Nauvoo Expositor Destruction

Public forum to discuss questions about Mormon history and doctrine.
User avatar
mormonheretic
Site Admin
Posts: 800
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 13:53
Contact:

Re: Nauvoo Expositor Destruction

Post by mormonheretic » 22 Dec 2011, 21:50

SD, that is a great question. The legal issues get muddied on this whole thing. Joseph and others were originally sent to Carthage on the charge of "riot" for the destruction of the Expositor. Once incarcerated, the charges were upgraded to treason in order to keep Joseph in jail, because they weren't sure how long they could keep him in jail on simply the riot charge.

Going back in time for a minute, Joseph was originally charged with treason as a result of the Mormon War of 1838. When he was captured, the leader of the Missouri Militia ordered Alexander Doniphan to execute Joseph, but Doniphan replied "It is cold-blooded murder. I will not obey your order. My brigade will march for Liberty at 8:00 tomorrow morning, and if you execute these men I will hold you personally responsible before an earthly tribunal, so help me God." Instead, Joseph was sent to the Far West jail where he received the revelation in D&C 122. Smith later escaped (with the help of some of the jailers), but enemies in Missouri were anxious to reinstate the charge. I'm not sure how much of those alliances that Quinn talks about played a role in this treason charge, but certainly Missourians were anxious to try Joseph on treason.

CWald, I have to agree with Ray on this. Jesus was originally condemned to death by the Jews for blasphemy, but the charge was upgraded to treason because Rome didn't recognize blasphemy as a capital crime. The Jews knew this, so they said that Jesus was trying to be a king, and guilty of treason. Certainly treason was a capital crime in Rome. So, whether you like it or not, there are some similarities on the legal proceedings for Jesus and Joseph Smith.

User avatar
SilentDawning
Posts: 7348
Joined: 09 May 2010, 19:55

Re: Nauvoo Expositor Destruction

Post by SilentDawning » 23 Dec 2011, 07:30

mormonheretic wrote:SD, that is a great question. The legal issues get muddied on this whole thing. Joseph and others were originally sent to Carthage on the charge of "riot" for the destruction of the Expositor. Once incarcerated, the charges were upgraded to treason in order to keep Joseph in jail, because they weren't sure how long they could keep him in jail on simply the riot charge.

Going back in time for a minute, Joseph was originally charged with treason as a result of the Mormon War of 1838. When he was captured, the leader of the Missouri Militia ordered Alexander Doniphan to execute Joseph, but Doniphan replied "It is cold-blooded murder. I will not obey your order. My brigade will march for Liberty at 8:00 tomorrow morning, and if you execute these men I will hold you personally responsible before an earthly tribunal, so help me God." Instead, Joseph was sent to the Far West jail where he received the revelation in D&C 122. Smith later escaped (with the help of some of the jailers), but enemies in Missouri were anxious to reinstate the charge. I'm not sure how much of those alliances that Quinn talks about played a role in this treason charge, but certainly Missourians were anxious to try Joseph on treason.

CWald, I have to agree with Ray on this. Jesus was originally condemned to death by the Jews for blasphemy, but the charge was upgraded to treason because Rome didn't recognize blasphemy as a capital crime. The Jews knew this, so they said that Jesus was trying to be a king, and guilty of treason. Certainly treason was a capital crime in Rome. So, whether you like it or not, there are some similarities on the legal proceedings for Jesus and Joseph Smith.

See, the PBS.org special on Mormonism -- the only objective source of history I ever was exposed to beyond the slanted Truth Restored was there. And they said it was disturbing the peace -- apparently and incomplete report. Amazing how things get more illuminated the deeper you go into it. MH or anyone in the know -- what is a good source of Church history for the casual student -- not too much detail, but enough to for the intelligent layperson to get a rudimentary to intermediate knowledge of what happened inour early history -- without all this hiding and partial reporting of facts like we saw in the PBS.org special, and Truth REstored? Not anti-Mormon, but not so pro-Mormon it paints everything as roses and candy?
"It doesn't have to be about the Church (church) all the time!" -- SD

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. No price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself."

