- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
PressingForward wrote:SamBee wrote:
Even if someone with mental illness has some kind of spiritual experience I do not believe that it necessarily invalidates it.
Agreed! Let us not forget dear prophet Isaiah, who walked around naked for 3 years. I’m sure he was looked at as a complete lunatic back in his time.
hmmm…I struggle with this. We have experienced mental illness issues in our family, and it is disturbing and painful.I have a hard time placing my faith in the notion that spirituality comes from such a state.
Heber, I personally would not say that spirituality comes from such a state – but I am open to the idea that those who struggle with some form of “mental illness” also have an openness to a parted veil that those without such a condition often lack. My mom is a great example of this – a very “spiritual woman” when her meds work, but classicly schizophrenic when they don’t. I think perhaps the lack of restraint, for lack of a better phrase, that exhibits itself in “mental issues” also might free the mind to experience truly spiritual outpourings – but that’s just an “I think . . . maybe . . .”
Old-Timer wrote:I think perhaps the lack of restraint, for lack of a better phrase, that exhibits itself in “mental issues” also might free the mind to experience truly spiritual outpourings – but that’s just an “I think . . . maybe . . .”
I don’t know…that’s a sensitive issue for me I guess. Perhaps Joseph had some kind of mental situation…but mental illness doesn’t sound right…maybe I need a more in depth understanding of “mental illness” is what I need …but perhaps a different thread topic.Quote:Old-Timer wrote:
I have no desire to comment it on, curt. All I would have is pure speculation, and anything I say other than, “I think she probably was telling the truth,” would be impugning her character. My own actual answer is, “I think she was telling the truth” – but I have no reason to give for it.
My summary: I don’t know. Could have been truthful; could have been to support her husband. I don’t know.
Well, thanks for replying anyway, Old-Timer, despite your claim that you had “no desire” to.
It is absolutely ridiculous to worry about impugning the character of historical figures or else why study history? Sure, it is fair, and good historical methodology, that we do not simply make baseless, false claims about historical figures, but that does not mean we can’t or should not question their veracity or character. So what gives? It is not simply a matter of speculation that the BofM is not true or that the plates really did no exist. There are all kinds of reasons to question the veracity of the testimony of the three and the eight witnesses. Emma’s testimony needs to be considered in the same light. We don’t even know, in fact, that this was her testimony because all we have is her son’s report of the matter, produced only AFTER Emma died. He could have fabricated the whole thing. Maybe your point is it doesn’t matter because, well, how can we know? But I find that a very weak answer unless one ignores so much of the other evidence demonstrating the falsehood of the plates as an actual physical object that JS had in possession.
curt, please drop the sarcasm. That’s not how we operate here. Quote:Maybe your point is it doesn’t matter because, well, how can we know?
I’ve never said that once in all my time here about anything, so please drop the strawman.
Quote:But I find that a very weak answer unless one ignores so much of the other evidence demonstrating the falsehood of the plates as an actual physical object that JS had in possession.
Wasn’t my answer, and I agree that it’s weak. Strawmen usually are.
However, this is about that type of issue, so provide evidence that Joseph had no plates in his possession, if that is your belief. I happen to believe he had some kind of plates in his possession, and I personally think the evidence is rather solid for that conclusion. You might be right; I might be right; since, ultimately, we really can’t know for sure. I just believe the evidence for plates of some kind outweighs the evidence for no plates of any kind.
As I said in my comment, there are multiple possible answers to your original question about Emma – and, again, my response is that I think she was telling the truth about touching plates. I don’t know, but I think the statement probably is true.
