don't like. If its the second. I am happy to debate what ever proof you may have to prove that Joseph was a martyr.

Actually I have been here from the start of this thread so, no I am not trolling. You have not had to say in as many words that you don't think Mormons are christians. That has been evident ever since you have determined that ONLY your definition of martyr is relevent. Your stance has been that because Joseph was not passive and went to his death without lifting a hand in his defense he is therefore not "good enough" to be classed as a martyr like "Christian" martyrs. It's been pretty transparent how you feel about Mormons and I am glad you are decent enough to admit that you don't think they are Christians. However, your opinion that they are not, does not make it so. What I don't understand is why Mormons even want to be classed as Christians, but that is their right.

It doesn't matter whether or not you think Joseph was a martyr. You can be a christian without being a martyr. You are grasping at straws in your effort to undermine the Morman legitimacy of calling themselves Christians imo.

 

[tumbleweed41]

NO! The Roman Catholics were calling those that disagreed with the "church" heretics. Which meant excommunication (in their eyes). Which meant those they tortured were no longer even considered "Christians," let alone Catholic. Why do you seem to twist everything I say. I feel that I'm rather blunt.

Hmm, just as those who disagree with your definition of Christianity (Mormons), you do not even consider them Christians.
So I take it you would consider Protestants who died for their faith as martyrs?

 

[ljam49]

challupa:

You have not had to say in as many words that you don't think Mormons are christians.

This is correct. Christians are monotheistic and Mormons are politheistic.

That has been evident ever since you have determined that ONLY your definition of martyr is relevent.

No, that is not true. I base that on what the Bible says and the example of what a martyr is by the Christians in history.

Your stance has been that because Joseph was not passive and went to his death without lifting a hand in his defense he is therefore not "good enough" to be classed as a martyr like "Christian" martyrs.

Read Hebrews 11: 35-39. Those spoken of lost their lives by various means not fighting back and God says about them that they were men of whom the world was not worthy. There is story after story in Foxes Book of the Martyrs where men of faith were told they would be burned at the stake if they did not renounce their faith. They peacefully went to the stakes, did not fight back, but praised God for allowing them to die for Him. This in the Christian world is how we see martyrs for God.

It's been pretty transparent how you feel about Mormons and I am glad you are decent enough to admit that you don't think they are Christians.

I do not hate any man and as for mormons, I do not hate them. But the doctrines they are taught are not what Christians believe and in that respect shows that they are not Christians. Are you aware that up until about 30 years ago Mormons refused to be called Chrisitans and openly admitted that what Christians believed was wrong and they would not have anything to do with it?

However, your opinion that they are not, does not make it so.

Its not my opinion that is determining whether they are Christians or not. It is the doctrinal differences in the BoM and Bible that shows them not to be Christians.

You are grasping at straws in your effort to undermine the Morman legitimacy of calling themselves Christians imo.

I don't think I am out of place in saying that this is a forum to discuss religious differences, correct? There is no debate if differences are not stated and brought into discussion. Thanks for the post. Your got your point across without being to harsh.

 

[Katzpur]

Where is your source? I asked for history not for fabled lore.

What part of what I said do you consider to be "fabled lore," Humanist? You made an accusation that the people who laid seige to the jail and killed Joseph Smith did so because he had cheated them. I'd never heard such a thing (even from an anti-Mormon source) and I asked for some details. Are you going to provide them? After you do, we can continue our conversation. I think I'm being entirely reasonable in asking for the details pertaining to even three or four of the instances of cheating.

 

[Katzpur]

That is not true at all. Even though I don't believe mormons are Christians, I never stated that in one post.

Essentially you did. You referred to Christian martyrs and Mormon martyrs. That alone would be offensive to any Mormon. And when it gets right down to it, I've know very few Baptists whom I would consider to be Christians. Christians, for one thing, are not supposed to be judgmental.

 

[Katzpur]

What I don't understand is why Mormons even want to be classed as Christians, but that is their right.

That is an excellent point, Challupa. As a matter of fact, I started a thread on that very topic awhile back. It was called "Maybe I Don't Want to Be a Christian Anymore." Read my OP in it for my point of view.

 

[Katzpur]

This is correct. Christians are monotheistic and Mormons are politheistic.

According to who? Ask any Muslim on this forum whether traditional Christians are monotheistic or not and they'll tell you that there is no God but Allah. And furthermore, Allah has no Son. They'll tell you that Christians are absolutely polytheistic. You don't care what Muslims believe about you? Well guess what, I don't give a damn about what any Baptist thinks of me.

I do not hate any man and as for mormons, I do not hate them. But the doctrines they are taught are not what Christians believe and in that respect shows that they are not Christians.

No, the doctrines we teach are not what Baptists believe and that shows we are not Baptists! (Thank God!)

Are you aware that up until about 30 years ago Mormons refused to be called Chrisitans and openly admitted that what Christians believed was wrong and they would not have anything to do with it?

That is absolute nonsense. I am over 60 years old and I knew from the time I was five years old that my Church was a Christian church. What do they teach you in Baptist Sunday Schools anyway?

Its not my opinion that is determining whether they are Christians or not. It is the doctrinal differences in the BoM and Bible that shows them not to be Christians.

Well why don't you start by giving us the Biblical definition of a Christian. When you're doing with that little assignment, give us a few examples of these "doctrinal differences" you're talking about.