A man asked Jesus "do all roads lead to you?" Jesus responds,”most roads don’t lead anywhere, but I will travel any road to find you.” Adapted from The Shack, William Young

User avatar
cwald
Posts: 3628
Joined: 10 Aug 2015, 06:39

Re: Nauvoo Expositor Destruction

Post by cwald » 23 Dec 2011, 09:34

MH, you missed my point. I didn't question the details of the comparison. Just like ray didn't really question the facts around my sexist pig comment. Some things just should not be said
  Jesus gave us the gospel, but Satan invented church. It takes serious evil to formalize faith into something tedious and then pile guilt on anyone who doesn't participate enthusiastically. - Robert Kirby

Roy
Posts: 6268
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: Nauvoo Expositor Destruction

Post by Roy » 23 Dec 2011, 10:40

cwald wrote:MH, you missed my point. I didn't question the details of the comparison. Just like ray didn't really question the facts around my sexist pig comment. Some things just should not be said
So, if I understand you correctly, it is kind of like criticizing the prophet Mohammed. Something to avoid to not inflame certain demographics.
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

User avatar
SamBee
Posts: 5642
Joined: 14 Mar 2010, 04:55

Re: Nauvoo Expositor Destruction

Post by SamBee » 23 Dec 2011, 12:12

I believe it was his biggest mistake.
DASH1730 "An Area Authority...[was] asked...who...would go to the Telestial kingdom. His answer: "murderers, adulterers and a lot of surprised Mormons!"'
1ST PRES 1978 "[LDS] believe...there is truth in many religions and philosophies...good and great religious leaders... have raised the spiritual, moral, and ethical awareness of their people. When we speak of The [LDS] as the only true church...it is...authorized to administer the ordinances...by Jesus Christ... we do not mean... it is the only teacher of truth."

Old-Timer
Site Admin
Posts: 16887
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: Nauvoo Expositor Destruction

Post by Old-Timer » 23 Dec 2011, 13:21

Yeah, cwald, we're even. :thumbup:

I used a big, fat disclaimer, but, still . . . I know. :oops:
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

User avatar
mormonheretic
Site Admin
Posts: 800
Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 13:53
Contact:

Re: Nauvoo Expositor Destruction

Post by mormonheretic » 24 Dec 2011, 13:48

SD,

I think the casual student reads Truth Restored. Rough Stone Rolling, and Great Basin Kingdom are 2 excellent books, though I wouldn't consider them casual reading. Michael Quinn's Mormon Hierarchy series is good too, but sometimes I don't always agree with him, and I don't think he's casual either. More Wives Than One by Kathryn Daynes is excellent for polygamy, and perhaps more casual than the others listed. Dallin Oaks has a great book on the Trial of Joseph's Assassins.

Casual readers don't get the details that are surprising--you've got to be willing to dig in to get the good juicy stuff. All of the books above target a specific time period, not all of church history. I don't know of any book that covers all of Mormon History in any sort of comprehensive way that a casual reader would get "the rest of the story" as Paul Harvey says.

User avatar
wayfarer
Posts: 1335
Joined: 09 Nov 2011, 15:59
Location: in ye olde world
Contact:

Re: Nauvoo Expositor Destruction

Post by wayfarer » 24 Dec 2011, 13:58

mormonheretic wrote: Rough Stone Rolling, and Great Basin Kingdom are 2 excellent books, though I wouldn't consider them casual reading. Michael Quinn's Mormon Hierarchy series is good too, but sometimes I don't always agree with him, and I don't think he's casual either. More Wives Than One by Kathryn Daynes is excellent for polygamy, and perhaps more casual than the others listed. Dallin Oaks has a great book on the Trial of Joseph's Assassins.
Great reading list. I love Arrington's histories, and was amazed at the honesty with which Dallin Oaks expressed the flaws in the revisionist history around the martyrdom in "Carthage Conspiracy" -- the trial book you mentioned. I find it interesting that Oaks' more recent works and talks are much more apologetic in content -- a little disappointing.
"Those who speak don't know, those who know don't speak." Lao Tzu.
My seat in the bloggernacle: http://wayfaringfool.blogspot.com

User avatar
Ilovechrist77
Posts: 707
Joined: 08 Nov 2011, 21:42

Re: Nauvoo Expositor Destruction

Post by Ilovechrist77 » 07 Jan 2012, 20:17

If the fall of Adam and Eve was supposed to happen to bring us into mortality to become like Heavenly Father, then why didn't Heavenly Father just say to them partake of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? Why did Satan say it? And if we're supposed to dress modestly then why did Satan tell Adam and Eve they were naked after partaking of the fruit? If these things are part of Heavenly Father's plan then why didn't he say those things? Even after hearing various explanations by the church, these things don't make any sense to me. Your thoughts?

Old-Timer
Site Admin
Posts: 16887
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: Nauvoo Expositor Destruction

Post by Old-Timer » 07 Jan 2012, 20:29

It's all symbolic - and there are no universal answers that will satisfy everyone.

I know that's not satisfying to everyone, as well, but it's how I see it - largely because it's how I personally want to see it. I want to find meaning and ask questions that make sense to me - and I gave up a long time ago caring if others' meaning and questions make sense to me. If they make sense to them, great; if the don't make sense to me, fine.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

Post Reply