Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In Joseph Smith's day prominent Americans were disgusted with the creeds of Christendom. (excerpt)

Posted on 12/25/2008 9:13:44 PM PST by restornu

In Joseph Smith's day some of the most prominent Americans were disgusted with the creeds of Christendom. Thomas Jefferson said:

I [Jefferson] am a real Christian, that is to say a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus, very different from the preachers . . of the gospel, while they draw all their characteristic dogmas from what its author never said or did.

They have compounded from the heathen mysteries a system beyond the comprehension of man of which Jesus, were he to return on earth, would not recognize one feature. . . . It is the speculations of crazy theologians which have made a Babel out of religion (Saul K. Padover, Thomas Jefferson on Democracy, 1939, pp. 122-123).

Writing to S. Hales in 1818, Jefferson wrote: "The truth is that Calvinism has introduced into the Christian religion more new absurdities than its leaders had purged it of old ones" (Ibid., p. 219).

On Jefferson's monument in Washington, D.C., is inscribed: "I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." If his complete quotation were on the monument it would bring out the fact that Jefferson was speaking against the dergy of his day (Ibid., p. 119).

Benjamin Franklin, replying to a letter from Ezra Styles, president of Yale, said shortly before his death:

As to Jesus of Nazareth, my opinion of whom you particularly desire, I think the system of morals and his religion, as he left it to us, the best the world ever saw or is likely to see; but I apprehend it has received various corrupt changes (Carl Van Doren, Benjamin Franklin, 1941, p. 777).

The first great work expressing the deistic feeling in America was Thomas Paine's Age of Reason, considered to have generated the greatest stir of any book of its day. It made clear that Paine was not an atheist as some claimed, but a deist because of the tyranny and bigotry he found in the existing churches (Thomas Paine, Age of Reason, 1793, p. 287).

Speaking of the period in America between 1670 and 1830, renowned theologian Paul Tillich has said, "First among the educated classes, then increasingly in the mass of industrial workers, religion lost its 'immediacy,' and it ceased to offer an unquestioned sense of direction and relevance to human living" (Roland N. Stromberg, Religious Liberalism, 1954, p. 1).

Carlyle has said of the Colonial Period: "An age fallen languid and destitute of faith and terrified of skepticism" (Ibid., p. ix).

Of this time Carl L. Becker has said, "What we have to realize is that in those years God was on trial" (Ibid., p. 1).

On another occasion, Thomas Jefferson said:

The impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavoring to impose them on others, have established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the earth (Peter H. Odegard, Religion and Politics, 1960, p. 110).

It is also true that in Colonial America only about 5 percent of the population belonged to any church and that those who did come to America for religious reasons did not come here initially to seek freedom of religion except for themselves. This is certainly an indictment against religion in Joseph Smith's day.

Peter Odegard also maintains this position:

Nowhere in the old world at the beginning of American colonization was there anything like religious toleration. . . . It is sad but not surprising to recall that even the religious dissenters who found refuge in America were, with notable exceptions, no more disposed toward toleration than the oppressors of the old world Obid., p. 9).

Historian William Warren Sweet says, "The rise of an intense anticlericalism was another cause of opposition to the churches." Further he relates: "The United States began as a free and independent nation with organized religion at a low ebb" (William Warren Sweet, Religion in the Development of American Culture, 1952, p. 92.).


TOPICS: Ecumenism; General Discusssion
KEYWORDS: christendom; creeds; intolerance; jefferson; lds; mormon; mormonism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320321-331 next last
To: Tennessee Nana; restornu; Monkey Face
The Bible plainly states that Jesus is the only Begotten Son of God and that he was visited by the Holy Spirit after his baptism by John the Baptist. ~ Monkey face
_____________________________________________
~ Tennessee Nana say NO it doesnt.....
________________________________________
Because it doesnt...


