Did Joseph Smith Jr. ever lie?

[_Maksutov]

Come on Subby, your debacle is still fresh in memory. You brought up the holocaust for the sheer offensiveness of it and to muddy the waters.

again, presuppositions...when unable to address message you go after messenger. You insist that you "know" the true motives when the motive you are presented with is not to your liking.

You were all over the map and left a huge incoherent mess. But don't let that stop you from defending your lying prophet. After all, he wasn't responsible for your ineptitude.

I am not defending anyone...once again, your presuppositions replace your intellect (or rumor of intellect). I simply pointed out how the poster did not respond to the OP's request and only offered soap-box styled conjecture...kinda like you are doing here - rather than deal with the actual topic, you would prefer to discuss your fantasy about whatever you imagined was going on with another thread and then conclude that this must surely make you correct about this thread.

So, did Joseph Smith ever lie?

[_subgenius]

So, did Joseph Smith ever lie?

i am sure you could start your own thread for that topic...but... i believe the topic at hand is - "Can it be demonstrated, from his own writings or public statements, that he lied, contradicted himself, or was less than truthful?" (and according to OP, barring the rather contentious topic of polygamy)

So, do you have trouble focusing on what people write?

[_Maksutov]

So, did Joseph Smith ever lie?

i am sure you could start your own thread for that topic...but... i believe the topic at hand is - "Can it be demonstrated, from his own writings or public statements, that he lied, contradicted himself, or was less than truthful?" (and according to OP, barring the rather contentious topic of polygamy)

So, do you have trouble focusing on what people write?

Escape and evade, eh, Subby? Anything but acknowledge the lies of your 'prophet'. I love how Clintonian you've become. You wear those avatars well.

[_carbon dioxide]

Can it be demonstrated, from his own writings or public statements, that he lied, contradicted himself, or was less than truthful?

The issue I have with this question is that is depending on how one views Joseph Smith will determine the answer to the question. If one believes Joseph Smith was a "con man" they will hold to the view that much of what Joseph claimed was a lie. If one believes him to be a prophet, they will say he was not lying. What is a lie

lie: "a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood."

Being wrong is not a lie. Being inaccurate is not a lie. Stating a belief that one believes to be true but is not true is not a lie. I have not seen really anything from the records that Joseph Smith believed anything other than what he said he believed or what happened to him. To Joseph Smith, an angel named Moroni did visit him on multiple occasions. People may not believe that and that is fine but to Joseph, that was a reality. In his mind, he was not lying because he was not telling an intentional untruth. He told what he believed to be true.

[_Maksutov]

Can it be demonstrated, from his own writings or public statements, that he lied, contradicted himself, or was less than truthful?

The issue I have with this question is that is depending on how one views Joseph Smith will determine the answer to the question. If one believes Joseph Smith was a "con man" they will hold to the view that much of what Joseph claimed was a lie. If one believes him to be a prophet, they will say he was not lying. What is a lie

lie: "a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood."

Being wrong is not a lie. Being inaccurate is not a lie. Stating a belief that one believes to be true but is not true is not a lie. I have not seen really anything from the records that Joseph Smith believed anything other than what he said he believed or what happened to him. To Joseph Smith, an angel named Moroni did visit him on multiple occasions. People may not believe that and that is fine but to Joseph, that was a reality. In his mind, he was not lying because he was not telling an intentional untruth. He told what he believed to be true.

Do you really think you can *know* what he really believed when he himself said, "No man knows my history"?

And so how should we solve the dilemma of such disparate perspectives?

[_Roger]

If one believes Joseph Smith was a "con man" they will hold to the view that much of what Joseph claimed was a lie. If one believes him to be a prophet, they will say he was not lying.

That's the bottom line, and rarely will discussions like these change anyone's point of view. It's pretty obvious to me that Hillary Clinton is a serial liar. In fact, it's so obvious to me that I find it difficult to believe that her supporters can genuinely believe otherwise. It's a pretty similar scenario with Joseph Smith, in my opinion. If there were just a few questionable incidents then one might be inclined to give Joseph the benefit of the doubt, but the problem is, if you really start looking at his history - just like Hillary Clinton - he gives his critics ample ammunition.

