Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: SL Cabbie ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 01:01PM

Warning, incoming high speed bullchip advisory...

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705373365/Defending-the-Faith-Were-Smiths-workers-or-slackers.html

Apologetics 101: First we build our strawman...

>The character and claims of Joseph Smith are fundamental to the claims of the church he founded. Knowing this, critics of the Prophet have contended for more than a century and a half that he and his family were the kind of people from whom nobody would want to buy a used car, much less receive a plan of salvation.

Uh Danny, that metaphor is really weak. There were no used cars in JS's time.... And the charge should probably read, "The Smiths were not someone to be trusted with guardianship of anyone's minor children."

>The Smiths' farming techniques, it seems, were virtually a textbook illustration of the best recommendations of the day, showing them to have been, by contemporary standards, intelligent, skilled and responsible people. And they were very hard-working.

Uh, what about the "glass looking trial"? I don't find glass looking or peepstone-peering in the Farmer's Almanac... The trial on that charge is a fact, as proven from a documented court record...

>In order to pay for their farm, the Smiths were obliged to hire themselves out as day-laborers...along the way, they produced between 1,000 and 7,000 pounds of maple sugar annually.

Maple syrup harvesting doubtless suited them; they could work a few weeks in the winter, boil down the sap, and have some ready cash...

And if the farm was so renumerative and successful, why did they leave the Palmyra area?

Too, Dr. Peterson, what about the Kirtland "anti-banking" scandal? The one where they used silver half dollars on top of lead and rocks in the safety deposit boxes to establish credibility and collateral? The scandal which, as LDS historian Richard Bushman noted, "Troubled Joseph Smith so much that he just had to do it. He had to leave town." (probably not quite verbatim, but it's from the PBS special, "The Mormons").

For actual insight into Joseph Smith's character, the William Law interiew offers the most credible detailing of the inner circle of church leadership. The story of Emma's role is particularly revealing (Why, Daniel, if the church is true, didn't Emma accompany the Saints to Utah?). And this was long after the Hurlbut era...

http://mrm.org/topics/documents-speeches/interview-william-law

Revisionist history sellers, thy name is Mormon apologetics...

Can't blame 'em I guess; pays better than honest car salesmen make...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Rebeckah ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 01:04PM

Joseph was a saint, I tell you, a SAINT!

:)

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: SL Cabbie ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 01:16PM

That one was invented by that ol' perv Brigham Young...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Rebeckah ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 01:20PM

And not only did Joseph never practice polgyamy, he never did ANY of those things people said he did.

Yes, I've had discussions with one of the RLDS. She didn't take it too well when I said that she had a double standard for evidence. (Anything Joseph, Emma or Joseph's mother said had to be the cold hard truth but anything said against Joseph was said by someone who was bitter, angry, apostate, or had something to gain -- like Joseph, Emma or Mary DIDN'T have anything to gain? Seriously?)

:D

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Heresy ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 01:07PM

Wonder what happened to the sins of the father not being relevant?

He comes from a good family, so he MUST be a prophet?

Where's that thread on logic errors when I need it?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Puli ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 01:39PM

What I recall from Sunday school lessons years ago was that the Joseph Smith Sr. home in Palmyra was foreclosed on but the family continued to rent the farm.

Wikipedia says the farm was foreclosed on in 1825, 7 years after they agreed to purchase it. "[T]he Smiths were unable to raise money for their final mortgage payment, and their creditor foreclosed on the property. However, the family was able to persuade a local Quaker, Lemuel Durfee, to buy the farm and rent the Smiths the property."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_life_of_Joseph_Smith,_Jr.

Interesting that one of the initial antagonists from the BOM shares the same name, Lemuel, as the man who bought their farm even though his doing so allowed them to remain living on it.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: jw the inquizzinator ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 02:27PM

http://diglib.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/RelEd&CISOPTR=5340&CISOBOX=1&REC=3

"This is the Palmyra, New York home of Lemuel Durfee, a good man who affiliated with the Quakers. This property had at least eleven wells on it. Tradition holds that members of the Joseph Smith, Sr. family dug some of those wells. After the Smiths lost the deed to their Manchester, New York farm and home, Lemuel Durfee somehow wrested that deed from Russell Stoddard. Mr. Durfee then rented the home back to the Smiths until the spring of 1829."

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: jw the inquizzinator ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 03:02PM

http://maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/publications/jbms/?vol=16&num=1&id=428

"Losing the Frame Home

Once again, however, the temporal world encroached on the spiritual. The Smith family found themselves about to be evicted from the frame home they had occupied for more than three years, the home Alvin had begun to construct with the hope of providing a "'nice pleasant room for father and mother to sit in,'" with "'everything arranged for their comfort.'"46 Although Joseph Sr. and Lucy had been unable to pay their rent late in 1825—and had been threatened with eviction—a Quaker named Lemuel Durfee had purchased the property and allowed the Smiths to stay in exchange for Samuel's labor. That arrangement ended early in 1829, however, when Durfee's daughter and her husband were scheduled to move into the house. Lucy wrote: "We now felt more keenly than ever the injustice of the measure which had placed a landlord over us on our own premises, and who was about to eject us from them."

The family now faced the dreary prospect of returning to the cramped log cabin they had occupied before the frame home was completed. A Palmyra resident described the cabin as a "small, one-story, smoky log-house," explaining that it was "divided into two rooms, on the ground-floor, and had a low garret, in two apartments," and that a bedroom wing constructed of sawed logs was later added.48 The cabin, barely capable of housing one family, was about to house two—Joseph and Lucy and their five children, as well as Hyrum and his wife, Jerusha, and their eighteen-month-old daughter, Lovina, with another child just months away. (Hyrum and Jerusha had lived in the cabin since their marriage in November of 1826.)

"In consequence of these things," Lucy explained to Oliver, who had spent much, if not all, of the school term with the Smiths, "we cannot make you comfortable any longer, and you will be under the necessity of taking boarding somewhere else."

"Mother," said the intent young man, apparently unaware he was speaking to a blood relative of his own mother, Rebecca Fuller, and showing how the Smiths' faithfulness had impacted him, "let me stay with you, for I can live in any log hut where you and father live, but I cannot leave you, so do not mention it." And so, on the brink of the key event of the restoration, ten Smiths and one surrogate Smith crowded into the humble log cabin, giving up convenience, as Lucy said, "for the sake of Christ and salvation."

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: May 27, 2011 04:54AM

. . . forces the deadbeat Smiths to occupy the place as tenant farmers due to their non-gold plated credit rating, followed by "Lemuel" being returned to his proper place in the "Book of Mormon" as a super satanic devil dude, where he eventually gets his just desserts for being such a lousy landlord who signs an affidavit saying the Smiths are bums and fakers, as the LDS God curses him with a dark skin.

That'll teach him.

At least that's ol' Joe's story--and he and his sheep are stickin' to it.

Now, the rest (and the best) of the story . . .
_____


--Who Was Lemuel Durfee and How Did He Know Joseph Smith?--

Lemuel Dufree was a local Quaker who ended up owning the Manchester farm in which the ne'er-do-well Smith family resided for a time.

Mormon historian Donna Hill writes about life for the Smiths in their new digs (no pun intended)--albeit "on the fringes of society" in Manchester, New York, just across the border from Palymra--and how the Smiths eventually got Durfee to buy it for them, who then rented it back to them:

"The basic structure of their new home had been finished some two years before. Recently they had done the finishing touches on it with the help of a hired carpenter named Stoddard, and according to Lucy were now within a few months of the last payment on the farm, although . . . no evidence has been found that they had a formal contract for it.

"Lucy wrote that Stoddard offered them fifteeen hundred dollars for the house, but the Smiths declined to sell. Soon thereafter, he and two associates told the Smiths' agent in Cananadaigua that Joseph Sr. and young Joseph had run away and that Hyrum was defacng the farm and cutting down the sugar trees. With this they persuaded the agent to give Stoddard the deed to the property upon immediate payment.

"Stoddard offered the deed to the Smiths for a thousand dollars. The Smiths tried desperately to raise the money, but failed. However, they persuaded one Lemuel Durfee to buy the farm, and county records show that he took ownership on December 20, 1825, for $1,135.

"A Quaker of the Hicksite persuasion, owner of a woods near Palmyra in which the little Quaker church stood, Durfee apparently treated the Smith family with sympathy. He gave them a lease on the house and they would remain in it another three years, until December 30, 1828, when they would move to another house a little farther south."

(Donna Hill, "Joseph Smith--the First Mormon: The Definitive Story of a Complex and Charismatic Man and the People Who Knew Him," in Chapter 3, "Courtship, Money-Digging, Marriage" [Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1977], p. 64)


According to a chronology of Oliver Cowdery's times in the trenches, life on the farm for the Smiths didn't work out so well--at least not as owners. Having failed to pay their bills, they were relegated to Durfee's field tenants:

"The Joseph Smith, Sr. family los[t] the the title to their farm in Manchester. Lemuel Durfee, Sr., the new owner, allow[ed] the Smiths to remain on the property as tenant farmers."

("Oliver Cowdery Chronology," in "Oliver Cowdery Pages," at: http://olivercowdery.com/history/Cdychrn1.htm)


There was another catch, as well.

