Joseph Smith's conflicts with media vital to backstory of the Articles of Faith

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Dan Maloy Enid, OK
    March 19, 2017 4:50 p.m.

    @Sharrona - Isaiah 55:8 - "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord." ......or don't you believe the Bible?

  • Dan Maloy Enid, OK
    March 19, 2017 4:34 p.m.

    Sharonna - You dodged my question so I will ask it again: can God command what He commands? In other words, can God give us "commands"? Does He or does He not have the authority to do that? And if so, are those commands just and moral? Always? Simply answer "yes" or "no".

    You dodged my question and then typed a lot of words/quotes that you do not fully understand.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    March 18, 2017 1:50 p.m.

    RE: Dan Maloy . A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife,..”(I Tim 3:2).,The Apostles did not maintain any O.T. pattern of polygamy and they and the early church condemned it.

    D&C 101: 4,”Inasmuch as this Church of Christ(JS) has been reproached with the crime of fornication and polygamy, we declare that we believe that one man should have one wife, and one woman but one husband”, also "(H of C, vol. 2, pg. 247 August 1835.)

    JS was married Before D&C 132 July 1843. *Living Husband at the time,2 of 11*marriages. Lucinda Morgan Harris, Marriage 1838 *husband George W. Harris. Presendia Huntington Buell marriage 1841 *husband Norman Buell.

    This scripture remained in the LDS canon until 1876,The general body of the church were informed about polygamy in 1852, at which time many practiced it because leaders like Brigham professed the necessity of it for exaltation. Since ( July 1843), contradicted 101:4, It was removed in 1876, when section 132 was placed in the new edition.

  • Dan Maloy Enid, OK
    March 18, 2017 10:57 a.m.

    @ Sharonna - First, I said nothing about any 'member' of the LDS church wanting to kill Joseph Smith. Second, you claim that some LDS members did want to kill Joseph due to him committing "adultery". However, he did not commit adultery. God commands what He commands, including, at times, polygamy. To deny this is to a) deny what is written in your own Bible (Abraham, etc) and b) deny the perfect righteousness and omnipotence of God, for who are we to tell God what to do?

  • sharrona layton, UT
    March 18, 2017 9:07 a.m.

    RE: Dan Maloy. Did Joseph go too far in destroying the Nauvoo Expositer's printing press? Maybe. However, was he innacurrately and dishonestly slandered many times in his life by "the press"? Definitely. Is that being taken into account by the antagonists here? Nope. But,

    Whether Mormons killed JS or not is unimportant many important Mormons wanted to by taking an oath to kill him.. do to, many marriages/Adultery.

    .…” when you feel like killing me for so doing, as some of the people did who called themselves brethren in the days of Joseph Smith, look out for yourselves, for ‘false brethren’ were the cause of Joseph's death, and I am not a very righteous man”.(JoD v 3 p.49.)

  • moresureword Maple Grove, MN
    March 18, 2017 7:35 a.m.

    CMTM, you responded to me, in part, as follows:

    "The one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil…. JS was confused. ...."

    The Prophet Joseph Smith was confused about nothing; he knew exactly what he was talking about and the purpose of his mission.

    BTY, I belong to "the church of the Lamb of God . ..."

  • Dan Maloy Enid, OK
    March 18, 2017 12:08 a.m.

    Breaks my heart to see so many people claim that Joseph Smith was, in essence, nothing more than a fool or a con man. Rubbish. He wasn't perfect, and neither he nor any believing poster here claimed he was. However, he was what he said he was: a prophet of God. Truth does not depend upon popularity, despite what antagonists claim.

    Did Joseph go too far in destroying the Nauvoo Expositer's printing press? Maybe. However, was he innacurrately and dishonestly slandered many times in his life by "the press"? Definitely. Is that being taken into account by the antagonists here? Nope.

  • skeptic Phoenix, AZ
    March 17, 2017 2:45 p.m.

    @truthseeker,
    You posted: "North American Indian tribes are the true remnant of the Book of Mormon peoples... and they didn't originate in Central America, but are genetically tied to the Hopewell Mound Builders of America's Heartland. DNA from the Mound Builders has Israelite DNA."

    What is your source of fake news, as there is no DNA connection. Also, it seems dishonest and unchristian to plant aliens in other's family tree in order to satisfy one's own superstions.

  • keyboarder College Station, TX
    March 17, 2017 1:34 a.m.

    @Paula666 The article clearly compares today's attitudes with the past to provide context for the press in Smith's time. But the "egregious failure in logic" you argue against was never put forth. I take Joseph Smith to be a prophet, but think Trump's whining about the press to be annoying and a waste of time... to say the least. I did not perceive any logic that tried convincing me that Trump is a "good person" or doesn't deserve legitimate criticism. I did read into the article that perhaps we modern folks take the existing political climate for granted... but that doesn't necessarily lead to the same conclusions that you seem upset about.

    As for today's press being "as partisan as" back then is also an incorrect characterization of what the article says. It actually says that the press was biased much more so and that our expectation of objectivity has evolved. And why is that idea so "ludicrous"? Certainly the attitudes of the press and the people were not identical to ours now. So no, it's not a ludicrous idea. I recommend the Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin for an enjoyable read & insight into the climate and ideas expressed by the press back in those days.

  • Truthseeker1 Provo, UT
    March 16, 2017 10:01 p.m.

    Interestingly a part of the original letter from Joseph read, “The Book of Mormon is a record of the forefathers of our western tribes of Indians… by it we learn that our western tribes of Indians are descendants from that Joseph that was sold into Egypt, and that the land of America is a promised land unto them.”

    This has interesting ramifications as regarding the geography of the Book of Mormon and DNA issues. Joseph understood the "western tribes of Indians" (ie. west of New York, or Ohio, Missouri, etc) to be the descendants of the Book of Mormon peoples and also that "America" (not the Americas) was their promised land. This is consistent with Oliver Cowdrey's claim that the Hill Cumorah in New York is the actual location of the final battles of the Jaredites and Nephites. There is only one Hill Cumorah, and the church has consistantly taught that it is in New York, not Central America. It also means that North American Indian tribes are the true remnant of the Book of Mormon peoples... and they didn't originate in Central America, but are genetically tied to the Hopewell Mound Builders of America's Heartland. DNA from the Mound Builders has Israelite DNA.

  • Truthseeker1 Provo, UT
    March 16, 2017 9:58 p.m.

    Joseph wrote the letter to the American Revivalist and Rochester Observer which was N.E. Saxton edited down dramatically. Joseph wrote back "I was somewhat disappointed on receiving the paper with only a part of my letter inserted,"

    Saxton never replied.

    But Frederick G. Williams copied the letter into Joseph Smith's letterbook, which is how we know what the original letter said.

  • petersenjc Springville, UT
    March 16, 2017 7:00 p.m.

    Hurts me to say this but President Trump and Joseph Smith had common relationships with the media. So the history of objectivity in journalism went from no objectivity to objectivity and is now back to no objectivity (national media that is). A fascinating article Tad, thanks.

  • NDM Sandy, UT
    March 16, 2017 6:58 p.m.

    Interesting article. I do have a problem with the headline, though (which of course was written by an editor and not the author). I can see that it is trying to suggest parallels between current events, but it's badly misguided.

    Joseph Smith did not have a problem with "the media" because there was no such thing in his lifetime. Let's ignore for the moment the fact that there was no widely accepted standard of journalism or journalistic ethics that would create a broad similarity of accepted practice from one publication to another. The word "media" (plural of medium) refers to the collection of various forms of news and entertainment: press, radio, television, podcasts, etc. In Joseph Smith's day, there was only the press, and even that term applied to the 1840s is misleading. Every paper was local and its standards were determined by the owner-publisher.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    March 16, 2017 3:06 p.m.

    GaryO,

    Clearly such murder is not acceptable. "What was done here long ago by members of our Church represents a terrible and inexcusable departure from Christian teaching and conduct."

    Orrin Porter Rockwell will have to answer for his actions (as will any gunfighter, Mormon or not).

    As to Joe Hill, it appears to be a miscarriage of justice but I am not deeply familiar with the facts.

  • Paula666 Redmond, WA
    March 16, 2017 1:59 p.m.

    It seems to me that this article's sole purpose is to justify Donald Trump's behavior with regards to the press. The article seems to make the case that Joseph Smith had trouble with a partisan press, and therefore anyone today who has trouble with the press, is also being persecuted unfairly. To argue that today's press is as partisan as it was in the early 18th century is ludicrous except for a few outlets like Breitbart and its leftist equivalents. But the more egregious failure in logic is that if a good person was persecuted by the press, then all people who are persecuted by the people are good people and do not deserve the persecution.

  • CMTM , 00
    March 16, 2017 12:34 p.m.

    RE: Moresureword, (1 Nephi 14:10)." The biblical witness is clear and convincing: Jesus Christ is the eternal Creator God (John 1; Col 1; Heb 1; Rev 1). Paul teaches that Jesus is the creator of all, including the angelic realm to which Satan belongs (f. John 1:3). Jesus is thus Satan’s creator, not his spirit brother.

    In contrast to Mormon Christology, But both the scriptures and the prophets affirm that Jesus Christ and Lucifer are indeed offspring of our Heavenly Father and, therefore, spirit brothers.” Ensign, magazine.

    The one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil…. JS was confused. e.g…,

    “Eloheim is from the word Eloi, God is singular number; and by adding the word heim ,it renders it Gods.” ( H of C, 1844) ,Wrong Elohim the construction is usually grammatically SINGULAR, the Hebrew God, but grammatically plural when used of pagan divinities ). # 430 Strong’s Hebrew .

    @ JS,” In the very beginning the bible shows there is a plurality of Gods. Beyond the power of refutation”.(Hof C v. 6 p.476)Wrong, Genesis 1:1 Greek LXX In the beginning God (*o Theos, Grk. 2316). Clearly God. *Nominative singular article

  • skeptic Phoenix, AZ
    March 16, 2017 10:56 a.m.

    @Horseapple - Salt Lake City, UT
    March 16, 2017 9:33 a.m.

    Questions for us:

    Must the chronology of known facts always need to be used in determining the veracity of truth?

    Can something be true (or a fact) if it has roots in another's mind?

    Possible answer:

    While one's perceived reality may be one's reality; if it is not true then if it is not real. But, it does help explain why some people are attended in mental hospitals getting help syncing their perception with reality .

  • clearthink Salt Lake City, UT
    March 16, 2017 10:16 a.m.

    As the article notes, Joseph Smith wrote, "As Mr. Barstow has taken the proper steps to obtain correct information," Smith wrote, "all that I shall ask at his hands is that he publish the account entire, ungarnished and without misrepresentation."

    Joseph should have addressed the current Curriculum Committee. When they reprinted the Wentworth letter in the lesson manual Teachings of the Presidents of the Church: Joseph Smith, they edited out Joseph's explanation of Book of Mormon geography because Joseph clearly stated the Book of Mormon took place in North America.

    Sadly, LDS scholars continue to insist on their Mesoamerican theory.

  • clearthink Salt Lake City, UT
    March 16, 2017 10:13 a.m.

    The Wentworth letter was edited from Orson Pratt's 1840 pamphlet. Joseph Smith deleted Pratt's discussion of Central/South America and replaced it with the clear declaration that the descendants of Lehi were the Indians living in this country.

    Nevertheless, LDS scholars continue to reject what Joseph taught in the Wentworth letter.

  • Horseapple Salt Lake City, UT
    March 16, 2017 9:33 a.m.

    Questions for us:

    Must the chronology of known facts always need to be used in determining the veracity of truth?

    Can something be true (or a fact) if it has roots in another's mind?

  • GaryO Virginia Beach, VA
    March 16, 2017 9:08 a.m.

    Hey Twin Lights -

    RE: "I would hope that all of us, irrespective of our opinions on Joseph Smith, can and would acknowledge that the murder of two men for the destruction of property is simply not acceptable. Period. Full stop."

    And the murder of a wagon train of innocent men, women, and children passing through Utah is even less acceptable . . . Not to mention who knows how many smaller non-Mormon groups and individuals murdered by the so-called Mormon gunfighter Porter Rockwell and his Avenging Angels.

    And the framing and execution of the labor activist Joe Hill? How acceptable was that?

    Or is all that just "fake news?"

    To those who might object, atrocities committed by Mormons are at least as pertinent to the article as is the death of Joseph Smith.

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    March 16, 2017 8:38 a.m.

    And much like today's conflicts with the media, alternative facts were the issue.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    March 15, 2017 9:38 p.m.

    I would hope that all of us, irrespective of our opinions on Joseph Smith, can and would acknowledge that the murder of two men for the destruction of property is simply not acceptable. Period. Full stop.

  • strom thurmond taylorsville, UT
    March 15, 2017 4:13 p.m.

    Mhenshaw,
    "That same man also suggested that the salamander note was a legitimate document and the word salamander might mean "angel".
    Ad hominem attack. "

    This is not an ad hominem attack. It speaks of the credibility of the man, and is a fact.

    "The exact Nauvoo Expositor quote --
    'War and extermination is inevitable! '"

    As noted elsewhere, those are not his words.

    "Given that there's never been any federal or state law in US history making "destruction of a printing press" a capital crime, I'd say his conclusion that "it did not merit murdering Smith" is inarguably correct."

    This is a straw-man argument.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    March 15, 2017 3:37 p.m.

    Buddyroe,
    " . . . . Since there was only one edition of this newspaper it can be assumed mhenshaw is be thinking of some other newspaper. . . . "
    ______________________________
    The quote mhensaw cites is actually by Thomas Sharp in an editorial in the Warsaw Signal on June 11, 1844. Sharp was virulently opposed to Joseph Smith and was one of those indicted and acquitted for the attack on Carthage jail.

  • Buddyroe Sherwood, OR
    March 15, 2017 2:38 p.m.

    mhenshaw wrote: "The exact Nauvoo Expositor quote --

    "War and extermination is inevitable! Citizens ARISE, ONE and ALL!!!—Can you stand by, and suffer such INFERNAL DEVILS! To ROB men of their property and RIGHTS, without avenging them. We have no time for comment, every man will make his own. LET IT BE MADE WITH POWDER AND BALL!!!"

    Doing a word search on the FairMormon text edition of the Nauvoo Expositor, none of the unique words could be found (including: extermination, avenging, powder, ball). Since there was only one edition of this newspaper it can be assumed mhenshaw is be thinking of some other newspaper.

  • mightymite , 00
    March 15, 2017 1:47 p.m.

    Conflicts with the media? Were we dealing with this same fake new that Donald Trump is spouting about? It all starts to make a little more sense personality wise. Two birds of a feather. Exposing fraud is a responsibility of the media whether it is spewed by a so called profit of god or sitting president. Good on the media for trying to keep the power hungry honest.

  • moresureword Maple Grove, MN
    March 15, 2017 1:39 p.m.

    CMTM, you responded to me with 1 Nephi 14:10, regarding the church of the Lamb of God and the church of the devil. I belong to the church of the Lamb of God. Which church do you belong to?

  • Buddyroe Sherwood, OR
    March 15, 2017 12:29 p.m.

    Much of the discussion here center around The Nauvoo Expositor, one charge was made by reader mhenshaw:

    "The problem wasn't whether the Expositor was printing falsehoods. The problem was that the Expositor was pretty explicitly calling for the assassination of Nauvoo's public officials, starting with Joseph."

