It doesn't make any sense. This is what I am trying to tell you. There are a lot of vague verses lifted out of context and then a conclusion that somehow Smith meets this standard.

I responded to a critical list. I did not provide the list, a critic did.

I simply showed that Smith met the criteria on the list.

 

 

Well, many people can be claimed to have done so just as well and often it is not in the least clear how any of it applies to any particular person. An exception is the verse from Matt. 7. It actually says something which can be tested in relation to a particular person, and Smith fails the test.

Jesus says those who do not know if Him and choose to follow Him will face the wrath of God. Jesus in the Old Testament (following creedal trinitarianism) killed women and children.

Jesus says: follow Me.

Smith says: follow Jesus.

Smiths fruits; the Book of Mormon and Doctrine and Covenants are clear: we are saved when we follow Jesus.

 

However, you do not include some other verses which actually do indicate whether a prophetic claimant is a true prophet. For example, you quote from Deut. 18 but leave out the part where it states that a prophet who speaks presumptuously on behalf of God shall die. Then it even describes how to tell. If their prophecies do not come to pass, then that is the thing the Lord has not spoken.

The Bible contradicts the Bible.

And even Jesus gave at least one false prophecy.

 

 

None of Smith's prophecies can be shown to have actually taken place and some can be proven false.

Not according to apologists.

 

You still have not given a definition of adultery, bearing false witness, or taking the name of God in vain which will not make Smith guilty of these things.

Your historical record of Smith doing those things is weak and non-existant.

 

 

Physical contact of a Biblical nature is not a sin in the Bible? This is not a definition of adultery.

Its true though. If Smith had relations with a woman he was sealed to in polygamy, per the Bible, that’s not a sin.

Smiths wife did not know? Not a sin—per the Bible.

 

 

You are simply making a concatenation of assertions which don't even follow from the verses you cite.

Same with you. The verses you cite do not make the claims you assert.

The historical record you cite do not match your claims.

This is a pot meets kettle situation for you.

 

 

You are also ignoring the major issues identified in the Bible. I think you don't know what you mean by words like adultery. You are just recycling jargon. If not, give the definitions. There is no question that Smith and especially his cronies slandered women.

Cite the historical source. Cite the first-hand historical source.

 

There is no question that he had secret sexual liaisons with multiple women while deceiving his wife.

That’s not against the rules in the Bible. You conveniently left out that the “multiple women” were his polygamist wives. And polygamy is not a sin in the Bible, no matter how hard you want it to be.

 

There is no question that he married other men’s wives. Even the church admits this.

Smith was sealed to married women and men.

No argument.

The historical record that he had physical relations of a Biblical nature with married individuals is non existent to weak. Zero first-hand source exists.

Plenty of first hand sources to the single women in polygamy with Smith, though.