Joseph Smith prophesied using a Book of Mormon character prophesying how his name was going to be dissed. Truly prophetic.

“He called me by name, and said unto me that he was a messenger sent from the presence of God to me, and that his name was Moroni; that God had a work for me to do; and that my name should be had for good and evil among all nations, kindreds, and tongues, or that it should be both good and evil spoken of among all people” (JS—H 1:33).

And it impressed his followers like this guy.

"It’s easy to take such things for granted. But, in September 1823 (when Moroni first visited Joseph Smith) or even in 1838 (when Joseph Smith—History was written), the prophecy would have seemed transparently absurd to almost anybody hearing it. How likely was it that an obscure and poorly educated farmer’s son on the early 19th-century American frontier would become internationally famous? And, besides the Book of Mormon, how many American books published in 1830 are still read today? James Fenimore Cooper’s “The Water Witch,” perhaps? Catharine Maria Sedgwick’s “A Tale of Our Times”?
For me, Moroni’s prophecy has been fulfilled."
https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865666273/Joseph-Smiths-name-had-for-good-and-evil-among-all-nations.html?pg=all


But instead of being seen as a conman raised to be one from a small child using his powers for self-aggrandizement many years after he brought his book out and seeing how many marks were eating it up, it is supposedly confirmation of his divine calling.

So what does this have to do with the current prophet's prophetic calling out the name Mormon being had for evil? Well, it is completely in opposition to the founding prophet's prophetically recognizing that his name and by extension this book's name will be had for GOOD as well as evil. Nelson is focusing on the bad connotation instead of the good. This doesn't sound very prophetic at all! It sounds like a crusty old man mumbling about bad press for his beloved organization.

Not a very good sign of prophetic powers in my opinion and requiring the faithful to roll with this is absurd in my opinion. It is like the Mormon version of being Rick Rolled by their fearless leader.

Meh.
Ask the 99% of the world that's not mormon who Joseph Smith was...

Around 3-4% would say, "Wasn't he that mormon guy?"
The other 96-97% would say, "No idea."

Mormons have such a high opinion of themselves and their fraudulent founder. The fact is, the vast majority of the world doesn't know about him and doesn't care, "good" or "evil."

Most people had never met a Mormon and the majority of them had no clue about what Mormons believed.

Many thought that Mormons were the same as Amish people.

If I mentioned being a Mormon, someone would invariably wonder why I was allowed to go to school with normal people and whether our family had electricity. Or "I thought you guys weren't allowed to watch TV. How do you know so much about that TV show? You must not be a good Mormon."

Some only knew the Mormon=polygamist aspect. "Do you live in the same house with other mothers?"

Most didn't know anything and had no clue. The word "Mormon" didn't mean any more or less to them than the word "Grobnoggin".

I remember being in a bus with other students on the DC beltway, passing by the Washington DC temple when it was under construction and the structure was not yet covered in marble. The day was misty and foggy and the structure looked a bit menacing. One of the students yelled out: "Look! Dracula's castle." That's what it looked like.

After it was completed, people started comparing it to Emerald City and someone painted graffiti on a beltway overpass that was in direct line of sight with the temple looming in the background. The graffiti read: "Free Dorothy!" As soon as you read that it was easy to imagine a bunch of flying monkeys coming out of the temple.

Bottom line: The words "Mormon" and "Mormonism" aren't going away just because the Nelson has waved his magic wand. To most people they are irrelevant. To anyone interested, those words are the words that MUST be used to do any meaningful research on the subjects of Mormons and Mormonism on-line or in libraries. When Mormons object to this, polite non-Mormons will pat them on the hands and say something like: "Yes, yes, that is important to you. I can see that now. Right, right...people should have the right to be identified by words of their own choosing. Totally understandable." But of course as soon as they're talking with any non-Mormons, they'll just go back to using the words Mormon and Mormonism.

His name was already being talked about "for good and evil." He was the leader of a cult whose followers would in a few years name him their priest-king; meanwhile, by 1838 he had been thrown out of NY and Ohio, and would soon add Missouri to the list. Retconning a fictional Nephite ghost is no more difficult than predicting Columbus in 1830.

"How likely was it that an obscure and poorly educated farmer’s son on the early 19th-century American frontier would become internationally famous?"

We're talking about Abraham Lincoln here, right? Because Lincoln had less formal education than Smith.

And limiting books to those published in the specific year of 1830 is transparently self-serving. "Oliver Twist" ran as a magazine serial from 1837-39. "Hunchback of Notre Dame" was published in 1831 and translated into English in 1833. "Last of the Mohicans" was published in 1826. "Legend of Sleepy Hollow," 1820. "Frankenstein," 1818…

he was known as a controversial and disreputable character in the area. Emma's father viewed him as a lazy, scammer. He was known for leading gullible people on phony treasure hunts and had already had legal trouble for scamming people with his "glass looking" con.

It gets so tiresome hearing TBMs using false descriptions of Joseph Smith's early life as a basis for their argument that only a divine miracle could explain what Joseph Smith accomplished, as in "who could possibly have known back then that a poor, obscure, illiterate farmer's son could {fill in the blank with amazing accomplishment}?

It's similar to the claim that the translation of the Book of Mormon was all written down within some short period of time, based on the circular reasoning that relies on believing that everything happened exactly the way that Joseph Smith said it happened because Joseph Smith said that everything happened just that way.

Or where they take a modern edition of the Book of Mormon, which has been edited multiple times, divided into numbered verses, altered to include introductory notes, footnotes and an index, etc., etc. and then invite investigators to marvel at how Joseph Smith, an ignorant, illiterate farmboy with no education could possibly have produced such a book. Of course that gambit relies on the investigator not knowing: (a) that Joseph Smith was not illiterate and was a reader; (b) that the first edition of the Book of Mormon was full of misspellings, errors, hillbillyisms (they was a hollering), was not divided into verses and included contents that were obviously copied from other sources; and (c) that Joseph Smith had been helped by multiple scribes, chiefly including Oliver Cowdery whose occupations included school teaching.

Here in Australia 'Mormon never heard of it'

In Utah 'isn't the world all Mormon's? '

Elder Berry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> And it impressed his followers like this guy.
>
> "It’s easy to take such things for granted. But,
> in September 1823 (when Moroni first visited
> Joseph Smith) or even in 1838 (when Joseph
> Smith—History was written), the prophecy would
> have seemed transparently absurd to almost anybody
> hearing it.

By 1838 Joseph Smith was a very well-known figure whose name had
been had for both good and evil in many nations of the world.
They already had missionaries in UK and in Canada, and were
planning to send missionaries to other countries. In 1838 when
J.S. wrote this there were over 17,000 Mormons and they were
planning and expecting to flood the earth with Mormonism by
1891. Mormonism was a major topic of discussion among non-
Mormons.

Apologists love to erase the past and fill it in to suit their
agenda.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/09/2018 12:31AM by baura.

"Apologists love to erase the past and fill it in to suit their
agenda."

Is THAT what Nelson is trying to do?

Thus saith the Lard God unto mine servant--Russ. Yo! I'm trying to be hip. Anyway, Russ...I'm disturbed about the "Mormon" business. Are you creatures so limited and lacking that you cannot say Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?! I chastise thee little creature. Say unto mine people repent! Use the full name of mine Church.

For those coffee drinking weaklings, they may say "Restored Church of Christ," and I will refrain from vaporizing them. Irritating slackers.

And Russ...don't count on any input from me on solving hunger and malnutrition, health care, housing, racism, global warming or anything else important. Tell them to follow what's his name?--starts with a T--he seems confident enough.

Now move your keister and get on TV. Thus speaks your Lard. Amen.

snowball Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Now move your keister and get on TV. Thus speaks
> your Lard. Amen.

Lol! Let my people know! It is by small things like names that greater things like world-wide evil speaking shall grow!

Isn’t the BoM Musical internationally famous?