1 John 4:9
9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.

Matthew 3:16
16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

Well....maybe she's reading one of them "new and improved" Bibles? /baffle
281 posted on 12/28/2008 2:16:28 PM PST by Stourme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: Stourme

Well....maybe she’s reading one of them “new and improved” Bibles? /baffle

***

You never know!:)


282 posted on 12/28/2008 2:31:08 PM PST by restornu (Gardeners have roots and Cowboys have boots!: smile)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

Elsie, Elsie, Elsie...

As long as you’ve been posting to me, you should know by now that I won’t do the little dance you want me to do.

Someone once said, “I disagree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.” I mean, after all ~ I’m not demanding YOU prove anything to me. ;o]


283 posted on 12/28/2008 2:45:33 PM PST by Monkey Face (For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | View Replies]

To: restornu

Could be, huh?

;o]


284 posted on 12/28/2008 2:45:54 PM PST by Monkey Face (For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: restornu; greyfoxx39

preparing the way for the return of the Lord Jesus Christ!
______________________________________________

And then what ????

What happens then ????

And what happens to you as a woman ?????


285 posted on 12/28/2008 3:50:45 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]

To: Stourme

Well....maybe she’s reading one of them “new and improved” Bibles? /baffle
___________________________________________

No, I dont read the book of mormon...

Nor that version of the bible by the false prophet Joseph Smith...


286 posted on 12/28/2008 3:53:29 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 281 | View Replies]

To: Tennessee Nana; Stourme; Monkey Face

TN we have no doubt that you don’t!


287 posted on 12/28/2008 5:22:23 PM PST by restornu (Gardeners have roots and Cowboys have boots!: smile)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 286 | View Replies]

To: restornu

preparing the way for the return of the Lord Jesus Christ!
______________________________________________

And then what ????

What happens then ????

And what happens to you as a woman ?????


288 posted on 12/28/2008 5:30:43 PM PST by Tennessee Nana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies]

To: restornu
NS. Vol. II.                              Utica, NY, April 9, 1831.                             No. 15.



(For the Magazine and Advocate.)

MORMONITES.
___________

Messrs. Editors -- In the sixth number of your paper I saw a notice of a sect of people called Mormonites; and thinking that a fuller history of their founder, Joseph Smith, jr., might be interesting to community, and particularly to your correspondent in Ohio, where, perhaps, the truth concerning him may be hard to come at, I will take the trouble to make a few remarks on the character of that infamous imposter. For several years preceding the appearance of his book, he was about the country in the character of a glass-looker: pretending, by means of a certain stone, or glass, which he put in a hat, to be able to discover lost goods, hidden treasures, mines of gold and silver, &c. Although he constantly failed in his pretensions, still he had his dupes [still does] who put implicit confidence in all his words. In this town, a wealthy farmer, named Josiah Stowell, together with others, spent large sums of money in digging for hidden money, which this Smith pretended he could see, and told them where to dig; but they never found their treasure. At length the public, becoming wearied with the base imposition which he was palming upon the credulity of the ignorant, for the purpose of sponging his living from their earnings, had him arrested as a disorderly person, tried and condemned before a court of Justice. But considering his youth, (he being then a minor,) and thinking he might reform his conduct, he was designedly allowed to escape. This was four or five years ago. From this time he absented himself from this place, returning only privately, and holding clandestine intercourse with his credulous dupes, for two or three years.

It was during this time, and probably by the help of others more skilled in the ways of iniquity than himself, that he formed the blasphemous design of forging a new revelation, which, backed by the terrors of an endless hell, and the testimony of base unprincipled men, he hoped would frighten the ignorant, and open a field of speculation for the vicious, so that he might secure to himself the scandalous honor of being the founder of a new sect, which might rival, perhaps, the Wilkinsonians, or the French Prophets of the 17th century.

During the past Summer he was frequently in this vicinity, and others of baser sort, as Cowdry, Whitmer, etc., holding meetings, and proselyting a few weak and silly women, and still more silly men, whose minds are shrouded in a mist of ignorance which no ray can penetrate, and whose credulity the utmost absurdity cannot equal.

In order to check the progress of delusion, and open the eyes and understandings of those who blindly followed him, and unmask the turpitude and villainy of those who knowingly abetted him in his infamous designs; he was again arraigned before a bar of Justice, during last Summer, to answer to a charge of misdemeanor. This trial led to an investigation of his character and conduct, which clearly evinced to the unprejudiced, whence the spirit came which dictated his inspirations. During the trial it was shown that the Book of Mormon was brought to light by the same magic power by which he pretended to tell fortunes, discover hidden treasures, &c. Oliver Cowdery, one of the three witnesses to the book, testified under oath, that said Smith found with the plates, from which he translated his book, two transparent stones, resembling glass, set in silver bows. That by looking through these, he was able to read in English, the reformed Egyptian characters, which were engraved on the plates.

So much for the gift and power of God, by which Smith says he translated his book. Two transparent stones, undoubtedly of the same properties, and the gift of the same spirit as the one in which he looked to find his neighbor's goods. It is reported, and probably true, that he commenced his juggling by stealing and hiding property belonging to his neighbors, and when inquiry was made, he would look in his stone, (his gift and power) and tell where it was. Josiah Stowell, a Mormonite, being sworn, testified that he positively knew that said Smith never had lied to, or deceived him, and did not believe he ever tried to deceive any body else. The following questions were then asked him, to which he made the replies annexed.

"Did Smith ever tell you there was money hid in a certain glass which he mentioned? Yes. Did he tell you, you could find it by digging? Yes. Did you dig? Yes. Did you find any money? No. Did he not lie to you then, and deceive you? No! the money was there, but we did not get quite to it! How do you know it was there? Smith said it was!" [some things never change...]
 
-->>Addison Austin was next called upon, who testified, that at the very same time that Stowell was digging for money, he, Austin, was in company with said Smith alone, and asked him to tell him honestly whether he could see this money or not. Smith hesitated some time, but finally replied, "to be candid, between you and me, I cannot, any more than you or any body else; but any way to get a living."<<-- Here, then, we have his own confession, that he was a vile, dishonest impostor.
 
As regards the testimony of Josiah Stowell, it needs no comment. He swears positively that Smith did not lie to him. So much for a Mormon witness. Paramount to this, in truth and consistency, was the testimony of Joseph Knight, another Mormonite. Newell Knight, son of the former, and also a Mormonite, testified, under oath, that he positively had a devil cast out of himself by the instrumentality of Joseph Smith, jr., and that he saw the devil after it was out, but could not tell how it looked!

Those who have joined them in this place, are, without exception, children who are frightened into the measure, or ignorant adults, whose love for the marvellous is equalled by nothing but their entire devotedness to the will of their leader; with a few who are as destitute of virtue and moral honesty, as they are of truth and consistency. As for his book, it is only the counterpart of his money-digging plan. Fearing the penalty of the law, and wishing still to amuse his followers, he fled for safety to the sanctuary of pretended religion.   A. W. B.
   S. Bainbridge, Chen., co., March, 1831.

289 posted on 12/28/2008 6:10:26 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion ("I've got a bracelet too, Jim")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

In Joseph Smith’s day unitarians were elected president. There were five unitarians elected president in the 19th century.

Today Unitarians could not be elected president. They have become total pond scum.


290 posted on 12/28/2008 6:20:44 PM PST by ckilmer (Phi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 279 | View Replies]

To: Colofornian
"I am a lawyer; I am a big lawyer and comprehend heaven, earth and hell, to bring forth knowledge that shall cover up all lawyers, doctors and other big bodies." (History of the Church, Vol. 5, p. 289)

How do you tell when a lawyer is lying? When their lips are moving.

291 posted on 12/28/2008 6:24:28 PM PST by Godzilla (Jesus - the REASON for the SEASON.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies]

To: restornu; Colofornian
20 And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.

Maybe that is how mormon apologists moved Hill Coumorah from New York to some obscure site in Central America (and Indonesia, and elsewhere).

292 posted on 12/28/2008 6:26:39 PM PST by Godzilla (Jesus - the REASON for the SEASON.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 276 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Oh, I think a Unitarian actually could be elected
POTUS today - well not today. Perhaps in 2012.
Could you float the names of any conservative Unitarians
who are so inclined?

Did your Unitarian comment have a connection to the
discussion we were having? If so, forgive me. I don’t
remember it on this thread, but I tend to get them
all confused.

best,
ampu


293 posted on 12/28/2008 6:27:39 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion ("I've got a bracelet too, Jim")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 290 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

endless nat troll aboard!


294 posted on 12/28/2008 6:33:13 PM PST by restornu (Gardeners have roots and Cowboys have boots!: smile)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 292 | View Replies]

To: restornu
endless nat troll aboard!

Uhhhh, resty your post is kinda garbled. Please resend in a more legible format. So where is Hill Cumorah - in New York or central America?

295 posted on 12/28/2008 6:44:47 PM PST by Godzilla (Jesus - the REASON for the SEASON.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion
From the Unitarian Website

.............

December 15th, 2008 - David Hume

Goto comments Leave a comment

I just realized something strange the other day. Here are the American presidents who were affiliated officially as Unitarians:

* John Adams * John Quincy Adams * Millard Fillmore * William Howard Taft

The first Adams, Fillmore and Taft were undeniably conservatives in their time. John Adams’ faction was much more hostile to French Jacobinism than those who supported Thomas Jefferson. Fillmore was a conservative Whig who later ran unsuccessfully as a Know Nothing. And Taft’s conservatism later prompted a third party challenge from Teddy Roosevelt. Whether John Quincy Adams is a conservative or not is more confused, and depends on whether you paint the Jacksonian populism which he opposed as Right or Left. Thomas Jefferson had personal Unitarian sympathies, but he was never an official member of the church.

This is strange because the modern Unitarian-Universalist Association is arguably more a body which brings together people of Left-Liberal politics, than a religious fellowship. And of course historically there were many radical Unitarians, such as the abolitionist Theodore Parker. But during this period Unitarian didn’t have such a strong factional valence in politics; besides Fillmore, Daniel Webster was another conservative Whig Unitarian, while John C. Calhoun was arguably the intellectual godfather of the Confederacy.

Well, Republican UUs are not unknown even in our time. Bob Packwood, William Cohen and Nancy Johnson come to mind.
296 posted on 12/28/2008 7:05:31 PM PST by ckilmer (Phi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

“Bob Packwood, William Cohen and Nancy Johnson come to mind.”

Are you a supporter of any of these three for POTUS?

Why are we discussing this on a mormonite thread anyway??

best,
ampu


297 posted on 12/28/2008 7:11:15 PM PST by aMorePerfectUnion ("I've got a bracelet too, Jim")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla

Where is Noah’s Ark?


298 posted on 12/28/2008 7:22:53 PM PST by restornu (Gardeners have roots and Cowboys have boots!: smile)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 295 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

No,

You said you thought a conservative unitarian could be elected president. You asked me to find some.

I went to a unitarian political site and looked over what they were saying among themselves and posted it here.

What you see is that Unitarians are saying among themselves that unitarians today are generally liberal to very liberal.

The notable public officials whom they cite as unitarians are all liberals with no shot at the presidency.

I’m not a unitarian nor do I support any of the names mentioned.


299 posted on 12/28/2008 7:25:05 PM PST by ckilmer (Phi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: aMorePerfectUnion

So!


300 posted on 12/28/2008 7:27:00 PM PST by restornu (Gardeners have roots and Cowboys have boots!: smile)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 289 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320321-331 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson