Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
- DEEPER storm
- captain of 100
- Posts: 107
Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
Do you think he flourished in the past because of a lack of communication?
I think he could still do it but probably would have ended something like this:
http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2013/04 ... 00-c85.jpg
I think he could still do it but probably would have ended something like this:
http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2013/04 ... 00-c85.jpg
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4066
- Location: Vineyard, Utah
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
I don't think Joseph Smith could have built *his* religion today or in 1830. He was only able to build a religion then because it was not his religion.
The work of God will almost always progress. When Heavenly Father decides it is time to establish the Church of Jesus Christ the church will grow and prosper because of prophetic leadership.
The work of God will almost always progress. When Heavenly Father decides it is time to establish the Church of Jesus Christ the church will grow and prosper because of prophetic leadership.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1690
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
It belongs to the Lord. Joseph Smith was a passenger on it, a loyal passenger but still he didn't call the shots. Jesus does. And he knows who he's got in his batting line up and who is playing for the other team, and who he will play in the future on his team.
- alduckdog
- captain of 10
- Posts: 39
- Location: MT
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
There was a reason why the Lord's church was restored when it was. As stated by other posters, it is not the church of Joseph Smith and would have/could still be restored if need be without him.
The timing was perfect if you think about it. At the time Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon were mocked for the content inside, as time went by science and history have proven the validity of Nephite/Lamanite society. If the church was to be restored today...all this impossible information is just a Google search away.
The timing was perfect if you think about it. At the time Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon were mocked for the content inside, as time went by science and history have proven the validity of Nephite/Lamanite society. If the church was to be restored today...all this impossible information is just a Google search away.
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
"In the modern world, He and His Father appeared to the boy Joseph Smith, ushering in the long-promised 'dispensation of the fulness of times' (Ephesians 1:10)." - The Living Christ
All the other Christian denominations can protest that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is not true, but they don't even know or completely follow the Bible which they profess to believe such as the verse mentioned above. Rather than our faith needing to defend the existence of prophets and apostles in the restored gospel, other denominations need to explain why they don't have any.
Baptism for the dead...
Lost sheep...
Jesus clearly identifying Himself as Jehovah...
Etc., etc., etc., the other denominations can only flap around and make noise, without success. They need to bring all the good and virtuous that they have and see if we can't add something to it. (paraphrasing the late President Gordon B. Hinckley https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... r?lang=eng )
Therefore, for the sake of a debate on which church is right, I'm willing to allow that perhaps the LDS Church is not true (but it is). However, if we're not, the others are quite lacking in the saving ordinances and the priesthood to perform them. If one is supposed to "born of the water" to get into heaven, what's their plan?
All the other Christian denominations can protest that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is not true, but they don't even know or completely follow the Bible which they profess to believe such as the verse mentioned above. Rather than our faith needing to defend the existence of prophets and apostles in the restored gospel, other denominations need to explain why they don't have any.
Baptism for the dead...
Lost sheep...
Jesus clearly identifying Himself as Jehovah...
Etc., etc., etc., the other denominations can only flap around and make noise, without success. They need to bring all the good and virtuous that they have and see if we can't add something to it. (paraphrasing the late President Gordon B. Hinckley https://www.lds.org/general-conference/ ... r?lang=eng )
Therefore, for the sake of a debate on which church is right, I'm willing to allow that perhaps the LDS Church is not true (but it is). However, if we're not, the others are quite lacking in the saving ordinances and the priesthood to perform them. If one is supposed to "born of the water" to get into heaven, what's their plan?
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1077
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
I think you are right. I think the Lord's timing for the Church to be restored was perfect, and wouldn't have worked at some other time in history, either before or after.DEEPER storm wrote: ↑October 13th, 2017, 4:36 pm Do you think he flourished in the past because of a lack of communication?
I think he could still do it but probably would have ended something like this:
http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2013/04 ... 00-c85.jpg
- captainfearnot
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1975
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
Could Chares Taze Russell have built his religion today? Or Barton W. Stone? Or Ellen G. White?
Or even L. Ron Hubbard?
Lots of restorationist, non-trinitarian churches were founded in 19th Century America, and a few of them are still thriving today. The time and place probably accounts for a lot of that success. There was lots of demand for that kind of religion at the time. As such, it's probably safe to say that those same religions would not get off the ground today, because times have changed and people want different things from their churches.
Even Scientology probably owes its success to the nascent allure of science fiction of the 1950s. If Hubbard tried to start the same religion today it probably wouldn't take off like it did, but maybe if he tweaked it and came up with a version that played to modern sensibilities it would.
All of these religions have evolved since they were founded, so if we imagined their founders trying to launch them today, in a form closer to their current version, maybe we can envision their success. Joseph Smith might focus a lot less on ancient artifacts, Native Americans, and communal utopias, and more on creating a squeaky clean corporate image and extolling the miracle of network marketing.
Or even L. Ron Hubbard?
Lots of restorationist, non-trinitarian churches were founded in 19th Century America, and a few of them are still thriving today. The time and place probably accounts for a lot of that success. There was lots of demand for that kind of religion at the time. As such, it's probably safe to say that those same religions would not get off the ground today, because times have changed and people want different things from their churches.
Even Scientology probably owes its success to the nascent allure of science fiction of the 1950s. If Hubbard tried to start the same religion today it probably wouldn't take off like it did, but maybe if he tweaked it and came up with a version that played to modern sensibilities it would.
All of these religions have evolved since they were founded, so if we imagined their founders trying to launch them today, in a form closer to their current version, maybe we can envision their success. Joseph Smith might focus a lot less on ancient artifacts, Native Americans, and communal utopias, and more on creating a squeaky clean corporate image and extolling the miracle of network marketing.
- Robin Hood
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 13159
- Location: England
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
I think the church was restored when it was for a reason. I suspect an attempt at a similar restoration today would not be successful.
I also suspect that there was at least one restoration attempt previously, which ended in failure.
I also suspect that there was at least one restoration attempt previously, which ended in failure.
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
I'm on the edge of my chair in anticipation of you expanding on your highlighted comment above. Who, what, where, when, why and how?Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 19th, 2017, 10:13 am I think the church was restored when it was for a reason. I suspect an attempt at a similar restoration today would not be successful.
I also suspect that there was at least one restoration attempt previously, which ended in failure.
- Robin Hood
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 13159
- Location: England
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
Ok, this probably isn't a popular view on this forum, but have you ever looked at the similarities between Joseph Smith and Muhammad?Silver wrote: ↑October 20th, 2017, 7:54 amI'm on the edge of my chair in anticipation of you expanding on your highlighted comment above. Who, what, where, when, why and how?Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 19th, 2017, 10:13 am I think the church was restored when it was for a reason. I suspect an attempt at a similar restoration today would not be successful.
I also suspect that there was at least one restoration attempt previously, which ended in failure.
We have to remember that most of what we "know" about Muhammad has come to us through a number of revisionists who eradicated any alternative history. For example, all alternative Korans were literally hunted down and burned.
Only the narrative according to a small select group following a prolonged power struggle was allowed to survive.
BYU middle-east professor Daniel Peterson has done some interesting work in this regard and pieced together an alternative view of Muhammad which he claims is much closer to the truth. For example, there is evidence that Muhammad's first visionary encounter was with God who was sat upon a throne, not Gabriel as later revisionists claimed.
Brigham Young and other church leaders taught that Muhammad was a true prophet of God to the Arab people (they are descendants of Abraham) but his that teachings were corrupted and changed by later revisionists for their own purposes.
If we consider the religious conditions of the day we see that the Christians were in disarray with loss of authority, factions and schisms everywhere, false gospels etc, the Jews still firmly entrenched in their apostasy and scattered to the four corners of the earth following their rejection of the Christ, and the rest of the seed of Abraham (Arabs - who had not had the gospel and had therefore not rejected Christ) steeped in idolatry. The conditions were ripe for God to reveal himself to a genuine seeker.
In effect, just like Joseph Smith, Muhammad's name was had for good and evil. It's just that in his case the evil triumphed and any hope of a restoration of lost truths and authority withered and died before they took root.
- inho
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 3286
- Location: in a galaxy far, far away
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
That thought has crossed my mind.Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 20th, 2017, 8:42 am Ok, this probably isn't a popular view on this forum, but have you ever looked at the similarities between Joseph Smith and Muhammad?
We have to remember that most of what we "know" about Muhammad has come to us through a number of revisionists who eradicated any alternative history. For example, all alternative Korans were literally hunted down and burned.
Only the narrative according to a small select group following a prolonged power struggle was allowed to survive.
BYU middle-east professor Daniel Peterson has done some interesting work in this regard and pieced together an alternative view of Muhammad which he claims is much closer to the truth. For example, there is evidence that Muhammad's first visionary encounter was with God who was sat upon a throne, not Gabriel as later revisionists claimed.
Brigham Young and other church leaders taught that Muhammad was a true prophet of God to the Arab people (they are descendants of Abraham) but his that teachings were corrupted and changed by later revisionists for their own purposes.
If we consider the religious conditions of the day we see that the Christians were in disarray with loss of authority, factions and schisms everywhere, false gospels etc, the Jews still firmly entrenched in their apostasy and scattered to the four corners of the earth following their rejection of the Christ, and the rest of the seed of Abraham (Arabs - who had not had the gospel and had therefore not rejected Christ) steeped in idolatry. The conditions were ripe for God to reveal himself to a genuine seeker.
In effect, just like Joseph Smith, Muhammad's name was had for good and evil. It's just that in his case the evil triumphed.
Is there any particular writing by Daniel Peterson you would suggest one to read?
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 454
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
Maybe another question would be: Would the world be as advanced as it is without the gospel being restored?
I think technology is where it is at today because the Lord is using it for his building the kingdom. if the restoration were to be just kicking off I would guess that technology and communication would be way behind where we are at today.
I think technology is where it is at today because the Lord is using it for his building the kingdom. if the restoration were to be just kicking off I would guess that technology and communication would be way behind where we are at today.
-
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 5247
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
Thanks for that. I'm going to fall back on the Book of Mormon to respond. Many of the prophecies in that book are fulfilled only through the establishment of free countries in the Western Hemisphere and through a translator there that had the same name as his father and as that of Joseph who wore stylish clothing in those days before he became 2nd only to Pharaoh. However, I do like what you've written and Daniel Peterson is no lightweight. I've read lots of his stuff although it's been a while.Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 20th, 2017, 8:42 amOk, this probably isn't a popular view on this forum, but have you ever looked at the similarities between Joseph Smith and Muhammad?Silver wrote: ↑October 20th, 2017, 7:54 amI'm on the edge of my chair in anticipation of you expanding on your highlighted comment above. Who, what, where, when, why and how?Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 19th, 2017, 10:13 am I think the church was restored when it was for a reason. I suspect an attempt at a similar restoration today would not be successful.
I also suspect that there was at least one restoration attempt previously, which ended in failure.
We have to remember that most of what we "know" about Muhammad has come to us through a number of revisionists who eradicated any alternative history. For example, all alternative Korans were literally hunted down and burned.
Only the narrative according to a small select group following a prolonged power struggle was allowed to survive.
BYU middle-east professor Daniel Peterson has done some interesting work in this regard and pieced together an alternative view of Muhammad which he claims is much closer to the truth. For example, there is evidence that Muhammad's first visionary encounter was with God who was sat upon a throne, not Gabriel as later revisionists claimed.
Brigham Young and other church leaders taught that Muhammad was a true prophet of God to the Arab people (they are descendants of Abraham) but his that teachings were corrupted and changed by later revisionists for their own purposes.
If we consider the religious conditions of the day we see that the Christians were in disarray with loss of authority, factions and schisms everywhere, false gospels etc, the Jews still firmly entrenched in their apostasy and scattered to the four corners of the earth following their rejection of the Christ, and the rest of the seed of Abraham (Arabs - who had not had the gospel and had therefore not rejected Christ) steeped in idolatry. The conditions were ripe for God to reveal himself to a genuine seeker.
In effect, just like Joseph Smith, Muhammad's name was had for good and evil. It's just that in his case the evil triumphed and any hope of a restoration of lost truths and authority withered and died before they took root.
- jbalm
- The Third Comforter
- Posts: 5348
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
Did God choose poorly?Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 19th, 2017, 10:13 am I think the church was restored when it was for a reason. I suspect an attempt at a similar restoration today would not be successful.
I also suspect that there was at least one restoration attempt previously, which ended in failure.
- Robin Hood
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 13159
- Location: England
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
No, but men have their agency.jbalm wrote: ↑October 20th, 2017, 2:20 pmDid God choose poorly?Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 19th, 2017, 10:13 am I think the church was restored when it was for a reason. I suspect an attempt at a similar restoration today would not be successful.
I also suspect that there was at least one restoration attempt previously, which ended in failure.
- jbalm
- The Third Comforter
- Posts: 5348
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
I take it you aren't one of the predestination types?Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 20th, 2017, 3:27 pmNo, but men have their agency.jbalm wrote: ↑October 20th, 2017, 2:20 pmDid God choose poorly?Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 19th, 2017, 10:13 am I think the church was restored when it was for a reason. I suspect an attempt at a similar restoration today would not be successful.
I also suspect that there was at least one restoration attempt previously, which ended in failure.
If so, I agree. Although it does raise questions about omniscience. Oh well... can't have everything.
- Joel
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 7043
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
Another similarity is some Muslims do not believe Muhammad was a polygamist that went after young girls and had older wives also just like some LDS folks do not believe Joseph Smith was a polygamist and did those things too.Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 20th, 2017, 8:42 amOk, this probably isn't a popular view on this forum, but have you ever looked at the similarities between Joseph Smith and Muhammad?Silver wrote: ↑October 20th, 2017, 7:54 amI'm on the edge of my chair in anticipation of you expanding on your highlighted comment above. Who, what, where, when, why and how?Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 19th, 2017, 10:13 am I think the church was restored when it was for a reason. I suspect an attempt at a similar restoration today would not be successful.