The missing manuscript episode that I wrote about a few posts back is just one example. It would seem difficult to squeeze the known circumstances of that incident into any of the: "Being wrong is not a lie. Being inaccurate is not a lie. Stating a belief that one believes to be true but is not true is not a lie" categories. It seems to me it's pretty cut and dry: either he was telling the truth or he was lying. I don't see how he could have sincerely believed he was telling the truth, when in fact he wasn't.

So if that much is true, then we have a simple yes or no choice. Given a yes or no choice, I suggest the evidence clearly points to Joseph lying. But that's just one example. There are many others. He obviously lied to Emma about polygamy. A fake sealing ceremony was held exclusively for her benefit after she finally, reluctantly relented and allowed Joseph to take a plural wife, when he had in fact already been sealed to the girl. Then there's the changing revelations, such as this one:

and he has a gift to translate the book and I have commanded him that he shall pretend to no other gift, for I will grant him no other gift.

And you have a gift to translate the plates; and this is the first gift that I bestowed upon you; and I have commanded that you should pretend to no other gift until my purpose is fulfilled in this; for I will grant unto you no other gift until it is finished.

Then there's the Kirtland Bank fiasco. Then there's the Kinderhook plates. The whole Book of Abraham thing. It goes on and on. Nothing seems to matter to folks who want to believe Joseph Smith was a true prophet.

[_SteelHead]

Saw this on reddit today:

http://www.josephsmithpapers.org/paperS ... s%20Carlin
24 June 1842
Governor of the State of Illinois
Nauvoo June 24th. 1842
Thomas Carlin Governor of the State of Ill.
Dr. Sir It becomes my duty to lay before you some facts relative to the conduct of our Major General John C. Bennett: which have been proven beyond the possibility of dispute, and which he himself has admitted to be true, in my presence. It is evident that his general character is that of an adulterer of the worst kind, and although he has a wife and Children living, circumstances which have transpired in Nauvoo, have proven to a demonstration that he cares not whose character is disgraced whose honor is destroyed nor who suffers so that his lustful appetite may be gratified and further he cares not how many, nor how abominable the falsehood he has to make use of to accomplish his wicked purposes, even should it be that he brings disgrace upon a whole community..
Some time ago, it having been reported to me that some of the most aggravating cases of adultery had been committed upon some previously respectable females in our city, I took proper measures to ascertain the truth of the report, and was soon enabled to bring sufficient witnesses before proper Authority to establish the following facts, More than twelve months ago Bennett went to a Lady in the City and began to teach her that promiscuous intercourse between the sexes was lawful and no harm in it, and requested the privilege of gratifying his passions but she refused in the strongest terms saying that it was very wrong to do so, and it would bring a disgrace on the Church. Finding this argument ineffectual he told her that men in higher standing in the church than himself not only sanctioned but practised the same deeds, and in order to finish the controversy said and affirmed that I both taught and acted in the same manner, but publicly proclaimed against it in consequence of the prejudace of the people and fear of trouble in my own house.