According to a history of the life of Joseph Smith's younger brother Samuel, Durfee agreed to buy the house if Samuel agreed to work in Durfee's store (Stay tuned. That store will come into play later in the Smith scheme of things):

"When [Joseph Sr.] . . . missed a mortgage payment on the family farm on the outskirts of Manchester Township near Palmyra, a local Quaker named Lemuel Durfee purchased the land and allowed the Smiths to continue to live there in exchange for Samuel's labor at Durfee's store."

(Samuel H. Smith," at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_H._Smith_(Latter_Day_Saints)


How did this Smith mess-up come about in the first place?

Histriographer of the American West Dale Morgan writes that, contrary to Lucy Mack's spin-doctoring, the Smiths were repeat poor performers on their mortgage, not just single-payment defaulters:

"Sometime in late 1826 the Smiths lost their farm. They had been unable to meet their payments and lacked a thousand dollars of completing the purchase when the land agent in Canandaigua foreclosed the property and sold it to Sheriff Lemuel Durfee.

"Although Durfee permitted the Smiths to remain in possession, in consideration of a small annual payment sufficient to pay the interest on the balance, . . . the family was heartbroken--their long ordeal by poverty suffered to no purpose. . . .

"This is the arrangement described by Thomas L. Cook [in] 'Palmyra and Vicinity' (Palmyra, 1930), p. 219, although he pictures Durfee as owner of the property from the beginning.

"Lucy Mack Smith's confused and pathetic account, 'Biographical Sketches' (Liverpool, 1853), pp. 92-98, 129, at any rate agrees that Durfee 'became the possessor of the farm,' and that the Smiths remained on it thereafter only at Durfee's pleasure.

"It would seem that Lucy's pride makes her insist that they missed only the final payment, for it is inconceivable that they could have contracted to buy the farm in no more than five installments, and even more inconceivable that they would have engaged to pay at the rate of a thouand dollars a year, the sum she says they would have needed to save the farm."

("Dale Morgan on Early Mormonism: Correspondence and a New History," John Philip Walker, ed., in Chapter Four, "The Golden Bible" [Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 1986], pp. 263, 263n1, 378-79)


So, here's the long and short of the Smiths' wanderings around Mancherster-Palymra, as found in an account of Joseph Jr.'s early life:

"The Smith family built a log home, technically just outside their property, in the town of Palmyra . . . .

"In 1822, the Smiths began building a larger frame house that was actually on their new property . . . .

"In 1825, the Smiths were unable to raise money for their final mortgage payment, and their creditor foreclosed on the property.

"However, the family was able to persuade a local Quaker, Lemuel Durfee, to buy the farm and rent the Smiths the property.

"At the end of 1828, the family moved to another house further south, where they remained until 1830."

("Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr.," at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_life_of_Joseph_Smith,_Jr.)


Which meant, in the end, the Smiths went from frame to log, returning to a house they had come from earlier.

Historian H. Michael Marquardt writes:

"Lucy Mack Smith mentions in her history that in 1829 her family had moved out of the frame house, which belonged to Lemuel Durfee and his heirs, and went back into their previous log house in the township of Manchester where Hyrum Smith and his family had been living. . . . In this building, Oliver Cowdery prepared the 'Book of Mormon' printer's manuscript in 1829-30 and here individuals visited the Smith family until the Smiths moved to Waterloo, New York, in the fall of 1830."

(H. Michael Marquardt, "An Appraisal of Manchester as Location for the Organization of the Church," Web version 2004,
originally published in "Sunstone" 16 (February 1992):49-57, at:
http://www.xmission.com/~research/about/manchester.htm)


So, just to keep the record straight (since Mormonism's shameless history-twisters are about to horn in here), Dufree wasn't just some casual acquaintance of the Smiths. He was their landlord for four years, as well as the employer of Joe's young brother Sam, who worked in Dufree's grocery store. Indeed, Dufree eventually went on record as saying he personally knew the Smiths.

But never mind that. Mormon apologist/"historian" Richard Lloyd Anderson attempts to slyly intimate that Dufree was not all that knowledgeable of the Smith family:

"Lemuel Durfee knew the Smiths indirectly as a landlord from 1825 to 1829, but prior to that evidently did not know them at all, according to Lucy Smith's account . . . ."

"Indirectly"?

Anderson goes on to disingenuously suggest that Dufree--who along with 50 other citizens of the Palymra area signed an affidavit in December 1833 attesting to the Smith family's well-known litany of character flaws and bogus schemes--"probably had no more than . . . [hearsay] knowledge of the Smiths."

(Richard Lloyd Anderson, "Joseph Smith's New York Reputation Reappraised," in "BYU Studies," 1970, Vol. 10, No, 3, 1970, pp. 20,, 27n.57 at: http://byustudies2.byu.edu/JSChronology/Articles/10.3Anderson.pdf)


Truth be told, Dufree, the Smith's local neighorhood grocer who employed one of the Smith kids, also frequently sold liquor to the Smiths.

Rodger I. Anderson, an author specializing in 19th-century religions, sets the record straight where Mormons fear to tread:

"According to [William Smith], 'I never knew my father Joseph Smith [Sr.] to be intoxicated or the worse for liquor, nor was my brother Joseph Smith in the habit of drinking spiritous liquors.'

"William’s . . . statement, made in 1875, was intended to contradict the many witnesses claiming to have seen Joseph Smith and his father drunk, but William only succeeded in proving himself either uniformed or deliberately untruthful.

"Besides the host of witnesses contradicting William’s recollection, there also exist other evidences proving his statement less than candid. If his family was not 'in the habit of drinking spiritous liquors,' it is difficult to explain the entries in neighborhood grocer Lemuel Durfee’s account book recording the sale of numerous barrels of 'cider liquor' to Joseph, Hyrum, and Samuel Smith during the years 1827-28." (Anderson adds that "Durfee’s account book is in the Palmyra King’s Daughters Free Library, Inc.")

Anderson offers a harsh but true judgment of the Smith family penchant for self-aggrandizing folklore:

". . . [R]ather than present to the world a photograph from life, Lucy and William chose to offer an idealized portrait of their family--a task which has since been assumed by [Mormon apologists] Hugh Nibley, Richard Anderson, and others."

(Rodger I. Anderson, "Joseph Smith’s New York Reputation Reexamined." in Chapter 7, "The Recollections of Lucy Mack Smith and William Smith" [Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Books, 1990], pp. 107-08; 110)
_____


--What Lemuel Durfee Eventually Came to Think of Joseph Smith and His Family--

"Not much" would be a pretty good answer.

In December 1833, Durfee joined 50 other residents from the Palymra area who knew of the Smiths' disreputable behavior, in signing a "group affidavit" harshly criticizing the character, disposition, actions and religious claims of Joe and his family.

This affidavit was among several sworn statements taken by Doctor Philastus Hurlbut, a former Mormon, who, as noted by Roger I. Anderson "was excommunicated in 1833 for, among offenses, saying 'that he decevied Joseph Smith's God, or the spirit by which he actuated.'"

Anderson reports that Hurlbut, being "convinced that Mormonism was a deception," "offered his services to an anti-Mormon group based in the Kirtland, Ohio, area interested in investigating rumors about Smith's early life and the possibly fraudulent origin of Smith's new scripture, the 'Book of Mormon.'

"To accomplish this end, they sent Hurlbut to Palmyra, New York, where Smith had spent most of his youth and early manhood. There Hurlbut collected the signatures of over eighty people testifying to the allegedly bad character of the Smith family and of Joseph Smith in particular."

Anderson writes that "[i]n affidavit after affidavit the young Smith was depicted as a liar and self-confessed fraud, a cunning and callous knave who delighted in nothing so much as preying upon the credulity of his neighbors. A money digger by profession, Smith spent his nights digging for treasure and his days lounging about the local grocery store entertaining his fellow tipplers with tales of midnight enchantments and bleeding ghosts, the affidavits maintained."

Hurlbut's collected evidence hit the Mormons like a flaming salamander striking Joseph Smith in the chest:

"Once published in 1834, Hurlbut's affidavits became especially dangerous to the newly-founded church and its leader. . . .

"Hurlbut's witneses remembers Smith as 'entirely destitute of moral character, and addicted to vicious habits. . . . Hurlbut's Smith was animated by no loftier purpose than the love of money . . . . Hurlbut's Smith was a money digger who told marvelous tales of enchanted treasure and infernal spirits."

What's more, they were among primary sources of credible information on Smith:

" . . . [Hurlbut's sources, along with others] . . . contain almost everything that is known about the young Joseph Smith from non-Mormon sources. . . .

"Faced with . . . the lack of credible testimony discounting the affidavits collected by Hurlbut and others, most scholars outside of Mormonism have tended to accept the non-Mormon side of the issue. The number of witnesses, the unanimity of their testimony, the failure to impeach even a single witness, and the occasional candid reminisence by Martin Harris, Brigham Young, Joseph Smith, Lucy Mack Smith, William Smith, Joseph Knight, or other early Mormons have contributed to the conclusion that Hurlbut and his followers were probably reliable reporters. Even those who suspected that the witnesses against Smith may have been motivated by more than a simple desire to inform have not questioned the depictions of Smith as a basically self-seeking charlatan."

