Fact-checking Saints -Chapter 38 up 11/15 (Attempt to kill Boggs, Spiritual Wifery, Joseph's polygamy)

[jfro18]

Edit: Chapter 38 published November 15... I want to give up but I must finish this!

Chapter 38 is at https://www.ldsdiscussions.com/saints-part-4

The first eight chapters are at https://www.ldsdiscussions.com/saints
You can see Part Two (Chapters 9-21) at https://www.ldsdiscussions.com/saints-part-2
You can see Part Three (Chapters 22-33) at https://www.ldsdiscussions.com/saints-part-3

I was thinking of doing a fact-check/review of Saints to point out where the church is being dishonest about historical issues, doing a chapter a day on the ldsdiscussions.com page... I was originally going to annotate it but I am 99.9% sure at some point the church would force me to take it down since it's a book and not an essay, so probably not kosher to just reproduce the text elsewhere.

Anyway - I wanted to see if anyone thought it was a helpful exercise for others or not. I worked on chapter one today - it's not meant to be super in-depth, but to just review each chapter and point out the problems in them (and to take a closer look at footnotes since those can be very tricky).

If anyone has any thoughts let me know, and if anyone has any suggestions on things I missed to put in there let me know that too -- not looking to make this a super long project, but to spend 30 minutes a day just doing a chapter at a time.

Direct link is at https://www.ldsdiscussions.com/saints if anyone wants to check it out. Figured I'd start it and get some comments before committing too much to doing it, but the book is just so slick at deflecting/ignoring/glossing over problems that I wanted to take a stab at it.

Thanks y'all!

[Hagoth]

I think it's a great idea. The question is, would anyone who reads Saints actually look at it, or would they just be offended that someone is questioning the Lord's own true novel series.

[jfro18]

I think it's a great idea. The question is, would anyone who reads Saints actually look at it, or would they just be offended that someone is questioning the Lord's own true novel series.

That's my thought... it's not that time consuming to do, but if no one is ever going to read it that might be helped by it... is it worth it?

And I know you could write long papers on each chapter to point out where they are just gaslighting the hell out of everyone, but I wanted to keep it short so that someone who might be interested could see the important parts of each chapter to compare to.

Maybe I'll do 5-6 and just see if it can be done without taking up too much time, and then if others send me good ideas to toss in I can add as we go.

BTW Hagoth - I actually got a message from someone yesterday that read the site and had questions about if the info was real and why the church never told them that, so that felt nice. Whether or not it amounts to anything who knows, but I know your annotated essays on polygamy and BoM translation that I used were a bit part of why they were having more issues... hopefully they'll keep asking questions if that have them.

[Hagoth]

Maybe I'll do 5-6 and just see if it can be done without taking up too much time, and then if others send me good ideas to toss in I can add as we go.

It actaly sounds like a fun project, so go for it!

BTW Hagoth - I actually got a message from someone yesterday that read the site and had questions about if the info was real and why the church never told them that, so that felt nice.

Excellent!

[græy]

I like your work jfro18, so I say go for it!

That said, I feel like most things that can be fact-checked have been. Obviously you can't really fact-check the details of the first vision, and huge chunks of the rest of the book are really only "true" if that event is also "true."

What I have found while discussing the book with my wife is that she can and does acknowledge some of the more difficult historical happenings without actually considering the implications of those happenings. So something that notes events that are technically mentioned, and then explains why those events can't just be glossed over, might be very helpful. I've started something like that, but I've been reading the book on Kindle, and my notes are all contained within there.

BTW Hagoth - I actually got a message from someone yesterday that read the site and had questions about if the info was real and why the church never told them that, so that felt nice.

That has to feel really good!

edit: One example, my wife might say "Yes, JS was involved in treasure digging, which is weird. But we can't judge the past for being different." And then she'd go on her marry way. But the real trouble happens when you realize what those actions imply. JS believed in practicing a form of black magic, involving animal sacrifices and everything. If that was real, if he really did see visions (as Bushman implies when he says it was a preparatory step to help him receive revelation) then we today, subscribe to the reality and efficacy of black magic, seances, etc.

