False Prophecy of Joseph Smith
Zion to be in Missouri on 9/11/1836
History of the Church 2:145; “…and peace prevails, use every effort to prevail on the churches to gather to those regions and locate themselves, to be in readiness to move into Jackson county in two years from the eleventh of September next, which is the appointed time for the redemption of Zion.”
Prophecy given August 16, 1834. The Mormons were supposed to move to Jackson County, MO on September 11, 1836 which was the “appointed time for the redemption of Zion”. Instead they fled to Nauvoo in 1839. Zion was not redeemed in Missouri.
On another 9/11 this time 9/11/1857, Mormons attacked a group of pioneers who were traveling from Arkansas to California. More than 120 unarmed men, women and children were gunned down and slaughtered because the Mormons didn’t like them. This is known as the Mountain Meadows Massacre.
First, the Mountain Meadows Massacre, as horrible as it was, is not as simple as you claim. This event should not be mentioned wihtout giving full details of the incident, and the events leadin up to it.
(I do not think it was justified, but it is not what most people think either.)
As to the quote from the History of the church, let us look at a little context.
Immediately after your quote Joseph Smith writes “If–verily I say unto you–if the Church with one united effort perform their duties; if they do this, the work shall be complete. He thus puts a condition on the redemption of Zion.
In the next paragraph he writes “Now, my beloved brethren, you will learn by this we have a great work to do, and but little time to do it in; and if we do not exert ourselves to the utmost in gathering up the strength of the Lord’s house that this thing may be accomplished, behold there remaineth a scourge for the Church, even that they shall be driven from city to city, and but few shall remain to receive an inheritance; if those things are not kept, there remaineth a scourge also; therefore, be wise this once, O ye children of Zion! and give heed to my counsel, saith the Lord.” Here we have the warning of what will happen if the saints are not faithful.
Two Paragraphs later he writes “I would also inform Bishop Partridge that I am not satisfied with Brother Hulet concerning the colt, and so long as unrighteous acts are suffered in the Church, it cannot be sanctified, neither can Zion be redeemed” He is thus citing actual events that are preventing the redemption of Zion.
History tells us that many church leaders in Missouri rebelled and eventually broke from the church. Thus, this prophecy (if it can be considered such) was fulfilled. It said that if they were faithful Zion would be redeemed, but if they were not they would be driven from city to city. They were not faithful, and thus were driven from City to City.
Here is a link to the History of the church volume two: http://www.boap.org/LDS/History/History_of_the_Church/Vol_II
Here are the events leading up to the Mountain Meadows Massacre. A group of early Christian settlers in their wagons were traveling from Arkansas to California. While traveling through Utah the Mormons dressed up as Indians and attacked them making it look like a group of wild Indians did it. They then approached the travelers, promised them safe travel and all they had to do was give the Mormons all their weapons so it’d look good for the group going through that territory.
The group was so thankful and did as they were told and over the next hill the Mormons gunned them down. The only survivors were children under the age of 8.
Mormons took jewelry, clothing, money, food, etc. and the kids. They raised the kids until other family members could come collect the children. One man spoke to a good friend of mine back in the 1940’s. He remembered one Mormon woman wearing his mother’s dress. You can find the info on Wikipedia or any Encyclopedia the Mormon Church doesn’t regulate to get truth.
As per the false prophecy. It was one thing after another w/ Smith. When one thing didn’t come true he’d blame it on the righteousness or unrighteousness of the people. Smith told the people God said; “Go to Independence and redeem it because it was the appointed time”.
If it was the appointed time why didn’t God provide?
Why is there always one excuse after another – what an exhausting, dismal way of life.
Pro-poe-gahn-da. Why is “context” necessary to the understanding of the most heinous peace-time atrocity in the history of (at least) this country? Should we consider Charles Manson’s “context”?
Lifeafter
You are not giving events leading up to, but the events of the Massacre.
Nice to know you can’t actually prove anything I said concerning the prophecy wrong.
Riddell
Yes, we need context even for Charles Manson, or we will never understand what happened and why.
In the case of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, as horrid as it was, it is important to note that not many months previous to this Parley P. Pratt had been murdered in Arkansas; in fact, in the same area from which these settlers were coming from.
One must also note that it was earlier that year that the United States government had sent 1500 troops to Utah on the word of false reports.
Then one must also remember the nearly constant persecution, including massacres, that the LDS had faced almost since it was organized.
So, the outrage at Parley’s murder, the fear of recently having troops sent against you, and the paranoia caused by three decades of constant abuse all play their part. This was not simply a group of Mormons seeking blood and slaughtering the innocent. That is my point.
It should also be noted that there is no evidence that any of this was ever sanctioned, or even known by the leadership of the church, but was the action of local leaders and members. As such, to lay the blame on the church itself is false and deceptive (just like blaming protestants for the Salem Witch Trials).
A final note is that it was not only Mormons involved, but that the Paiute Indians were involved (proven through archeology).
People want to characterize this event in ways that are not honest analysis of the event.
“It should also be noted that there is no evidence that any of this was ever sanctioned, or even known by the leadership of the church, but was the action of local leaders and members.”
Verbatim from LDS material? I read those words before, as in the LDS explanation.
I read those words too; from Non-LDS historians who have studied all records, including the archeological ones, and have concluded that the idea that the church itself was involved has no support in the records, and is basically only believed by those wanting to hate the church.