Anderson firmly attests to the soundness and overall reliability of these sworn statements, for the following reasons:

"First," he writes, "I can find not evidence that the primary source affidavits . . . collected by Philastus Hurlbut . . . are other than what they purport to be. The men and women whose names they bear either wrote them or authorized them to be written. Ghost-writing may have colored some of the testimony, but there is no evidence that the vast majority of testators did not write or dictate their own statements or share the attitudes attributed to them.

"Second, every contemporary attempt to impugn these accounts failed. . . . The fact that these efforts resulted in impeaching not a single witness who testifed against Smith, though many of these same witnesses were still alive and willing to repeat their testimony, supports the conclusion that the statements collected by Hurlbut . . . can be relied on as accurate reflections of their signers' views.

"Third," Anderson writes that, with limited exceptions, "there is no evidence that the witnesses contacted by Hurlbut in 1833-34 . . . perjured themselves by knowingly swearing to a lie. In fact, existing evidence goes far to substantiate the recorded stories. The harmony of the accounts, the fact that they were collected by different people at different times and places, and the sometimes impressive confirmations supplied by independent witnesses or documents never intended for public consumption discredit the argument that the work of Hurlbut . . . contains nothing but 'trumped-up evidence'.

"Fourth, there is no evidence that the majority of witness indulged in malicious defamation by repeating groundless rumors. Many based their descriptions on close association with the Joseph Smith, Sr.'s family. They did not always distinguish hearsay from observation, fact, from inference, but they generally state whether or not the source of the information is firsthand, and several witnesses provided enough information to demonstrate that much of what was previously thought to be popular rumor about the Smiths was not wholly groundless.

"Having survived the determined criticism of Mormon scholars Hugh Nibley and Richard L. Anderson, the Hurlbut . . . affidavaits must be granted permanent status as primary documents relating to Joseph Smith's early life and the origins of Mormonism. . . .

"In general terms, the Hurlbut . . . testimonials paint a portrait of a young frontiersman and his family struggling to eke out a minimal existence in western New York, facing the discouraging realities of life on the margins of society. Intelligent and quick-wttted, if not always a hard worker, Joseph Smith, Jr., had been brought up by parents who believed in angels, evil spirits, and ghosts; in buried treasure that slipped into the earth if the proper rituals were not performed to exhume them; in divining rods and seer stones, in dreams and visions; and that despite their indigent status, their's was a family chosen by God for a worthy purpose. . . .

"Nondescript and of little condequence until he started attracting others to his peculiar blend of biblical Christianity, frontier folk belief, popular culture, and personal experince, Joseph Smith was an enigma to his incredulous New York neighbors. For them, he would always remain a superstitious adolescent dreamer and his succes as a prophet a riddle for which there was no answer."

(Anderson, "Joseph Smiths's New York Reputation Reappraised," pp. 2-6, 112-13, 115)


Actually, there was an answer: one of many, in fact, and it came in the form of the Durfee-signed affidavit:

With the above solid endorsement of Hurlburt's evidence-gathering against Smith, here is that affidavit bearing the affirming signature of the Smith's neighborhood grocer/landlord/liquor-provider Lemuel Durfree:

"Palmyra, New York, affidavit,

"Palmyra, Dec. 4, 1833.

"We, the undersigned, have been acquainted with the Smith family, for a number of years, while they resided near this place, and we have no hesitation in saying, that we consider them destitute of that moral character, which ought to entitle them to the confidence of any community.

"They were particularly famous for visionary projects, spent much of their time in digging for money which they pretended was hid in the earth; and to this day, large excavations may be seen in the earth, not far from their residence, where they used to spend their time in digging for hidden treasures.

"Joseph Smith, Senior, and his son Joseph, were in particular, considered entirely destitute of moral character, and addicted to vicious habits.

"Martin Harris was a man who had acquired a handsome property, and in matters of business his word was considered good; but on moral and religious subjects, he was perfectly visionary--sometimes advocating one sentiment, and sometimes another.

"And in reference to all with whom we were acquainted, that have embraced Mormonism from this neighborhood, we are compeled to say, were very visionary, and most of them destitute of moral character, and without influence in this community; and this may account why they were permitted to go on with their impositions undisturbed.

"It was not supposed that any of them were possessed of sufficient character or influence to make any one believe their book or their sentiments, and we know not of a single individual in this vicinity that puts the least confidence in their pretended revelations.

[signed by]

"Lemu[e]l Durfee [and 50 others]"

(Anderson, "Joseph Smith's New York Reputation Reexamined," p. 148)


But that's not all.

Lemuel Durfee may well live on in the fictitious "Book of Mormon" itself.
_____


--How Lemuel Durfee Might Have Made It Into the "Book of Mormon"--

Author Richard Abanes observes that the "Book of Mormon's" Lemuel character conceivably could have been Smith's own backwoods neighbor--one who supplied him booze and later put his name to a court document denouncing him:

"[A] source of inspiration for the 'Book of Mormon' may have been Joseph's own life, neighborhood, family, and friends. . . .

"[T]here are various 'Book of Mormon' names such as 'Lemuel,' a wicked character.

"This may refer to Lemuel Durfee, a neighbor who in 1825 bought the Smith's farm when they could no longer afford it, thus forcing them to live as tenants."

(Richard Abanes, "One Nation Under Gods," pp. 72, . 514n61; see also, Dan Vogel, "Early Mormon Documents," vol. 1, p. 321n128)


To repeat the point for Mormon lurkers on this board:

While "Lemuel" is a Biblical name mentioned in Proverbs 31: 1 and 4, it is also the name of "a neighbor of Joseph Smith, Lemuel Durfee, who signed an affidavit in 1833 that denounced Smith's supposed revelations and accused him of immoral character and vicious habits (See Howe's 'Mormonism Unvailed,' pp. 261-62).

"Lemuel was one of the bad guys that God cursed, causing him and all his descendants to have dark skin."

("Skeptic's Annotated 'Book of Mormon.'" at: http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/BOM/topics/lemuel.html)

*****


One wonders if the racist Mormon God has since cursed Lemuel Durfee with a brown skin for signing that cursed affidavit.



Edited 7 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2011 10:14PM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: JoD3:360 ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 01:41PM

After we had dug a trench about five feet in depth around the rod, the old man by signs and notions, asked leave of absence, and went to the house to inquire of young Joseph the cause of our disappointment.

He soon returned and said, that Joseph had remained all this time in the house, looking in his stone and watching the motions of the evil spirit—that he saw the spirit come up to the ring and as soon as it beheld the cone which we had formed around the rod, it caused the money to sink. We then went into the house, and the old man observed, that we had made a mistake in the commencement of the operation; if it had not been for that, said he, we should have got the money.

See Howe, Mormonism Unvailed, pp. 238-39, 257-58.
-------------

Yep, sitting in the house looking in a hat while everyone else does the hard work is surely not the deeds of a slacker...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Nightingale ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 01:43PM

SL Cabbie Wrote:
---------------------------------------------------
DCP wrote:
>The character and claims of Joseph Smith are fundamental to the claims of the church he founded.

Hold on a minute. I thought JS *restored* a church, not *founded* it.

I'm confused. :)

Also, where is it written that prophets must be flawless? Surely, that denies the human condition and goes against the clear egs in the Bible of all-too-imperfect prophets. The message for believers is that God can use anybody, no matter what character flaws they may have.

I see people criticizing JS and successive Mormon prophets for not being saints (so to speak!) but I think we're the ones who set up that expectation and then criticize when it doesn't come to pass.

This in no way means I give these "prophets" a pass on their beliefs and practices and behaviour, just that the fact that they are not "perfect" does not necessarily itself indicate that prophets they ain't.

I know that my comments on this don't necessarily relate to the points in the OP or in DCP's article. It's just an opinion that's been floating around in my head for a long time and it came out here.

I agree that you'd likely want a moral person as head of your church. But even major flaws don't seem to disqualify someone from serving as prophet or leader, according to scriptural examples. (Such as Jonah, for instance, who didn't even want the job and initially ran away from it).

I'm just saying that JS' character and behaviour alone would not necessarily disqualify him from becoming the Mormon prophet as he did. It's not enough, imho, to just point out that he was flawed (as are we all). We can't realistically expect to have a perfect person as prophet.

We can, however, call him on his moral standards and say we don't want to follow in the footsteps of a man such as he.

I hope I've made my points clear. I am definitely no Joe-apologist.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Rebeckah ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 05:15PM

After all, God may used flawed humans (assuming God exists) but using a known liar to proclaim the "truth" is just plain stupid.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: imalive ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 05:43PM

I only expected the truth but was I ever mistaken!!!!!!!!!>:-(

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Stray Mutt ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 02:04PM

I don't know about the Smiths being lazy, but it seems like they were kind of inept when it came to money and making farming pay. That happened with a lot of people. It can lead to people chasing after dubious money-making schemes and putting their hopes in magical solutions to their financial problems. The Smiths were very interested in folk magic and the secret, mystical, quasi-religious knowledge of the ancients that was supposed to unlock fabulous wealth. It's easy to draw a straight line from there to several LDS doctrines.

