FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Difference between revisions of "Criticism of Mormonism/Books/Nauvoo Polygamy/Chapter 2"
m (→155) |
m |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
||[Joseph] "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window.'" | ||[Joseph] "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window.'" | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | |||
*{{InternalContradiction|p. 65}} | *{{InternalContradiction|p. 65}} | ||
| − | *Age | + | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] |
| + | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Mind reading]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Romance]] | ||
| + | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | ||
| + | *Smith commonly exploits the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentism_(literary_and_historical_analysis) presentist fallacy] in the matter of Joseph's wives' ages. | ||
| + | *[[Polygamy book/Age of wives|Age of wives]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Presentism]] | ||
|| | || | ||
*Smith, Letter to "Brother and Sister [Newel K.] Whitney, and &c.," Nauvoo, Illinois, Aug. 18, 1842, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City. | *Smith, Letter to "Brother and Sister [Newel K.] Whitney, and &c.," Nauvoo, Illinois, Aug. 18, 1842, LDS Church Archives, Salt Lake City. | ||
| + | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}} | ||
| + | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Age_wives}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 25: | Line 34: | ||
||The prophet then poured out his heart, writing to his newest wife: "My feelings are so strong for you…now is the time to afford me succour….I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me now." | ||The prophet then poured out his heart, writing to his newest wife: "My feelings are so strong for you…now is the time to afford me succour….I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me now." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | *Joseph is speaking to all three, and again | + | *Joseph is speaking to all three, and the author again distorts the letter as at the beginning of the book. |
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Mind reading]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Romance]] | ||
| + | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842. | *Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842. | ||
| + | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 37: | Line 52: | ||
*As stated in the letter, the reason for the visit was to perform ordinances. | *As stated in the letter, the reason for the visit was to perform ordinances. | ||
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Mind reading]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Romance]] | ||
| + | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842. | *Whitney letter, Aug. 18, 1842. | ||
| + | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 46: | Line 67: | ||
*The documentary record is not silent, however, as to why Joseph sought a visit with his plural wife and her parents: to “tell you all my plans . . . [and] to git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c.” | *The documentary record is not silent, however, as to why Joseph sought a visit with his plural wife and her parents: to “tell you all my plans . . . [and] to git the fulness of my blessings sealed upon our heads, &c.” | ||
*Small wonder that Joseph didn’t want a hostile Emma present while trying to administer what he and the Whitneys regarded as sacred ordinances. And, it is unsurprising that he considered a single private room sufficient for the purposes for which he summoned his plural wife and her parents. | *Small wonder that Joseph didn’t want a hostile Emma present while trying to administer what he and the Whitneys regarded as sacred ordinances. And, it is unsurprising that he considered a single private room sufficient for the purposes for which he summoned his plural wife and her parents. | ||
| + | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Mind reading]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Romance]] | ||
| + | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
| + | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 54: | Line 82: | ||
|| | || | ||
*No evidence that Joseph did any courting. He often used intermediaries. | *No evidence that Joseph did any courting. He often used intermediaries. | ||
| − | * | + | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] |
| − | * | + | *[[../../Mind reading]] |
| + | *[[../../Romance]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Assumptions and presumptions]] | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | *No source provided. | + | *No source provided. |
| + | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Womanizing and romance}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 67: | Line 98: | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
| + | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Necessary_for_salvation}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 73: | Line 105: | ||
|| | || | ||
*[[Polygamy a requirement for exaltation]] | *[[Polygamy a requirement for exaltation]] | ||
| − | || | + | || |
| + | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Necessary_for_salvation}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 82: | Line 115: | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
| + | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Womanizing and romance}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
====55==== | ====55==== | ||
| − | ||"He assured the women and their families that such unions were not only | + | ||"He assured the women and their families that such unions were not only sanctioned but were demanded by heaven and fulfilled the ethereal principle of 'restoration.'" |
|| | || | ||
*Does not tell us that Joseph had the women get their OWN witness. | *Does not tell us that Joseph had the women get their OWN witness. | ||
| − | * | + | *[[Divine manifestations to plural wives and families]] |
| − | *Women could and did turn Joseph down with no consequences. | + | *Women could and did turn Joseph down with no consequences. |
| + | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/Did women turn Joseph down]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | ||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
| Line 97: | Line 133: | ||
||"There may have been even more wives and plural children." | ||"There may have been even more wives and plural children." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | *Anything might have happened. | + | *Anything ''might'' have happened. The author provides no evidence. |
| − | * | + | *This is the [[Logical_fallacies#Appeal_to_probability|fallacy of probability]]. |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
| Line 117: | Line 153: | ||
||"As will be seen, conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure." | ||"As will be seen, conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | * | + | *The author provides no such evidence save his repeated distortion of the Whitney letter. |
| − | |||
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
| + | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 126: | Line 162: | ||
||“when Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window,’ he reassured his new young wife that Emma would not be there, telegraphing his fear of discovery if Emma happened upon his trysts” | ||“when Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window,’ he reassured his new young wife that Emma would not be there, telegraphing his fear of discovery if Emma happened upon his trysts” | ||
|| | || | ||
| + | *{{InternalContradiction|The invitation was to Sarah and her parents}} | ||
*[[../../Contradictions]] | *[[../../Contradictions]] | ||
| − | * | + | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] |
| − | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | + | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] |
| − | *{{ | + | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] |
| + | *[[../../Mind reading]] | ||
| + | *[[../../Romance]] | ||
| + | *{{GLS-Nauvoo Polygamy-FARMS}} | ||
|| | || | ||
*No citation given | *No citation given | ||
| + | *{{HistoricalError}} | ||
| + | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:Love_letters_Whitney}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 138: | Line 180: | ||
|| | || | ||
*A huge leap, presuming that Bennett's adulteries were ever sanctioned by Joseph, or had anything to do with plural marriage. | *A huge leap, presuming that Bennett's adulteries were ever sanctioned by Joseph, or had anything to do with plural marriage. | ||
| − | *[ | + | *[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]] |
| − | |||
|| | || | ||
*Author's opinion. | *Author's opinion. | ||
| Line 161: | Line 202: | ||
|| | || | ||
*Bennett's power was mainly secular. He did little in the religious realm. Joseph had wanted to be relieved of temporal responsibilities, and Bennett was available. | *Bennett's power was mainly secular. He did little in the religious realm. Joseph had wanted to be relieved of temporal responsibilities, and Bennett was available. | ||
| − | * | + | *[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]] |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
| Line 171: | Line 212: | ||
|| | || | ||
*Bennett was guilty of serial immoralities, and had been disciplined on multiple occasions. He only "spoke out" once he learned that he was to be stripped of membership in the Church. | *Bennett was guilty of serial immoralities, and had been disciplined on multiple occasions. He only "spoke out" once he learned that he was to be stripped of membership in the Church. | ||
| − | * | + | *The author has cause and effect reversed, perhaps because he doesn't want us to know of the overwhelming evidence of Bennett's guilt. |
| − | * | + | *[[Polygamy book/John C. Bennett|John C. Bennett]] |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
| Line 192: | Line 233: | ||
|| | || | ||
*Many of Bennett's claims are clearly false. | *Many of Bennett's claims are clearly false. | ||
| − | * | + | *The author uses Bennett uncritically, and naively. |
*The things which Bennett can "confirm" are mostly things like names of people Joseph married. | *The things which Bennett can "confirm" are mostly things like names of people Joseph married. | ||
*Bennett also clearly forged some material from others. | *Bennett also clearly forged some material from others. | ||
| Line 203: | Line 244: | ||
||"Even though his statements must be weighed critically, he cannot be merely dismissed as an unfriendly source who fabricated scandal." | ||"Even though his statements must be weighed critically, he cannot be merely dismissed as an unfriendly source who fabricated scandal." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | * | + | *The author never does this weighing for us. |
*Much of what he writes, after analysis, must be dismissed as fabrication or exaggeration, however. | *Much of what he writes, after analysis, must be dismissed as fabrication or exaggeration, however. | ||
*Even anti-Mormon authors warned of Bennett's problems: | *Even anti-Mormon authors warned of Bennett's problems: | ||
| Line 231: | Line 272: | ||
||"Writing on March 23, 1846, Bennett claimed to have known 'Joseph better than any other man living for at least fourteen months!'….Bennett was well positioned to know all about any behind-the-scenes transactions. | ||"Writing on March 23, 1846, Bennett claimed to have known 'Joseph better than any other man living for at least fourteen months!'….Bennett was well positioned to know all about any behind-the-scenes transactions. | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | * | + | *The author here accepts Bennett uncritically. |
*Despite his claim, he was never part of the inner circle which received the highest temple ordinances introduced by Joseph. Bennett and Rigdon "were conspicuously absent" when Joseph Smith spoke to those who would be among the first to receive the full endowment necessary "to finish their work and prevent imposition" by Satan. | *Despite his claim, he was never part of the inner circle which received the highest temple ordinances introduced by Joseph. Bennett and Rigdon "were conspicuously absent" when Joseph Smith spoke to those who would be among the first to receive the full endowment necessary "to finish their work and prevent imposition" by Satan. | ||
*Bennett had secular influence, but relatively little to do with religious matters in Nauvoo: | *Bennett had secular influence, but relatively little to do with religious matters in Nauvoo: | ||
| Line 363: | Line 404: | ||
||"However, Joseph concluded that she had been wrong to reject him—and that she had failed the test. The defiance she exhibited ultimately led to alienation with her husband…." | ||"However, Joseph concluded that she had been wrong to reject him—and that she had failed the test. The defiance she exhibited ultimately led to alienation with her husband…." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | * | + | *The author again says nothing about Sarah and Bennett's affair, which probably had something to do with her "alienation." |
|| | || | ||
* No source provided. | * No source provided. | ||
| Line 373: | Line 414: | ||
||"Eventually Orson accepted Joseph's explanation that he merely wanted to test Sarah's obedience, and was not seriously courting this married woman." | ||"Eventually Orson accepted Joseph's explanation that he merely wanted to test Sarah's obedience, and was not seriously courting this married woman." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | * | + | *The author does not tell us that Orson eventually believed Sarah and Bennett had misled him, saying he was first informed by "a wicked source, from those disaffected, but as soon as he learned the truth he was satisfied." He presents no evidence for what explanation Joseph gave Orson, or what Orson believed. |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
| Line 381: | Line 422: | ||
||"Meanwhile, Bennett seems to have followed his leader in courting several women himself." | ||"Meanwhile, Bennett seems to have followed his leader in courting several women himself." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | * | + | *The author is here presuming that Bennett imitated Joseph. |
*Bennett was also involved in operating a prostitution ring and house of ill repute in Nauvoo (Bushman RSR, 411). | *Bennett was also involved in operating a prostitution ring and house of ill repute in Nauvoo (Bushman RSR, 411). | ||
|| | || | ||
| Line 394: | Line 435: | ||
*In fact, Bennett was forced to resign by Joseph, who wrote to the Church recorder: "be so good as to permit Bennett to withdraw his name from the Church record, if he desires to do so, and this with the best of feelings towards…General Bennett." | *In fact, Bennett was forced to resign by Joseph, who wrote to the Church recorder: "be so good as to permit Bennett to withdraw his name from the Church record, if he desires to do so, and this with the best of feelings towards…General Bennett." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | * Andrew Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 86–89. (Note that | + | * Andrew Smith, ''Saintly Scoundrel'', 86–89. (Note that The author does not properly represent the source's contents.) |
{{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | {{CriticalWorks:Smith:Nauvoo_Polygamy:See_also:John_C._Bennett}} | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Line 416: | Line 457: | ||
|| | || | ||
{{GDS-See also|1|119}} for Smith acting as if this claim of Bennett's is established fact. | {{GDS-See also|1|119}} for Smith acting as if this claim of Bennett's is established fact. | ||
| − | * | + | *The author mischaracterizes his source, and does not tell us that Bennett's claim was false. |
*Bennett's biographer wrote: | *Bennett's biographer wrote: | ||
| Line 443: | Line 484: | ||
||"It is entirely plausible that Bennett was then privy to Smith's domestic matters." | ||"It is entirely plausible that Bennett was then privy to Smith's domestic matters." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | * | + | *The author wants to rehabilitate Bennett as a source, while glossing over the problems. |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
| Line 475: | Line 516: | ||
|| | || | ||
*History of the Church 4:445. | *History of the Church 4:445. | ||
| − | * | + | *The author implies that sexuality was involved in this polyandrous marriage. |
*He tries to prejudice the reader by pointing out that Zina was pregnant when she and Henry approved her sealing to Joseph. | *He tries to prejudice the reader by pointing out that Zina was pregnant when she and Henry approved her sealing to Joseph. | ||
*{{Wyatt-Zina}} | *{{Wyatt-Zina}} | ||
| Line 492: | Line 533: | ||
||When [Henry] Jacobs returned in June [1844] "he found Zina accompanying Joseph to private meetings involving Masonic-like handshakes, oaths, and special clothing." | ||When [Henry] Jacobs returned in June [1844] "he found Zina accompanying Joseph to private meetings involving Masonic-like handshakes, oaths, and special clothing." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language|Prejudicial language]], in which | + | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language|Prejudicial language]], in which The author tries to make the endowment seem foreign, strange and alienating. |
*[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | *[[../../Loaded and prejudicial language]] | ||
*{{Wyatt-Zina}} | *{{Wyatt-Zina}} | ||
| Line 502: | Line 543: | ||
====77==== | ====77==== | ||
| − | ||"Even though Zina was pregnant with Henry's child when she married Joseph, the theology of 'sealing' meant that in the next life she and her children would be Joseph's 'eternal possessions,' unconnected to Henry. | + | ||"Even though Zina was pregnant with Henry's child when she married Joseph, the theology of 'sealing' meant that in the next life she and her children would be Joseph's 'eternal possessions,' unconnected to Henry. The author gives no evidence for this. It may be that some early sealings (especially polyandrous ones) were intended to bind families to each and Joseph in salvation in the next world. |
|| | || | ||
*The image which this gives of Joseph "taking away" Henry's children is inflammatory and probably misleading. | *The image which this gives of Joseph "taking away" Henry's children is inflammatory and probably misleading. | ||
| Line 646: | Line 687: | ||
*[See also p. 75 above.] | *[See also p. 75 above.] | ||
*No "blood penalties" were associated with plural marriage. | *No "blood penalties" were associated with plural marriage. | ||
| − | *Prejudicial language, in which | + | *Prejudicial language, in which The author tries to make the endowment seem foreign, strange and alienating. |
|| | || | ||
*Author's opinion. | *Author's opinion. | ||
| Line 668: | Line 709: | ||
*Compton notes that this statement is "antagonistic, third-hand, and late" (In Sacred Loneliness, 650). It seems implausible that Harris would admit to being a "mistress." | *Compton notes that this statement is "antagonistic, third-hand, and late" (In Sacred Loneliness, 650). It seems implausible that Harris would admit to being a "mistress." | ||
