Posted on 07/08/2011 1:44:03 PM PDT by Colofornian
...David Hyrum Smith...youngest son of...LDS prophet, Joseph Smith...returned to a mission to Utah...Reorganized church prophet, Joseph Smith III, who the letter was addressed to, must have regretted extending the call, writes Valerie Tippetts Avery, author of “From Mission to Madness: Last Son of the Mormon Prophet...” To young David...the mission...served to convince himself...that he had spent years angrily refuting — that his father...preached and practiced polygamy.
...David...Smith took his...skepticism...further, arguing against...dogma that man can only seek important further knowledge from a selected prophet. This doubt struck at a key doctrine of both churches. He wrote: “If faith unto salvation was an eternal principle and true, it could be discovered and demonstrated so as to be of general benefit as the law of gravitation or the rules of mathematics. But as it comes to us it makes us subservient to our falable (sic) fellow Man for eternal life, a most absurd proposition. But you again might speak God has revealed himself. But here again is an absurdity our fellow man brings us a revelation, and we are only guided by our faith in him. We do not know he has had this revelation and eternal salvation depends upon our faith in our fellow man and his revelation. Unjust and absurd.”
...David Smith...pointed out the inconsistency of ascribing belief based on one man’s claim of divine prophecy. For every Joseph Smith, he told his brother, there were Brigham Young, “Spiritualists” and Strangites” (an offshoot of Mormonism).
Young Smith’s ideas could be dismissed as heresy...by rigid believers...Any follower of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints…should acknowledge... inconsistencies demanded…which are:
• ...belief is required without presentable evidence...
• ...for every claim of a Joseph Smith or a Thomas Monson, there are thousands of similar claims from prophets with hundreds of millions of adherents...
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.standard.net ...
But it is worth noting that mormonism was started by a depraved scammer - Joseph Smith - who was also a horndog - taking the wives of other men and very young women. Much could be said about Bring 'em Young. It is not much of a stretch to believe a corrupt leadership breeds problems.
With that, I will let a friend of Beck's tell here story...
Offering Martha Beck The Unapologetic Defense She Justifiably Deserves
Posted By Steve Benson
HUGH NIBLEY -Guid-
↑
Recent inquires have been made on this board regarding my thoughts on claims made by Martha Beck. Below I synthesize, reiterate and amplify on what I have posted in earlier forums.
I have known Martha Beck since 1993, when she and her then-husband John Beck publicly announced they were leaving their teachings positions at BYU--and exiting the Mormon Church, as well. I became aware of their departure from BYU and the LDS faith while watching a news broadcast on their resignations (before I and my former spouse Mary Ann left the LDS Church later that same year). After viewing the news report, I personally phoned them to congratulate them on their courage.
From my own interaction with Martha over the years, I have found her to be honest, believable, articulate, intelligent, talented, persuasive and credible. She is a Harvard-educated scholar, a published sociologist with recognized expertise in women's studies, a respected and popular book author, a national magazine columnist and an accomplished, versatile artist. (The last time I was in her home, I saw how she had decorated it with her amazing creations). When I went through my own post-divorce emotional upheaval, Martha was there as a strong support and a listening ear. Over the years, I have trusted Martha implicitly, respected her immensely and considered her a friend.
After leaving the Mormon Church, Martha and John moved to the Phoenix area, where she also resettled following the eventual dissolution of their marriage. Living in the same metroplex, I and my ex-wife socialized with the Becks, including visiting their home, and she and John coming to ours.
During these times, we talked at length about Martha's life experiences. Years before eventually writing and publishing her book, "Leaving the Saints," she spoke to me of some of her realities growing up in the Nibley household, focusing particular attention on her encounters with her father.
For instance, she told me of how her father was fundamentally incapable of meaningful, interactive dialogue with his children, saying that when he "spoke" with them, he followed mechanical prompts from 3 x 5 notecards he held in his lap.
She said that, as a child, she was responsible for seeing to it that her siblings got off to school in the morning. She described the Nibley home of her youth as being eerily dark and quiet.
According to what Martha has shared with me, while her father was in some ways was a kind and good man, in other ways he was deeply psychologically unbalanced, emotionally scarred, fundamentally burdened with self-doubt, frustratingly mired in denial, continually seeking throughout in his life approval from the leaders of the Mormon Church and its members--and absolutely capable of committing the sexual abuse that Martha describes as having occurred.
Martha spoke of her father as someone who, in her opinion, had been deeply pschyologically damaged, probably by his personal experiences in World War II military intelligence. She told me how once when walking outdoors with him as a child, he suddenly appeared to have a post-traumatic stress episode and ordered her to lay down and take protective cover. She did not tell me exactly what events during WWII may have been had a severe impact on her father's mental health but expressed the opinion that they may have been connected to possible involvement in abusive treatment of non-combatant civilians.
Martha told me her father had decided many years before (regardless of the evidence put forward against the Mormon Church by its critics) that he would always defend the LDS Church, despite any counter evidences mounted against its claims. She told me that her father was psychologically dependent on the support and admiration he received from the BYU students he taught, that he thrived on their adulation of him and that he needed their constant reinforcement to bolster his self-esteem.
With regard to his decades of devoted Mormon apologia (particularly his writings on the Book of Abraham), Martha told me that she found it curious and inexplicable how devout Mormons--when observing her Down Syndrome child Adam engage in primitive childhood vocalizations--would regard them as "gobble-de-gook," but that when her father spoke Mormon apologetic gobble-de-gook, they declared it to be divinely inspired.
I spent a good amount of time over the years talking with Martha about the experiences she eventually wrote about in "Leaving the Saints." Based on the consistency of her accounts over that period, I regard her claims of sexual abuse that she says occurred at the hands of her father to be compelling, true, reliable, consistent and evidentiarily sound--both as she has laid them out in her book and as she has relayed then to me personally in great detail before and after the book was published.
In describing what she calls her father's sexual abuse of her, she detailed to me how she remembers her father's face physically above her--with her hands immobilized--and how she then experienced a sharp pain in her vaginal area. In this context, she told me that her father believed he was engaging in higher spiritual connection with God through his study of ancient Egyptian religious/sexual rites and that she was utilized by him as a vehicle in those exploratory studies.
Martha's explicit descriptions of what she says took place (and when) at the hands of her father were spoken to me from her heart--and I have no doubt that they were actually experienced by her. Attempts by some in her family and other Mormon Church defenders to discredit her are, in my opinion, baseless, vindictive and, in some cases, driven by greed and jealousy. Martha told me later that her mother confided in her that Martha's father (according to Martha's account) was capable of doing what she described in her book as having had occurred.
During the times that Martha and John visited with us, John never disputed a single word of Martha's account. Later (and attendant to their divorce proceedings in which money became a significant issue of dispute), John began to openly criticize Martha's version of events that she said she experienced at the hands of her father.
It is important to emphasize that Martha's claim of sexual abuse by her father is not limited to recovered memory alone. Martha strongly reiterated to me that ever since she was a small child she has had memories of experiences related to her abuse by her father which she was eventually able to put into proper perspective and context.
Combined with that, Martha lays claim to evidence of severe physical trauma and scarring in her genital area that, contrary to some attempts at explanation, did not come from playing on the jungle gym as a little girl.
Martha compares the basis for her contention that she was sexually molested by her father to a three-legged stool. One leg of the stool are recovered memories, another leg of the stool are memories she has always had and the third leg of the stool are physical evidences of significant sexual injury.
This combination of evidence has also been a subject about which I have spoken with one of Martha's cousins, who firmly supports the veracity of Martha's claims and who has been steadfast in defending Martha against efforts to discredit her. This cousin personally told me that she was present in a setting where Martha attempted to have her father acknowlege to her the truthfulness of the charges she had made against him. *Martha told me that during this episode her father was detached, unemotional, unfocused and unresponsive, refusing to deal with the issues in any meaningful way).
Amazingly, for all she has been through, Martha speaks of her horrible abuse experiences with dignity, calmness, candor and stoicism, but I have nonetheless seen the anger spark in her eyes and heard her voice rise in indignation when she sees people attack her character, malign her account of what happened and dishonestly or ignorantly assail the people who mean the most to her. (I never met Hugh Nibley, so I cannot speak from any personal experience about him). Despite searing criticsm from members of her family along with with that from bands of Mormon faithful, Martha personally told me how the criticism has actually made her stronger and that she is at peace with herself.
When her father died in 2005, I received an early morning phone call from Martha, informing me of his passing and asking me if I wouldn't mind speaking in her defense to a reporter from "People Magazine." I told her unhesitatingly that I would (especially when she added that some of her friends were not willing to go public in her defense because of their fears of personal recrimination).
The following article, written by Michelle Green and entitled "Leaving Home: In a New Book, Author Martha Beck Accuses Her Father, a Mormon Scholar, of Sex Abuse," appeared in "People Magazine," (11 April 2005, vol. 63, no. 14):
"When Martha Beck receives the shattering phone call that everyone with an elderly parent half expects, she is sitting in her kitchen in Phoenix, talking about her provocative memoir 'Leaving the Saints.' Author of the 1999 bestseller 'Expecting Adam,' about her experience with a son born with Down syndrome, Beck has crafted a new book documenting the spiritual disenchantment that led to her break with the Mormon church. And there is more: In her book Beck alleges that she was molested by her father, Dr. Hugh Nibley--a prominent Mormon scholar and historian.
"Now . . . one of Beck's seven siblings is calling to say that Nibley, 94, has died. Wiping tears from her blue eyes, Beck, 42, says that she was told her father's last words were, 'I love Martha so much. She's my favorite.'
"Even as Nibley lay dying in Provo, Utah, he knew that Beck---a Harvard Ph.D., sociologist and 'O' magazine columnist who calls herself a 'life coach'--was going public with the accusations of 'ritual sexual abuse' that she had made privately years before.
"Now Beck confides that she had felt 'an overwhelming wave of peacefulness' when she was meditating earlier that morning. 'It would have been when he was dying,' she adds softly.
"But if Beck is feeling at peace, it is in spite of the maelstrom around her. Even before her book, subtitled 'How I Lost the Mormons and Found My Faith,' was published . . ., Mormons rushed to protest the fact that she wrote about sacred rituals, including her wedding (to John Beck, now 45 and the father other children Kate, 19, Adam, 16, and Lizzy, 14). They also hastened to defend Nibley, professor emeritus of ancient scripture at Brigham Young University. Church members conducted a campaign to send anti-Beck e-mails to Oprah, and Kim Farah, a church spokeswoman, told PEOPLE, 'Fair-minded readers will find ["Leaving the Saints"] at best unconvincing, at worst mean-spirited and at times absurd.'
"In addition, all of Beck's siblings have signed a statement claiming that the 'portrayal of our family [in the book] is false.' Says brother Alex, 49, a filmmaker: 'We stand together and say we saw no evidence of this abuse.'
"By Beck's account her siblings never witnessed the molestation, which began when she was 5 and continued until she was 8. 'What I remember [of the first incident] is this,' she says now. 'My mother had taken my little sister to the doctor and my other siblings were at school. My father told me that I had to have a special bath . . . and then,' she sighs, 'he tied my hands together and put them over my head. He was saying it was an Abrahamic sacrifice he had to make.'
"Beck describes 'having my legs shoved apart' and experiencing 'this horrible, horrible pain' that would produce ragged scar tissue gynecologists would note in later years. The memories did not stay with her; though she says she suffered from anorexia and depression, she remembered nothing of the abuse during the first eight years of her marriage to Beck, a professor and author, while they were studying at Harvard and later teaching at Brigham Young. (The two separated in 1993; Beck and the children now live with her partner, Arizona State University professor Karen Gerdes, 48.)
"It was in 1991, when her daughter Katie was 5, says Beck, that she began having 'these vivid flashbacks that crashed in on me like a wave.' Seeing her elder daughter at the same age, she theorizes, triggered the memories of the abuse: 'It was sensory, it was visual, it was overwhelming.'
"Knowing that the images were connected to her father, Beck first called her mother, Phyllis (who, Beck claims, initially said she believed the charges and then recanted); she then confronted her father in 1993. His response, she says: 'To think that my own child would act in league with Satan . . .'
"But if her family brushed off Beck's claims, others have not. Steve Benson, an editorial cartoonist for the 'Arizona Republic,' has known Martha and John Beck since 1993, and, like them, he and his [formner] wife, Mary Ann, have left the church. 'I believe Martha,' he says now. 'Years ago she told us about the sexual abuse. She wasn't sensational about it. She also told us her family was in deep denial.'
"Like any memoirist who claims the title of life coach, Beck--whose oeuvre also includes self-help guides like 'The Joy Diet' and 'Finding Your Own North Star'-—is able to see the hope that shines through the horror of her story. 'It was hard as hell to write it,' she says, 'but with every page there seemed to be a more clear space in me where there had been pain.'"
http://www.people.com/people/archive/...
Have you conveniently left out the fact Nibley’s daughter also had some serious mental issues?
- - - - -
Well, pinhead, wouldn’t you have mental issues (depression and anxiety) nothing more serious than that if your father sexually abused you?
I do not know Martha Beck, but I do know several people who knew Hugh Nibley and from what they told me they were not surprised at the accusations. Nibley was known as being ‘off kilter’ and weird even among other professors at BYU. Reed Benson called him “creepy”.
And, most sexual abuse cases are he said/she said, very few abusers are caught in the act and there are medical reports to support that Martha was sexually abused.
Taken out of context? Methinks so.
- - - - - -
ROFLMAO!! Taken out of context??? Els quoted the entire revelation!
Oy!
Why would I want to be a Born Again evangelical?
- - - -
Because your current faith is going to lead you to Hell?
You want to be Mormon, fine. But don’t expect me to just let you slide without telling you the truth. Your church is lying to you and leading you to follow an unbiblical Christ.
If you choose to reject the Jesus of the Bible and follow Mormonism that that is your decision, but don’t claim to be Born Again in the Biblical way, because you aren’t. Mormons redefine Born Again (and so many other words) and I’m not gonna let it pass.
I was happy when I was LDS, and I was good at it, but I am much happier as a Christian than I ever was as a Mormon.
Heads up, the Christians on these threads know much more about Mormonism than even most Mormons. Stick around and learn what your church doesn’t tell you.
Trapped is what they are, led around is what they are. Blind faith is encourage. I was one once, and I saw that and the concern about thinking oneself out of the church was a real one.
I once said I chose to be LDS, but after I left I saw how brainwashed I was, how brainwashed they all are.
Or do you not believe in Mormon doctrine? Are you just LDS to keep the peace in the family (like Shawn McCraney was for many years) or because you don’t see there are better things outside of Mormonism?
You are so obsessed with the faith, you can’t even get the incorrect garbage about Mormons right, let alone the truth
- - - - -
You really don’t know who you are dealing with on these threads do you? Several of us are ex-momon and most of those who aren’t (like Elsie) know much more about Mormon teachings and doctrine than most LDS.
And we can prove everything we say with MORMON sources, so the standard “anti’s” lie and take things out of context won’t work here.
?
I hope you find your relationship with God your way and I will find mine my way. America is a great place to do that as long as we protect it.
- - - - -
Doesn’t work that way. I cannot adopt a ‘live an let live’ attitude, especially when that attitude will result in people going to hell. Christ saved me out of Mormonism and I have a calling to tell the truth about the Mormon cult.
I was happy in Mormonism, but I could no longer live a lie or be part of a church that went against the Bible, taught a false Christ and LIES TO ITS MEMBERS.
Your comment is typical of Mormonism, rather than debate, they play the ‘you go your way and I’ll go mine”. No dice. You are being lied to and deceived.
And Nibley DID claim to get it all right and is near worshiped by Mormons who have no idea he was making stuff up.
So, if you stop by these threads, be prepared to hear the truth about Mormonism and it isn’t what you are being told.
Why would you rather live a comfortable lie than know the truth?
LDS doctrine since its inception has always maintained that Joseph Smith claimed he saw The Father and The Son Jesus Christ.
- - - - -
Not even close. Colo, Elsie, or grey have a chart that shoes the comparisons.
Not even a good try, pinhead.
X Here Lies Mormonism Placemarker
The point of my listing my language experience was to show that I am qualified to comment on Nibley as a scholar. I have read his works, tried to find his sources (which were amazingly made up, out of context, or incorrect), and found him to be lacking severely.
Outside of Mormonism (which almost worships him) he has no standing as a scholar.
And I am just as well versed (and probably moreso) in the topics you listed in your ‘resume’ as well as other topics no included. I have degrees in Biblical studies, Ancient History (Rome and Egypt), Culinary arts, Poli Sci, and Medieval History. I am also a past president of the largest chapter in the US of the Archeological Institute of America, and know there is no proof for the Book of Mormon.
My academic interests are what led me out of Mormonism. Basically, I learned enough to no longer be fooled. For a church that claims “the glory of God is intelligence”, I see far too many Mormons who can’t add 2+2.
“Basically, I learned enough to no longer be fooled. For a church that claims “the glory of God is intelligence”, I see far too many Mormons who can’t add 2+2.”
... or rightly divide the Scriptures without falling prey to the See and Say method.
Then YOU'll have to actually POST the truth; or folks will be left with the impression that you can ACCUSE, but you can't PRODUCE.
In conclusion let us summarize this grand key, these “Fourteen Fundamentals in Following the Prophet”, for our salvation depends on them.
1. The prophet is the only man who speaks for the Lord in everything.
2. The living prophet is more vital to us than the standard works.
3. The living prophet is more important to us than a dead prophet.
4. The prophet will never lead the church astray.
5. The prophet is not required to have any particular earthly training or credentials to speak on any subject or act on any matter at any time.
6. The prophet does not have to say “Thus Saith the Lord,” to give us scripture.
7. The prophet tells us what we need to know, not always what we want to know.
8. The prophet is not limited by men’s reasoning.
9. The prophet can receive revelation on any matter, temporal or spiritual.
10. The prophet may advise on civic matters.
11. The two groups who have the greatest difficulty in following the prophet are the proud who are learned and the proud who are rich.
12. The prophet will not necessarily be popular with the world or the worldly.
13. The prophet and his counselors make up the First Presidency—the highest quorum in the Church.
14. The prophet and the presidency—the living prophet and the First Presidency—follow them and be blessed—reject them and suffer.
I testify that these fourteen fundamentals in following the living prophet are true. If we want to know how well we stand with the Lord then let us ask ourselves how well we stand with His mortal captain—how close do our lives harmonize with the Lord’s anointed—the living Prophet—President of the Church, and with the Quorum of the First Presidency.
Ezra Taft Benson
(Address given Tuesday, February 26, 1980 at Brigham Young University)
| Version Number When Published Brief Description |
Age/Year | Evil Power | Pillar of Light or Fire |
Number of Personages |
Father | Son | Question: Join What Sect |
Remarks |
| Official Version, Mormon scripture, Pearl of great Price p. 47, 48, 1974 Ed. |
Age 14 1820 |
| Yes | Yes Light |
2 | Yes | Yes | Join None | Lucy, Hyrum, Samuel, Sopronia Join Presbyterian Church 1820 |
||
| Paper by Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons March, April 1842 |
Same as item 1 above | |||||||
| Letter from Joseph Smith to John Wentworth, editor Chicago Democrat 1841 account Published March 1,1842 |
None given | No | No | 2 | ? | ? | No question, told all incorrect |
Joseph Smith's First Vision by Milton V. Backman Jr. Bookcraft, Appendix D. Ensign, Jan.1985, p. 16 |
| Both looked the Same They spoke |
||||||||
| Dictated by Joseph Smith, in hand of James Mulholland, 1838 |
Same as item 1 above, first known account of the official version. | Ensign, Jan. 1985 p. 14 | ||||||
| Joseph Smith's diary of 1835, Recorded by Warren Cowdery Nov. 9, 1835, conversation of Joseph Smith with Joshua | Joseph, about 14 | No Tongue seemed swollen; heard someone; at first couldn't pray |
Yes Fire |
One, and then another like unto the first | ? | ? | No question, told sins are forgiven, Jesus Christ is the Son of God | Joseph Smith's First Vision by Milton V. Backman Jr. Bookcraft, Appendix B |
| Second spoke. | ||||||||
| Saw many angels | ||||||||
| Messenger & Advocate by Oliver Cowdery supervised by Joseph Smith Feb. 1835 p. 77-79; Also see Dec. 1834 p. 43 | Joseph 17 1823 |
No | Yes | 1 |
No | No | No question told sin are forgiven | Note on pg. 78 that the revival was in 1823 (NOT 1820) so this must be the First Vision. |
| Messenger from God | ||||||||
| Dictated by Joseph Smith to F. G. Williams Summer to Nov. 1832 | Joseph 14 or 16 | No | Yes | 1 | No | Yes | No question, told "None doeth good", sins forgiven | Joseph Smith's First Vision by Milton V. Backman Jr. Bookcraft, Appendix A |
| Saw Lord (Jesus) he "spoke" | ||||||||
| Written by Joseph Smith, 1832 diary | Joseph 15 | No | Yes | 1 | No | Yes | No question, told sins forgiven all do no good | Ensign, Dec. 1984 pgs. 24-26 Jan. 1985 pg. 11 |
| Saw the Lord Jesus Christ (said He was crucified) | ||||||||
| Early Church leaders B. Young, G. A. Smith, J. Taylor | Joseph 15 | No | No | 1 | No | No | Join None | See Journal of Discourses, 2:171; 18:239; 13:77,78; 20:167; 12:333,334 |
| Saw an angel, and asked the angel | ||||||||
WELL!
THAT came out nicely!!
cleanup aisle 56!
I’ve never heard of David Hyrum Smith, ever, but he is a perfect example of where doubt leads. God calls on us to have faith, not facts.
David Smith has essentially described the entire Bible by which all our knowledge of God has come. Through prayer, though, I can know what is and isn’t true.
Faith is the key, not facts. Feelings, not logic are what converts one to Christ. Has anyone ever been logicked to the Gospel?
A quick search will show you this: http://en.fairmormon.org/Primary_sources/First_Vision_accounts/1832
It only mentions the Lord, no angels and no Heavenly Father. It is Smith’s own account in his own hand.
Every Christian knows that if you don’t want to believe something you won’t. Why every religious person knows just that. Twaddling in the minutiae is simple wallowing.
Look to the doctrine. That’s the Fruit.
I don’t know why you ping me to these posts, but I presume it is that you and your posse continue to seek the light.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.