Remember, Joseph was up to 10 secret wives as of the date of this letter

By this means he accomplished his designs, he seduced a respectable female with lying and subjected her to public infamy and disgrace. Not contented with what he had already done he made the attempt on others and by using the same language seduced them also. about the early part of July 1841 I received a letter from Pittsburgh Pa In it was contained information setting forth that said Bennett had a wife and two or three children then living. This I red to him and he acknowledged it was true A very short time after this he attempted to destroy himself by taking poison but being discovered before it had taken sufficient affect, and proper antidotes administered he again recovered. The impression made on the minds of the public by this event was; that he was so ashamed of his base conduct that he took this coursse to escape the censures of a justly indignant community. It might have been supposed that after this he would have broke off his adulterous proceedings but to the contrary the public consternation had scarcly ceased before he was again deeply involved in the same wicked proceedings, and continued until a knowledge of the fact reached my ears. I immediately charged him with the whole circumstance and he candidly acknowledged the truth of the whole. The foregoing facts were established on oath before an alderman of the City.— the affidavits are now in my possession. In order that the truth might be fully established I asked Bennett to testify before an alderman whether I had given him any cause for such aggravating conduct. He testified that I never taught to him that illicit intercourses with females was under any circumstances justifiable neither did he ever hear me teach any thing but the strictest principles of righteousness and virtue.This affidavit is also in my possession. I have also a similar affidavit taken before the City Council and signed by the members of the council after these things transpired, and finding that I should resist all such wicked conduct and knowing that he could no longer maintain himself as a respectable citizen he has seen fit to leave Nauvoo, and that very abruptly. I have been credibly informed that he is colleaguing with some of our former cruel persecuters the missourians and that he is threatening destruction upon us; and under these circumstances I consider it my duty to give you information on the subject that a knowledge of his proceedings may be before you in due season It can be proven by hundreds of witnesses that he is one of the basest of liars that his whole routine of proceedings whilst amongst us has been of the basest kind.

Irony

He also stated here that he had resigned his commission as Major General to the Governor weither this be true or not I have no knowledge. I wish to be informed on the subject that we may know how to act in relation to the Legion. A short time ago I was told by a friend of mine (not a member of the Church) that some of the Missourians were conspiring to come up to Nauvoo and Kidnap me, and not doubting but that it might be true I consulted with General Bennett upon the most proper course to be pursued. We concluded to write to you on the subject, and I requested him to do so. I understand he has wrote to you but I know not in what manner, and I should be very much pleased if you would write to me on reciept of this giving me the contents of his communication. I have also heard that yourself has entertained of late very unfavourable feelings towards us as a People, and espicially so with reguard to myself and that you have said I ought to be shot &c. If this be true I should be pleased to know from your self the reason of such hostile feelings, for I know of no cause which can possibly exist that might produce such feelings in your breast. It is rumoured and strong evidence exists that Bennett and David Kilbourne and Edward Kilbourne have posted Bills in Galena calling upon the people to hold meetings and have themselves in readiness at a moments warning to assemble and come here and mob us out of the place and try to kidnap me we know not as to the truth of this report but we have conversed with some transient persons who had the report from a Gentleman who lately came from there and had seen those hand Bills posted in Galena— In case of a Mob coming upon us I wish to be informed by the Governor what will be the best course for us to pursue, and how he wished us to act in reguard to this matter Joseph Smith Leu. General Nauvoo Legion

The Cowardly Liar never ceases to amaze me.

No shortage of lies.

[_Themis]

lie: "a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood."

So was he lying when he denied he had more then one wife? Was he lying when he denied being married to some other women to Emma? Was he lying years later when he made his work with Stowel out like he was just some regular worker? Was he lying with the bank scam about how much money they really had?

There are many examples Joseph deliberately trying to deceive, but some instances maybe he was just delusional. We have some posters who think feelings are the only way to know the truth. Did Joseph delude himself in a similar way, such that when he said a certain hieroglyph was Abraham's signature. Was he lying or just delusional? There are multitudes of examples like this.

Does it matter if he believed or not, or is it more important whether his claims are true or false?

[_Roger]

He testified that I never taught to him that illicit intercourses with females was under any circumstances justifiable neither did he ever hear me teach any thing but the strictest principles of righteousness and virtue.This affidavit is also in my possession.

This is one of the ways Joseph Smith was constantly excusing his own behavior. He never "taught to him that illicit intercourses with females was under any circumstances justifiable" because to his (convoluted) way of thinking plural marriage wasn't illicit. He just left that key component out of the letter - probably due to limited space. The only difference between Bennett's behavior and Smith's is that Smith had Smith's prior approval.