    The exact opposite seems to be the case where on page 2 William Law (editor) stated:

    "That in all our controversies in defence of truth and righteousness, the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty through God, to the pulling down of the strong holds of Satan; that our strifes are not against flesh, blood, nor bones; but against principalities and power against spiritual wickedness in high places and therefore we will not use carnal weapons save in our own defence."

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    March 15, 2017 12:15 p.m.

    observator,
    " . . . . Destruction of the press may not have been a wise move, but it did not merit murdering Smith."
    ______________________________
    It certainly did not. We have a system of due process in this country. No one is justified in taking the law into his own hands.

    That said, Joseph was reckless in exercising his authority as a civic leader, first in ordering the Expositor’s press destroyed and subsequently declaring martial law in Nauvoo. He was behaving like an autocrat who was out of control in a volatile situation. That’s no justification for vigilantism but I can see why his enemies felt they had cause to be frightened of him.

  • Manzanita Las Vegas, NV
    March 15, 2017 11:49 a.m.

    Re the explanations proferred in this article re the genesis of the LDS Articles of Faith, I think those who were quoted likely overlooked a far simpler source: The Articles of Religion of the Methodist Church. One can observe by reading the Methodist Articles that Joseph Smith apparently just reworded them and called them his own. Heck, Smith didn't even bother to call them anything other than "Articles" as the Methodists had. Depending on one's perspective, Smith was a master at cribbing materials from others and reorganizing them for his own purposes (see e.g. The Late War, View of the Hebrews, Swedenborg's "three degrees of glory," the Bible, etc.) Further, we know Smith was familiar with many tenets of the Methodist Church, since he joined that church and added his name to the roles, even after he had ostensibly been told by God in the Sacred Grove to join none of the churches because all were in error.

  • mhenshaw Leesburg, VA
    March 15, 2017 11:20 a.m.

    >>As for Dallin Oaks's legal argument, it is extremely flawed, not to mention extremely biased.

    Given that there's never been any federal or state law in US history making "destruction of a printing press" a capital crime, I'd say his conclusion that "it did not merit murdering Smith" is inarguably correct.

    >>That same man also suggested that the salamander note was a legitimate document and the word salamander might mean "angel".

    Ad hominem attack. Elder Oaks was a Chicago Law School graduate; served as a Utah Supreme Court justice; and was, at one point, officially listed as a potential Supreme Court pick. So unless someone in this discussion can claim comparable legal credentials, I think I'll favor Oaks' research and legal reasoning and conclusions over anything I'm likely to read here.

  • mhenshaw Leesburg, VA
    March 15, 2017 11:06 a.m.

    >>They did not call for anyone's death.

    The exact Nauvoo Expositor quote --

    "War and extermination is inevitable! Citizens ARISE, ONE and ALL!!!—Can you stand by, and suffer such INFERNAL DEVILS! To ROB men of their property and RIGHTS, without avenging them. We have no time for comment, every man will make his own. LET IT BE MADE WITH POWDER AND BALL!!!"

    "War and extermination?" "avenging"? "Powder and ball"? It would take an unreasonably charitable reading of that quote to think that the Expositor's publishers weren't calling for Joseph's assassination (especially when that's exactly what happened shortly thereafter).

    >>As for Dallin Oaks's legal argument...he suggests that freedom of the press was not considered as sacred as it is now. This is fallacious...

    No it's not. For example, the Sedition Act of 1798 allowed the US government to arrest authors of "seditious writings" that criticized government leaders. Thomas Jefferson let that expire a few years after, but it shows that even some Founders didn't consider press freedom absolute.

    And the mobs certainly didn't consider it sacred, given that they destroyed Mormon presses at will.

  • sharrona layton, UT
    March 15, 2017 10:58 a.m.

    RE: observator, “*they decided on assassination instead. Destruction of the press may not have been a wise move, but it did not merit murdering Smith.”

    The death of JS I remember what Joseph said, a short time before he was slain in one of the last sermons I ever heard him preach. Said he, “Men are here today who are seeking my blood, and they are those who have held the[Mormon}*Priesthood and have received their washings and anointing’s; men who have received their endowments.” I saw the faces of those men at that time, and they had a hand in slaying the Prophet . (JoD v 4 p 149). Wilford Woodruff, December 21, 1856.

    Brigham Young comments on it.…” when you feel like killing me for so doing, as some of the people did who called themselves brethren in the days of Joseph Smith, look out for yourselves, for ‘false brethren’ were the cause of Joseph's death, and I am not a very righteous man”.(JoD v 3 p.49.)

  • strom thurmond taylorsville, UT
    March 15, 2017 10:23 a.m.

    obervator

    "A University of Chicago law professor named Dallin Oaks (yes, that one) determined in the above article that destroying the printed pages of the Nauvoo Expositor was a legal action under the interpretation of freedom of the press at the time."

    That same man also suggested that the salamander note was a legitimate document and the word salamander might mean "angel".

    For what its worth.

  • strom thurmond taylorsville, UT
    March 15, 2017 10:18 a.m.

    mhenshaw,

    "The problem wasn't whether the Expositor was printing falsehoods. The problem was that the Expositor was pretty explicitly calling for the assassination of Nauvoo's public officials, starting with Joseph. "

    They did not call for anyone's death.

    observator,
    "Destruction of the press may not have been a wise move, but it did not merit murdering Smith."

    He was not killed explicitly for destroying the expositor. The proprietors were not, as far as anyone can tell, part of the mob. I'm not sure how one can explain such a blunderous move on the part of Smith and claim he was inspired, but I would love to hear the argument.

    As for Dalin Oaks's legal argument, it is extremely flawed, not to mention extremely biased. In it he suggests that freedom of the press was not considered as sacred as it is now. This is fallacious, and one only need read the language of the expositor for evidence this was not the case, they wrote, "until we can enjoy those glorious privileges which nature's God and our country's laws have guaranteed to us- freedom of speech, and liberty of the press..."

  • Rikitikitavi Cardston, Alberta
    March 15, 2017 10:04 a.m.

    Should constitutionally protected freedom of the press actually include knowingly printing falsehoods and outright lies?
    Should that freedom include lazy, shoddy reporting of unverified "news"?

    The real answer should be YES but must put the onus on the consumer to take everything you read, watch, or hear "with a grain of salt" as the saying goes.

    Given the above freedoms of the media, two results invariably occur:

    1)over time, informed consumers will ascertain which news sources are reliable. Political persuasion will be a major factor in that choice.
    2)far too many consumers will remain in their ignorance, many of whom will vote with no information whatsoever or will simply not take the trouble to vote.

  • observator east of the snake river, ID
    March 15, 2017 9:44 a.m.

    Oaks, Dallin H. "The Suppression of the Nauvoo Expositor." Utah Law Review 9 (Winter 1965):862–903.

    A University of Chicago law professor named Dallin Oaks (yes, that one) determined in the above article that destroying the printed pages of the Nauvoo Expositor was a legal action under the interpretation of freedom of the press at the time. However, destruction of the press itself went too far, and the owners of the equipment probably could have sued for damages.

    However, instead of a lawsuit, they decided on assassination instead. Destruction of the press may not have been a wise move, but it did not merit murdering Smith.

  • Sportsfan123 Salt lake, UT
    March 15, 2017 9:27 a.m.

    For the author of this article to make the assumption that todays media take an objective approach to reporting the news is about as funny as watching SNL make fun of Trump.

    The political bias and public smearing agenda of todays MSM is obvious as it is sickning. Whether its FOX, MSNBC, CNN, Breitbart doesnt matter they all have their own political agenda and it greatly affects and persuades the divisiveness we see in todays culture.

    There is more racism today and hate coming from the minority groups and marxist educators that have our young people confused and pointed in the wrong direction.

    Never in our history has there been controversy over bathroom equality, based on gender confusion. 50 years ago if you had wrote a book based on this subject it would be considered a fictional book, but today its fact.

    The media has been used to persuade and misguide the populace into false naratives back in Joseph Smiths time and its still happening today.

    Hence that is why we refer to it as fake news, a common theme in todays world, beware of the news you read, because it just might not be true.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    March 15, 2017 9:11 a.m.

    Freedom of the press isn’t conditional on the press being responsible although it ideally has a social duty to the public to be such. It doesn’t even require it to be accurate although it certainly has a duty to be that as well. It simply guarantees that the press is to be free of government attempts to police it.

    Washington and Jefferson were two of the greatest advocates for a free press. Yet both in turn were at times savaged by elements of the press of their day. In making freedom of the press part of the Bill of Rights, the founders risked making an act of trust, not trust in the press as an institution, but trust in the people to hear it all, sort it out, and in their own time and way arrive at their own sense of truth.

  • CMTM , 00
    March 15, 2017 8:48 a.m.

    RE: moresureword . A “creed” is an authoritative set of fundamental beliefs; and Mormons have one, just as other religions do. In addition, many Mormons forget what the Prophet Joseph Smith taught about honoring and respecting other people’s beliefs: “allow all men [to] worship how, where, or what they may. “

    (1 Nephi 14:10)."And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth"

    all their creeds were an abomination in his sight .... He again forbade me to join with any of them (Joseph Smith - History )
    If all their creeds are an abomination, why is much of the Nicene Creed to be found in D&C 20:17-28?

    The Nicene Creed is also based almost entirely on scripture, much more so than the Articles of Faith. Almost every phrase is taken word for word from the Bible. All phrases have Biblical supporting scriptures

  • moresureword Maple Grove, MN
    March 15, 2017 8:01 a.m.

    "Every Mormon child sets out to memorize them. Virtually every Mormon missionary knows them. The list, known as the Articles of Faith, were first published 175 years ago this month and later canonized. … Smith said God told him in the First Vision that creeds were an abomination. … ‘The Latter-day Saints have no creed . …’”

    A “creed” is an authoritative set of fundamental beliefs; and Mormons have one, just as other religions do. In addition, many Mormons forget what the Prophet Joseph Smith taught about honoring and respecting other people’s beliefs: “allow all men [to] worship how, where, or what they may. “

  • mhenshaw Leesburg, VA
    March 15, 2017 4:56 a.m.

    >>And I'm curious, can someone tell me what the expositor wrote that was untrue?

    The problem wasn't whether the Expositor was printing falsehoods. The problem was that the Expositor was pretty explicitly calling for the assassination of Nauvoo's public officials, starting with Joseph.

    It's one thing to be politically biased. It's another to incite people to violence.

  • Uncle_Dave Springville, UT
    March 14, 2017 11:28 p.m.

    Joseph Smith was a virtuous and honest man.

  • strom thurmond taylorsville, UT
    March 14, 2017 8:38 p.m.

    Conflicts with the media?

    He destroyed a printing press which led to his being jailed for treason against the state of Illinois.

    And I'm curious, can someone tell me what the expositor wrote that was untrue?

  • TAS Tehachapi, CA
    March 14, 2017 8:11 p.m.

    Today's media is much better than it was in the first have of the 19th century. There are exception, those owned by Rupert Murdoch leave much to be desired, particularly the tabloids he owns in the U K.

  • Jimbo Low PLEASANT GROVE, UT
    March 14, 2017 5:15 p.m.

    @California Steve:
    Yes--I am thinking the exact same thing. "Objective Press" seems to be an oxymoron.

  • California Steve Hanford, CA
    March 14, 2017 4:00 p.m.

    I didn't know objectivity was a policy adhered to today by the press.