I’d like to weigh in on the plates issue. I agree with Old-Timer that, for me, there is overwhelming evidence that there were plates of some kind. One of the things that bothered me a lot during my faith crisis was James Strang. Strang rose to status quickly in Joseph’s eyes, and upon Joseph’s death, Strang claimed that Joseph had given him authority to lead the church. Strang had a set of plates, that, in many ways were more convincing that Joseph’s story. He actually had witnesses come with him to help dig them up, let people touch and see them, and had a translation to accompany it (The Voree Record, and also The Book of the Law of the Lord). Strang led many of the saints away from the Brighamite church and they eventually settled on Beaver Island in Lake Michigan. Strang was crowned King over the Kingdom of God during this time, and reversed his position on polygamy, marrying 5 wives. This is not at all unlike what was transpiring in the later years of Joseph’s life especially with regard to the Council of 50. Anyway, in many ways Strang was a Joseph Smith double but with a bit more dictatorial bent.
The
Wikipedia articleFrom that webpage:
Quote:Like Joseph Smith, James Strang reported numerous visions, unearthed and translated ancient metal plates using the Urim and Thummim, and claimed to have restored long-lost spiritual knowledge to humankind. Like Smith, he presented witnesses to authenticate the records he claimed to have received. Unlike Smith, however, Strang offered his plates to the public for examination. The non-Mormon Christopher Sholes–inventor of the typewriter and editor of a local newspaper–perused Strang’s “Voree Plates”, a minuscule brass chronicle Strang said he had been led to by a vision in 1845. Sholes offered no opinion on Strang’s find, but described the would-be prophet as “honest and earnest” and opined that his followers ranked “among the most honest and intelligent men in the neighborhood.” Strang published his translation of these plates as the “Voree Record,” purporting to be the last testament of one “Rajah Manchou of Vorito,” who had lived in the area centuries earlier and wished to leave a brief statement for posterity. While many scoffed, two modern scholars have affirmed that the text on the plates appears to represent a genuine, albeit unknown, language. The Voree Plates disappeared around 1900, and their current whereabouts is unknown.
Heber13 wrote:PressingForward wrote:SamBee wrote:Even if someone with mental illness has some kind of spiritual experience I do not believe that it necessarily invalidates it.
Agreed! Let us not forget dear prophet Isaiah, who walked around naked for 3 years. I’m sure he was looked at as a complete lunatic back in his time.
hmmm…I struggle with this. We have experienced mental illness issues in our family, and it is disturbing and painful.I have a hard time placing my faith in the notion that spirituality comes from such a state.
I think that it has become so stigmatized in our society though that sometimes we don’t realise that it can have *positive* effects as well as negative. Our society’s attitude is either to sweep it under the rug, i.e. ignore it, or to just dope up the person in question.
And yet, some of the greatest people in history have experience mental illness. It can be painful, but as someone else here has pointed out, pain can be a symptom of growth, not just of disability. Sometimes mental illness is the mind’s way of saying not to continue along a particular path.
Great art and inventions have come out of mental illness, not just death and disability.
There is a very good Strangite site online. I don’t know whether I’m allowed to post the link or not. The Strangites seem to think that James Strang had authorisation from Smith to be his successor. His opponents say that the letter was forged. In many ways, Strang was more similar to Smith than Brigham Young was.
curt wrote:Quote:Old-Timer wrote:
I have no desire to comment it on, curt. All I would have is pure speculation, and anything I say other than, “I think she probably was telling the truth,” would be impugning her character. My own actual answer is, “I think she was telling the truth” – but I have no reason to give for it.
It is absolutely ridiculous to worry about impugning the character of historical figures or else why study history? …So what gives? It is not simply a matter of speculation that the BofM is not true or that the plates really did no exist…Maybe your point is it doesn’t matter because, well, how can we know? But I find that a very weak answer unless one ignores so much of the other evidence demonstrating the falsehood of the plates as an actual physical object that JS had in possession.
I agree that it’s a good idea to question historical claims especially highly unusual claims like this. However, I don’t believe that there is any convincing evidence that there were no plates. Instead we have people saying they saw or touched physical plates so unless there is a good reason to believe they were all liars at the same time then the simplest explanation is that there probably were some plates or at least a physical prop of some sort that they believed to be plates. Basically we don’t really have a single confession by anyone who said they saw or touched the plates later admitting they lied about it just to support Joseph so to assume they were all lying is pure speculation which I think was Ray’s original point.
Besides the official witnesses and Emma another witness of the plates (covered with cloth) was William Smith who said he lifted them and he guessed that they weighed about 60 lbs. When asked if he didn’t want to look under the cloth and see the plates he said no because Joseph told him they would be taken away again and Joseph was really upset when he had lost them before.
Reading some of what David Whitmer said I get the impression that he really believed in the Book of Mormon probably until he died even though he openly disagreed with the LDS Church in Salt Lake and especially disliked the doctrine of polygamy. He seemed to view Joseph Smith as a fallen prophet similar to King David but basically said this was no reason to reject the Book of Mormon because the Lord works in mysterious ways.
I could see a scenario with a few people deliberately telling lies while still being able to keep their stories straight and consistent with each other, but the more people you add to a full-blown conspiracy the harder it is for me to believe that they could really get away with this without at least one of them letting the cat out of the bag at some point. If you assume that the Book of Mormon is a purely man-made myth not only did Joseph Smith and possibly other co-conspirators have to write the story itself but they also had to convince many others to believe in it or get them to go along with them in the scheme without any of them ever exposing it.
DevilsAdvocate wrote:… I don’t believe that there is any convincing evidence that there were no plates. Instead we have people saying they saw or touched physical plates so unless there is a good reason to believe they were all liars at the same time then the simplest explanation is that there probably were some plates or at least a physical prop of some sort that they believed to be plates. Basically we don’t really have a single confession by anyone who said they saw or touched the plates later admitting they lied about it just to support Joseph so to assume they were all lying is pure speculation which I think was Ray’s original point.
I agree. I don’t know of many on either side of the authorship fence that believe there were no “plates.” Even most of the Rigdon/Spalding/Cowdery as authors’ advocates believe there was some kind of prop to convince key people of the story.
SamBee wrote:I think that it has become so stigmatized in our society though that sometimes we don’t realise that it can have *positive* effects as well as negative. Our society’s attitude is either to sweep it under the rug, i.e. ignore it, or to just dope up the person in question.
And yet, some of the greatest people in history have experience mental illness. It can be painful, but as someone else here has pointed out, pain can be a symptom of growth, not just of disability.
Thanks for putting it that way, SamBee.SamBee, go ahead and provide the link in a new thread about Strangites, if you want to do that – or here, if you just want to provide it. So who decides who is being sarcastic or not, Old-Timer? I thought your initial comment to my post was quite sarcastic, which is why I responded to it as I did. You suggested it would be beneath you to reply to and then did anyway. What am I supposed to make of that? Do you want this to be an open forum or not? Need we adhere to some established rules that don’t allow for contention? That would be sad. I am angry that I have been deceived. Does that not resonate with you? I have spent my whole life as a Mormon believing and now all of this!!!
Curt…I don’t have a “dog in the fight” here, but I’ll give my 2 cents worth on the subject. I love this forum. It is one of a very few I post on these days — mainly because it is friendly and thought-provoking. I don’t feel worried that somebody is going to attack me about my weird beliefs or “diagonal” positions on the church.
I have been involved (in the distant past) on RFM, MA&D, Mormon Discussions, and others…and the main reason I don’t go there much anymore is that they all have a “spirit” of attacking the poster. It didn’t feel good. It wasn’t worth it anymore…to me.
The way I look at it now is that we are each at various stages of our spiritual journey. I completely understand the anger many of us feel about a degree of deception that may have happened to us along the way. But I look at it differently now…I see what happened as each person doing the best they could considering their circumstances. It’s a matter of emotional survival — we try to hold on to what we feel is our foundation — sometimes defending the undefensible. I feel it best to love, and “bless” the angered, and hope they can get some healing and peace at some point. That comes with time, and discussion of the issues that are confusing to us. I have found that the good folks here, despite very different beliefs, are sympathetic, and really care for the well-being of each other. It’s a very supportive group…and I find it healing in many ways.
Anyway, that’s my feeling…of course I could be wrong!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.