*Newel and Avery, Mormon Enigma, 346 have likewise seen the "mistress" label as "an embellishment by either Sarah Pratt or W. Wyl." | *Newel and Avery, Mormon Enigma, 346 have likewise seen the "mistress" label as "an embellishment by either Sarah Pratt or W. Wyl." | ||
| − | * | + | *The author provides none of this perspective. |
|| | || | ||
*Wyl, Mormon Portraits, 60. | *Wyl, Mormon Portraits, 60. | ||
| Line 743: | Line 784: | ||
|| | || | ||
*[[Joseph_Smith_and_polyandry/Book_chapter#Sarah_Kingsley_Howe_Cleveland]] | *[[Joseph_Smith_and_polyandry/Book_chapter#Sarah_Kingsley_Howe_Cleveland]] | ||
| − | * | + | *The author does not tell the reader that this difficulty did not occur until after Joseph's death, and the Saints had gone west. He neglects to point out that Compton noted that even six months before Joseph's death, Sarah's husband was "very friendly and frequently visited the Prophet." (Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 281). |
*Thus, the implication that Joseph's plural marriage caused problems for Cleveland is not sustained by the evidence. | *Thus, the implication that Joseph's plural marriage caused problems for Cleveland is not sustained by the evidence. | ||
| − | * | + | *The author also does not tell us that one version of Sarah's decision to remain behind instead of going to Utah tells us: |
*"Brigham Young and council…counciled her to stay with her Husband as he was a good man, having shown himself kind ever helping those in need, although for some reason his mind was darkened as to the Gospel. She obey[ed] the council and stayed with her Husband, and was faithfull and true to her religion and died a faithfull member of the Church…." (Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 283). | *"Brigham Young and council…counciled her to stay with her Husband as he was a good man, having shown himself kind ever helping those in need, although for some reason his mind was darkened as to the Gospel. She obey[ed] the council and stayed with her Husband, and was faithfull and true to her religion and died a faithfull member of the Church…." (Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, 283). | ||
|| | || | ||
| Line 756: | Line 797: | ||
*[[Joseph_Smith_and_polyandry/Book_chapter]] | *[[Joseph_Smith_and_polyandry/Book_chapter]] | ||
*As shown above, Cleveland was not bitter about the Church or Joseph during Joseph's lifetime. | *As shown above, Cleveland was not bitter about the Church or Joseph during Joseph's lifetime. | ||
| − | *No other examples are given. It is not clear to whom | + | *No other examples are given. It is not clear to whom The author is referring.|| |
|- | |- | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 800: | Line 841: | ||
|| | || | ||
*[[Kirtland_Egyptian_Papers]] | *[[Kirtland_Egyptian_Papers]] | ||
| − | * | + | *The author here acts as if a highly debated matter is settled. It is not at all clear that Joseph's seer stone was used "to produce" the alphabet and grammar. Rather, the alphabet and grammar may have been an attempt by some (possibly including Joseph) to 'reverse-engineer' a translation of Egyptian from the divine translation given of the Book of Abraham. |
|| | || | ||
*History of the Church 2:235-36, 238. | *History of the Church 2:235-36, 238. | ||
| Line 810: | Line 851: | ||
*[[Hebrew_and_Native_American_languages]] | *[[Hebrew_and_Native_American_languages]] | ||
*This is of no relevance to Joseph Smith unless we are to assume that Joseph taught that American writing could be used to illuminate ancient Egyptian. The Book of Mormon explicitly rejects any such idea, saying that "we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and ''altered by us'', according to our manner of speech…. ''none other people knoweth our language''; and because that none other people knoweth our language, therefore he hath prepared means for the interpretation thereof" ({{s||Mormon|9|31,34}}). | *This is of no relevance to Joseph Smith unless we are to assume that Joseph taught that American writing could be used to illuminate ancient Egyptian. The Book of Mormon explicitly rejects any such idea, saying that "we have written this record according to our knowledge, in the characters which are called among us the reformed Egyptian, being handed down and ''altered by us'', according to our manner of speech…. ''none other people knoweth our language''; and because that none other people knoweth our language, therefore he hath prepared means for the interpretation thereof" ({{s||Mormon|9|31,34}}). | ||
| − | * | + | *The author should also consider consulting scholarship more recent than 1823 if he wishes to know whether there are any links between Old World and New World languages. |
|| | || | ||
*Thomas Young, An Account of Some Recent Discoveries in Hieroglyphic Literature and Egypitan Antiquities (London: John Murray, 1823). | *Thomas Young, An Account of Some Recent Discoveries in Hieroglyphic Literature and Egypitan Antiquities (London: John Murray, 1823). | ||
| Line 818: | Line 859: | ||
||"As we consider Joseph Smith's new religious texts in early 1842, we should review what was known of the language of ancient Egyptian, not only in 1823 when Smith began to anticipate the Book of Mormon's 'reformed Egyptian records,' but later in the 1830s and 1840s when he prepared his second Egyptian scripture, the Book of Abraham." | ||"As we consider Joseph Smith's new religious texts in early 1842, we should review what was known of the language of ancient Egyptian, not only in 1823 when Smith began to anticipate the Book of Mormon's 'reformed Egyptian records,' but later in the 1830s and 1840s when he prepared his second Egyptian scripture, the Book of Abraham." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | * | + | *The author is again presuming that studies of ancient Egyptian would have had any relevance for the Book of Mormon records—yet the Book of Mormon explicitly says they would not. |
|| | || | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Line 834: | Line 875: | ||
|| | || | ||
*Joseph's scriptural texts associated only a small group from the Old World with the New. His 1842 scriptures had nothing at all to do with the New World. | *Joseph's scriptural texts associated only a small group from the Old World with the New. His 1842 scriptures had nothing at all to do with the New World. | ||
| − | *That Joseph's own personal opinions may have reflected his time is irrelevant, unless we presume at the outset (as | + | *That Joseph's own personal opinions may have reflected his time is irrelevant, unless we presume at the outset (as The author does) that the Book of Mormon was a fabrication by Joseph. If it was not, then his personal views are irrelevant. |
