• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Religious Book Exchange

This is cool!

I think if any two posters can pull off something like this and make it useful and informative, it is RandFan and rcronk.

I look forward to reading it.
 
rcronk said:
prewitt81 - Thanks!

RandFan - You go ahead and introduce the first item and I'll reply to it and we'll go back and forth until we reach an agreement to move on to the next item. Sound ok?
Click to expand...
Sounds good. I will do so now. I'm thinking on this and I think it would be best to keep the posts pithy. Straight and to the point without a lot of superfulous commentary.

My first post should be up in the next hour. Stay tuned.

Again, I'm not sure how much time I'll hve to devote so it's possible a day or two can go by between responses.

RandFan
 
I'm not sure if it's better to resurrect this thread, but I'm afraid my question might be lost in the noise on the other one.

rcronk:

I'mm nearly to the end of D&C and I just hit the section where they describe the death of Joseph Smith. Quite poignant and sad really, regardless of one's opinion of him.

Anyway, my question is this: that section dates his death as being in 1844. The previous revelations are in the 1835 area, with some maybe as late as 1837. I don't think I saw any later than that. Do you know why there was such a gap? Did Smith consider his work complete? Was he somehow prevented from writing during that time? Did he focus on other writings, maybe Peal of Great Price instead? Or were some writings lost?

Thanks in advance!
 
Yes - his murder was inexcusable.

There was also a time where his infant child had a high fever and while he was comforting his child in the middle of the night, a mob broke into his house and pulled him out and tarred and feathered him. He spent the rest of the night picking the tar off of his burned skin, got up the next day and preached a sermon where some of his attackers were present and were subsequently baptized. His child died five days later because of exposure during the incident. Sometimes I completely lose my faith in humanity.

See http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/chrono

The sections are not always in chronological order.
 
Thanks, I knew they weren't all chronological, but I had missed the dates for the Nauvoo ones, apparently.

I'm also wondering why there are so few (only 2 I think) from the 20th century. I thought the first president (I think that's the title) is supposed to get revelations as a matter of course. Are there more such revelations that are not listed in D&C? If so, why are they not there? Are they available online elsewhere? If they actually have stopped, is there a reason given?

Just more curiosity, I can't seem to help myself! :)

ETA: Tarring and feathering was a rather barbaric practice. I'm sure glad the US has gotten past that, and that in general there's less vigilante action.
 
There are monthly messages from the first presidency in the "Ensign" - available online at www.lds.org for free. There is also a General Conference every six months (in April and October) with about 10 hours worth of talks in each two-day conference. I'm not sure why some of these things are not added to the D&C but I guess it doesn't matter much. It's all out there for anyone to access. Perhaps it has something to do with reprinting the D&C every year and the cost involved - maybe it's just logistics. I really don't know. I guess it could also have to do with the nature of the content. The D&C was revelation about how to get things started and organized along with other things. Now that it's set up, only major significant changes are put into the D&C instead of just day to day guidance.

Yes it was barbaric. Killing his child indirectly was horrifying as well. I can't even imagine baptizing and attending church with and forgiving the people who killed my child in such a way. I can't imagine.
 
rcronk said:
Sometimes I completely lose my faith in humanity.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

Though I find it interesting that Mormons are so outraged at these events. It reminds me of the outrage of Timothy McVeigh at the death of the children at Waco. Yet McVeigh had little compulsion to kill other innocent children.

I apologize rcronk for the comparison but I wonder, are you outraged by the Mountain Meadow Massacre? Do those tragic deaths trouble you? I personally am a descendant of family involved in the incident. I find the events troubling, as troubling as anything visited upon any Mormons. Children were murdered in front of parents and then taken to the houses of Mormons to be raised.

Man's inhumanity is not monopolized by any group of people. Neither is any group immune from it.
 
RandFan said:
Agreed.

Though I find it interesting that Mormons are so outraged at these events. It reminds me of the outrage of Timothy McVeigh at the death of the children at Waco. Yet McVeigh had little compulsion to kill other innocent children.
Click to expand...

Most people find it easier to kill when they don't have to see other people as human. In a purely analytical sense the distance is irrelevant but emotionally it makes all the difference.
 
I'm actually more disturbed by the Mountain Meadows Massacre than anything that happened to Joseph Smith. Did you just compare me to Timothy McVeigh? He was a perpetrator, I am not. I forgive you for the comparison though. I think I understand where you're coming from a lot better now. I am sorry for what happened to your ancestors - it was unspeakable. And you're right, it can happen to any group or individual and it can happen for many different reasons.
 
Last edited:
rcronk said:
I'm actually more disturbed by the Mountain Meadows Massacre than anything that happened to Joseph Smith. Did you just compare me to Timothy McVeigh? He was a perpetrator, I am not. I forgive you for the comparison though. I think I understand where you're coming from a lot better now. I am sorry for what happened to your ancestors - it was unspeakable. And you're right, it can happen to any group or individual and it can happen for many different reasons.
Click to expand...

rcronk, my ancestors took part in the killing. Please be careful to infer my intentions and beliefs on any one thing. Mountain Meadow likely played no part in my conversion. I say likely because I can't exclude subconsciousness and I can't remember every thought I ever had. I simply have no memory of it playing a part.

I apologized ahead of time for the comparison. I truly do not think you are a McVeigh.

I have found (yes, anecdotal I concede) that Mormons are not outraged by the event. Currently there is a movie playing about it and my family is outraged by the movie.
 
rcronk said:
I think I understand where you're coming from a lot better now.
Click to expand...
I have to say that after thinking this over I'm a bit disappointed. Perhaps I'm wrong but I seem to recall you saying that you wouldn't do this.

My position is based on years of honest inquiry. I did not leave the Church because I was aggrieved. I left because the weight of the evidence was overwhelming. From DNA to Smiths conviction to the white wash of history it all points to the undeniable fact that Smith was a fraud. Smith's own father doesn't say that Joseph read gold plates. He says that Joseph stuck his head into a hat to translate the plates. If this was all that was needed why preserve the plates at all?

If you choose to continue to believe then that is your prerogative. However, please have the honesty not to ascribe to me motives that have no basis in fact.
 
RandFan said:
If you choose to continue to believe then that is your prerogative. However, please have the honesty not to ascribe to me motives that have no basis in fact.
Click to expand...

He has "inner knowingness"-- god told him why you left. I guess you just couldn't cut the mustard randfan...

I hadn't heard about the Mountain Meadow massacre. How is it taught in Mormon culture? I'm thinking of the other thread about how this sort of faith can get good people to do unthinkable things-- What is the justification your family uses? Most of the people who suffer in battles and wars and lose loved ones--have done nothing wrong... they had no choice as to what government or religion they gave allegiance to-- This suffering inflicted for nebulous higher ideals (which may include all wars) costs such concrete horrific suffering-- and I have such a hard time seeing the "goal"-- and are the gains worth the suffering of those who were innocent of whatever it is that made the other group think they should be killed?

I used to think I just didn't have enough information to know the real reason for these acts--but I don't think there is a "real reasons" for many mass killings--just lots of little reasons and the stories the soldiers tell themselves as to why. And if there is no measurable goal, then how can humans ever know if the concrete suffering inflicted on others resulted in anything "worth it". Seeing people as "evil others" makes it too easy for people to remove themselves from the suffering they inflict on those others.
 
articulett said:
I hadn't heard about the Mountain Meadow massacre. How is it taught in Mormon culture?
Click to expand...

http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Mountain_Meadows_Massacre

Compare and contrast to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Meadows_massacre

Also, there is a ton of info on the web.

What is the justification your family uses?
Click to expand...
I'm not exactly certain about justification. I think most believed that this was the result of misguided individuals and not of the Church and that opponents of the Church are using this as a means of attack.

I don't find the notion that the Church was not involved reasonable.
 
RandFan said:
http://www.fairwiki.org/index.php/Mountain_Meadows_Massacre

Compare and contrast to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Meadows_massacre

Also, there is a ton of info on the web.

I'm not exactly certain about justification. I think most believed that this was the result of misguided individuals and not of the Church and that opponents of the Church are using this as a means of attack.

I don't find the notion that the Church was not involved reasonable.
Click to expand...

Wow... it took place on 9-11.

Faith can lead people to do scary things.

That's interesting... so whenever something bad happens it was misguided individuals... and those who bring it up are trying to make the church look bad or untrue. But that is probably true of most religions and religion in general. Every time someone points out the harm of this notion that "faith is a means of finding truth" or suffering or lies perpetrated-- in the name of religion-- most people in will go out of their way to take the blame of religion and faith-- they've been taught to thank god for all that is good and "misguided others" and satan and non-believers for all that is bad. And they can't see themselves doing that. Every time someone's mentions the harms of religion, people come out the woodwork to make the person mentioning it into the bad guy (trying to destroy faith) instead of "hearing" what was said. Religions are the liars--but they teach the believers to think that those who say so are the liars... or the "enemies of the church" (Mormon apologists).
 
Last edited:
RandFan - Good call. You're absolutely right. I should not have done that. I apologize. My sorrow still goes out to you for what your ancestors did. Do you know their names? There is a huge book coming out about the Mountain Meadows Massacre that is supposed to include journals from the people involved and is supposed to be quite comprehensive. Your relatives being outraged by the movie that is coming out could be because the makers of the movie are portraying an innacurate account of the events according to reviewers of the movie so far - even non-mormon or anti-mormon reviewers are saying they did a bad job of it. I hope the truth of it can prevail whatever that is.
 
Last edited:
rcronk said:
RandFan - Good call. You're absolutely right. I should not have done that. I apologize. My sorrow still goes out to you for what your ancestors did. Do you know their names? There is a huge book coming out about the Mountain Meadows Massacre that is supposed to include journals from the people involved and is supposed to be quite comprehensive. Your relatives being outraged by the movie that is coming out could be because the makers of the movie are portraying an innacurate account of the events according to reviewers of the movie so far - even non-mormon or anti-mormon reviewers are saying they did a bad job of it. I hope the truth of it can prevail whatever that is.
Click to expand...

rcronk, you are an interesting person. I like and respect you. I hope you stick around and I'm sorry for anything that I might have done to cause offense.

Thank you for the appology. You are a gentleman.

I understand your point about my family and I will reserve judgment until I get more information. I'll likely see the movie.

Also, I have been reading up on the event and though I suspect Young had a hand in the affair I will concede that there is no direct evidence that he did.

Thank you for your calm tone and reasoned response. It's apreciated. I will try and remember to respond in kind.

RandFan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom