The Martyrdom of Joseph Smith, LDS Founder

[@bronsolo6941]

As a direct decedent of John Taylor, this is always a fascinating piece of history for me, on top of everything else

[@melosborn962]

Wow, Brother Griiffiths made that so powerful! THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS EPISODE!

[@BobArmstrong123]

That was a truly amazing telling of the martyrdom. Thank you! We've visited Carthage Jail and were very impressed at the reverence in which Joseph's martyrdom was portrayed. This was excellent. Thank you so much.

[@BobDunlock]

According to one account (found in the book Murder of An American Prophet) after Joseph jumped from the window he struck the roof of the well below and then tumbled to the ground against the jail. After which he was propped against the outside wall of the jail and shot to death as he stared down his executioners. IIRC the account was from a kid who lived in Carthage and witnessed the incident from the ground. It has always stuck with me because there isn't a lot of detail after he goes through the window, just that it was his final act before being killed.

[@ninjsteve1]

When he went out the window he also yelled out a masonic cry for help but no one cared cuz he was a nasty POS lol

[@mpaulm]

A very important video for someone new to the church…like me.☺️

[@samuelanderson9416]

It was actually John Taylor’s iPhone SE sitting behind his mini quad scriptures that saved him

[@SaintsUnscripted]

I heard it was a Nokia. Those were a thing in the 1840s, right?

[@DannyAGray]

I only recently learned that Joseph didn't die inside the jail, but was killed outside on the ground firing squad style.

[@Telavian]

He may have technically been alive while propped up against the well. However he was essentially going to die anyways.

[@dinocollins720]

Another fantastic video; thank you!!!

[@tpbarron]

That was great, thank you!!!

[@Hamann9631]

The definiton of a martyr came up. By the traditional or dictionary defiition of a martyr Joseph Smith was a martyr. The only definition which doesn't count Joseph Smith as a martyr is the definition created or picked out by people already trying to exclude Joseph Smith because they don't want to count him as a martyr.

[@xisoverx]

Thank you brother, great lesson

[@brettmajeske3525]

Not enough people talk about the double jeopardy. Two judges had already found JS not guilty. The Third trial at Carthage was double jeopardy and unconstitutional. The other thing is the exclusion principle. Even assuming the destruction was illegal, it would have been the incorporated city of Nauvoo that would have been responsibility. Joseph, as a private citizen, is not criminally liable for the official actions of the city. It is why it is so difficult to convict police officers for actions taken while in uniform.

[@erikdavey4056]

Casey Griffiths was my favorite professor at BYU, wonderful person.

[@rennyriv05_]

Precciate y’all much! 🙌🏾

[@garysatterlee9455]

Nice job. A lot covered in a short amount of time.

[@Stargazernomadcamper]

Excellent episode thank you ! There is a guy out there with a movie called who killed Joseph Smith that it would be cool if you guys reviewed !

[@patricianoel7782]

I watched the video, Who Killed Joseph Smith?”. Thought provoking at the least. The theory I’d that John Taylor killed him. The author makes an impressive case.

[@brettmajeske3525]

@@patricianoel7782 The movie felt more like a Qanon conspiracy theory to me. There are some wild jumps in logic that do not seem justified by the historical record.

[@kenton6804]

@@brettmajeske3525 In an outside interview, the creator also acknowledged that the mob is what killed Joseph, even if he still thinks that Willard Richards and John Taylor were somehow in on it.

[@brettmajeske3525]

@@kenton6804 I saw the interview on Mormon Book Review. I was not impressed. Rather than claiming new information, I felt he was just looking to invent controversy to get attention. He implied that John Taylor, who almost died, and Hyrum Smith, who did die, might have been involved. Since there is clear evidence of multiple people being involved, six who were tried, and others like Law and Bennet who bragged about their involvement, I do not see the need to invent secret conspirators.

[@kenton6804]

@@brettmajeske3525 Oh, I completely disagree with his premise, but I was just saying how he was very set in his thesis.

[@piperjohnson4808]

What movie is the Emma and Joseph clip from please?

[@Storm2458]

I'm no lawyer but it sounds like Joseph was brought to trail for the same charges multiple times even after being found innocent. Doesn't this fall under double jeopardy?

[@iroh8946]

This reminds me of Christianity and its origins... was the law completely oppressive that Christians just couldn't succeed using the law as was done for Nauvoo?

[@shaylakenney141]

What is the movie shown throughout the video?

[@porkchopproductions0314]

It is the PBS documentary Joseph Smith: American Prophet with narration by Gregory Peck. It is from 2017

[@ladybug-mv8tn]

Joseph Smith had twenty something wives. One being 14 and another being 16. This is in the church archives.

[@brettmajeske3525]

I don't understand what that has to do with the topic. Brain Hales has a series of books detailing the circumstances of Smith's polygamy, you should check it out.

[@SundayVibesmusic]

Where in the world was the officer? Did I miss that moment? He let a group of people come into his own house and murder people? Wouldn’t the officer have guns and weapons?

[@brettmajeske3525]

He fled for his life because he didn't want to die.

[@SundayVibesmusic]

@@brettmajeske3525I can see that..but it doesn’t make sense to me bc the officer works for that town. The town militia wouldn’t kill their own guy for doing his job. The story just doesn’t add up to me. The officer had sense to move them to a more secure area but not enough sense to call for backup? Then he allows guns to get in? Then he leaves his post? Which happens to be his own home? Hopefully you can see why I’m struggling to make sense of this story..thank you for the comment though 🙏🏽

[@brettmajeske3525]

@@SundayVibesmusic Remember who the mob actually was. They were the backup. The modern concept of a police force didn't exist. The "officer" was a volunteer who earned a living as a farmer. The only weapons he would have had access to, were his own personal belongings. Anticipating trouble they did call in backup the local militia. And it was that miltia, the backup, who murdered Joseph and Hyrum.

[@SundayVibesmusic]

@@brettmajeske3525 wait the backup that was called for help…was the criminals? Sorry I’m more confused. The homeowner volunteer “officer” anticipated criminals coming and causing harm to Joseph?…so the owner calls for help against the criminal “mob” but it was the help that in actuality ended up being the very criminals and mob he was calling to come help fight against? Idk this still doesn’t add up. I know that Joseph was murdered by a group of people and that he was shot. That I know from history..but the whole story of why it happened in the first place is confusing. No way he didn’t know they wanted him dead. Yet he went anyways..that is another conversation. Then on top of that the guy in the video who is the expert gives the benefit of the doubt to the guy who left with all the unbiased militia as if he didn’t really know what would happen to Joseph smith. I just don’t buy that story. I think they wanted him dead..and part of me feels like Joseph himself felt like he had nothing to “live for” after all the turmoil going on in the church and even more so with his wife Emma..so he basically went to die. And remind you this is after he had already been found not guilty in a sense..he willingly goes on trial again in a place that he knows wants him dead. All the signs lead up to that and then it’s proven by the fact that crazy people come and kill him. Joseph ended up killing two guys I think in self defense but somehow few out of a window in which he survived but then was shot and stabbed to death? Forgive me if I’m way off..I’ve only seen the movies and shows of this being played out and that’s what I’ve seen..him falling or jumping out a window and being shot and stabbed. Horrible horrible way to go. Beyond sad that people would do that. Did Joseph ever use a gun before that day? I’ve never used a gun before and I don’t image it would be hard to point and shoot but I’m wondering if Joseph actually already knew how to use guns before he shot back at the intruders?

[@brettmajeske3525]

@@SundayVibesmusic Your misunderstanding is in thinking the 'mob" was a bunch of criminals. They were the upstanding members of the community, not only Militia members but elected officials. JS was killed by the people who were to supposed to keep him safe waiting for trial. On charges two different judges had already ruled on. It was "not guilt" in a sense. It was "not guilty" twice. He knew Carthage was an unconstitutional trial. He was trying to protect the people of Nauvoo, so he submitted to unrighteous authority. There is no evidence that anyone other than the prisoners were hurt let alone killed. Joseph fired without aiming. Trying to shoot people on the other side of a door is not easy, and pistol back then were not accurate weapons. All farmers knew how to use firearms, but he was more likely used to using a rifle. So in wrap up, it is not that the officer asked help from criminals. He asked for help from the law. Think of it like a town sherrif asking the FBI or State Police for help in guarding a prisoner. And then they decided to the kill that prisoner. I do not blame the jailer for running.

[@jenniferboht961]

So did plural marriage stop being a revelation when Utah wanted statehood?

[@mcz610]

I think polygamy was exaggerated to make mormons look bad. The real persecution came because of anti slavery sentiments and mormon communalism

[@bobweiser3134]

Mormons d have always done a great job making themselves look bad. They do not need help.