|| | || | ||
*No source provided. | *No source provided. | ||
| Line 857: | Line 898: | ||
*[[Godhead_and_the_Trinity]] | *[[Godhead_and_the_Trinity]] | ||
*Since the original Bible has no Nicene Trinitarian format, it would be difficult to Joseph to leave it there. | *Since the original Bible has no Nicene Trinitarian format, it would be difficult to Joseph to leave it there. | ||
| − | *If | + | *If The author does not mean a Nicene Trinity, then it would be strange for Joseph to alter it, since the Book of Mormon and Book of Abraham all teach a non-Nicene trinitarianism. |
*The Book of Moses ({{s||Moses|1|3,6,13,24,32-33}}, {{s||Moses|2|1}}, {{s||Moses|4|2-3,28}}) also described the distinction between Father and Son in non-Nicene terms, as did the Enoch material ({{s||Moses|5|57}}, {{s||Moses|6|51-52,57,59,66}}, {{s||Moses|7|27,39}}), long pre-dating the Book of Abraham (Summer-Winter 1830). | *The Book of Moses ({{s||Moses|1|3,6,13,24,32-33}}, {{s||Moses|2|1}}, {{s||Moses|4|2-3,28}}) also described the distinction between Father and Son in non-Nicene terms, as did the Enoch material ({{s||Moses|5|57}}, {{s||Moses|6|51-52,57,59,66}}, {{s||Moses|7|27,39}}), long pre-dating the Book of Abraham (Summer-Winter 1830). | ||
*Joseph was also teaching a non-Nicene Trinitarianism long before 1842: | *Joseph was also teaching a non-Nicene Trinitarianism long before 1842: | ||
| Line 863: | Line 904: | ||
*[[Only one Personage appears in the 1832 account]] | *[[Only one Personage appears in the 1832 account]] | ||
*[[Lack of contemporary Father and Son vision until 1838?]] | *[[Lack of contemporary Father and Son vision until 1838?]] | ||
| − | * | + | *The author wants to display an evolution in Joseph's views, but he has not done the necessary legwork. He merely presumes, rather than demonstrates. |
|| | || | ||
*Quinn, Mormon Hierarchy: Origins, 620. | *Quinn, Mormon Hierarchy: Origins, 620. | ||
| Line 893: | Line 934: | ||
|| | || | ||
*[See also p. 31, 44 above.] | *[See also p. 31, 44 above.] | ||
| − | * | + | *The author again does not tell us that Marinda testified against the version of Joseph's mobbing which he pushes on p. 44. |
*See Smith FARMS, Marinda Nancy Johnson. | *See Smith FARMS, Marinda Nancy Johnson. | ||
|| | || | ||
| Line 915: | Line 956: | ||
|| | || | ||
*[[John C. Bennett]] | *[[John C. Bennett]] | ||
| − | * | + | *The author is arguing from negative evidence—he claims that the absence of any record of Bennett's "marriages" is proof that the Church or Joseph suppressed them! |
*He is presuming that Bennett's "marriages" were at one time sanctioned by Joseph. All the evidence indicates that Joseph was upset whenever Bennett's behavior came to his attention. | *He is presuming that Bennett's "marriages" were at one time sanctioned by Joseph. All the evidence indicates that Joseph was upset whenever Bennett's behavior came to his attention. | ||
|| | || | ||
| Line 1,005: | Line 1,046: | ||
||"Three weeks after the wedding, Joseph took steps to spend some time with his newest bride." | ||"Three weeks after the wedding, Joseph took steps to spend some time with his newest bride." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | *Again, | + | *Again, The author fails to acknowledge that Joseph wanted Sarah Ann and her parents with her. |
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | ||
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | ||
| Line 1,032: | Line 1,073: | ||
|| | || | ||
*Joseph’s behavior is then pictured as callous toward Emma and also as evidence of an almost insatiable sexual hunger. | *Joseph’s behavior is then pictured as callous toward Emma and also as evidence of an almost insatiable sexual hunger. | ||
| − | *Yet again, | + | *Yet again, The author does not acknowledge that Joseph wants all the Whitneys there. |
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | ||
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | ||
| Line 1,070: | Line 1,111: | ||
*Having just reproduced the letter, Smith again insists that Sarah Ann is the one to "comfort" Joseph, even though the letter says nothing of the sort. | *Having just reproduced the letter, Smith again insists that Sarah Ann is the one to "comfort" Joseph, even though the letter says nothing of the sort. | ||
*Smith does not indicate how he knows the invitation was accepted. | *Smith does not indicate how he knows the invitation was accepted. | ||
| − | *We do know that the Whitneys were sealed in eternal marriage three days later. But, | + | *We do know that the Whitneys were sealed in eternal marriage three days later. But, The author does not tell us that either. |
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | ||
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | ||
| Line 1,135: | Line 1,176: | ||
||"As if Sarah Ann Whitney's liaison were not enough…another marriage took place…." | ||"As if Sarah Ann Whitney's liaison were not enough…another marriage took place…." | ||
|| | || | ||
| − | * | + | *The author persists with Sarah Ann Whitney and "liaison." |
*[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | *[[Joseph Smith and polygamy/"Love letters"]] | ||
*[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | *[[../../Misrepresentation_of_sources#Sarah_Ann_Whitney_and_the_letter_to_the_Whitneys|Misrepresentation of sources—Letter to Whitneys]] | ||
Revision as of 07:51, 23 December 2008
| Chapter 1 | A FAIR Analysis of: Criticism of Mormonism/Books A work by author: George D. Smith
|
Chapter 3 |
Claims made in "Chapter 2: Comfort me now"
| Page | Claim | Response | Author's sources |
|---|---|---|---|
53 |
[Joseph] "recommended his friend, whose seventeen-year-old daughter he had just married, should 'come a little a head, and nock…at the window.'" |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) Ages of wives (edit) |
53 |
The prophet then poured out his heart, writing to his newest wife: "My feelings are so strong for you…now is the time to afford me succour….I know it is the will of God that you should comfort me now." |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
53 |
"Emma Hale, Joseph's wife of fifteen years, had left his side just twenty-four hours earlier. Now Joseph declared that he was "lonesome," and he pleaded with Sarah Ann to visit him under cover of darkness. After all, they had been married just three weeks earlier. |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
54 |
“Did Sarah Ann keep this rendezvous on that humid summer night? Unfortunately, the documentary record is silent.” But “the letter survives to illuminate the complexity of Smith’s life in Nauvoo” (p. 54). |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
54 |
"What interested me most was how Smith went about courting…these women." |
|
Womanizing & romance (edit) |
55 |
"When [polygamy] was officially abandoned in 1890, what previously had been called 'celestial marriage' was subtly redefined to specify something new: marriage performed in LDS temples for this life and for an expected eternal afterlife." |
|
Necessary for salvation? (edit) |
55 |
Plural marriage had been a key principle of Mormon exaltation; but by adaption, celestial marriage was still said to be required, only now it meant monogamy rather than polygamy. |
Necessary for salvation? (edit) | |
55 |
"Despite his crowded daily schedule, the prophet interrupted other activities for secret liaisons with women and girls…." |
Womanizing & romance (edit) | |
55 |
"He assured the women and their families that such unions were not only sanctioned but were demanded by heaven and fulfilled the ethereal principle of 'restoration.'" |
|
|
56 |
"There may have been even more wives and plural children." |
|
|
57 |
History of the Church says nothing about Nauvoo on the day of Louisa Beaman's marriage to Joseph. |
|
Censorship of Church History (edit) |
63 |
"As will be seen, conjugal visits appear furtive and constantly shadowed by the threat of disclosure." |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
65 |
“when Joseph requested that Sarah Ann Whitney visit him and ‘nock at the window,’ he reassured his new young wife that Emma would not be there, telegraphing his fear of discovery if Emma happened upon his trysts” |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
65 |
"One of the instrumental people in the inauguration of plural marriage was John [C.] Bennett…." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
"…in 1841 [Bennett] functioned as perhaps Joseph Smith's closest confident." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
Joseph was "sharing power" with Bennett |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
"In the spring of 1842, Bennett spoke out against Smith and was soon stripped of his offices and titles." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
"Each accused the other of immoral behavior." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
"While some of his claims may have been exaggerations, much of what he reported can be confirmed by other eyewitness accounts." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
"Even though his statements must be weighed critically, he cannot be merely dismissed as an unfriendly source who fabricated scandal." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
65 |
"Bennett had an ambitious but colorful background." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
66-67 |
"Writing on March 23, 1846, Bennett claimed to have known 'Joseph better than any other man living for at least fourteen months!'….Bennett was well positioned to know all about any behind-the-scenes transactions. |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
68 |
“Joseph” is merely “feigning impartiality” before going on to practice “undemocratic block voting” |
|
Bloc voting (edit) See NOTE on bloc voting |
69 |
"Undeterred" by reports of a negative assessment of Bennett, Joseph "named Bennett Assistant President of the Church." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
69 |
Bennett was Assistant President of the Church |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
69 |
Bennett had religious influence by being Assistant President of the Church. |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
70 |
Smith and Bennett remained confidants until about March the next year (1842) |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
70 |
There seemed to be no office or honor within reach that Smith did not hasten to grant to Bennett. |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
70 |
"Zina Huntington, who married Henry Jacobs instead but then reconsidered seven months later in response to Joseph's restated interest." |
|
|
70-71 |
"Seemingly impatient, Joseph soon after married Zina's sister, Presendia, who was also already married." |
|
|
71 |
"Bennett alleged that during the summer and fall of 1841, Smith made unsuccessful advances toward Apostle Orson Pratt's wife, Sarah." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
71 |
"Whatever the accuracy of the quotes [i.e., Bennett's claims] the two men [Orson and Joseph] quarrelled…." |
|
|
71 |
"…the important aspect of this incident is that it tells us less about Bennett's motive in recalling this dispute and more about Orson's willingness to support his wife over his religious leader…." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
71 |
"However, Joseph concluded that she had been wrong to reject him—and that she had failed the test. The defiance she exhibited ultimately led to alienation with her husband…." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
72 |
"Eventually Orson accepted Joseph's explanation that he merely wanted to test Sarah's obedience, and was not seriously courting this married woman." |
|
|
72 |
"Meanwhile, Bennett seems to have followed his leader in courting several women himself." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
72 |
"Bennett resigned from the church on May 17, 1842." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
72 |
"In retaliation, church leaders apparently excommunicated him on May 25…." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
72 |
"…Bennett claimed [his excommunication] was postdated to May 11 to appear that it had occurred before his resignation." |
for Smith acting as if this claim of Bennett's is established fact.
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
73 |
"Up until early 1842, Smith and Bennett seemed to be on good terms." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
73 |
"It is entirely plausible that Bennett was then privy to Smith's domestic matters." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
73 |
"In the spring of 1842, the two men quarreled and Smith had Bennett excommunicated…." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
75 |
Zina and Henry Jacobs "were apparently willing to let the prophet insinuate himself into their marriage." |
|
|
75 |
"In the context of having just married a pregnant wife, [Joseph's] words acquire added meaning: 'If you will not acuse me, I will not accuse you….'" |
|
|
75 |
The Smith diary or History of the Church do not "give any hint of conjugal contacts Smith might have had with this wife." |
|
|
75 |
When [Henry] Jacobs returned in June [1844] "he found Zina accompanying Joseph to private meetings involving Masonic-like handshakes, oaths, and special clothing." |
|
|
77 |
"Even though Zina was pregnant with Henry's child when she married Joseph, the theology of 'sealing' meant that in the next life she and her children would be Joseph's 'eternal possessions,' unconnected to Henry. The author gives no evidence for this. It may be that some early sealings (especially polyandrous ones) were intended to bind families to each and Joseph in salvation in the next world. |
|
Sealing takes away families? (edit) |
77 |
"Some sources say [Brigham] Young advised [Henry Jacobs] to find a wife who could be his eternal partner." |
|
|
77 |
Henry's subsequent life is not discussed by Smith, perhaps because it would provide insight into why Zina chose to remain with Brigham. |
|
|
78 |
"Brigham explained that 'if a woman can find a man holding the keys of the priesthood with higher power and authority than her husband, and he is disposed to take her, he can do so, otherwise she has got to remain where she is. In either of these ways of sep[a]ration, you can discover, there is no need for a bill of divorcement." |
|
Brigham Young's 8 October 1861 talk (edit) |
79 |
Presendia Buell "displayed an affinity for mystical religious experiences as one of the women who began speaking and singing in tongues…." |
|
Presendia Buell (edit) |
79 |
Presendia "did not take the prophet's advice [to leave for Illinois while he was in Liberty Jail] prior to his escape from jail on April 16. Nine months later, on January 31, 1841, she gave birth to a son Oliver. Later that year [she went to Illinois]….." |
|
Presendia Buell (edit) |
80 n. 63 |
Fawn Brodie pointed out that Oliver was born at least a year after Presendia's husband left the church and that Oliver had the angular features and high forehead of the Smith line (No Man Knows, 2989ff, 301, 460. |
Despite Brodie’s enthusiasm, few other authors have included Oliver on their list of possible children. With so many authors ranged against him, G. D. Smith ought not to act as if Compton’s analysis is merely about dates. Within note. 80 n. 63 [Note continued from above]….There is no DNA connection (). Compton does find it 'unlikely, though not impossible, that Joseph Smith was the actual father of' John Hiram, Presendia's seventh chld during her marriage to Buell and born in November 1843 (Sacred Loneliness, 124, 670–71). New wiki article? Joseph as father of Prescenda Buell's children? SMITH FARMS He makes no mention in the main text that Oliver’s paternity has been definitively ruled out by DNA testing. This admission is confined to a footnote, and its impact is minimized by its placement. After noting Compton’s disagreement with the main text’s suggestion that Oliver might be Joseph’s son, G. D. Smith writes, “There is no DNA connection,” and cites a Deseret News article. He immediately follows this obtuse phrasing with a return to Compton, who finds it “‘unlikely, though not impossible, that Joseph Smith was the actual father of another Buell child,’ John Hiram, Presendia’s seventh child during her marriage to Buell and born in November 1843” (p. 80 n. 63). Thus the most salient fact—that Joseph is certainly not Oliver's father—is sandwiched between a vicarious discussion with Compton about whether Oliver or John could be Joseph’s sons. Since G. D. Smith knows there is definitive evidence against Joseph’s paternity in Oliver’s case, why mention the debate at all only to hide the answer in the midst of a long endnote? Within note. |
Presendia Buell (edit) |
81 |
"Occasionally, as King David did with Uriah the Hittite, Smith sent the husband [of potential polyandrous marriage partners] away on a mission which provided the privacy needed for a plural relationship to flower." |
|
|
81 |
"This [see above] applied to Zina…." |
|
|
82 |
"The History of the Church makes no mention of the second Huntington nuptial…." |
|
Censorship of Church History (edit) |
82 |
a Buell child being sealed to a proxy for Joseph with “wording [that] hints that it might have been Smith’s child….It is not clear…which of her children it might have been." |
| |
84 |
"From the inception of plural marriage, Smith demanded confidentiality from those whom he taught the principle." |
|
|
85 |
"…Smith evidently adapted and redefined [elements] from the Masonic rituals and incorporated [them] as part of the unfolding Mormon temple ceremonies." |
| |
85 |
"The [temple] vows of secrecy and threats of blood penalties intensified the mysterious rites of celestial marriage…." |
|
|
88 |
"There is no mention of [Joseph's sealing to Agnes Smith] in the History of the Church." |
|
Censorship of Church History (edit) |
92 |
Sarah Pratt reported in 1886 that Lucinda had told her nearly forty-five years earlier in 1842: "Why[,] I am his [Smith's] mistress since four years." |
|
|
99 |
"As usual, the History of the Church made no mention of Sylvia [Sessions Lyon] on February 8, 1842…." |
|
Censorship of Church History (edit) |
100 |
"During these years as Windsor's wife, Sylvia reportedly bore Smith a child in 1844…." |
|
|
103 |
"Typically, [Joseph] never mentioned his marriage to Patty [Sessions] on paper…." |
|
Censorship of Church History (edit) |
105 |
Sarah Cleveland's husband "was a Swedenborgian, embracing a world view compatible with that of Mormons." |
|
|
106 |
"John Cleveland's Swedenborgian faith might have helped prepare Sarah for some of Joseph's teachings. Like Smith, followers of Emanuel Swedenborg conceived of a pre-existent life, 'eternal marriage' for couples who had a true 'affinity' for each other, and a three-tiered heaven that required marriage for admission to the highest level." |
|
|
106 |
"John [Cleveland]'s continued willingness to host LDS events indicated a likely compatibility of beliefs." |
|
|
106 |
"Like some of the other husbands of women who agreed to marry the prophet, John Cleveland nevertheless became 'more and more bitter towards the Mormons.'" |
|
|
106 |
Besides Cleveland (see above) other polyandrous husbands became more bitter against the Church. |
| |
108 |
"Sarah Pratt told…Wyl…'There was an old Woman called Durfee…to keep her quiet, he admitted her to the secret blessings of celestial bliss—she boasted here in Salt Lake of having been one of Joseph Smith's wives." He follows Compton in misreading the Wyl data. Richard Anderson and Scott Faulring argue that In Sacred Loneliness misleads the reader by claiming that “Sarah Pratt mentions that she heard a Mrs. Durfee in Salt Lake City profess to have been one of Smith’s wives.” But this changes the actual report of Sarah’s comments on Mrs. Durfee: “I don’t think she was ever sealed to him, though it may have been the case after Joseph’s death. . . . At all events, she boasted here in Salt Lake of having been one of Joseph’s wives.” |
|
|
110-111 |
"When Napoleon invaded Egypt in 1798 and exposed the world to then-indecipherable ancient writings, Europe and the United States became fascinated with Egyptian artifacts. Egyptian hieroglyphics, ike the origin of Native American tribes, were mysteries of the times, sometimes regarded as clues to Indian Origins." |
|
|
111 |
"This is not to suggest that Smith necessarily visited the library…." |
|
|
111 |
"…but from the age of ten…to about age twenty-two (December 1827) when he began dictating the Book of Mormon, published accounts of Napoleon and his foray into Egypt would have been available in books, periodicals, and possibly tracts." |
|
|
110 – 111 n. 150 |
[Of the Chandler papyri] Joseph "translated some of the hieroglyphics by means of his white seer stone to produce 'an alphabet…[and] grammar of the Egyptian language' through July 1835." |
|
|
112 |
A scholar in 1823 "rightly concluded that these American [Indian] symbols 'appear to have had little or nothing in common with those of the Egyptians.'" |
|
|
112 |
"As we consider Joseph Smith's new religious texts in early 1842, we should review what was known of the language of ancient Egyptian, not only in 1823 when Smith began to anticipate the Book of Mormon's 'reformed Egyptian records,' but later in the 1830s and 1840s when he prepared his second Egyptian scripture, the Book of Abraham." |
|
|
112 |
"Joseph Smith… [made] the association of Native American pictographs with 'reformed Egyptian.'" |
|
|
112 |
"Smith's association of these unrelated cultures [Egypt and the New World] simply reflected the prevailing misperceptions of the pre- to mid-nineteenth century." |
|
|
113 |
"The first ancient scripture Smith presented since the Book of Mormon was the Book of Abraham." |
|
|
113 n. 157 |
The JST "altered over 3,400 verses but left the deities singular and in a Trinitarian format." |
|
|
114 |
"The prophet coalesced astronomy, biblical mystery, ancient Egyptian writing, and Masonic ritual into portentous ceremony for his followers." |
|
|
114 |
"The spring of 1842 was also the time when John C. Bennett began to separate himself from Smith…." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
116 |
Marinda Johnson "met Joseph while he was retranslating the Bible with Sidney Rigdon in her parents' home in 1831." |
|
|
117-118 |
Orson Hyde "was reportedly 'furious'" with Joseph's plural marriage doctrine. |
|
|
119 |
"[A]fter [John C. Bennett's] disagreement with Smith, the record of his celestial marriages was apparently expunged." |
|
|
119 |
"Smith told Bennett he could not withdraw from the church because he had been 'disfellowshipped' two weeks before on May 11. This apparent backdating was an attempt to discredit Bennett." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
122 |
"In Bennett's first letter…he reported that Smith 'attempted to seduce Miss Nany Rigdon,'…." |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
123-125 |
Bennett's version of the Sarah Pratt episode |
|
John C. Bennett (edit) |
129-134 |
Emma Smith pushing Eliza Snow down the stairs |
|
|
131-132 |
"…historian Fawn M. Brodie thought the documentation was strong enough to include it in her biography of Smith." |
|
|
131 n. 195 |
Smith cites the BYU Studies on Emma and Eliza, but does not disclose that those authors find that the story is not plausible. |
|
|
132 |
Smith cites Newel and Avery, Mormon Enigma without acknowledging or engaging their arguments against the story of Emma and Eliza. |
|
|
133 |
"Most convincing of all is to think that these stories [about Emma] were circulating widely and Eliza never bothered to clarify or refute them." |
|
|
137 |
"The History of the Church reports the day's activities…without a hint of a wedding" to Sarah Ann Whitney. |
Censorship of Church History (edit) | |
138 |
"Three weeks after the wedding, Joseph took steps to spend some time with his newest bride." |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
139 |
"In an extraordinary move, the Nauvoo City Council issued an ordinance limiting the power of state courts and claiming the right to review and dismiss future writs." |
Nauvoo city charter (edit) | |
142 |
"It was the ninth night of Joseph's concealment, and Emma had visited him three times, written him several letters, and penned at least one letter on his behalf…For his part, Joseph's private note about his love for Emma was so endearing it found its way into the official church history. In it, he vowed to be hers 'forevermore.' Yet within this context of reassurance and intimacy, a few hours later the same day, even while Joseph was still in grave danger and when secrecy was of the utmost urgency, he made complicated arrangements for a visit from his fifteenth plural wife, Sarah Ann Whitney." |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
142-143 |
"Smith urged his seventeen-year-old bride to 'come to night' and 'comfort' him—but only if Emma had not returned….Joseph judiciously addressed the latter to 'Brother, and Sister, Whitney, and &c." |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) Ages of wives (edit) |
147 |
"Invites Whitneys to visit, Sarah Ann to 'comfort me' if Emma not there. Invitation accepted." |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |
147–154 |
Nancy Rigdon episode |
|
|
149 |
[Sidney Rigdon] "was in many ways a mentor to Joseph." |
|
|
149 |
Sidney Rigdon "was not someone Joseph felt comfortable approaching to ask for his daughter's hand in polygamy. So Joseph appealed to the young woman directly." |
|
|
149 |
"For some reason, Marinda [Johnson Hyde] stayed [in the same house as] Apostle Willard Richards, whose wife, Jennetta, was in Massachusetts….Although the two may have lived in separate parts of the building…their living arrangements seemed to be an open scandal." |
|
|
154 |
"…both Nancy [Rigdon] and Martha [Brotherton] were…isolated in a locked room during the persuasive effort." |
|
|
155 |
"As if Sarah Ann Whitney's liaison were not enough…another marriage took place…." |
|
Whitney "love letter" (edit) |