I can imagine JS as one of those young guys who wanted a future away from farming and, like many people, wanted some fame along with his fortune. He looked around and saw that preachers -- particularly the ones on the revival circuit -- could draw adoring crowds, could have social stature, could become celebrities, and all they had to do was talk. That sure beat the hell out of manual labor.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: imalive ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 05:43PM

Dubious money schemes . . . hhhmmmmm that sounds like MLM in Utard.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: imalive ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 05:45PM

Yup DCP is full of shit once again.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Rubicon ( )
Date: May 27, 2011 04:44AM

Stray Mutt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't know about the Smiths being lazy, but it
> seems like they were kind of inept when it came to
> money and making farming pay. That happened with a
> lot of people. It can lead to people chasing after
> dubious money-making schemes and putting their
> hopes in magical solutions to their financial
> problems. The Smiths were very interested in folk
> magic and the secret, mystical, quasi-religious
> knowledge of the ancients that was supposed to
> unlock fabulous wealth. It's easy to draw a
> straight line from there to several LDS
> doctrines.
>
> I can imagine JS as one of those young guys who
> wanted a future away from farming and, like many
> people, wanted some fame along with his fortune.
> He looked around and saw that preachers --
> particularly the ones on the revival circuit --
> could draw adoring crowds, could have social
> stature, could become celebrities, and all they
> had to do was talk. That sure beat the hell out of
> manual labor.

I read a book on Wild Bill Hickok and he chose to make his living gambling and with a pistol because it was easier than being on a cattle drive or digging for gold.

Not everyone can be a good public personality. It seems like Joseph Smith was a natural at it. Some people just have that magical charm. I think his natural people skills, his interest in the esoteric, and desire to be more than a farm boy led him on his way to being what he became.

I think Joseph thrived on the attention more than anything. If he would have snuck out of Nauvoo a life somewhere else as Joe Blow with no church to lead would have been hell for him. He loved and thrived being the leader of his pack and loved it.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Gorspel Dacktrin ( )
Date: May 27, 2011 04:47AM

Tom Sawyer knew how to appeal to people's desire to hear a good and fantastic story, and knew how to manipulate their gullibility to his own advantage.

I always have this picture in my mind of Tom Sawyer convincing other kids in the neighborhood to paint his fence and pay him for the privilege when, in fact, it was a tedious chore that he wanted to get out of doing.

From everything I've read, Joe was a smooth talker and an opportunist--and when the buried treasure gimmick didn't work out, he saw his opportunity in all the religious suckers that were everywhere to be seen and successfully transitioned from being a guide for finding treasures in the earth to being a guide for finding treasure in heaven.

Another character that comes to mind when I think of Joe Smith is Jon Lovitz's "Liar" character on SNL.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: jw the inquizzinator ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 02:19PM

1805 - JS born, Sharon, VT
1811 - Smith family moves to Lebanon, NH
1816 - Smith family moves to Palmyra, NY
1825 - JS at Harmony, PA (meets Emma)
1825 - In December, the Smiths' farm, on which they are delinquent, is sold to Lemuel Durfee. The Smiths remain as renters.
1827 - JS elopes with Emma,goes back to NY. Emma's Dad opposed marriage since JS has no visible means of financial support
1827 - JS and Emma go back to her father's house
1829 - JS moved to Fayette, NY to complete transation of BOM
1830 - 5,000 copies of Book of Mormon were printed by the Grandin Print Shop in Palmyra, NY. Martin Harris pledged his farm to cover the printing costs.
1831 - In April one hundred and fifty-one acres of Harris' farm were auctioned off to pay the bill.

Now why would a 'succesful' farming family be moving every 5-9 years, and why would this same 'successful' family have to rely on Martin Harris' farm for collateral??? Hmmmmmm

OR.....perhaps it is more likely they were a shiftless family of would-be con-artists that wore out their welcome and had to keep moving to stay ahead of angry victims and law enforcement.

AND...perhaps it is more likely the Smith family was unable to finance the publication of the BOM (that they intially sold for profit) becasue their farm was crap. Hmmmmmmmmmm



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2011 02:24PM by jw the inquizzinator.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Charlie ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 02:26PM

I, for one, am impressed with the article and may need to revise my opinion of the Smith family in general. However, I have always been disconcerted that one of the ways the family made money was to hire out the "virgin boy" Joseph in their money digging enterprises. It is obvious by his own accounts that Joseph was a fraud, maybe virgin but a fraud none the less.

If one is to isolate Joseph from the rest of the family and take a close look at his character and evidence of hard work, the lessons of history do raise issues about his willingness to work and the kind of work he looked for. As soon as he got the book of gold story started he sponged on others to take care of his living expenses. Once he had a church going, he seemed to have used the saints as his meal ticket. One of the strange things he did several times was to get a revelation that called on the faithful to move to an area in which he had purchased land on credit. He then sold the land to the saints making his portion free and maybe making enough profit to support himself. (Brigham made his fortune this way in Utah.) Once Nauvoo was established in this manner he "called" men to work his farm so that he could wrestle all comers on the streets of town.

