LDS Joseph Smith Smashes the Printing Press of His Critics

[He is the way]

Don't know, don't care, not relevant. Why do you keep defending your outlaw false prophet?

Yes it is relevant because it was the Marshall who actually destroyed the press. He was the law in Nauvoo. However, they were only wanting to kill the prophet Joseph Smith, not the Marshall.

 

[He is the way]

Great, that's 0ne. Was his vote the only vote? How many members were there? And where is the record to indicate he was for the destruction of the press?

Good questions, do you have the answers?

 

[mmksparbud]

Good questions, do you have the answers?

I'm not the one that thinks anyone other than JS and his buddies destroyed the property of someone else for printing stuff against JS---all of it true anyway. I do not need to know for it seems more than obvious to me and anyone else that is not LDS.

 

[He is the way]

I'm not the one that thinks anyone other than JS and his buddies destroyed the property of someone else for printing stuff against JS---all of it true anyway. I do not need to know for it seems more than obvious to me and anyone else that is not LDS.

A lot of people assume they know the facts when indeed they really don't know the full story. There are a lot of people who want the prophets dead.

 

[mmksparbud]

A lot of people assume they know the facts when indeed they really don't know the full story. There are a lot of people who want the prophets dead.

Yes, like you, who only believe what they want, no matter what the truth may be. The whole point for you guys is to make others believe that JS was right about everything he did when he clearly wasn't. You can't even admit the clearly obvious fact that he is the one that destroyed the press, the rest were just following orders he wanted carried out.

 

[He is the way]

Yes, like you, who only believe what they want, no matter what the truth may be. The whole point for you guys is to make others believe that JS was right about everything he did when he clearly wasn't. You can't even admit the clearly obvious fact that he is the one that destroyed the press, the rest were just following orders he wanted carried out.

I know that Joseph Smith gave the order to destroy the press, but you don't know the rest of the story.

"Brother Joseph called a meeting at his own house and told us that God showed to him in an open vision in daylight [meaning that this was not something he had just conjured up in dreams of the night] that if he did not destroy that printing press that it would cause the blood of the Saints to flow in the streets and by this was that evil destroyed."

From: Truman G. Madsen, Joseph Smith the Prophet (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1989), 114; citing Diary of George Laub, BYU Special Collections, 18.

So ignore God or do His will?

 

[mmksparbud]

I know that Joseph Smith gave the order to destroy the press, but you don't know the rest of the story.

"Brother Joseph called a meeting at his own house and told us that God showed to him in an open vision in daylight [meaning that this was not something he had just conjured up in dreams of the night] that if he did not destroy that printing press that it would cause the blood of the Saints to flow in the streets and by this was that evil destroyed."

From: Truman G. Madsen, Joseph Smith the Prophet (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1989), 114; citing Diary of George Laub, BYU Special Collections, 18.

So ignore God or do His will?

LOL!! The get out of jail free card for the LDS---God told him to! Right, like God told him to have a bunch more wives---God told this man nothing. He said God did and the LDS believe. What else is new?

 

[He is the way]

LOL!! The get out of jail free card for the LDS---God told him to! Right, like God told him to have a bunch more wives---God told this man nothing. He said God did and the LDS believe. What else is new?

LOL People on glass houses shouldn't throw rocks:

White claimed to have received over 2,000 visions and dreams from God[4] in public and private meetings throughout her life, which were witnessed by Adventist pioneers and the general public.

From: Ellen G. White - Wikipedia

 

[mmksparbud]

LOL People on glass houses shouldn't throw rocks:

White claimed to have received over 2,000 visions and dreams from God[4] in public and private meetings throughout her life, which were witnessed by Adventist pioneers and the general public.

From: Ellen G. White - Wikipedia

There you go again, trying to derail this thread. It is not about White but about JS. That is what you do when you can not defend your point. And she most certainly did and has not one tiny thing to do with the fact that only JS was responsible for illegally destroying the property of someone else. Everyone on that city council were JS loyalists. White was not there and had nothing to with this. Your desperation is evident. But thanks for the plug. The difference between the 2 is clear.

 

[He is the way]

There you go again, trying to derail this thread. It is not about White but about JS. That is what you do when you can not defend your point. And she most certainly did and has not one tiny thing to do with the fact that only JS was responsible for illegally destroying the property of someone else. Everyone on that city council were JS loyalists. White was not there and had nothing to with this. Your desperation is evident. But thanks for the plug. The difference between the 2 is clear.

It is evident that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God and made the correct choice. He gave up his life for the benefit of the saints and Christ's true church. Christ's true restored church will continue to lead people to salvation through correct principles and teachings.

 

[mmksparbud]

It is evident that Joseph Smith was a true prophet of God and made the correct choice. He gave up his life for the benefit of the saints and Christ's true church. Christ's true restored church will continue to lead people to salvation through correct principles and teachings.

Obvious only to the LDS. You guys make a big deal of read you BOM after praying, yet your church forbids you to read the works of anyone else. You do not know anything about White, except what you have read on Wikipedia. You will not actually read her works, you can't and your are afraid to. If you did, you would not remain an LDS. We have many ex-LDS.

 

[He is the way]

Obvious only to the LDS. You guys make a big deal of read you BOM after praying, yet your church forbids you to read the works of anyone else. You do not know anything about White, except what you have read on Wikipedia. You will not actually read her works, you can't and your are afraid to. If you did, you would not remain an LDS. We have many ex-LDS.

The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints does not forbid me to read anything. That being said I am positive that The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints is Christ's true church.

 

[mmksparbud]

The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints does not forbid me to read anything. That being said I am positive that The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter Day Saints is Christ's true church.

Really
I dare you to read the Great Controversy. I read your book, how come after all this time, you won't read even one book of mind? Maybe then you are just afraid to.
We all know you believe in your prophet, has nothing to do with JS destroying the printing press. Now, it's because God told him to. Before you swore up and down he had nothing to do with it---it was all the city council that did it. So now, you hide him behind the God call. How come you never pulled that card out until now? Why not from the very beginning?

 

[Ironhold]

Really
I dare you to read the Great Controversy. I read your book, how come after all this time, you won't read even one book of mind? Maybe then you are just afraid to.
We all know you believe in your prophet, has nothing to do with JS destroying the printing press. Now, it's because God told him to. Before you swore up and down he had nothing to do with it---it was all the city council that did it. So now, you hide him behind the God call. How come you never pulled that card out until now? Why not from the very beginning?

I've read more anti-Mormon books than most anti-Mormons I've encountered have read, period.

 

[He is the way]

Really
I dare you to read the Great Controversy. I read your book, how come after all this time, you won't read even one book of mind? Maybe then you are just afraid to.
We all know you believe in your prophet, has nothing to do with JS destroying the printing press. Now, it's because God told him to. Before you swore up and down he had nothing to do with it---it was all the city council that did it. So now, you hide him behind the God call. How come you never pulled that card out until now? Why not from the very beginning?

When did I say Joseph Smith had nothing to do with the press being destroyed? He did not destroy the press and he did as the city council recommended which was to tell the Marshall to rid the town of the press. Would you have believed any differently if I would have mentioned it sooner?

 

[mmksparbud]

I've read more anti-Mormon books than most anti-Mormons I've encountered have read, period.

LOL! That is not an anti-Mormon book! You're not even mentioned!!

 

[mmksparbud]

When did I say Joseph Smith had nothing to do with the press being destroyed? He did not destroy the press and he did as the city council recommended which was to tell the Marshall to rid the town of the press. Would you have believed any differently if I would have mentioned it sooner?

Seeing as I do not believe JS is a prophet of God--no, it would have made no difference. Just strange to not mention it right of the bat. He did not physically destroy the press---he just gave the orders. Everyone knew what he wanted done. No non-Mormon would have had wanted it destroyed.

 

[Ran77]

1. Wikipedia also gives a definition of proving libel, which is noted that you conveniently left out in all your so-called evidences. So below from your Wiki defamation definition page (bold mine):
Proving libel[edit]
There are several things a person must prove to establish that libel has taken place. In the United States, a person must prove that the statement was false, caused harm, and was made without adequate research into the truthfulness of the statement. These steps are for an ordinary citizen. For a celebrity or public official, a person must prove the first three steps, and that the statement was made with the intent to do harm or with reckless disregard for the truth,[16] which is usually specifically referred to as "actual malice".[17]

So, other than your opinion, still waiting for this evidence that libel/slander was proven.

2. Joseph Smith got his feelings hurt from people who disagreed with him. Does not prove libel, slander, falsehood, and/or perjury.
3. Irrelevant
4. Irrelevant
5. Not applicable. St John's Review did not exist in the 1840's.

So, no evidence presented that libel/slander occurred and no points for you.

These comments demonstrate a lack of understanding about what constitutes "evidence presented." It does not require your acceptance to qualify as either evidence or having been presented.

If I'm not mistaken, the Wikipedia quote provides the requirements for proving libel under modern-day parameters. The requirements during Joseph Smith's time was quite different. Specifically, the emphasis was placed on the person or newspaper to provide reasonable evidence that their claim was true. I looked at the article and this was not done. However, I do find it amusing that you refute point number five above with the argument that St. John's Review did not exist in the 1840's, but provide a modern understanding of the law through Wikipedia as part of your evidence. That's a double standard.

As fun as this has been, I have provided evidence and see no reason to continue going over the same arguments ad infinitum. Thank you for taking the time to respond.

 

[BigDaddy4]

These comments demonstrate a lack of understanding about what constitutes "evidence presented." It does not require your acceptance to qualify as either evidence or having been presented.

If I'm not mistaken, the Wikipedia quote provides the requirements for proving libel under modern-day parameters. The requirements during Joseph Smith's time was quite different. Specifically, the emphasis was placed on the person or newspaper to provide reasonable evidence that their claim was true. I looked at the article and this was not done. However, I do find it amusing that you refute point number five above with the argument that St. John's Review did not exist in the 1840's, but provide a modern understanding of the law through Wikipedia as part of your evidence. That's a double standard.

As fun as this has been, I have provided evidence and see no reason to continue going over the same arguments ad infinitum. Thank you for taking the time to respond.

I agree that it is pointless to continue to ask for actual evidence vs. the speculation/opinion that has been presented as "evidence" that JS acted lawfully and did not violate the U.S. and Illinois Constitutionally-protected rights of the printing press owners. It is also pointless to continue to ask for evidence that if libel did occur, that destruction of private property is a just remedy.

Kudos to you for trying, though.

 

[He is the way]

I agree that it is pointless to continue to ask for actual evidence vs. the speculation/opinion that has been presented as "evidence" that JS acted lawfully and did not violate the U.S. and Illinois Constitutionally-protected rights of the printing press owners. It is also pointless to continue to ask for evidence that if libel did occur, that destruction of private property is a just remedy.

Kudos to you for trying, though.

Joseph Smith did not destroy the printing press, and those who did were not brought to trial. Therefore the title of this thread is wrong.