Joseph Smith Was a False Prophet


April 22, 2013 by mattfradd

Joseph Smith, founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

Joseph Smith, founder of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

You see? That wasn’t nearly as offensive as my last blog. But why?

Just in case you were interested in learning more about Joseph Smith and Mormonism, click here.

11 thoughts on “Joseph Smith Was a False Prophet

    • There is no thoughts Joseph Smith was no false prophet…

      • JesusIsMyAnchor says:

        In his book, History of the Church, vol. 2, pg. 189, he states:
        “With a determination to lay down their lives, if necessary, should be ordained to the ministry, and go forth to prune the vineyard for the last time, for the coming of the Lord, which was nigh — even fifty-six years should wind up the scene.”
        — It’s now more than 1,000 years later, and Jesus has still not returned, yet. To be wrong by more than 1,000 years is not true divine word.

        In Doctrine and Covenants, Smith prophesied the following:
        “…as he has spoken by the mouth of his prophets, and for the gathering of his saints to stand upon Mt Zion, which shall be thr city of New Jerusalem…” (Which straight away contradicts the most ancient historical documents in history, translated accurately – as far as the message goes – into the Holy Bible) “…Which city shall be built, beginning at the temple lot, which is appointed by the finger of the Lord, in the western bounderies by the state of Missouri, and dedicated by the hand of Joseph Smith Jr., the others with whom the Lord was well pleased. Verily this is the word of the Lord, that the city of New Jerusalem shall be built by the gathering of the saints in this place, even the place of the temple, which temple shall be reared in this generation. For verily this generation SHALL NOT PASS AWAY until an house shall be built unto the Lord” (partially plagiarised from the Bible)
        Interestingly enough, not only were Mormons driven out of Jackson County in 1833, they never gathered there in accordance to this prophecy.
        This clearly states that the generation present would not pass away until this temple was built in the western state of Missouri which is now in Independance. This is a false prophecy.

        The list goes on but this is painfully obvious that someone was being whispered to by the Devil to cause many to stumble and vear off the path of the straight and narrow.

        God bless you and lead you to knowledge and truth.

  1. I didn’t find your other post offensive, just disrespectful to another’s faith by inferring Muhammad is a lunatic, liar or demonically possessed.

    Personally, I would see no difference if you wrote the same here as you did in the last post and used the same wording.

    The followers of the particular faith are likely to find it offensive, other people, like myself, may see it as disrespectful, and no doubt, some will find it ok and possibly commendable.

    • Andrew R says:

      If I were a materialist, it would be against my own belief system to believe that Christ was anything but the product of material cause. So what should I make of a man who went around claiming that he was the son of God? Is he a liar or a lunatic? It has to be something similarly “disrespectful”, because that is what is required for a materialist.

      I myself am a Christian, and I take no offense at the logical conclusions of materialism: since there is only the physical that exists, those claiming spiritual powers are either lying, or crazy, or some combination of those.That is the consequence of holding a belief, it simply can not be held simultaneously with beliefs that contradict it. Things CAN get offensive when you go off the deep end; for example, I noticed you mentioned Richard Dawkins in your last post, but Dawkins said giving children religious education is akin to child abuse. Matt Fradd is nothing like Richard Dawkins…

      • Hi Andrew,

        You raise some good points.

        Matt Fradd is an apologist, so is Richard Dawkins. There tactics are somewhat different, I agree. In the past I haven’t found any of his posts to be like Richard Dawkins, the last one, from my perspective I did.

        It’s about whether “Character attacks” are necessary to make a point. Richard Dawkins will quite often attack the character of “God”, “Jesus” and other “Prophets” to make his point, while chucking in a little philosophy.

        But hey, I equally acknowledge some people find “Character attacks” as acceptable.

        I follow Matt to learn more about the “Catholic Faith”, as he is a “Catholic Apologist”. I wouldn’t mind articles which clearly showed the difference between a Catholic’s beliefs and a Muslims, but I don’t need to see negative inferences made about their prophets.

        There are plenty of Christian blogs that say all kind of things about the “Pope” and I find them disrespectful as well.

        I’m not Catholic, I follow Matt, as I was interested in possibly pursuing the Catholic Faith. These sorts of articles do not encourage that.

        From a person looking to become a Catholic, and maybe that isn’t Matt’s target, they don’t help, if anything they drive, well at least me, away.

    • They probably would. Unfortunately, truth often is offensive. Murder and rape are offensive. And so is the betrayal of trust one puts into a man.

      But what other options would there be for any prophet? Either he is a prophet. Or he is lying. Or he is mistaken. Or he is possessed and errs neither willingly nor innocently.

      What else is there?

      Only that he might not have ever existed…

  2. Darran says:

    If either of them aren’t legitimate prophets there are only 3 other possibilities Steve. Relating the case against their prophethood even without these conclusions still leads to the same conclusions. How offensive. Perhaps we should be careful we don’t hurt the devils feelings. He is after all the chief author of these lies.

    We often make the good we are supposed to do seem bad, that way we don’t have to do it. Calling out irrationality, lies and exploitation for what they are requires courage. We don’t get to nip around that by claiming it to be offensive.

    • Hi Darran,

      Thanks for your comments Darran, I appreciate the feedback. Disagreements are a good way to grow. People will see things different, and read posts differently. As Matt often says, text is tone deaf.

      I find inferring leaders of others peoples beliefs of faith to be disrespectful, heck, that is from my perspective. It does not mean I don’t challenge people on “beliefs”, that is a different thing all together, I just don’t find the need to infer the prophets they belief in are “lunatics, liars or demon influenced’.

      I would find nothing wrong in a article pointing out the differences between what a Catholic believes in regards to Christ, and what a Muslim does. Hey, I would probably find it informative, if accurately presented.

  3. RoodAwakening says:

    Having read extensively about Joseph Smith (and the LDS, in general) some years back, I came to the conclusion about the man that I still hold: He suffered from schizophrenia at a time when such could not be diagnosed as mental illness, and he also had a charismatic personality (NOT spirituality) that attracted others to him. Combine the two elements, and–poof!–a new, aberrant religion is born.

    I know someone who has schizophrenia, who has also developed religious theories as a result of it, but who–fortunately–is not particularly charismatic. My friend’s religious ramblings DO have a certain logic to them, except that his conclusions are just plain crazy…much like Joseph Smith’s.

  4. CaptainDG says:

    RoodAwakening is the greatest religious handle ever. Your comment is not bad either. I would only say that God was somehow writing straight with the man (though not as as a prophet!) because Mormons (for all the faults of Smith) seem to work a lot of good in the world.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Don't miss a post - enter your email address below.

Join 3,133 other followers

New Book!

My new DVD: How to Win an Argument without Losing a Soul.

Free E-Book!


Blog Stats

  • 895,881 Visits
%d bloggers like this: