- Stephen C on Joseph Smith as a 19th Century L. Ron Hubbard: “Not a Cougar: I’m trying to be more sophisticated here than simply saying “L. Ron Hubbard was bad, was Joseph Smith bad too?” Rather, I’m looking at the particular points of reference that people may draw in comparing the two and seeing how much merit they have.” Sep 22, 11:44
- on Joseph Smith as a 19th Century L. Ron Hubbard: “Stephen, I don’t really love this post. That said if you’re going to “steel man” the comparison, I think you’re leaving out a lot of relevant fodder (though I admit completely that what constitutes fodder depends on what you think of Joseph). As a warning, the following is drafted and slanted to be provocative (i.e., it doesn’t constitute my personal opinion on Joseph or my reading of the evidence and I won’t debate anyone else about the veracity of the allegations): 1. Joseph engaging in treasure digging and never being able to demonstrate the ability to actually find the treasure (and being tried as a disorderly person over it – the Church paints it as an acquittal, but the outcome of the trial is not clear). 2. Joseph having a relationship with Fanny Alger that amounted to an affair and had to be justified afterwards as a marriage and then having other leaders who disagreed with his actions excommunicated (i.e., Oliver Cowdery) 3. Engaging in a whole host of multiple plural marriages without Emma’s knowledge or consent (and engaging in a sham ceremony to cover up his actions on at least one occasion) 4. Seemingly conveniently timed revelations used to coerce people into complying with Joseph’s wishes and that benefitted him. 5. A callous disregard for the law when the law didn’t go along with his wishes (e.g., the Kirtland Safety Society). 6. A willingness to retcon Church history when he needed to justify a new practice or idea (e.g., the appearance of Peter, James, and John to restore the Melchizedek priesthood, something the Whitmers argued never happened). Again, this short list doesn’t represent my own feelings about Joseph, but suggesting that comparisons of Joseph with L. Ron are completely ungrounded forces you to simply ignore plenty of points raised by those not enamored of Joseph. Also, to be 1000% clear, I’m not going to argue with anyone about the list I created – the veracity of these issues was not the point for listing them.” Sep 22, 10:43
- on Joseph Smith as a 19th Century L. Ron Hubbard: “To be clear, I’m responding to the people who make the flippant comparison online. I’m saying that Joseph Smith *does not* = L. Ron Hubbard” Sep 22, 09:38
- on Joseph Smith as a 19th Century L. Ron Hubbard: “This comparison is too reductive. Really? Why do we need to drag Smith’s name through the mud this way? Do you know what this does to persons recovering from Scientology as they encounter Mormonism? Have you seen Leah Remini’s show ‘Scientology and the Aftermath”? So unnecessarily triggering. Superficial similarities do not make Joseph Smith and L. Ron Hubbard historical equivalents any more than George Washington and Colonel Sanders. Both wore distinctive clothing and became famous firsts, so . . . let’s lump them together too. This reminds me of those Linclon-JFK “coincidence” cards sold at gas stations. They point out the number of letters in their names are the same, both had successors named “Johnson”, both assassinated on a Friday, etc. This list sounds eerily meaningful until you realize it’s just coincidences strung together. At least Lincoln-JFK comparisons are fairly innocuous because the comparison doesn’t inherently demean either man. Your comparison is different. When you choose a deeply discredited figure like Hubbard as the point of comparison, the associate itself carries a negative judgement. Cherry-picking the similarities between the two and presenting them as historically meaningful is not serious historical work, it’s a RHETORIC that sneaks the conclusion into the comparison.” Sep 22, 09:00
- on Joseph Smith as a 19th Century L. Ron Hubbard: “I’ve heard it all: Mormonism is “19th century Scientology.” Mormonism is “Islam for white people.” The Nation of Islam is “Mormonism for black people.” And so on. It’s all very reductionist and juvenile.” Sep 22, 08:46
- on Joseph Smith as a 19th Century L. Ron Hubbard: “My one starting and ending beef with Scientology is its universal opposition to all psychiatric medication. I used to live in Hollywood and went to the anti psychiatry museum and ended up arguing with there visitor center person when they tried to sell me on their view. While psych med prescriptions isn’t always correct the message not to take meds is harmful to many who buy the take. They also seemed to be recording or monitoring visitors digitally when they visit, so it was kind of a creepy experience. I’ve never met a Scientology member in the wild, especially in the places I’ve lived in flyover country. I don’t like being compared to Scientologists or Evangelicals in general but I can see why people do it.” Sep 22, 07:31
- on Judging in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 9/20: “Annual Primary Program; the one time a year when (it’s basically assured) that one will “feel the Spirit”. Not to be missed. Otherwise, on most weeks, once the Sacrament has been taken; it’s simply bland drudgery and pablum; on endless repeat.” Sep 22, 07:18
- on Judging in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 9/20: “I am Sunday School President and I noted yesterday that our teachers (in Sunday School and R.S. and E.Q.) all struggled and seemed frustated by the shorter lesson time. Setting up some main points, covering a verse/quote or two and fielding comments in 20 minutes is a tough job. I jokingly told the Bishop that we should have cut the high council speaker. I wonder if Salt Lake is aware of the difficulty? We also discussed Chrsitofferson’s talk. Our discussion turned to Grace and how it transforms human hearts. We did have our monthly linger longer, which is one of the best things our ward has ever done. It is where I was able to get additional feedback from our teachers while munching a brownie (or two).” Sep 21, 18:43
- on A Review: The Diaries of Carol Lynn Pearson: Mormon Author, Feminist, and Activist, Volume 1: 1956–1990: “Wow, thanks for this. I am also hoping for something that will make BKP more three dimensional. I remember him speaking in the MTC and using the “Thimble and Umbrella” analogy, and listening to a talk about a newly married woman saying “my troubles are finally at an end”, to which her mother replied, “yes, my dear, you just don’t know which end.” He had a certain wisdom that needs to be acknowledged.” Sep 20, 19:42
- on Judging in our Meetings (Or What Did Church Lead You to Think About Yesterday), 9/20: “Here’s a few of my thoughts in reaction to what I experienced in Church yesterday (9/20): Our Bishop himself announced tithing settlement in Sacrament Meeting, emphasizing that the tithing declaration was a minor part of meeting with him — instead he said the purpose is to meet the ward members. Fifteen seconds of tithing and ten to fifteen minutes of getting to know you. I think that’s exactly what Bishops should be doing. I hear too many people saying that they don’t know or trust their Bishop — and that seems like a tragedy. In Sunday School the teacher pointed out two things about Isaiah that are commonly not known: 1) Quotations of and paraphrases of Isaiah make up about 35% of the Book of Mormon — so, do you think the BoM authors thought that it was important? And 2) Isaiah is a poet — the book is almost all poetry. The poetry in the Old Testament is made up of parallel metaphors, and it occurred to me that this form of poetry, by giving two metaphors for the same idea helps us to triangulate the message, and zero into ideas that aren’t explicit in the text, and may not be things that can be easily stated explicitly. Our priesthood lesson looked at Elder Christofferson’s talk “The Character of Christ”, in which he suggested that character is rooted in the motivations in our hearts. But it seems to me that even if our motivations are the same as those of Christ, we still have the difficulty of figuring out how to apply those motivations to specific situations. For example, when dealing with a wayward child, is it best to establish strict rules, or allow the child to make choices? A lot depends on the child, and what is best for their personality and view of the world, which makes the decision difficult. Any particular approach could be loving or could be harsh. ” Sep 20, 19:13
