Talk:Joseph Smith Jr.
From MormonWiki.org
It should somewhere be included that it is taught that Smith helped create the earth. -Aaronshaf 12:19, 5 December 2005 (PST)
- Really? Never seen that one, but would be very interested to read it. :-) Jpb 17:48, 5 December 2005 (PST)
And we can't forget his glass-looking trial.... [1] -Aaronshaf 21:36, 6 December 2005 (PST)
Contents |
Titles of Articles
Lets keep consistent. I vote that titles should go "xxxxx and Joseph Smith" because of alphabatizing and categorizing ease. Also, if we make sure to do this now we won't have to do it later and it will look more professional to keep them all consistent. Thoughts? Jpb 14:54, 16 December 2005 (PST)
This quote needs some verifying
- "If the people will let us alone we will preach the gospel in peace. But if they come on to molest us, we will establish our religion by the sword. We will trample down our enemies and make it one gore of blood from the Rocky Mountains to the Atlantic Ocean. I will be to this generation a second Mohammed, whose motto in treating for peace was 'the Alcoran [Koran] or the Sword.' So shall it eventually be with us -- '"Joseph Smith or the Sword!'" (October 14th, 1838 in the town square at Far West, Missouri) [2]
To add later
http://www.ldshistory.net/pc/merlbyu.htm
Recent quote
What is this quote supposed to mean? What's the context? Right now it just appears as an uneducated anti-mormon scheme. Jpb (talk) 15:34, 20 January 2006 (PST)
- Smith is secretly communicating with one of his lovers, and his hiding it from Emma. I'll try to couch it in some context. -Aaronshaf 20:42, 20 January 2006 (PST)
- Ok, I would just recommend doing it sometime soon. I have to often remind myself of the possibility of an LDS coming across this website and it causes me to edit and write a little differently. I'm not against the quote in and of itself, but if an LDS saw it without it's context I imagine they may go so far as to dismiss our entire website. I'd rather them get upset because of our content (the truth) rather than our methods. Jpb (talk) 10:09, 21 January 2006 (PST)
Awaiting contextualization
- "The only thing to be careful of; is to find out when Emma comes then you cannot be safe, but when she is not here, there is the most perfect safty. Only be careful to escape observation, as much as possible, I know it is a heroick undertakeing; but so much the greater friendship, and the more Joy, when I see you I will tell you all my plans, I cannot write them on paper, burn this letter as soon as you read it; keep all locked up in your breasts, my life depends upon it. I close my letter, I think emma wont come tonight if she dont, dont fail to come to night, I subscribe myself your most obedient, and affectionate, companion, and friend. Joseph Smith." -Letter written to Sarah Ann Whitney, quoted by Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness, page 180
Source
http://www.fairboards.org/index.php?showtopic=19783
Rework proposal
Here's my proposal for a new look and outline for the article.
- Intro Smith by discussing his significance for/in Mormonism. Talk about what has been said about him (both positive and negative; i.e. give both sides) which will show that you intend to discuss these and not just to paste negative quotes about Smith.
- Discuss his life (what is now labeled 'history') - this can include family, BoM translation (w/ link to the article), polygamy, character/reputation, etc. Discuss the first vision, but imply that the theological significance of this historical event will be discussed under the theology section (which should/will ultimately become a separate article)
- Discuss his theology and don't just reduce this to his false revelations, polytheism, etc. Give a fair presentation of what he thought/taught and then critique it rather than presenting in a negative view from the getgo.
Other ideas:
- Perhaps discuss what a contemporary view of Smith looks like today (the adolation article works well here). This may be where blogs come in handy to give a wide variety of portrayals)
- You could also fit in Smith's letters and other writings which have recently been published. Perhaps even discuss the JS Paper's project going on at BYU (I can try and get more info from my buddy on this if you develop this as a section).
The article as it currently stands clearly communicates a strong desire to paint Smith in the worst light possible. While this may not mean that the things said of him are not true, the article gives the vibe that we hate our enemies when we are called to love them (can we actually 'love' dead people?). This does not mean that loving them means tolerating them or making them look good, but I believe it at least means giving both sides and then showing why one is wrong. Right now it is clearly one-sided and has a clear agenda to make Smith look as bad as possible. We don't have to leave out the negative stuff about Smith, but I believe it can be presented in a significantly better way. Jordan Barrett (talk) 04:41, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