But if you ask my wife directly, if she believes in those things, she'd say no. So let's look at the opposite side of his treasure digging. He had no visionary powers, and couldn't see anything. And yet, he charged people for services finding lost things, or hunting down buried treasure which means he was a fraud! Do we really believe that God would choose a liar, and a fraud as his mouthpiece for the restoration of his gospel?

Furthermore, Moroni's visit and obtaining the Gold Plates followed the EXACT. SAME. FORMULA. as all his previous treasure hunts. Saints breezes past that by noting the JS had "heard" stories of guardian angels and treasures, but Moroni and the plates were different. Except they weren't. If JS was a fraud, and then told the same story to convince people he had found the gold plates, how is that not a continuation of the fraud?

There is no win here. Either our church is founded on black magic, or JS was a fraud. But those implications are completely missed by anyone casually reading the book.

[jfro18]

I like your work jfro18, so I say go for it!

That said, I feel like most things that can be fact-checked have been. Obviously you can't really fact-check the details of the first vision, and huge chunks of the rest of the book are really only "true" if that event is also "true."

What I have found while discussing the book with my wife is that she can and does acknowledge some of the more difficult historical happenings without actually considering the implications of those happenings. So something that notes events that are technically mentioned, and then explains why those events can't just be glossed over, might be very helpful. I've started something like that, but I've been reading the book on Kindle, and my notes are all contained within there.

That's the other thing about Saints - there is *nothing* new here, so doing this feels like beating a dead tapir.

But I'm hoping as it gets going that maybe anyone who visits the site might see it and check it out since it proves how the church in 2018 is still producing material that completely ignores difficult issues or just deflects/glosses over them.

You're right though about your discussion with your wife. The last talk I had about church with my wife, she said that polygamy/polyandry are wrong, but then when you connect it to the church she says it was a bad thing that it had to happen, but from God. I don't know what it takes for that insulation to get broken for people to realize if it's wrong, it's wrong... but apparently for a lot of people it does happen eventually.

I'll give it a go for a while - if it ends up being stupid I can always kill it off. It's not like a lot of people are visiting the site anyway.

[rockslider]

Shame on me, first time I've even heard of/seen the site https://www.ldsdiscussions.com Not only did I enjoy your first saints chapter, I spent some time reading the Summary section. I now look forward to reading the essays anew with the given annotations.

Nice!

Spreading the word: http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/vie ... 1#p1144901

[Corsair]

jfro18, I think your fact-check plan is a good one. There is not doubt that this information has already been available elsewhere, but new versions of this material is worth creating because new people who have never encountered this material are always arising. Maybe you will be lucky and be one of the pantheon of apostate celebrities that get a full response by FairMormon.

[jfro18]

Shame on me, first time I've even heard of/seen the site https://www.ldsdiscussions.com Not only did I enjoy your first saints chapter, I spent some time reading the Summary section. I now look forward to reading the essays anew with the given annotations.

Nice!

Spreading the word: http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/vie ... 1#p1144901

Truth be told, this was all inspired by Hagoth. His annotated essays made me think about how much better it is to attack the apologetics head on than to leave yourself open to rebuttals like the CES Letter does. And that is in *no* way a knock on the CES Letter, but I saw a lot of people would read it, go to FAIR or LDS Answers, etc and then feel like the CES Letter was being dishonest. By going after it this way it really (in my opinion) makes it clear that the apologetics do not work. His annotative essays are really the core of the site and I've been trying to build around it.

And thank you for sharing this - I know it's getting minimal views right now but it's helpful for me to put thoughts down and so far it's helped one person I think, so that's encouraging.

jfro18, I think your fact-check plan is a good one. There is not doubt that this information has already been available elsewhere, but new versions of this material is worth creating because new people who have never encountered this material are always arising. Maybe you will be lucky and be one of the pantheon of apostate celebrities that get a full response by FairMormon.

LOL... I highly doubt that happens considering how many others have done this, but I hope it leads a few people out or at least gets some people thinking differently about the church. That would make it worth the time for sure.

[MerrieMiss]

edit: One example, my wife might say "Yes, JS was involved in treasure digging, which is weird. But we can't judge the past for being different." And then she'd go on her marry way. But the real trouble happens when you realize what those actions imply. JS believed in practicing a form of black magic, involving animal sacrifices and everything. If that was real, if he really did see visions (as Bushman implies when he says it was a preparatory step to help him receive revelation) then we today, subscribe to the reality and efficacy of black magic, seances, etc.

But if you ask my wife directly, if she believes in those things, she'd say no. So let's look at the opposite side of his treasure digging. He had no visionary powers, and couldn't see anything. And yet, he charged people for services finding lost things, or hunting down buried treasure which means he was a fraud! Do we really believe that God would choose a liar, and a fraud as his mouthpiece for the restoration of his gospel?

Furthermore, Moroni's visit and obtaining the Gold Plates followed the EXACT. SAME. FORMULA. as all his previous treasure hunts. Saints breezes past that by noting the JS had "heard" stories of guardian angels and treasures, but Moroni and the plates were different. Except they weren't. If JS was a fraud, and then told the same story to convince people he had found the gold plates, how is that not a continuation of the fraud?

There is no win here. Either our church is founded on black magic, or JS was a fraud. But those implications are completely missed by anyone casually reading the book.

I was in a place for a long time where I argued that god was using means that Joseph Smith could understand. I mean, the bible is filled with that kind of stuff: talking donkey, animal sacrifice, Moses and the snakes, competitions with Baal, burning bushes, and on and on. Obviously God had no problem using the supernatural. Why wouldn't Joseph Smith witch for water? Dig for treasure? Why wouldn't god use Joseph Smith's occupation to to get him to accept a heavenly messenger? After all, Moses was killing lambs to save the firstborn! He and Aaron were competing with Pharaoh's magicians. I wouldn't be too hard on people who make this connection - in some ways, it's very believable. If you believe the bible and what it contains, why not other incredible ideas? (It isn't that the rock in the hat is stupid and magic glasses attached to a breastplate aren't -they're both ridiculous - it's the lying about it.)

And I guess that's where judeo-christian thought really broke down for me. When you do a little research and find out early judaism was a form of monolatry, everything in the bible makes rational sense, like Rachel and her idols. When you start reading religious texts around the world, myths and folklore, Joseph Campbell, you begin seeing that there's a common theme that humanity is holding onto, many of which are developed independent of each other. Which makes me ask, if god was okay with every culture finding him in their own way, why the sudden shift to a corporate, bland structure where everything is the same? Why only one god now? Why no magic or miracles? And then when you start reading contemporary texts of Smith, where people thought people like him were nuts (just like our anti-vaxxers and essential oil believers today).

Anyway, proceed with the Saints experiment. It may give people something to think about. I know my husband often thinks more about something if it comes from a source that isn't me. I'm sure others are the same. It might just make something click for someone. I know reading things like that really made a difference to me. They say the internet doesn't change anyone's mind, but I disagree. Made the biggest difference in my life.

[MerrieMiss]

What I have found while discussing the book with my wife is that she can and does acknowledge some of the more difficult historical happenings without actually considering the implications of those happenings. So something that notes events that are technically mentioned, and then explains why those events can't just be glossed over, might be very helpful. I've started something like that, but I've been reading the book on Kindle, and my notes are all contained within there.

You're right though about your discussion with your wife. The last talk I had about church with my wife, she said that polygamy/polyandry are wrong, but then when you connect it to the church she says it was a bad thing that it had to happen, but from God. I don't know what it takes for that insulation to get broken for people to realize if it's wrong, it's wrong... but apparently for a lot of people it does happen eventually.

Yep, same experience here. Interesting example: my husband maintains he's known about Joesph Smith and polygamy all along. When I asked him to point out where he learned this, he said church materials. I asked where, and he went to the Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith where it's never mentioned that he has additional wives. His response? "That's odd." And he moved on never giving it a second thought.

I've seen it mentioned by several people, and it was certainly true for me, it takes more than just the intellectual part to make those connections - there has to be both an emotional reason and an intellectual one. I had plenty of intellectual, doctrinal, historical reasons to believe the church wasn't true for years, but it wasn't until I had an emotional breakthrough I was able to look at it all objectively. I think that's what makes the faith crisis so difficult - it's an emotional realization coupled with truth.

[Corsair]

edit: One example, my wife might say "Yes, JS was involved in treasure digging, which is weird. But we can't judge the past for being different." And then she'd go on her marry way.

Careful! Going on a "marry" way appears to be how Joseph was operating during his entire time in Nauvoo.

[Arcturus]

I'll give it a go for a while - if it ends up being stupid I can always kill it off. It's not like a lot of people are visiting the site anyway.

Don't let this get you down jfro18! What you've done is awesome. I hope you plan to keep the site up for the long haul.

[græy]

Careful! Going on a "marry" way appears to be how Joseph was operating during his entire time in Nauvoo.

LOL, good catch. I stared at that word for 2 or 3 seconds yesterday after typing it and couldn't figure out why it didn't quite feel right.

I certainly hope my wife doesn't decide to follow Joseph down that particular path.

[græy]

I mean, the bible is filled with that kind of stuff: talking donkey, animal sacrifice, Moses and the snakes, competitions with Baal, burning bushes, and on and on. Obviously God had no problem using the supernatural. Why wouldn't Joseph Smith witch for water? Dig for treasure? Why wouldn't god use Joseph Smith's occupation to to get him to accept a heavenly messenger? After all, Moses was killing lambs to save the firstborn! He and Aaron were competing with Pharaoh's magicians. I wouldn't be too hard on people who make this connection - in some ways, it's very believable. If you believe the bible and what it contains, why not other incredible ideas? (It isn't that the rock in the hat is stupid and magic glasses attached to a breastplate aren't -they're both ridiculous - it's the lying about it.)

Those are good points. And I admit to falling back to the "animal sacrifice for God = animal sacrifice to appease guardian spirit" in my mind before too. Just like your rock+hat vs stones+breastplate argument, weird things are weird, why accept one and not the other?

I still find it frustrating that my wife believes whole-heartedly that God would condemn any sort of ritualistic animal killing, yet seems fine with that being something his chosen prophet practiced.

Cognitive dissonance is a hell of a thing.

[20/20hind]

"They are just gaslighting the hell out of everyone"..

Gaslighting for Joseph Smith has become such a perfected art for this corporation.

[jfro18]

Three chapters down... I can see why Saints took 6 years of approvals before release. They dance so carefully around these issues that it's amazing they released this at all.

If you read Saints along with the church's claim that this is the newest, most honest church history and then read any type of rebuttal to it, I can't imagine you'd believe a word they said ever again.

I've read a handful of chapters around the wort of the issues and I don't think it gets that much better. The gaslighting is strong with this one.

[jfro18]

I just finished Chapter 5 this morning... that chapter is an absolute doozy when you look at the Martin Harris/Anthon meeting that the church continues to push as fact when Anthon has a completely different story, and that we have varying descriptions of what the "Urim and Thummim" looked like when Joseph Smith himself said he would be destroyed if anyone saw it!

Anyway... the one thing that always cracks me up whenever I see it is this interaction that Emma claims happened (and of course is featured in Saints):

One day, while he translated, Joseph suddenly grew pale. “Emma, did Jerusalem have a wall around it?” he asked.

“Yes,” she said, recalling descriptions of it in the Bible.

“Oh,” Joseph said with relief, “I was afraid I had been deceived.”23

It's such a stupid thing. First, it was mentioned by Emma 50+ years after in the same interview that she claimed Joseph never had any other wives but her.

But more importantly - Joseph Smith we are told studied the Bible constantly, so of course he would know of the wall. And even if you don't believe that... of all the things in the Book of Mormon, why would that be the thing that would turn his face pale?

Am I missing something here or am I right that the exchange is completely nonsensical?

[Reuben]

Deceived by Satan about Jerusalem having a wall? Are we meant to understand that Satan was trying to sneak things into the text to make Joseph look uninspired? Such as supporting the idea that all human languages were created by a curse from God, maybe?

Darn that wily Satan. Darn him to heck.

[græy]

This is really looking good jfro18! Thank you for putting in all the time to put this together.