[@georgemartin1383]

Um... Polygamy is pretty much the go to for all religious heretics like Joey Smith and Mohammad. I left the Mormon church and joined the "of church of the world" the Catholic church, the one and only true church.

[@iroh8946]

If more bloodshed was to happen, it would totally be a judges 17-21 moment where more contemplation would've had to be done. This only delays the inevitable

[@Hamann9631]

Whether something is controversial depends upon the definition of controversial. I can think of 2 definitions. (1) A thing about which reasonable people disagree. (2) A thing about which people have strong opinions and get aggitated. A person being killed without a fair trial isn't reasonable. So by definition 1 it wasn't controversial for Joseph Smith, etc to be ready to defend themselves against intending extra-judicial killing.

[@paulblack1799]

Wait...when did John Taylor and Willard Richards pull out pistols and shoot Joseph???

[@zissler1]

When people wanted a scape goat for any doctrinal or policy issues with the church.

[@PapaKryptoss]

Casey is awesome

[@DanC180]

What evidence is there for the claim William Law's end goal was to kill Joseph and Hyrum and that the Nauvoo expositor was done in order to further this goal? This goes against pretty much every major history of the Church, Nauvoo and Joseph Smith so seems like you kinda need to provide some evidence for this claim. Also seems important to mention that Dallin H. Oakes view on the legality of the destruction of the Navouu Expositor and its printing press is not widely accepted by most legal historians and that even Oakes came to the conclusion that while destroying the editions of the paper could be seen as legal, the destruction of the printing press itself was almost certainly illegal.

[@jdawg3677]

I have seen lds historians condemn all the times the printing press of the church was destroyed but then justify when the Nauvoo expositor was destroyed. I never heard William law wanted to kill Joseph or Hyrum.

[@brettmajeske3525]

Oak's conclusion was that while the destruction of the press may have been wrong, and the government of the City of Nauvoo would have been liable, Smith did not break the law. The issue is about the distinction between personal liability for official acts of a government and civic liability. My understanding is that most current constitutional experts, even those who believe that the destruction of the press was excessive, would agree that is the city council as an administrative body and not Joseph Smith as an individual who would be liable for any wrong doing. The Exclusion Principle is the primary defense when police are involved in wrongful deaths. Not to mention the double jeopardy of a new trial when Joseph had already been cleared by two different judges.

[@littlebigband2010]

Does anyone know if Sharp was a Freemason?

[@eileentwitchell1796]

After Hyrum was shot in the face how was he able to speak

[@roughstonerolling]

Unlike what you see in the movies, people don't just go instantly limp immediately after being shot. Even if they are shot in the head. I had to put a dying cow down once and it was traumatizing to me how long she still had to suffer even though I shot her several times between the eyes. After that, I NEVER accepted that unfortunate duty again.

[@wardtwitchell4059]

Hi Eileen

[@clontstable1]

Robert Kennedy spoke after he was shot in the back of the head.

[@kellymcdonald1895]

Wow all of this sounds like today's politics something never change

[@vonsowards1297]

You can shout fire in a crowded theater. Especially if there is actually a fire.

[@brettmajeske3525]

And one can be sued for doing so. The first amendment does not protect against inciting a riot, and indeed some yelling "fire" in a crowded building, especially if they did so maliciously. can not only be sue, but charged with endangerment and go to prison.

[@vonsowards1297]

@@brettmajeske3525 I think you are mistaken

[@brettmajeske3525]

@@vonsowards1297 Why? the US Supreme Court has already ruled that inciting a mob is not protected speech.

[@vonsowards1297]

@@brettmajeske3525 ok, so the misquote comes from the case U.S. v. Schenck. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic." Notice that he did not use the word “crowded” and that most people who invoke this omit the word “falsely”. This play to my initial point that you can if there is actually a fire. Further, U.S. v. Schenck had nothing to do with fires nor theaters, but ruled against Charles Schenck writing pamphlets opposing the draft. AND the U.S. v. Schenck was overturned 40 years later.

[@vonsowards1297]

*NOTE: I accidentally hit post before I was done with typing, so the comment was edited.

[@BadA_patriot]

Joseph condemned polygamy. He did not live it and did not teach it. William law believed the rumors by John C Bennett that Joseph was practicing it and taught it but there is a very good case against these rumors that everyone wants to ignore. Joseph’s own words in the times and seasons and lawsuits he issued for slander to name a few.

[@richarner3856]

What flavor Kool-aid are you drinking?

[@clontstable1]

Sharp was a real piece of work😡

[@justin-griffin]

Markham brought the single shot pistol and Wheelock brought the 6 shooter pepper box. The trial was for 5 people, not 6. We do know the three mob members who were hit. According to John Taylor, the mob did come back up the stairs and into the room. Oh, and John Taylor was lying about being shot in the watch.

[@brettmajeske3525]

It is just as likely that Taylor was mistaken. The watch did break, the face shattered.

[@sealedsecure3754]

Jeff Durbin

[@seans5289]

Considering the historical context of Joseph Smith’s death, wouldn’t plural marriage be the most likely belief for which he was martyred?

[@Pocketkid2]

The main criticisms are found in the Nauvoo Expositor, and yes, polygamy was one of them, but another big reason was that Joseph had recently taught in the April conference that men and women can become like God, and that teaching was too much for the apostates and they called it blasphemy.

[@brettmajeske3525]

Since both Bennet and Law were themselves excommunicated for adultery, and the names of the women listed in the Expositor were not those we now know to have been Plural Wives but instead were the witnesses who testified against Bennet and Law in their membership council, and that Law when addressing the Militia focused on Joseph's political power and campaign for president, I doubt it.

[@seans5289]

@@Pocketkid2: Joseph also stated the claims of the expositor were false. If plural marriage and the possibility of becoming gods are both true teachings, what false accusations were made by the expositor?

[@Pocketkid2]

​@@seans5289 The expositor did not actually represent the truth of those doctrinal teachings though, it simply criticized them according to the understanding of the apostates who wrote the paper and made ridiculous claims about Joseph Smith. That is what he was responding to.

[@seans5289]

@@Pocketkid2: Which was the most egregious example of dishonesty in the Nauvoo Expositor?

[@masonm240]

Why do you guys still use "LDS"? also I feel like you shouldn't call Joseph Smith the "founder".

[@brettmajeske3525]

Why?

[@masonm240]

@@brettmajeske3525 he didn't create it, God and Jesus did, Joseph Smith was just the first prophet

[@sdb816]

The thumbnail with the bloody hand is in bad taste. Please remove.

[@harryhenderson2479]

Joseph could’ve stopped all of this, but his ego got the best of him.

[@AlexBrown9635]

Tell me you didn't watch the video without telling me you didn't watch the video... Literally the entire video discusses how every decision he made sacrificed his own personal safety for the protection of those around him.

[@werkzeugmann6224]

Mormon's easier to spot these days, clean shaven like a woman's face. They make great FBI agents too!

[@RyanMercer]

I have like a foot and a half long beard and am a member of the Church...

[@jdawg3677]

Was polygamy legal at the time?

[@patricianoel7782]

Polygamy gas never been legal in the United States.

[@jdawg3677]

@@patricianoel7782 was it legal in Utah?

[@brettmajeske3525]

@@jdawg3677 This gets into a legal quagmire. Prior to 1878 there was no national ban of the practice, although some local and state governments had laws against multiple marriage licenses. Patricia Noel is correct that no State specifical endorsed polygamy, many had no specific laws either way at the time Joseph was killed. Less than 1/3 of states in 1840 had specific anti-polygamy laws. Utah as a territory did pass laws endorsing Plural Marriage, which Congress overturned. Since in the US the legal principle that anything not specifically banned is permitted, one can argue that it was legal in Missouri, Ohio, and New York when the Saints lived in those locations, since all three only banned polygamy after the LDS Church was forced to flee from those locations. I think it is worth noting that the early Saints felt that bigamy/polygamy and Plural Marriage were two distinct practices and objected to the usage of the word polygamy. Legally most jurisdictions did not seem to care, the LDS themselves felt there was a significant difference.

[@jdawg3677]

@@brettmajeske3525 do you believe they were obeying article of faith 12 during that time? I have struggled with polygamy.

[@brettmajeske3525]

@@jdawg3677 If they believed Plural Marriage and polygamy were two different things, then yes.

[@leahhumberstone1010]

You make it sound like William Law was a bad guy for rejecting Polygamy. Since when is it considered bad for a man to want to be faithful to his wife? Also, weren’t most of the Warsaw militia men Freemasons?

[@brettmajeske3525]

Well, he was excommunicated for adultery, so I do not think faithfulness to his wife was his issue.

[@leahhumberstone1010]

Accusations of adultery were Joseph and Hyrum’s convenient method of marring a persons character. There are many reports by women and men who were warned not to tell of polygamy or Joseph and Hyrum would mar their character. History reveals the truth - if Law was an adulterer he would have embraced polygamy to save face and justify its continuance like Joseph Smith did with Fanny Alger.

[@brettmajeske3525]

@@leahhumberstone1010 You are ignoring the political ramifications. Politi tics more than any specific doctrine were Law and Bennets motivations. Your insinuation does not match the historical record. When other leaders disagreed with Joseph and either left or were removed, they were not accused of adultery. As far as I can tell only Laws and Bennet were accused of such. Bennet had actually been excommunicated from two previous churches for adultery before even becoming LDS.

[@Hamann9631]

Leah HUmberstone. Auithorized polygamy isn't adultery!

[@ryanbradley3293]

Yay I’m the 333rd like

[@SaintsUnscripted]

3️⃣3️⃣3️⃣

[@grayman7208]

09:00 actually ... the first amendment protects freedom of the press.

[@AlexBrown9635]

Nowadays, yes. Back then, no. The protections in the Bill of Rights only applied to the FEDERAL government, not STATE or LOCAL governments. It wasn't until the Supreme Court's "Incorporation Doctrine" that the Bill of Rights was made to apply to the States as well.

[@bobweiser3134]

The Expositor told the truth.

[@Pocketkid2]

I never really understood why people think the destruction of the Nauvoo Expositor was illegal and wrong. It was clearly a conscious and careful decision made by the government of Nauvoo.

[@ninjsteve1]

Regardless of that or not sex crimes were illegal

[@Pocketkid2]

@@ninjsteve1 That's why it was kept secret, but the Lord commanded it and Joseph had to obey or be destroyed

[@Telavian]

@@Pocketkid2 Supposedly commanded it. There is very strong evidence that section 132 is not a revelation from God.

[@Pocketkid2]

@@Telavian And what evidence is that? All the evidence I've seen suggests that it was

[@Telavian]

@@Pocketkid2 I am not sure if I can use a link because youtube removes those posts. However if you search youtube for "rob fotheringham" then he has a video that goes through it in amazing detail.

[@Ditka-89]

Not a martyr but a lynch victim nonetheless.

[@malexander4094]

@25:44 "the dictionary definition" is missing the point behind the criticism, and misunderstanding history. It's not about how the dictionary defines it: it's about what the term itself hearkens to in the early Christian church, which the LDS faith claims to restore. During the 2nd & 3rd century, claiming faith in Christ was a Roman capital punishment. Across the empire, it could earn you the death penalty. It was illegal: you were a criminal. Moreover, the idea was a believer was using their death to bear "witness" (this is what the word "martyr" has at its roots) and a witness volunteers themselves. Thus, they willingly sacrificing their life, without raising even a finger in self-defense: as Christ taught to turn the other cheek. Because trusting your death to be redeemed in salvation in Christ "rather than the arm of the flesh" would be the clearest, most ultimate test & demonstration of your faith. Throughout the history of Christians being persecuted, you frequently see this intersection of empire & faith in martyrdoms. For a recent dramatization, look at the recent film adaptation of the 1966 Japanese novel "Silence" (with Andrew Garfield, Adam Driver, and Liam Neeson). There are municipal tribunals, it's an affront to nationalist sensibilities, believers go willingly & without self-preservation to their deaths....Also, they are branded as criminals & also traitors against their country... ...So, all of this is why, yes, it is quite contestable to call Joseph Smith a martyr. It doesn't mean Joseph Smith didn't die for his beliefs!!! Obviously! But that alone does not make you a martyr, not in the Christian sense. (If it did, then this definition is so broad as to be meaningless: then JFK, Gary Gilmore, the Colombine & VirginiaTech shooters, etc. are martyrs...SO MANY people have died for their beliefs! 😂 You may as well include the MCU's Tony Stark.) The fact is, he had & used a gun in self-defense, and attempted with his dying words to cry for help. And the fact is, it was a gang of local thugs under orders to carry out basically a political assassination...and not, rather, some state-sanctioned form of capital punishment. So, calling him a martyr is very understandably at odds with what that term historically describes.

[@brettmajeske3525]

Yet while some of the historical martyrs did not fight back, there are many examples of Catholic Saints, who are commonly referred to as martyrs, whose stories indicate that they did. It is a matter of cultural context. I would argue that, at least in the United States, the common understanding of the word is closer to the dictionary definition used in the video

[@malexander4094]

@@brettmajeske3525 Then, why would Japanese Christians martyr themselves in the same way Christians in ancient Rome did in a culture hundreds of years previously & thousands of miles away? I quite disagree "cultural context" relativizes away the meaning. I'm not saying a martyr is someone who doesn't fight back at all....However, LDS material seems to shape the narrative of Joseph Smith in a particular way: on Carthage jail tours, the guides do not mention he had a gun, even though if you ask, almost invariably they tend to know he did. In movie/TV representations, the moment with the window is depicted in this submissive "into the hands of god I commend my spirit" self-sacrifice all awash in white light...Often it's missing history, or re-configuring it. And whether he was actually sending a Masonic distress signal or not, no Mormon I've met even realizes that's a possibility; few know a Mason, or why that might've been seen as a threat. So, even if we admit the definition of martyrdom cannot be one that rules out self-defense: what IS clear to me is, LDS "cultural context" around Joseph Smith's assassination is painted in a particular way: like a martyrdom. And I for one can understand why this is incongruent, in the historical account & especially to other Christians.

[@brettmajeske3525]

@@malexander4094 Maybe not on the tour you took, but when I went they talked about Joseph being armed. We talked about it in my seminary class as well when I was a teen. The guns themselves have been on display for the last 50 years or more. I am unaware of a single member who didn't know he was Mason. Every lesson I have had about the Martyrdom mentions that he tried to protect the others present. Your perceptions on this matter do not align with my 50+ years of lived experience as a member of the Church.

[@malexander4094]

​@@brettmajeske3525 That's okay. Your 50+ years of lived experience do not align with my 25 years as a member & 35 years in Utah. But I don't think it's right to seek such alignment. This is because the point is a broad one about representations throughout LDS media: it's not limited to any one person's experiences (perhaps yours are, and that's fine). The first feature-length film about Joseph Smith came out in 2005. It was shown in Salt Lake City "and 19 Church visitors' sites around the world." The film was slightly revised about 10 years ago: the new version was made available online, still plays at the Legacy Theater & various other church sites, etc. So, this is very much an official Church-supported representation, which is already almost 20 years old. And, when you go to 59 minutes in...anyone who understands rhetoric can tell you exactly what this scene *wants* you to think. And yet, anyone who understands the historical account can tell this scene is heavily dramatized for that effect. (There is, by the way, no gun in this representation. Nor does the film ever mention he was a Mason.) 3 to 5 million people visit Temple Square each year. This movie has had millions of views. Can you align your 50+ years of lived experience with millions of other perceptions? Feel free. I don't think it's hard for non-members to look at the facts & say, "this was a political assassination, and he died for what he believed in." It's harder, or at least arguable, to also call it a martyrdom, in the sense it gets used in Christian history. But that is exactly what, broadly speaking, most LDS media, representations, and tellings of Joseph Smith's death want it to be.

[@mycatwould]

@@malexander4094I was just at Carthage jail last month, and the sisters giving the tour definitely said they had the two guns that were smuggled in and used them

[@williamcharles2117]

You'd think a true prophet could have found a way to keep out of trouble. It's simply amazing the hagiography surrounding this man. He was a grifter that saw a new set of marks.

[@williamcharles2117]

@@nancid5265 - I find all claims of "revealed knowledge" incredibly flimsy. And the entire run of LDS "prophets" have been less than impressive. Nothing of substance, but Heavenly Father apparently told Rusty to change sacrament meetings from 3 hours to 2.

[@williamcharles2117]

@@nancid5265 - I at least don't bring my opinions door to door. Whenever I watch these things, I get a sense of just how much is involved in treating this whole godview as ordained by God and directed for his purposes. That would be quite a hurdle if it made sense, and the fact is it doesn't.

[@biokido575]

what evidence is there he was a grifter?

[@williamcharles2117]

@@biokido575 - his treasure seeking. He was prosecuted for defrauding people. His "miraculous" claims were the basis for the grift he began starting his own church. His many failed prophecies attest to the fact that he is undeniably not a prophet of the Lord.

[@biokido575]

@@williamcharles2117 He was acquitted of treasure seeking. His prophecies are up for debate. The conditions were never met for the ones that didn’t come true.