The Prophet Joseph Smith
When Jesus walked the earth with his disciples, he told them:
These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not be offended. They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service. And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me.
It was to be so with the living apostles and prophets throughout their ministries, both anciently and in modern times.
From the time Joseph Smith told a Methodist minister, a family friend, about his vision of God, he became the target of ridicule, derision, and persecution organized by the Christian clergymen of his day.
Beginning at the age of fourteen years, Joseph was continually harassed, physically assaulted, tarred and feathered, had a vial of poison poured into his throat, subjected to frivolous lawsuits for charges like "ecclesiastical perjury" (in civil court in the United States?), and falsely imprisoned for months at a time. He was to be executed military firing squad but a kind general named Doniphan refused to carry out the order.
I once had an Evangelical declare to me that any group of "meek, God-filled Christians" had "more power than any of [our] supposed apostles." On June 27,1844 a band of these "meek, God-filled Christians" exercised their "power." The following comes from the Doctrine and Covenants of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Section 135.
To seal the testimony of this book and the Book of Mormon, we announce the martyrdom of Joseph Smith the Prophet, and Hyrum Smith the Patriarch. They were shot in Carthage jail, on the 27th of June, 1844, about five o’clock p.m., by an armed mob—painted black—of from 150 to 200 persons. Hyrum was shot first and fell calmly, exclaiming: I am a dead man! Joseph leaped from the window, and was shot dead in the attempt, exclaiming: dO Lord my God! They were both shot after they were dead, in a brutal manner, and both received four balls.
John Taylor and Willard Richards, two of the Twelve, were the only persons in the room at the time; the former was wounded in a savage manner with four balls, but has since recovered; the latter, through the providence of God, escaped, without even a hole in his robe.
Joseph Smith, the Prophet and Seer of the Lord, has done more, save Jesus only, for the salvation of men in this world, than any other man that ever lived in it. In the short space of twenty years, he has brought forth the Book of Mormon, which he translated by the gift and power of God, and has been the means of publishing it on two continents; has sent the fulness of the everlasting gospel, which it contained, to the four quarters of the earth; has brought forth the revelations and commandments which compose this book of Doctrine and Covenants, and many other wise documents and instructions for the benefit of the children of men; gathered many thousands of the Latter-day Saints, founded a great city, and left a fame and name that cannot be slain. He lived great, and he died great in the eyes of God and his people; and like most of the Lord’s anointed in ancient times, has sealed his mission and his works with his own blood; and so has his brother Hyrum. In life they were not divided, and in death they were not separated!
When Joseph went to Carthage to deliver himself up to the pretended requirements of the law, two or three days previous to his assassination, he said: “I am going like a lamb to the slaughter; but I am calm as a summer’s morning; I have a conscience void of offense towards God, and towards all men. I SHALL DIE INNOCENT, AND IT SHALL YET BE SAID OF ME—HE WAS MURDERED IN COLD BLOOD.”—The same morning, after Hyrum had made ready to go—shall it be said to the slaughter? yes, for so it was—he read the following paragraph, near the close of the twelfth chapter of Ether, in the Book of Mormon, and turned down the leaf upon it:
And it came to pass that I prayed unto the Lord that he would give unto the Gentiles grace, that they might have charity. And it came to pass that the Lord said unto me: If they have not charity it mattereth not unto thee, thou hast been faithful; wherefore thy garments shall be made clean. And because thou hast seen thy weakness, thou shalt be made strong, even unto the sitting down in the place which I have prepared in the mansions of my Father. And now I . . . bid farewell unto the Gentiles; yea, and also unto my brethren whom I love, until we shall meet before the judgment-seat of Christ, where all men shall know that my garments are not spotted with your blood. The testators are now dead, and their testament is in force.
Hyrum Smith was forty-four years old in February, 1844, and Joseph Smith was thirty-eight in December, 1843; and henceforward their names will be classed among the martyrs of religion; and the reader in every nation will be reminded that the Book of Mormon, and this book of Doctrine and Covenants of the church, cost the best blood of the nineteenth century to bring them forth for the salvation of a ruined world; and that if the fire can scathe a green tree for the glory of God, how easy it will burn up the dry trees to purify the vineyard of corruption. They lived for glory; they died for glory; and glory is their eternal reward. From age to age shall their names go down to posterity as gems for the sanctified.
They were innocent of any crime, as they had often been proved before, and were only confined in jail by the conspiracy of traitors and wicked men; and their innocent blood on the floor of Carthage jail is a broad seal affixed to “Mormonism” that cannot be rejected by any court on earth, and their innocent blood on the escutcheon of the State of Illinois, with the broken faith of the State as pledged by the governor, is a witness to the truth of the everlasting gospel that all the world cannot impeach; and their innocent blood on the banner of liberty, and on the magna charta of the United States, is an ambassador for the religion of Jesus Christ, that will touch the hearts of honest men among all nations; and their innocent blood, with the innocent blood of all the martyrs under the altar that John saw, will cry unto the Lord of Hosts till he avenges that blood on the earth. Amen.
The 165th anniversary of the martyrdom of the first prophet of God in modern times is Saturday, June 27th. As the world mourns the passing of celebrities such as Ed McMahon, Farah Fawcett, and Michael Jackson. perhaps Americans might find a moment to consider and remember the murder of the American Prophet, Joseph Smith. Mormons all over the world will sing this Sunday:
Long shall his blood which was shed by assassins plead unto heaven while the earth lauds his fame. Hail to the Prophet, ascended to heaven. Traitors and tyrants, now fight him in vain. Mingling with gods he can plan for his brethren. Death cannot conquer the hero again. (Praise to the Man, Hymn 27)
Comments
"perhaps Americans might find a moment to consider and remember the murder of the American Prophet, Joseph Smith."
Uh, WHY?
Joseph Smith and his teachings are relevant only to the LDS. They hold no interest beyond the LDS. No other Christians consider him a prophet.
Indeed, I am pressed to think of any LDS biblical scholar or theologian who is recognized as any sort of authority outside of LDS circles. Certainly the leadership of the LDS holds no recognition outside of the LDS. This is striking to me, as most religious traditions seem to have members that transcend the boundaries of the particular tradition and act as exemplars to others, such as the Dalai Lama and Catholics like Mother Teresa and Dorothy Day. I cannot think of any LDS that holds similar status. Certainly Joseph Smith does not.
He is an American "prophet" to LDS only. He holds no relevance to anyone else, except as a curiousity of history.
DA says, "Joseph Smith and his teachings are relevant only to the LDS. They hold no interest beyond the LDS."
Actually, in 2005 the Library of Congress held a 2-day symposium marking the Bicentennial of the birth of Joseph Smith. The Library noted of the event "Leading scholarly experts will examine Smith’s religious, social and theological contributions."
Harvard Divinity School offers a course called "Mormonism and the American Experience".
DA makes blanket statements about Joseph Smith's that reflects his understanding of history and the LDS but is not reflective of scholarly understanding.
Yes, a lot like the Savior. All the established churches at the time (i.e. Judaism and its various sects / castes - Pharisee, Sadducees) viewed him as first a "curiosity" and later as a heretic as well. Not surprising that modern leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of LDS are seen the same way by popular religionists of our day. Though they have all been and currently are men and women of distinction both within the Church and in broader society.
While I can see the study of Joseph Smith and Mormonism as a sociological phenomenon, my central point remains. LDS theology does not even enter into the Christian theological equation. I am well acquainted with Christian theology, and LDS "men and women of distinction" do not warrant even a passing mention.
Sorry, folks. Smith simply is not relevant to Christianity. Deal with it, and continue to live in the LDS bubble.
DA says, "LDS theology does not even enter into the Christian theological equation." What is the Christian theological equation and who wrote the equation?
Because you don't agree with the LDS movement does not make the movement (with its 13 million members) any less of a movement than "Methodism", "Calvinism", or "Presbyteterianism".
To say that LDS theology does not enter the equation simply means it doesn't enter into "your" equation. Christian theology is not one harmonious discourse on Christian faith. It is a series of movements and reformations.
Instead of saying, " Smith simply is not relevant to Christianity", you should just say, "Smith isn't relevant to MY movement or to MY interpretation of Christianity."
KJ:
Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans, and Catholics by and large talk to one another. LDS thought is completely apart from that.
It may regard itself as "Restorationist Christianity," but most Christian communities would not recognize it as a Christian church.
For example, the Catholic Church does not recognize Mormon baptism as valid, while it does regard the baptisms of Protestant churches. A convert from a Presbyterian church to a Catholic church would not need to be "re-baptized." A Mormon, raised as a Mormon, would need to be baptized because as far as the Church is concerned, they were never baptized.
LDS is not a Christian church. They do not recognize other Christian churches as valid, and see themselves as the "true, restored Church." Fine. However, it is fair to say that they are NOT Christians, but something new. That is okay. Buddhists are not Christians either.
DA,
Are you submitting that a church can only be called Christian or be true if they are at least somewhat accepted by all other Christian faiths or if they recognize each others' baptisms? The term or classification Christian, at least in my opinion, defines someone who is committed to be a follower of Jesus Christ and a Christian church is one that teaches the gospel of Christ (which the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (aka Mormon) does emphatically, but you are probably already aware of that since you are very familiar with our theology).Spare me the ever changing arguments against this.
And if Mormons and Joseph Smith are so irrelevant why do so many "Christian" churches spend the time to preach and teach against it? If it were irrelevant why spend time fighting it? The fact is that Joseph Smith and Mormonism have impacted and influenced millions of individuals. Either way, Mormons are not necessarily concerned with acceptance as much as they are the truth.
DA:
Again, you want to coopt the term "Christianity" to define solely YOUR movement or sect. If you define Christianity as someone who believes that Christ is their personal savior and the son of God, then Mormons are clearly Christians.
When you say, "The LDS is not a Christian church" - what you mean is "The LDS Church is not a part of my loose coalitian of Christian demoninations, movements, or sects that occasionally talk to each other and that may or may not recognize each others' baptisms."
Comparing the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints (LDS Church) to Buddhism in terms of their beliefs in Christ is nonsensical.
In fact, to say (as you do) that the "LDS Church is NOT Christian", "Smith is not relevant", and LDS "should continue to live in their LDS bubble" strikes me a bit condescending and not very Christ-like. But, I won't take offense.
DA2, MJ, et al:
"Again, you want to coopt the term "Christianity" to define solely YOUR movement or sect. If you define Christianity as someone who believes that Christ is their personal savior and the son of God, then Mormons are clearly Christians."
But you have rooted that claim in a document that we would claim to be false, the Book of Mormon. Thus, to us, you claim a false Jesus as your personal lord and savior.
Now, I cannot definitively claim you are wrong. I have reasons to think you ARE wrong, and you follow the false testimony of a false teacher, but that cannot be avoided. I have reasons for thinking that, many of which I am sure you have heard.
"Comparing the The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day-Saints (LDS Church) to Buddhism in terms of their beliefs in Christ is nonsensical."
I was not comparing LDS to Buddhism in description of Christology. I was saying that Mormons are not Christian, and that is okay. You don't have to be.
"In fact, to say (as you do) that the "LDS Church is NOT Christian", "Smith is not relevant", and LDS "should continue to live in their LDS bubble" strikes me a bit condescending and not very Christ-like. But, I won't take offense."
As I am not, according to LDS teaching, a true Christian, and I do not have the true gospel, and that truth was lost after the Great Apostasy, then I do not see why my opinion would matter. In fact, one aspect of LDS that has always fascinated me is the desire to be known as Christian, when in fact LDS would say until they came along, there was no true Christian church. So, why the desire for inclusion in a false group? I can see the drive to redefine Christian to mean LDS, but otherwise it makes no sense. Why would you care if you are not thought of as Christians by other Christians? My earlier point is that Buddhists are not Christians just means that they would not care that they are not. So why does it bother you if Christians would not include you?
Now, what I found condescending is the idea that "Americans" in general would care or give a second thought to the death of an "American prophet." Joseph Smith, to me, is a liar and a fraud. He had a "revelation" that included the call to take multiple wives, and a loose collection of sects now make that same case to abuse women and boys in plural marriages in isolated compounds. Warren Jeffs, anyone?
I freely admit the flaws and dangers of Christian denominations and sects. Jim Jones. David Koresh. But the LDS is not immune from this. Joseph Smith changed the lyrics, but not the tune.
I believe firmly in the saving grace of God through Jesus Christ, and I would not deny your salvation. I do think LDS teachings obscure and confuse rather than clarify the God's love and grace. That does not, from my perspective, put you outside of God's work. It just means you are not enjoying God's gift to the fullest. OTOH, I am sure you would say the same about me.
I am sorry he was killed at that jail, mainly because it prevented him from ever being fully exposed as the fraud that he was. I ask you one question that most Mormons don't know the answer to. Why was that mob so angry at him? Most answers you recieve are vague and quote scriptures like the ones Greg puts in his article. The truth is most Mormons are not aware of why the crowd was so angry with him. I won't go into it but I would hope anyone so dedicated to the man would be interested in the true events leading up to his death. Unfortunately if you are only looking in the D&C or the official Church history you will find little of what really happened. A little research reveals a lot about what transpired, such as how this "lamb" was armed and fought back even killing one of the attackers. But Mormon's would automattically scream "lies! halftruths! you are twisting the events!" etc. The problem is people believe what they want to believe and they refuse to look at Truth.
DA:
Let me try this another way. The term Christian describes someone who believes in Jesus Christ. It is not an adjective to describe one particular religion or coalition of religious sects (as you want define it). Indeed, someone can be a Christian and not belong to any sect, movement, or denomination.
The LDS church wants people to know that they are Christian because they believe in the saving power of Jesus Christ. However, if you want to say the LDS church doesn't have any formal (or loose) affiliations with other Christian denominations - that is fine - but it completely separate issue from not believing in Christ.
As for Mormons believing in a "false" Christ, what is a "false" Christ? Mormons believe in the Christ of the New Testament. The Book of Mormon describes Christ's visit to the American continent after His resurrection. If you don't believe it, OK. I don't believe Mary appeared in Fatima, but I don't believe Catholics worship a "false" Mary.
KJ:
"I don't believe Mary appeared in Fatima, but I don't believe Catholics worship a "false" Mary."
Not the same thing. A Catholic is not bound to accept any Marian apparition as definative or binding. Fatima and Lourdes are "approved" in the sense that they are accepted as true, and thus not harmful to a Catholic's faith and practice, but not all Catholics concern themselves with the validity of the apparitions.
To be LDS is to accept the First Vision and the Book of Mormon as definative. It is not something that provides consolation and edification of the faith, but the truth of the revelation.
Now, if the Catholic Church defined itself through the events at Fatima or Lourdes, your analogy would be accurate. That is not the case.
Smith's account of the history of the Americas has no corroboration in history, genetics, anthropology or archaeology. Considering the events described, some evidence should have turned up.
DA: OK. I don't believe the Pope has any authority given to him by God. If I did, I would be Catholic. But, that doesn't cause me to believe that Catholics aren't Christian or they worship a "false" Christ. They worship the same Christ that I do - the Christ of the New Testament. They just have some beliefs that differ from mine.
You don't believe Joseph Smith was a prophet or in the Book of Mormon. Therefore, you are not LDS. That fact that you don't believe in the Book of Mormon doesn't mean that the LDS believe in a "false" Christ. It just means you don't believe everything the LDS do - but you and I worship the same Christ of the New Testament. There is not "another" Christ that LDS worship.
As for scientific evidence of the Book of Mormon, that is a matter of "he said, she said". We can both point to evidence that may or may not suggest things happened the way the Book of Mormon explains but neither of us can prove or disprove it. Where is the evidence of a Great Fl
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!