In Kirtland he spotted banking as a great way to make money. Well actually to make money by printing fake money. In Nauvoo all he wanted to do was set up a bar where he and Orrin Porter Rockwell could entertain the men of the town. These are not the occupations of a man given to earning his bread by the sweat of his brow. Note that he didn't build Nauvoo House, the saints did.

While the saints we logging under extremely harsh condition with nothing but a porrage made from parched corn (cattle feed) to build the Kirtland Temple, he sat back in town receiving revelations and promulating new ways to get his hands on the bothers' naked bodies and calling it temple ordinances
It is my opinion that if he didn't grow up as a neer-do-well, he certainly learned to live off the fat of the saints. He called them to provide him a living and then rewarded them by screwing their wives and daughters. Take a look at the endowment and you will see he had far too much time on his hands. What was it that Poor Richard said about idle hands? Oh, Yes. "Idle hands are the devil's play things."

This man, by his history as found in the Documentary History of the Church, was a slacker, womanizer and pervert. Sorry, but that is the way it was.

Please note that in at least the case of Brigham he had a dedicated student and mimic.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: angsty ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 03:12PM

Sure, if you cherry-pick your facts and ignore huge swaths of data, you can paint a picture of the Smiths as a competent, hard-working, respectable family.

--How many business ventures did the Smiths start?
--How many of those business ventures involved questionable/fraudulent practices?
--How many business ventures actually succeeded?
--How good was the family's credit?
--How often did they repay loans in full?
--How often did they have to move?

As far as I can tell, the only business ventures Smith ever 'succeeded' at were founding the church, receiving gifts from his followers, and spending the inheritances of the Lawrence sisters.

He was working hard at something, but it wasn't honest employment.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2011 03:14PM by angsty.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: anon666 ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 03:48PM

Mopologists are known to attack the critic. Well, fair is fair.

It's hard to believe Denial Pete's words about the Smith family when he has come up with these boners:

"There have also been some horse bones that have been radiocarbon dated to about the time of Christ that were found up in the upper midwest, in the United States." How could Dr. Peterson not know about the Spencer Lake Horse Hoax?

And my all time favorite: "There is no such thing as Jewish DNA".

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: rt ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 05:08PM

When Joe married Em in 1828, they lived on Emma's father's estate. Rather than work to pay off the $200 debt to father Hale, Joe "translated" the BoM while living off the charity of Martin Harris and Joseph Knight.

Then in August 1830, he paid off the $200 all at once and no one knows where the money came from.

Next, they moved to Kirtland in 1831 and first lived with Newel Whitney for a month, after which Joe received a revelation that someone should build him a home (Isaac Morley was the idiot who actually did it).

In the months after that, Joe was on a business trip to Missouri and when he returned in September, he moved in with the Johnson's to work on his bible " translation".

But having a free roof over your head is one thing, a man has to eat too. Luckily, October conference was nigh and lo and behold, a revelation was received that David Whitmer, Reynolds Cahoon, Simeon Carter, Orson Hyde, Hyrum Smith and Emer Harris should take care of the Smiths (2 kids) and the Rigdons (6 kids).

By now, Joe knew how to employ his prophetic powers. In 1834 he got a tract of land "revealed" to him and in 1841 a complete hotel.

Another way of making ends meet is borrowing. In 1838 Joe had to flee Kirtland because he had run up a $100.000 debt (and those were real dollars, not the modern funny paper dollars the Fed prints these days). And, of course, the good thing about being a prophet is that you can let others clean up after you (Oliver Granger and Jared Carter in this case).

Did I mention shady land deals in Nauvoo yet? Or stealing inheritances from your wards (whom you can also "plurally marry" while you're at it)? No? Well, that's for another day then.

The Smiths "workers"? HAHAHAHAHAHA!

I don't think Joe did a single honest day's work in his entire life and I don't know of anyone in his family who did.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Thread Killer ( )
Date: May 26, 2011 08:12PM

Bub, but, but...in the movies he's always outside with his shirtsleeves rolled up leading the saints in honest, hard work!! I seen it, I swear!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: steve benson ( )
Date: May 27, 2011 04:21AM


Edited 8 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2011 04:49AM by steve benson.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: get her done ( )
Date: May 27, 2011 08:16PM

Is there endless bullshit on this planet, and why do the mormons have more of it and control most of it?

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Screen Name: 
Your Email (optional): 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
  ******   **     **  **      **  **    **   *******  
 **    **  **     **  **  **  **  ***   **  **     ** 
 **        **     **  **  **  **  ****  **  **        
 **        *********  **  **  **  ** ** **  ********  
 **        **     **  **  **  **  **  ****  **     ** 
 **    **  **     **  **  **  **  **   ***  **     ** 
  ******   **     **   ***  ***   **    **   *******