Josh love the site. I have actually thought of your question a bit. I have two lines, my following line and my faith line. My following line ends before my faith line. My follow line consists of actions I would not do, but I would still remain a believer. When I fall between the two lines I would probably ask for the prophet to have a “Dan Jones” attitude towards me. Better a disobedient believer than an offended less active that writes so called “non-Hagiography” books of biased perspectives.

I hope I am beyond Thomas B. Marsh (quarrel over cream) and Symonds Ryder (with his misspelled name) type offense. The line for my following would be a request for me to pull an Abraham/Isaac sacrifice (probably the most odd request from a leader in the old testament). Just could not do it, but I would still believe in the principles.

My line for faith is much stronger. This is because I have found so often in my life that time is critical to understanding God. Great example of this is John 6. Christ first informs followers that they will need to eat his flesh and drink his blood. Out of context…sounds fairly crazy, and people actually stopped following him because of this statement. Had they only known, they would have probably stayed with him.

Like wise I am curious if some of the more strange revelations and actions of Smith were not more in the vein of “Dan Jones” type moments. Throughout Joseph’s life he had few he could trust. As with today, those most against the church are former believers and friends of the faith that were offended. I can’t help but to think if a number of “revelations” were actually tests of faith (including a few marriages) to determine who he could trust.

Other contemporaneous accounts of his life aren’t very flattering.

Believe what you will, but there’s a ton of evidence that Smith was a con man.