MovieChat Forums > September Dawn (2007) Discussion > In defense of my religion!!

In defense of my religion!!

posted 16 years ago by debdeanlds-2
58 replies | jump to latest

First off I will say that I posted on here a few years ago that I would see this movie and give it a fair shake. I thought it was wrong of people of my faith to come on here and judge a movie they had not even seen. I watched it and it was completely inaccurate and none of it was true. There is a documentary filmmaker that has done an excellent film on the Mountain Meadows Massacre. Chris Cain who directed this film stole things from this guys documentary and when it was found out the guy wanted to sue Cain in court. Because Cain had more money and backing the suit was thrown out. The filmmaker named Brian Patrick came out against the film and said it was inaccurate and did not portray the LDS Church fairly. I have been a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints for 30 years and it should be also noted that I am a history major. I have researched Mountain Meadows thoroughly and I can say with firm conviction that the Church was in no way responsible. The Prophet Brigham Young made the statement and told the brethern that when the immigrants arrived to "Leave Them Alone." You can find this statement in the Utah state archives and there is plenty of documentation on the quote. There were angry disenfranchised people that disobeyed the Prophet's counsel and took the law into their own hands. The documentary I referred to above is called "Burying the Past" Chris Cain and his son Dean Cain made this horrible movie which is as Roger Ebert quoted in his review "A Mormon Hit job." A new book has also been released that refutes Dan Bagley and Sally Denton who have written books on Mountain Meadows and they want to blame Brigham Young and the Church for the whole thing. The book has been written by three historical scholars and is well documented and footnoted extremely well. The movie September Dawn paints my religion and past leaders in a bad light and none of it is true. The way that our ceremonies in the Temple are portrayed is horrible and very offensive. Showing Dean Cain who plays Joseph Smith as a vindictive and vengeful person is also offensive and wrong. The movies is a huge let down and doesn't make you feel good at all. Many critics have denounced the film as one that obviously paints the LDS church in a bad light. The new book that will be the definitive study on this subject is called Massacre at Mountain Meadows. The Mormons in their early history were driven out because of not only their religious beliefs but because they were anti-slavery and they were friendly with the Indians. Young boys were murdered, women raped and houses burned all because of what the beliefs of the early saints were. From all I've read and believe me I've read both sides the evidence against Brigham Young and the Church is circumstantial and has never been proven. The people who committed this massacre were angry members of the Church that wanted revenge after Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum were murdered. They went against what Brigham Young said and took the law into their own hands. I am a firm believer in my faith and am not brainwashed. Problem is I can't prove to anybody who would respond to this that I'm not. I have researched and read a lot of the early history of my Church. I firmly believe in my faith. I am also Christian and believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that he died and was resurrected. I believe God speaks to man daily and that the Bible is not all there is. I believe the Bible to be the word of God but I also believe in the Book of Mormon and that it was written by Holy Prophets who were called of God also. I believe that Joseph Smith was called as a Prophet of God and that he did see God the Father and his son Jesus Christ.

[–] geode 16 years ago

You state that the film is completely innaccurate and state twice that none of it is true. I think my posts on the board indicate that I find many inaccuracies in the film and also feel as you do that it does not represent Mormons correctly. I think I have commented on almost every point you make except the other film. However, although most of it twists the truth out of recognition I think there are some rare moments of accuracy that do hold close to the truth in regards to the events. A couple of scenes with John D. Lee being examples.

There were angry disenfranchised people that disobeyed the Prophet's counsel and took the law into their own hands.

How were these people disenfranchised ? How did they disobey Brigham Young ? As far as I have been able to determine, Brigham Young's counsel arrived after the massacre had already taken place. Up until that time he had been using inflammatory language, and one can make the argument that some of the men involved in the MMM were not consciously in defiance of what they thought Brigham might have wished.

I can say with firm conviction that the Church was in no way responsible

I have been accused of saying that the blame does not lie at the uppermost levels of the Mormon church and that in my opinion Brigham Young did not order the attack. But I think that having the attack organized under the direction of authority as high as the stake president level does not allow for one to say that the church had been in no way responsible. It also appears fairly certain that church authorities up to Brigham Young were involved in covering up the event to a fair extent after the fact.

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] Father_Anthonis 16 years ago

DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB...

Oh Mormon Lord, you gave them twenty wives but they cannot see...

[–] geode 16 years ago

Looking in a mirror and doing a self-appraisal again ?

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] Father_Anthonis 16 years ago

Looking in a mirror and doing a self-appraisal again ?

DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB

Oh Mormon Lord, you gave them twenty wives but they cannot see...

[–] geode 15 years ago

....it is obvious.

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] Paul 4774 14 years ago

to the comment,

DUMB DUMB DUMB DUMB...

geode said,

Looking in a mirror and doing a self-appraisal again ?

I thought he was quoting that South Park episode!

[–] williamhardy-385-280591 10 years ago

Hey geode,
How did they disobey Brigham Young? Fact: President Young’s message of reply to Haight, dated September 10, 1857, read: "In regard to emigration trains passing through our settlements, we must not interfere with them until they are first notified to keep away. You must not meddle with them. The Indians we expect will do as they please but you should try and preserve good feelings with them. There are no other trains going south that I know of[.] [I]f those who are there will leave let them go in peace."[12]

As you know this statment is very, very, very, and very well documentented. For example: Massacre at Mountain Meadows by Ronald W. Walker, Richard E. Turley JR., and Glen M. Leonard. Oxford University Press (http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=nGEL80DBnccC&oi=fnd&pg=PP4&dq=Mountain+Meadows+massacre+and+Brigham+Young+Involved&ots=Apc6q9Dhg1&sig=1Bu_4cE_3dkULn4bFrp--AJTFkg#v=onepage&q=Mountain%20Meadows%20massacre%20and%20Brigham%20Young%20Involved&f=false).

[–] ollie501 16 years ago

I generally find it trite to criticise peoples grammar, but in this case I'll make an exception. A few paragraphs here and there would make it MUCH easier to read your post, because as it stands, it is extremely difficult to concentrate. This isn't intended to be rude, as I would like to read, and comment on, your post, but as it stands it is somewhat on the large side! :)

[–] geode 16 years ago

The posts appear to be years apart. So here goes:

First off I will say that I posted on here a few years ago that I would see this movie and give it a fair shake. I thought it was wrong of people of my faith to come on here and judge a movie they had not even seen.

I watched it and it was completely inaccurate and none of it was true. There is a documentary filmmaker that has done an excellent film on the Mountain Meadows Massacre. Chris Cain who directed this film stole things from this guys documentary and when it was found out the guy wanted to sue Cain in court. Because Cain had more money and backing the suit was thrown out. The filmmaker named Brian Patrick came out against the film and said it was inaccurate and did not portray the LDS Church fairly.

I have been a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints for 30 years and it should be also noted that I am a history major. I have researched Mountain Meadows thoroughly and I can say with firm conviction that the Church was in no way responsible. The Prophet Brigham Young made the statement and told the brethern that when the immigrants arrived to "Leave Them Alone." You can find this statement in the Utah state archives and there is plenty of documentation on the quote. There were angry disenfranchised people that disobeyed the Prophet's counsel and took the law into their own hands.

The documentary I referred to above is called "Burying the Past" Chris Cain and his son Dean Cain made this horrible movie which is as Roger Ebert quoted in his review "A Mormon Hit job." A new book has also been released that refutes Dan Bagley and Sally Denton who have written books on Mountain Meadows and they want to blame Brigham Young and the Church for the whole thing. The book has been written by three historical scholars and is well documented and footnoted extremely well.

The movie September Dawn paints my religion and past leaders in a bad light and none of it is true. The way that our ceremonies in the Temple are portrayed is horrible and very offensive. Showing Dean Cain who plays Joseph Smith as a vindictive and vengeful person is also offensive and wrong. The movies is a huge let down and doesn't make you feel good at all. Many critics have denounced the film as one that obviously paints the LDS church in a bad light.

The new book that will be the definitive study on this subject is called Massacre at Mountain Meadows. The Mormons in their early history were driven out because of not only their religious beliefs but because they were anti-slavery and they were friendly with the Indians. Young boys were murdered, women raped and houses burned all because of what the beliefs of the early saints were. From all I've read and believe me I've read both sides the evidence against Brigham Young and the Church is circumstantial and has never been proven. The people who committed this massacre were angry members of the Church that wanted revenge after Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum were murdered. They went against what Brigham Young said and took the law into their own hands.

I am a firm believer in my faith and am not brainwashed. Problem is I can't prove to anybody who would respond to this that I'm not. I have researched and read a lot of the early history of my Church. I firmly believe in my faith. I am also Christian and believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that he died and was resurrected. I believe God speaks to man daily and that the Bible is not all there is. I believe the Bible to be the word of God but I also believe in the Book of Mormon and that it was written by Holy Prophets who were called of God also. I believe that Joseph Smith was called as a Prophet of God and that he did see God the Father and his son Jesus Christ.

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] ollie501 16 years ago

That's extremely considerate and much appreciated, thanks :)

I know very little about the film; what was your position on it, and how biased it was one way or another?

Cheers :)

Daz

[–] geode 16 years ago

I put down quite a detailed set of comments on this film when I watched it last year, but that post appears to be long gone from the board. I found much of the film to be inaccurate, probably in an attempt to paint the Mormons in as poor a light as possible. Some posts I have made about this do still exist in other threads.

It is almost as if the choice was made to make the emigrants as saintly as any men have ever been, and the Mormons as bitter and prone to evil and violence as any people who have ever lived. There was an effort throughout to attempt to establish parallels between the Mormons and modern-day Muslim extremist terrorists. It became ridiculous at times. They put a concept called "blood atonement" as a prime cause of the massacre, when it was not the case.

Unlike some other comments now erased from the board, I found the acting and cinematography to be OK.

I watched it and it was completely inaccurate and none of it was true.

Parts of it were fairly accurate.

I can say with firm conviction that the Church was in no way responsible. The Prophet Brigham Young made the statement and told the brethern that when the immigrants arrived to "Leave Them Alone." You can find this statement in the Utah state archives and there is plenty of documentation on the quote. There were angry disenfranchised people that disobeyed the Prophet's counsel and took the law into their own hands.

I have my doubts that this document still exists as implied here. It is also implied that Brigham Young is by himself "the church"...although I also do not believe that Young ordered the massacre, I do believe he was involved in attempts to cover it up, and today would probably be guilty of "obstruction of justice"...

The movie September Dawn paints my religion and past leaders in a bad light and none of it is true. The way that our ceremonies in the Temple are portrayed is horrible and very offensive. Showing Dean Cain who plays Joseph Smith as a vindictive and vengeful person is also offensive and wrong.

The film goes too far with Brigham Young, but some local leaders in Cedar City probably deserve to be painted in a rather bad light. In Young's case they spliced parts of speeches out of context together in an attempt to show he ordered the massacre and then have the audacity to claim that all of it is in Young's own words and therefore portraying what actually happened. This is intellectual dishonesty of the worst kind on the part of the screenwriter and director.

Too bad they chose a fictional character as bearing most of the blame for the actual event as it happened, as the real stake president (Mormon equiv. of a Catholic bishop) there did some hateful things involving the massacre.

The temple ceremony was thrown in for negative effect and could not have taken place as shown as no endowment house existed at the time outside Salt Lake City.

From all I've read and believe me I've read both sides the evidence against Brigham Young and the Church is circumstantial and has never been proven. The people who committed this massacre were angry members of the Church that wanted revenge after Joseph Smith and his brother Hyrum were murdered. They went against what Brigham Young said and took the law into their own hands.

This bends over backwards to attempt and absolve all Mormon church responsibility. An objective view will implicate local church leadership and not individuals acting on their own. The men involved acted upon the orders of leaders.

I am a firm believer in my faith and am not brainwashed. Problem is I can't prove to anybody who would respond to this that I'm not. I have researched and read a lot of the early history of my Church. I firmly believe in my faith.

And he/ she appears to have a bias towards believing as sanitized version of what happened as possible, such as is promoted in official Mormon histories.

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] debdeanlds-2 15 years ago

Hey well what do you know. I am back. Let me start off by saying I respect your opinions but I disagree with the fact that I just believe in sanitized versions of my Church's history. You don't even know me or the research I have done on this subject. A lawyer refuted Dan Bagley's entire book Blood of the Prophets and Sally Denton has been taken to task on her conclusions made in her book American Massacre.

I find it interesting you don't disagree with the claims and facts I presented on Chris Cain stealing from the documentary "Burying the Past." Brigham Young's quote still exists in the Utah state archives and it has been reprinted in the official publication of my Church known as the Ensign. Most of the descendants of the people from the ones who were killed at Mountain Meadows hold no animosity toward the Church. A monument has been dedicated by our now deceased prophet President Gordon B. Hinckley at the site of the massacre. I repeat that Brigham Young's counsel to the members of the Church in Utah were to leave the immigrants alone. We are talking about vigilante justice here where men took the law into their own hands. The evidence against Brigham Young is flimsy and circumstantial and would be thrown out in court. I don't like the film and the way it paints early church leaders. Brigham Young was not a bloodthirsty tyrant and knowing the many studies that have been done on him such as American Moses, there is a clear cut conclusion that he did not order the massacre. Now other people in the Church I do not know but laying the blame on Brigham Young is completely dishonest as you have pointed out.

I like a lot of your comments but I would like to be taken at my word that I do not just read sanitized versions of history. As painful as it is I have to look at both sides. That is the responsibility of a true historian. This movie is complete historical fiction and that is my personal opinion.

[–] JackDaniels-theJackMormon 15 years ago

Running the risk of interjecting myself into a discussion in which I have not been a part I think I will make a few comments. It appears to me as well that you favor "sanitized" versions of the Mountain Meadows Massacre. You posted statements that would absolve the LDS church entirely from any responsibility yet objective historians say otherwise. I don't think much of Dan Bagley's work, nor Sally Denton's so I am not making reference to them. Refuting only them does not prove the case you are attempting to make.

Brigham Young's quote might have been reprinted in The Ensign, one of the most long-standing sources of sanitized Mormon history, but this doesn't prove that the actual letter resides in the Utah State Archieves. I don't know, but geode seems to have doubts about this, as do I. As I understand the situation the men who committed the MMM actually represented elements of law enforcement in southern Utah, so terming them as only viilantes is perhaps a bit of a stretch, but would fit in well with Mormon sanitized versions of what happened. I agree that the evidence favoring Brigham Young ordering the attack is flimsy, but evidence that he helped set up John D. Lee as a fall guy for punishment is fairly substantial. He certainly did not seem to cry any tears for the people who lost their lives, or attempt to bring those responsible to justice. As both a religious and civic leader he should have done so. What did he think was necessary to hide?

There are many descendants who bitterly hold the LDS church responsible for what happened, and one or two have posted on this board.

You claim that the film is complete fiction and not accurate. I too have seen the film and read accounts of what happened in print. I do not think this is a very good film, and I think it distorts much of what history tells us probably happened. However, I did find parts to follow what I think occurred from what I have read. It probably is more fiction than fact, but you seem to want to reject all of it as fiction. I think you are exaggerating its inaccuracy, and this does tend to make me believe as well that you are not being objective but favoring the more sanitized Mormon version of events. Historically this has been to deny as much as possible about the involvement by the Mormon leadership.

Now other people in the Church I do not know but laying the blame on Brigham Young is completely dishonest as you have pointed out.

You say that you are well read on the subject, but here you do not wish to comment on any blame that should be assigned to Mormons other than Brigham Young? Sorry, but to me this seems the typical Mormon reaction to ignoring some of the nasty aspects of the MMM, and giving a version which geode called "sanitized."

"I'll take the fifth"

[–] geode 15 years ago

Brigham Young's quote might have been reprinted in The Ensign, one of the most long-standing sources of sanitized Mormon history

A periodical my brother once called "Pravda West"

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] JackDaniels-theJackMormon 15 years ago

Good one. Yes, citing The Ensign as a source did lessen the credibilty of the post in my opinion.

"I'll take the fifth"

[–] geode 15 years ago

It isn't exactly the most objective source.

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] JackDaniels-theJackMormon 15 years ago

I don't think objectivity is the prime motivation for a magazine that has a distinct propagandistic tone.

"I'll take the fifth"

[–] geode 15 years ago

No, but this is probably to be expected.

I have no good reason and suspect that monkeys possess some sort of soul. Geode

[–] j_donbraska-1 15 years ago

You know if I was in a spot like Brigham Young was I would have said the same thing! After all who was going to doubt him? He was the "Prophet" Brigham Young and had a lot of power to throw around. Sometimes the truth is hard to accept and just because there is a lot of documentation on his quote, doesn't always mean that he was in the clear. Look at Bill Clinton for example, didn't he go on record during a court hearing under oath and say "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." There is plenty of documentation that he said it, but the truth is he did have sexual realtions with that woman. And for a lot of his supporters it was and for some still hard to grasp. I watched the movie knowing what happened up there and it was pretty close to what I have read. John D. Lee wasn't the only one that had a hand in the "cookie jar" so to speak. He was just the only one that was convicted but only after his second trial. The men in the militia should have also been tried but instead these men of "faith" hung one of their own out to dry. I am a Christian man and was always taught that when you do wrong, stand up and tell the truth. It is hard to believe that one man planned and executed this mission on his own. And it was really convenient to blame the indians in the area. You know I'm sure that if you ask the radical Muslims about the 9/11 attacks they would probably say that Mohammed Atta wasn't really behind it and they could come up with some documentation that proves he is innocent. Brigham Young was a bright man and knew who and how to manipulate to get what he wanted. He wanted to make Utah its own country, which is why the Army was being sent out there in the first place. It had nothing to do with indians at all. In fact General William S. Harney was in charge of the forces being sent to stop them. When asked how he was going to solve the Mormon problem he was quoted as saying "I'm going to hang Brigham Young and all his apostles." Lucky for Young and his followers Harney was re assigned and was to stay in Kansas to deal with issues there.

[–] geode 15 years ago

Look at Bill Clinton for example, didn't he go on record during a court hearing under oath and say "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." There is plenty of documentation that he said it, but the truth is he did have sexual realtions with that woman.

Hell, we all saw him say it on TV, not under oath. What is defense consisted of was defining oral sex as not being sex.

John D. Lee wasn't the only one that had a hand in the "cookie jar" so to speak. He was just the only one that was convicted but only after his second trial. The men in the militia should have also been tried but instead these men of "faith" hung one of their own out to dry. I am a Christian man and was always taught that when you do wrong, stand up and tell the truth. It is hard to believe that one man planned and executed this mission on his own.

I don't think anybody on the planet thinks Lee acted alone.

And it was really convenient to blame the indians in the area. You know I'm sure that if you ask the radical Muslims about the 9/11 attacks they would probably say that Mohammed Atta wasn't really behind it and they could come up with some documentation that proves he is innocent.

No, these Muslims take it as a badge of honor to have been involved.

Brigham Young was a bright man and knew who and how to manipulate to get what he wanted. He wanted to make Utah its own country, which is why the Army was being sent out there in the first place. It had nothing to do with indians at all. In fact General William S. Harney was in charge of the forces being sent to stop them. When asked how he was going to solve the Mormon problem he was quoted as saying "I'm going to hang Brigham Young and all his apostles." Lucky for Young and his followers Harney was re assigned and was to stay in Kansas to deal with issues there.

And your point would be ?

I have no good reason and suspect that monkeys possess some sort of soul. Geode

[–] TheRealBambi 15 years ago

Did they teach you about how to make paragraphs at school?

I don't care about your religion. That's your business. My religion is my business. I do care that the Mormon Church is a 501 (c) 3 non profit Church that breaks laws. They kill people, they influence legislation (against the law), and they subjugate women .... and let's not start with the sanctioned child molestation, shall we?

Your diatribe reminds me of someone who has just committed a crime, and is trying to talk their way out of getting arrested, lol.

Oh, and could you please stop coming to my door?

The next time you do, my pet lions will escort you out.

You might enjoy this reading to accompany your bible reading:

"The Mormon Murders"

http://www.amazon.com/Mormon-Murders-Steven-Naifeh/dp/0312934106

<")
( ~\/

[–] geode 15 years ago

I do care that the Mormon Church is a 501 (c) 3 non profit Church that breaks laws.

...and which laws have they broken ?

They kill people, they influence legislation (against the law), and they subjugate women ....

A case can be made for your third point, but I think none exists for your first. Influencing legislation is something I would not have done, but where did they break laws in doing this ?

and let's not start with the sanctioned child molestation, shall we?

Let's not, since they do not sanction child abuse.

You might enjoy this reading to accompany your bible reading:

"The Mormon Murders"

http://www.amazon.com/Mormon-Murders-Steven-Naifeh/dp/0312934106

What a pity that the authors of this book did not just stick to facts and interjected conjecture to serve their purpose of presenting a biased version of events.

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] bob-1204 15 years ago

Wow, did the Mormon Church get the whole Mormon Tabernacle Choir to bombard this discussion?

Actually, love the Choir but hate fascist operations.

[–] TheRealBambi 15 years ago

You make a very credible point, Bob. Knowing the truth about something terrible that was done by your country or organization doesn't mean that you or other members are terrible people.

My ancestors and country have done hideous things. It's good to know that these things occurred so that they might not re-occur. Denial feeds the sickness.

BTW, I love the Mormon Tabernacle Choir's music as well.

<")
( ~\/

[–] geode 15 years ago

Actually this thread seems to have both those presenting a typical Mormon poiint of view and those presenting something opposite to this. I would say there is less of a Mormon Church version than opposing viewpoints.

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] jamalnasir_2000 14 years ago

Bring 'em Young has some hot chicks.

[–] geode 14 years ago

Bring 'em Young has some hot chicks.

They must only be in the special edition. I did not see them.

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] joemcmaster193 11 years ago

3 years ago you guys wouldn't shut up about this, I have come to relive the angry Mormon hype.

[–] Dismenot 11 years ago

6 Months ago you posted and revived nothing, so I'm lending a hand....

What *I* want to know, is why would any man want to be manipulated and bossed around by 30 wives?
ONE is all more than enough imho... lol

http://www.missingkids.com
http://www.amberalert.gov

[–] joemcmaster193 10 years ago

Haha you're really clever and funny :)

[–] ghigau 15 years ago

There is little historic doubt that Brigham Young was responsible for the murders at Mountain Meadows. Mormon revisionists mount a regular campaign to deny the murderous nature of their religion's beginning, but the history is proved.

[–] geode 15 years ago

There is little historic doubt that Brigham Young was responsible for the murders at Mountain Meadows. Mormon revisionists mount a regular campaign to deny the murderous nature of their religion's beginning, but the history is proved.

There has been historic doubt from the beginning about Brigham's involvement that remains through this day. Those who speak as you do are lacking just as much in being impartial as steadfats Mormons who deny he had anything to do with the event. One murderous act by a few Mormons hardly constitutes a "murderous nature of their religion's beginning" and the MMM was not even at the beginning making your statement even less correct.

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] tylerrabbit 14 years ago

"The movies is a huge let down and doesn't make you feel good at all. "

My favorite part of the OP's critique.

[–] geode 14 years ago

...but the comment was so profound.

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] dave2187124 14 years ago

i understand that you are very passionate about your religion, but it is only a movie with only a purpose to entertain. im not sure if you read Sally Dentons book or not but you will find in her book that she explains that the attack on the missouri and arkansas settlers was because of tension between Mormons and Non Mormons. being that it was a new religion several U.S. officials were closed minded and didnt except it as a religion. there is no doubt that Young was against violence he merely didnt want to trade supplies with non Mormons, also he did write a letter to the militia at cider creek stating let them pass in peace it only arrived a day or so later. the fact of the movie was that early Mormons did use indians to help them in their attack on the wagon train with the intent to kill all of them. they did it because times were tough the wagontrain had a large number of healthy cattle and other valuables, also because the town would not trade with the wagontrain the people of the wagontrain said when they got to california they would encourage an attack on the Mormon community from the west as well so that the Mormons would be pressured from both sides. there is also the talk that the travelers poisoned the water well at cider city and they were acting in defience but that theory is not credible. the movie was meant to entertain and i feel that it did its job it was not a great film nor was it the worst but worth watching once. and remember it is not the same religion that it is today because the members of LDS are not living under the same conditions that they were then, so don't get so mad.

[–] derekjstephens 14 years ago

Deb,

I understand you wanting to defend your faith here, but since you brought up what you believe in terms of the Book of Mormon, I thought I'd ask you a few questions here.

Does it ever occur to you to be a little weird that the Book of Mormon is written in King James style language? Isn't it interesting that many of the B.O.M. stories parallel those in the Old Testament of the Bible with like characters and stories.

Do you know the real history of Joseph Smith and his reputation as an imposter who initially claimed to be a "seer" but ended up ripping off people who hired him to find treasures for them in their lands, at a time when farmers and settlers were struggling to yield crops from said lands?

How about the notion that his account of the Moroni vision and the account that his mother wrote about in letters to his relatives, listed him at different ages. One said 16, and another said 14. Wouldn't his mother remember how old her son was when he had the vision, being that it was such a pivotal moment.

Also, when Jesus met with the disciples one last time before ascending into Heaven (Acts chapter 1), he made it clear to the disciples that they were to fulfill the great commission, going into the world and preaching the gospel. He empowered them at that point, and even said "greater things will you do than I". After his resurrection, he ascended to heaven and the Bible is clear that the Man of Jesus had completed his work on earth.

And let's also not forget that when the Book of Mormon was being written, and Joseph was reading from the tablets, from behind a veil while his scribe was writing down everything that Joseph said, there was a time when the scribe's wife had demanded that he bring her this book so that she could see what he was doing. Joseph agreed, and the wife of the scribe took and hid the book, never to be recovered and Joseph had to start over, writing it completely different the second time.

Jesus is all we need! Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written by apostles and each account verifies the other. Scripture proves scripture. The Bible is a collaborative effort and proves itself. The Book of Mormon is an account written by one man, revised by that one man, mysteriously mimmicking the Old Testament/King James language and stories.

[–] geode 14 years ago

Also, when Jesus met with the disciples one last time before ascending into Heaven (Acts chapter 1), he made it clear to the disciples that they were to fulfill the great commission, going into the world and preaching the gospel. He empowered them at that point, and even said "greater things will you do than I". After his resurrection, he ascended to heaven and the Bible is clear that the Man of Jesus had completed his work on earth.

This is basically consistent with Mormon theology, so I'm not sure what point you are attempting to make.

And let's also not forget that when the Book of Mormon was being written, and Joseph was reading from the tablets, from behind a veil while his scribe was writing down everything that Joseph said, there was a time when the scribe's wife had demanded that he bring her this book so that she could see what he was doing. Joseph agreed, and the wife of the scribe took and hid the book, never to be recovered and Joseph had to start over, writing it completely different the second time.

No, the missing pages ("the Book of Lehi") that Lucy, the wife of Martin Harris "lost" were not written again with Smith starting over. The Mormon version, as recorded as a revelation to Smith, is that he was not to translate that portion again, for it was covered elsewhere.

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/10

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

[–] Filky 14 years ago

DerekJstephens-

"How about the notion that his account of the Moroni vision and the account that his mother wrote about in letters to his relatives, listed him at different ages. One said 16, and another said 14. Wouldn't his mother remember how old her son was when he had the vision, being that it was such a pivotal moment."

You're forgetting, sir, that we never revered Lucy Mack Smith as a prophet. We've always honored Joseph Smith as the prophet. You'll notice that there's nothing recorded by Joseph stating that he was 16 when he had the vision. My own mother can't remember sometimes how old she was when she adopted me, or how old I am, so it's not inconceivable that a mother would be a little mixed up on ages of her son(s) during significant events.

"Does it ever occur to you to be a little weird that the Book of Mormon is written in King James style language? Isn't it interesting that many of the B.O.M. stories parallel those in the Old Testament of the Bible with like characters and stories."

Which is why your argument supports the truth of the Book of Mormon. In Bible times, that's how people spoke (in ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, etc.) but translated into English, it's generally Shakespearian in nature. The only like characters, though, are Jesus Christ and other Bible characters specifically named (Jeremiah, Abraham, Moses, etc.) But the stories in the Book of Mormon are not derived directly (or indirectly) from the Bible. They are unique in and of themselves. The only similarity in stories that I see is the faith in the Lord Jesus Christ by the prophets in both books.

"Jesus is all we need! Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written by apostles and each account verifies the other. Scripture proves scripture. The Bible is a collaborative effort and proves itself. The Book of Mormon is an account written by one man, revised by that one man, mysteriously mimmicking the Old Testament/King James language and stories."

You're absolutely correct, sir. Jesus is the ONLY way for us to return to heaven. Without him, we are nothing. I believe the Bible wholeheartedly, and I know that the doctrines therein are true. I also know that the Book of Mormon is another testament of Jesus Christ. It is not, however, written by one man. It was written by many prophets, beginning with Nephi and ending with Moroni. I think, however, that you are mixing the "written by 1 man" part with the fact that the Book of Mormon was abridged, organized, and put together in its current form by one man (Mormon) and was translated into English by one man (Joseph Smith)