I also suspect that there was at least one restoration attempt previously, which ended in failure.
We have to remember that most of what we "know" about Muhammad has come to us through a number of revisionists who eradicated any alternative history. For example, all alternative Korans were literally hunted down and burned.
Only the narrative according to a small select group following a prolonged power struggle was allowed to survive.
BYU middle-east professor Daniel Peterson has done some interesting work in this regard and pieced together an alternative view of Muhammad which he claims is much closer to the truth. For example, there is evidence that Muhammad's first visionary encounter was with God who was sat upon a throne, not Gabriel as later revisionists claimed.
Brigham Young and other church leaders taught that Muhammad was a true prophet of God to the Arab people (they are descendants of Abraham) but his that teachings were corrupted and changed by later revisionists for their own purposes.
If we consider the religious conditions of the day we see that the Christians were in disarray with loss of authority, factions and schisms everywhere, false gospels etc, the Jews still firmly entrenched in their apostasy and scattered to the four corners of the earth following their rejection of the Christ, and the rest of the seed of Abraham (Arabs - who had not had the gospel and had therefore not rejected Christ) steeped in idolatry. The conditions were ripe for God to reveal himself to a genuine seeker.
In effect, just like Joseph Smith, Muhammad's name was had for good and evil. It's just that in his case the evil triumphed and any hope of a restoration of lost truths and authority withered and died before they took root.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1795
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
Would the founding fathers - writers of the constitution be able to write such a document today - no chance the document is based on biblical principles. The US constitution was required to be in place, today the constitution is so far gone that these things are no longer possible.
The truth was restored at the right time, the earliest possible time, there would be no Salt Lake city or ownership of Jackson County.
The truth was restored at the right time, the earliest possible time, there would be no Salt Lake city or ownership of Jackson County.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1795
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
Mohammad was an Antichrist a messenger of Satan, that plagiarise the bible.Joel wrote: ↑October 21st, 2017, 10:06 pmAnother similarity is some Muslims do not believe Muhammad was a polygamist that went after young girls and had older wives also just like some LDS folks do not believe Joseph Smith was a polygamist and did those things too.Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 20th, 2017, 8:42 amOk, this probably isn't a popular view on this forum, but have you ever looked at the similarities between Joseph Smith and Muhammad?Silver wrote: ↑October 20th, 2017, 7:54 amI'm on the edge of my chair in anticipation of you expanding on your highlighted comment above. Who, what, where, when, why and how?Robin Hood wrote: ↑October 19th, 2017, 10:13 am I think the church was restored when it was for a reason. I suspect an attempt at a similar restoration today would not be successful.
I also suspect that there was at least one restoration attempt previously, which ended in failure.
We have to remember that most of what we "know" about Muhammad has come to us through a number of revisionists who eradicated any alternative history. For example, all alternative Korans were literally hunted down and burned.
Only the narrative according to a small select group following a prolonged power struggle was allowed to survive.
In effect, just like Joseph Smith, Muhammad's name was had for good and evil. It's just that in his case the evil triumphed and any hope of a restoration of lost truths and authority withered and died before they took root.
Christian scholar claims 'shocking similarity' between biblical 'antichrist' and Muslim messiah called the 'Mahdi'
https://www.christiantoday.com/article/ ... /78196.htm
- LukeAir2008
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2985
- Location: Highland
Re: Do you think that Joseph Smith could have built his religion today?
There was no failed restoration attempt. There have been inspired men who have tried to reform existing churches and those who have established new religions.
The time for the restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ and the dispensation of the fullness of times was known and planned from the beginning.
Islam is the antithesis of Christianity - the polar opposite. There is no Saviour and no requirement for an Atonement. According to the Koran, Jesus escaped crucifixion and death and a stooge ended up getting executed in his place.
‘That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;-‘
— Qur'an, sura 4 (An-Nisa) ayat 157–158[10]
As we have seen in the table above, their version of Jesus and his sidekick the Mahdi are identical to the Christian Antichrist and False Prophet.
The time for the restoration of the Church of Jesus Christ and the dispensation of the fullness of times was known and planned from the beginning.
Islam is the antithesis of Christianity - the polar opposite. There is no Saviour and no requirement for an Atonement. According to the Koran, Jesus escaped crucifixion and death and a stooge ended up getting executed in his place.
‘That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-
Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;-‘
— Qur'an, sura 4 (An-Nisa) ayat 157–158[10]
As we have seen in the table above, their version of Jesus and his sidekick the Mahdi are identical to the Christian Antichrist and False Prophet.