Transcription
There's something going on in Mormonism. Why are so many people starting to believe something that's making the experts and commentators call them polygamy deniers? Polygamy deniers, polygamy deniers. I'm going to group together these individuals and call them polygamy deniers. Why are we asking and answering the question, "Was Joseph Smith a polygamist after all?" As they say, everyone agrees that when it comes to polygamy and Mormonism, it all started with Joseph Smith, right?
Given the consensus among the historians, why then are so many people starting to believe something very different, that Joseph Smith was in reality not a polygamist? Wouldn't have predicted this based upon the amount of evidence, but the numbers seem to be crescendoing rather than people getting knowledge in this kind of floating away. It's getting so you can't swing a dead cat in Utah without hitting somebody who denies that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. The other emerging community that's only really becoming quite dominant now, a group of people in the church who are absolutely convinced that Joseph Smith did not practice polygamy. There seems to be a real ground swell of Neo-fundamentalist Mormons who now want to say that Joseph Smith never practiced polygamy, that this was a scheme by Brigham Young, that it all started with big bad Brigham Young.
A hot topic that would require one of the number one scholars in Mormonism to talk about, which is whether or not Joseph Smith actually practiced polygamy. This upswing in conspiracy theories and Joseph Smith polygamy denial that's really taking off, and I would say in a concerning way. The arguments are compelling. They are really good at weaving together certain facts to frame a narrative that protects the reputation of Joseph Smith, so that, you know, we can deny that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy, put all on Brigham Young. And believe you me, I want to blame everything on Brigham Young. It makes perfect sense to me that people would be uncomfortable with Joseph Smith having practiced polygamy, and that they might prefer that he not have practiced polygamy. Again, other things being equal, I would prefer that too. A little part of everybody wants to believe that Joseph Smith never practiced polygamy, and we can just kind of shrug this whole thing away.
In today's world, the Prophet Joseph Smith and the early Saints who practiced plural marriage are under attack. Our history is under attack, and the traditional narrative surrounding Joseph Smith's polygamy is being reinterpreted by those with a very dark agenda. And I say, enough. I think that that is a dangerous approach to our heritage, and if we continue to allow that sort of thinking to get oxygen, it's going to have real-world consequences. It, it's not possible that these, in a rapidly growing number of Latter-day Saints, Mormons of all stripes, even some ex-Mormons, are right.
[Music]
This is still Mormon, the show dedicated to unsettling Mormon history. When the collective body of scientists, academics, politicians, and historians, the experts speak with one voice, the thinking is over. This is, this is the consensus. I'm interested in medical consensus, in scientific consensus. Consensus, we hear that word a lot. Here's a history professor's take on the importance of historical consensus. A consensus in general is what most experts on a subject believe to be true about a certain issue, based on their collective analysis of all the evidence that they have at their disposal. In other words, it is the collective answer of historians to a particular question. The best choice is defer to the consensus of the experts. Boy, we hear that all the time, don't we? And when the historians and commentators so confidently proclaim, "The data is conclusive. I don't know of anybody, any trained historian, who believes Joseph didn't introduce and practice plural marriage. I'm aware of any credible historian who are you? You know, who, who work at universities or who publish credible history books with credible publishers that would deny, that would deny that Joseph Smith was polygamous. I know I still get some people who insist that Joseph Smith was a monogamist. It boggles my mind how anybody who really studies the history can come to that conclusion. But, uh, the overwhelming scholars, the community, uh, basically, there's the consensus is that Joseph Smith did indeed practice polygamy. My position when regarding anything that I'm not too knowledgeable of, as I just go with a scholarly consensus on this. Published authors who are historians like Dan Vogel or Brent Metcalf. You've got people who have left the church who agree with this. You've got him over here on the inside as well. You've got Richard Bushman, Brian Hales, reputable, peer-reviewed, published by academic presses, people. Turley and Fiona, given Rick Turley, former church historian, Marlon Jensen, former church historian. The Mormon Church's own Gospel Topics Essays. Pretty much all reasonable people agree. Well, I guess that settles it, because consensus is never wrong. Or is it?
But some might say, and some have, "Well, wait a minute. The consensus has been wrong before." You know, Cleopatra was an Egyptian. Wait, what? But is it that simple, Professor? You're saying consensus has been wrong? Yes, it has many times. People make mistakes. People have biases. In fact, we should expect that the consensus will be wrong again. The Salem witches were never burnt and were actually hanged. Burning never happened in Salem. Emperor Nero was accused of starting the fire and then was set to play the fiddle while his people suffered, and was actually 30 miles or 48 kilometers away. He certainly wasn't playing his fiddle when the fire was burning. History, archaeology, science do not claim to be always right. These fields not only expect revision and adaptation, they require it. They must change. I mean, think about it. A historian studies documents and finds something that hasn't been noticed before. Ooh, they share it, and opinions change. An archaeologist finds something in the ground, new things are learned, opinions change. That is what is supposed to happen. Changing your opinion in the face of new evidence is about the most honest thing that you can do.
That's interesting, Professor. So maybe it's not as simple as to say, "Consensus is everything, and therefore the history is settled." What if, when it comes to Joseph Smith and polygamy, the story isn't quite that simple either? It's just an artificial history that they're creating, a fantasy world. Have you heard of the KISS principle? It stands for "Keep It Simple, Stupid." Well, they're manipulating the data. Keep it simple, stupid. Great advice. Hurt my feelings every time. Really important for me to have conversations with people that I disagree with. This is a growing conspiracy theory, and I call it that because it is one, not because I, you know, want to diminish people that that latch on to this. But the ad hominem attack. Believe that Joseph Smith wasn't practicing polygamy? You've got to go fairly deep down the conspiracy rabbit hole. Ad hominem fallacy. I've seen some eerie comparisons with COVID deniers and Joseph Smith polygamy deniers. Arguing that Joseph Smith didn't practice polygamy is along the same lines as arguing that the Apollo 11 moon landing was a fake. Ad hominem criticism is where, instead of criticizing the arguments or ideas of the person with whom you are conversing, you criticize the person themselves, and in so doing, claim you have also criticized their argument. And boy, is this one popular. You don't think ad hominem attacks are that bad? Well, you would think that because you're a... to escape this evidence. Others like Jeremy Ho invents the ad hoc theory. In my opinion, this is a disingenuous argument simply to escape the evidence that makes no sense in the historical context. Yeah, this kind of shoddy approach of cherry-picking sources that agree with your preconceived narrative, right? Or what you want the narrative to be. They'll leave out such swaths of church history that I'm familiar with now, right? And, and so I, I, I see weird omissions that it's selective. Yeah, it's, and I don't know if they're doing it on purpose or if it's just a, a consequence of their model being something else. I wouldn't dream of lying about such things, but they have to go through hours and hours of extreme mental gymnastics to talk away the credibility of all the evidence supporting that. Of course, in my personal opinion, the not-so-intelligent ones generally tend to amass on the other side of the argument with the polygamy deniers. The argument you are employing, Homesman, is not logical. In fact, it exhibits the fallacy of ad hominem. What was it our good man said? We should expect that the consensus will be wrong again. Changing your opinion in the face of new evidence is about the most honest thing that you can do. Thanks, Professor. Great advice. But according to the experts and commentators, the historians all agree. You'd have to be a conspiracy theorizing, moon landing denying, unreasonable, dangerous, unintelligent, lying, mental gymnast to claim that the history of Joseph Smith and polygamy isn't simple. It isn't settled. So I have a sincere question: What if that history isn't settled at all? What if that could be proven? What if, just maybe, there is something to what so many people are waking up to?
Hi, I'm Jeremy, and I'm a polygamy denier. Before anyone jumps to conclusions that I fully embrace that silly little epithet designed to put us over here in the same camp as Holocaust deniers, I'm just following the sage advice that my daddy gave me in the seventh grade when Mark Ben Zenga figured out what my last name spelled backward was. What was it? My pop said, "Sticks and stones." Sticks and stones may break my bones. Ah, sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never harm me. Despicable. So, you can call me a polygamy denier if you must, but let me say for the record, I do not deny that polygamy happened in the early days of the restoration. But I do deny that there is any credible evidence that Joseph Smith practiced, taught, or even believed in it. None. I know, crazy, right? I, I know the experts say there's tons of it, but that depends on how you define evidence. That's a discussion we need to have, and we will have it. The bottom line is, what they call evidence isn't really evidence at all. I also deny that polygamy was ever a good or godly thing, but rather has always been what Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon called an abomination and a whoredom. Now, who am I to challenge the historians? Nobody, really. I'm just a husband and father. What gives me the right to say they are wrong? Well, I'm no credentialed historian, but I am a thinker, a researcher, an amateur historian, if you will. In a day when anyone who wants to can look at exactly the same historical documents that the historians have studied, a time when any, anyone who's willing to put in the required time to go through all the evidence, which thanks to the internet is actually available for anyone to view, all it takes is the willingness to put in that work. I've done that work for nearly a decade. I've examined all the source material that the historians have used to draw their conclusions, and I've come to a very different one. I've been speaking on this subject publicly for many years now. As I've gone on this path of discovery, I've met others who've also been doing their own independent research on the same topic. These are crazy smart, open-minded people who have studied this subject extensively, and like me, they are, they're motivated by one thing: a pursuit of the truth. So I decided to ask them to join me in a common cause, to teach others what we've discovered about Joseph Smith. I'm excited to tell you what we're up to, but first, I have a question for you, the audience. Do you have an open mind? An open heart? Are you willing to consider new information? Also, what if you've made decisions about your faith, your relationship to church, or to God, or, or you've even given up on faith and God altogether, and you've made those decisions, issued those critical decisions based on bad information? Would you want to know? Because I can tell you that when it comes to Joseph Smith and polygamy, categorically, you have gotten bad information. A lot of it.
Let me illustrate that point. Um, it's so hard to even consider if things might, might not be true. This is an example of what happens when a person who has sincere questions is presented with bad information. Cara Burrell of the Nuance Ho podcast and John Dehlin of Mormon Stories are going to interview Cara's friend live in real time and for the first time give her the quote facts about Joseph Smith and polygamy. In your 33 years in the church, what has the church taught you in terms of how many wives Joseph Smith had? Nothing. I would guess like four or five. Four or five? Four or five. Okay. When you were on your mission? I just didn't like to think about it, honestly. Polygamy was always something that I tried not to think about because it thinking about it just made me sad. So she said four, five. Cara, do you want to do the reveal? Yeah. So not only did Joseph Smith secretly marry between 30 and 40 women, but he also lied to his own church, many of his top leaders, to the general public, and to his own wife, Emma, about his secret polygamy. In fact, even though Joseph's polygamy revelation stipulates that the first wife must approve all subsequent wives, aka the law of Sarah, Emma was sealed to Joseph after 20-plus other women were already sealed to him, all without her knowledge. Given Emma's angry reaction while discovering Joseph's affair with 16-year-old Livin Servant in the barn, it's understandable why Joseph would keep his first 20-plus marriages from his wife. Okay, so there's a lot there. So Eve, let's just start. 30 to 40 living women in Nauvoo married to Joseph Smith? What did you know that? Well, no, I mean, I had an idea the number was higher, um, but that's insane. Okay, so what Cara and John have just done is give a pretty decent summary of what I call the antagonist point of view. Based on what a good friend of mine calls the conman model, antagonist historians and commentators basically believe Joseph Smith was fundamentally a fraud, a conman. And their interpretation of the historical sources is based on that framework model. You'll clearly see that as you hear what follows. Let's continue with Cara's friend's reaction. That's crazy. Yeah. What I, I mean, I have, I can ask questions. Like, I have questions. Were they already married? Was he having sex with all these women? Uh, like, where? And he was doing this secretly? Like, how do we know if he was doing it secretly? Is it like from his journals or their journals? So where do you get all the information about all the other people? Great questions. Natural questions, of course. Let's hear his answer. Um, he was having sex with those wives because later, the Reorganized Church was denying that Joseph ever practiced polygamy. And so the, the Utah Salt Lake City Mormon Church had Joseph's former wives called in to provide sworn affidavits. And Joseph's former wives signed sworn affidavits that they, that they were married to Joseph. And very deep, you probably know what that, what that means. And so, so he definitely, he definitely had sex with many, if not most, if not all of these plural wives. Yeah. Um, so the information about all the other women, you're saying is coming from the sworn affidavits of testimonies of the women and their journals? There's a really good book called "In Sacred Loneliness" by Todd Compton, where he gives the history of every, in each chapter is one of Joseph's 30-whatever wives. So from public records, it's so the personal journals of the wives of Joseph Smith, along with church documents and these sworn affidavits that the church wanted made public. Okay, and how, like, is there a way that I could read the journals? Yeah, yeah, you just get the book "In Sacred Loneliness." Okay. And who was that written by? Todd Compton. Well, the best source is probably the essay "Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo." It's one of the Gospel Topics Essays. Wow, so much wrong with what he just said, and I'll address all of it later. But notice how he responds to her very important question: "Can I read the journals for myself?" Instead of pointing her to the original sources she's asking for, and by the way, he can't, because spoiler alert, there are no journals left by any of the women documenting any connection to Joseph Smith. Instead of giving her what she wants, he tells her to read a book and the church's essay, as if to say, "It's all in those two secondary summaries because they'll give you everything you need to know." So many problems there. We will have to address, but let's continue. And it will, it will give you the number of wives, the range. There, Joseph Smith had so many wives, we don't know exactly how many, somewhere between 30 and 40. But the, the Gospel Topics Essay, um, will, uh, will give you that range. The other thing that you should know, so this is the LDS Church talking. Following his marriage to Louisa Beaman, and before he married other single women, Joseph Smith was sealed to a number of women who were already married. Estimates of the number of these sealings range from 12 to 14. Why? They, yeah, why? And, and most of these men were already married to the polyandrous wives that Joseph Smith married were, were faithful members of the church. So if it were about offspring, why would Joseph be marrying the wives of women already married to men? Yeah. And that's called polyandry, which is different than polygamy or polygamy. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Were those men like still good, faithful members in the church? They must have been if they were serving missions. Yeah, some of them didn't know Joseph would. Yeah. So how, I mean, I guess maybe we don't know this, but like, how would he approach them? The Liv... that's its own episode. It's, it's really interesting. We can go into that in the car. How do you know that what you want to Google is something called the Happiness Letter, which gives... Have you ever heard, um, of conference talks, especially where they'll say happiness is the object and was say the word, yeah, is the word purpose of our existence? Happiness is the object and purpose of our design. It says, "What's wrong in one instance may be right in another." And it basically, what he would do is he would sometimes get these young girls into a room alone, and he would tell them, "You've got 24 hours. Your, your family salvation is on the line. You can either accept to marry me, and your family all gets in and get, you know, get to be exalted with you as you were married to me. And if you, if you reject my proposal, then you and your family don't get to be sealed to me." It was very coercive and high-pressured. When I interviewed Patrick Mason, who was the church's top faithful, uh, historian, Mormon scholar, just recently sitting in that chair, his, when I asked him about Joseph Smith's polygamy, what he said was that Joseph Smith's polygamy looked a lot like sin. That's what the church is. And like, where is all this information? I'm like, it's in the Gospel Topics Essay. Say, so many conflations, assumptions, mischaracterizations, and flat-out falsehoods. Believe me, I'll deal with all of that soon in detail. But now, because of the slip and slide foundation he's laid out, he can now with confidence say the following. Oliver Cowdery was in the First Presidency with Joseph. Oliver caught him in an affair back in the mid-1830s. So with someone who wasn't his wife? Yeah. Fanny Alger. How many women? Yeah. Now her wheels and conclusions are spinning almost out of control. So Fanny Alger was allegedly Joseph's first wife, and she was a domestic helper between 1833 and 1835. Emma apparently caught Joseph in the barn having sex with Fanny Alger. Oliver Cowdery found out about it, called Joseph Smith an adulterer, said he was part of a dirty, filthy, nasty affair. Guess what Joseph did when Oliver rightly accused him of adultery? Guess what Joseph did? Not killed him. Excommunicated him. Exactly. He excommunicated Oliver Cowdery, who was, who, what did Oliver Cowdery do that was really? Wrote the Book of Mormon. He was the scribe to the Book of Mormon. Did you know? Were you ever told that the scribe to the Book of Mormon was excommunicated for rightly accusing Joseph Smith of adultery? No, not until right now. Interesting. So is this all again from that book by David O. McKay? It's, it's going to be in Rone Rolling 2. Oh, this is in Rone Rolling. People have been reading this book. The church has known about this stuff for 100 years or more. You can see the effect of this kind of narrative. Pretty effective when you spin a yarn like that. If only it were true. 30 to 40 wives, 12 of them were married to other men, some were as young as 14. Sister Peis, mother, daughter Peis. Emma didn't know until like she was wife, she was like the 22nd wife to be sealed to Joseph. And they don't give reasons for why Joseph was marrying women or 14 or who already had, like, who are already sealed to active members. There's no say, a lot of the reasons is like, this is for their salvation. It's the mysteries of God at work. Okay. Yeah, I mean, without obviously me going and actually reading this stuff, taking. Yeah, don't take our word for it. I'm very trusting of Cara, but obviously, yes, I'm asking you like, where are these things coming from? Because I would want to read them. I expect say, I go and I read all this and I'm like, you know what? They're totally right. It sounds really creepy. Like, it sounds like Warren Jeffs. That's what it sounds like to me. Yeah. Once we talked about this with Samantha last, last, in part two of the series, you line up all the things Warren Jeffs did, you line up all the things Joseph Smith did. There are some differences. Like, I don't think Joseph Smith raped girls in the temple. Oh, yeah. Forgot about that. But like, shy of that, it's, it's hard. It's hard to make a meaningful distinction. This is how this works, unfortunately, all too often. Because of the egregiously bad information that John and Cara have laid on her, she concludes on her own that if what they're saying is true, true, Joseph is basically no different than Warren Jeffs. See why we call it the conman model? Maybe we should call it the Warren Jeffs model instead. Yeah. So, I mean, it appears to be that way, and it makes me really sad. Sad. Yes. What just happened here? And what happens when people pass on these specious distortions posing as historical facts is sad. Cara and I get jokey in the intro. We're not, we're not excited or eager to see people have their lives turned upside down. This is really tender. You know, we try and be funny because otherwise you cry or you're angry. Exactly. But we're not, we're not here to sort of like revel in someone's world being turned upside down. This is tender stuff. But we also try and for our own sanity, yeah, and laugh sometimes too. But there's an emotional upheaval that does happen when you take these things really seriously and say, "What if all of these things about Joseph Smith and his character, um, that really, that really dismantles his credibility that I had my testimony based on? What am I going to, what am I going to teach my kids? How am I going to live my life? What about eternity? What about all this devotion that I already gave?" But it's for people in this space that are just like, "Eh, it's whatever is true is that's just the thing that I want to follow." Are we going to be able to still be friends? Obviously, we're still friends. I, yeah. I mean, I feel like I have a lot of reading to do. You have a lot of homework. When you come see me, I guess. Yeah. I also am impressed with how smart you are. I love it that you're saying, "I'm not going to believe you and Cara. I respect you guys, but do your reading. I think you'll find that most of what we say is, is pretty accurate here." But find out for yourself. We don't want anyone to believe us based on our authority or our reputation, or in Cara's case, our incredible charm and charisma. But I like that you're basically saying, "Let me find this out for myself." And we're not here to take faith away, believe it or not. We're just here to let people know the truth, and then they can make informed decisions. So even though I'm sad that we dumped all this on you, I guess, yes, we believe that people, well, number one, you're an adult, and you agreed to come here. But number two, um, we believe that people should base their lives on truth. And guess where I learned that? At church. That's what I was going to say. Every, every single thing you're saying right now is exactly what the church says. The truth shall set you free. But first, it shall wreck your marriage. No, no, no, no. The truth shall set you free, but first it'll piss you off.
Unfortunately, Cara's friend got anything but the truth in that interview, and what was the result? "Whoa. Devastating to me. I had always had issues with polygamy, and finding out about polyandry was especially difficult to me, and that was one thing I really needed to like understand and understand why that would be." Was that the first time you heard that Joseph Smith was marrying? That was the first time I ever heard the word polyandry. I was just like, "I'm done." Yeah. I decided I was done. It's like there's something that switched in my brain, and I could see the spiritual manipulation, um, that was happening to me. A lot of people. Spiritual manipulation. That's a perfect term for what you just saw. All of the claims of the sex and the polyandry and the teenagers, the adultery, the excommunications, the lying, and the proof, all in journals, affidavits, church records, etc., all laid out clearly in a few accurately sourced books and the church's essay. I will show you, I'll prove to you how none of that is true. But what a horrible shame to destroy a woman's faith so quickly with bad information.
Now, there are primarily two groups of people I'm speaking to. First, those of you who mainly are in the LDS Church, maybe other restoration branches as well, who have sincere questions concerning Joseph Smith and polygamy. Things you just, you cannot reconcile, but you want to very much so you can understand it, make sense of it, be at peace. Maybe you're on the verge of making decisions about whether to stay with your church or not, whether to hold on to your belief and faith in God. This issue is that serious to you. I know there are thousands upon thousands of you that are in a, you're in a crucible of sorts right now over this issue. I know that because I've had so many conversations with so many of you. Second, I'm speaking to another group of you who may very well have left your church or even left your faith and belief altogether, and you did so in the sincerity and integrity of your heart, at least in part because of this issue. I mean, if Joseph was basically a liar, womanizer, pedophile, con man, I, I'd probably leave him, the Book of Mormon, all of it behind too. And yet, there remain many of you who've left him and that faith behind that's still, and I know this because I've also talked at length with so many of you, there are a great number of you that still have tremendous affection for aspects of your past religious experience. There are, there are things that you, you can't explain away, experiences with family, with your children and other loved ones, in nature, in church, in prayer, with God, maybe, maybe what you used to think was God, experiences that emblazoned themselves so deep inside you that when you think about them, when you're quiet, they're still there. And maybe, maybe you don't know what to do with that still very present part of you. So, so you've set it aside for now. I have tremendous sympathy and even empathy for those of you in that situation. See, I spent a period of time, um, during the darkest period of my life, after the sudden death of my 10-year-old son, when, when I chose to embrace agnosticism for myself. The loss and, and the pain I experienced, it drove all certainty from my life. I had questions that could not be answered by my former paradigms. That time in my, my life, and, and what brought me from there to here is a discussion for another day and setting. I only relate that briefly because I have, I have great compassion for those of you who have had a, a faith crisis, as they say, and now find yourselves with far more questions than answers. The two groups of you that I'm speaking to, you, you both have something in common: integrity, open minds, open hearts, and you both have a sincere desire to know the truth. You are the people, both in and out of the churches, that I'm addressing now. If you've already made up your mind about this, if you've closed your heart, I don't suspect I can be persuasive, and that's okay. But if you remain open and would like more, and I, I believe, better information than you've previously had, and this is the place for you. Now, to be clear, I have the utmost respect for your belief, whatever it is. I think that belief is sacred, and I don't trifle with that. It's not my intent to get you back in church if you've left, or to change your relationship with your church in any way if you're active in it. That is between you and God alone. My only hope is to present you with new information and research that, that chances are, you've never been exposed to in a methodical and transparent way, so you can form a clearer picture of this issue than, than ever before, and so that you can form your views based on good information, not bad.
Now, I'd like to make this a little more personal and pose a scenario to all of you watching and listening. Imagine someone you love very much, your grandfather, your mom, a dear friend, your sister, brother, dad. You know this person, their heart, their integrity. They aren't perfect, but they never betrayed your trust. They've, they've been there for you for many years, in good times and especially in the hardest of times. Your love for them has been tested, proven. Now imagine, out of the blue, someone, maybe a group of people, start saying things or publishing things on social media, maybe, uh, maybe they even go to the press, accusing this person you love so dearly of awful things that they swear happened decades ago. They put out what appears at first glance to be compelling testimonies. They, they even sign affidavits. They tell their story loudly and begin to convince people, people you know and respect, that your loved one was actually guilty of those things. The accusers are saying, "But you know this person. You were there during that time. There is, there is no evidence from that time period to corroborate what those people are saying. There, there's not a shred of it." And yet, the accusers are adamant and relentless in their accusations. Your loved one, however, is equally adamant in her denials. According to your loved one, the accusations are unequivocally untrue. They're lying, he says. But the accusations lead to charges, which lead to a trial, which lead to a conviction. Your loved one is found guilty and then sentenced to many years in prison. After being through the trial, even you become convinced of their guilt as they are hauled away to be locked up for decades. Now imagine that after many years of serving their sentence, something like this happens. Do this. I'm sorry. What I did not do this. Hardly anyone believed him until last year when he was exonerated by DNA testing. Let's go. By then, he had spent nearly 25 years of his life behind bars. The end of Brian Banks's ordeal, marked by tears after a judge threw out the rape charge that had sent him to prison for more than five years. My only dream in the world was to just be free. The incredible story about a mother of three set free from prison after serving 17 years for a murder she did not commit. Joyce Watkins spent decades in prison for a crime she did not commit because of bad science. Morning, Deborah Milky is a free woman. A judge dismissing the case against her just hours ago. She spent more than two decades on death row here in Arizona for the murder of her four-year-old son. 43 years after entering a Missouri prison after being convicted in a triple murder that prosecutors now say he did not commit. Kevin Strickland is finally free, exonerated today by a Missouri judge. David Ranta was convicted of murdering a Brooklyn Rabbi back in 1990, but always maintained he was innocent. 23 years in a maximum security prison for the 1990 gunshot killing of a Williamsburg Rabbi. Haskell Werzberger was killed by a carjacker who had just botched a robbery attempt. The killer was said to be blonde and athletic. Ranta was arrested and convicted, but the case later collapsed. The defense and prosecution agree witnesses gave perjured testimony. The defense blamed detectives for fabricating evidence, coaching a witness at a lineup. A now retired detective is 61-year-old Lewis Scarcella. I stand by the, the confession. I stand by the case. Did you coach witnesses? No, sir. Did you ever instruct a 13-year-old witness to pick out the guy with the big nose? I don't, never. No, sir. No, sir. Didn't do it. No, no, sir. As, um, as I said from the beginning, I had nothing to do with this case. David Ranta spent most of his adult life behind bars. The father of three adult children will try to begin a new life. Miss Yon, you told the lie. It was a lie, and you told it, and you got to own it. I'm sorry. I need you to say that you did not rape your girls. I need to hear it come out of your mouth the way I've always heard it. Mom, I apologize for accusing you of raping them. Deep down, I know that you know that you didn't. You knew I had no sexual desires for my children. For 25 years, this thing has broken me. You don't know. It has affected my life in ways I can't even count. The things that you did. This is not no game. These children's lies, and it's just a demon in you that you need to deal with. He spent 16 years in prison after being wrongly convicted of rape. His accuser, a best-selling author, is now apologizing, saying she's truly sorry. But how do you undo such a life-altering mistake? Cheers of joy as a man wrongly accused of rape is exonerated after spending 16 years in prison. His accuser was Alice Sebold, author of "The Lovely Bones." Her rape at age 18 took place when she was a college student in Upstate New York, years before she became famous. He was found guilty after Sebold took the stand and identified him as her rapist. The people that knew me and know my character, they know that wasn't me. Doubts about his guilt were raised when movie producer Timothy Miante started investigating the story as he prepared to make a movie based on Sebold's memoir about the rape called "Lucky." Anyone who reads the transcript of the trial and compares it to her book, there's quite a lot that's omitted that a reader would would look at and say, you know, this doesn't add up. Just like I did. Sebold, now 58 years old, had nothing to say as she walked her dog in San Francisco, where she lives. Anything to say to Anthony Broadwater? But on Tuesday, she issued a public apology to Broadwater in which she acknowledged he had been wrongly accused. "I am sorry, most of all, for the fact that the life you could have led was unjustly robbed from you. And I know that no apology can change what happened to you and never will." What do you think of that apology? If it's sincerely from my heart, I can accept it.
Now imagine that. What I just showed you, very recent, real-world examples of people, uh, being falsely accused of heinous crimes, being wrongfully convicted of those crimes, and serving many years in prison as a result for crimes they did not commit. Imagine that is your loved one, your sister, mother, brother, dad. What if then you discover evidence that proves your sister's innocence while they are still serving time in prison? While, while everyone in the outside world is still convinced your brother is guilty? What do you do? Do you keep it to yourself, or do you feel a sense of duty, obligation, determination, a mission, even, to clear your father's name, to, to set your mother free, because you now know of their innocence? Or do you do nothing? Oh, and one more thing. Now imagine that everything I've described happened to you. You are the one falsely accused. You are serving time for a crime you did not commit. You have evidence to exonerate you if you can only make the case and get the word out. Now I want to invite you to consider the possibility that just that very thing may have occurred with Joseph Smith. Now, undoubtedly, some of you, you're thinking that I, and people like me, that we just need Joseph to be innocent of the charge of polygamy. We, we just can't stand that quote fact, and so out of that motivated reasoning, we've created an elaborate conspiracy theory to support our, our crazy, non-evidence-based conclusions. I'm certain some of you are thinking just that, because I and others like me, we get accused of that kind of, uh, motivated reasoning all the time. In fact, I think I can even hear some of you cheering right now, hearing me say that. But here's the thing: I used to believe Joseph was a polygamist. I was convinced of it. I used to believe polygamy was part of the fullness of the Gospel. I even taught my understanding of it in private discussions. I didn't need him to not be, because I had already accepted that he was. Changing my view of Joseph in this regard only came about as I looked closely at the many claims that have been made about him. And the deeper I looked at the actual facts, the more I came to understand that the consensus narrative is absolutely and categorically wrong. And after nearly a decade of studying the history and all the claims against him, I now have a conviction that he didn't do it. And to be perfectly clear, clear, lest anyone remain willfully under the delusion that that I'm stuck in a confirmation bias loop, I didn't start with a belief and then try to make the facts work with that belief. I changed my belief because of the facts. And by the way, that, that is a much harder road than merely accepting well-heeled tradition, collective understanding, or the consensus of the experts and historians. And I should ask, what real benefit, what reward does one derive from challenging the revered experts? Mostly derision. Choosing to take on this topic, this way, it does much more to make people roll their eyes at me than applaud. To be crystal clear on my motivations, because of the work I've done, I now believe an innocent man has been horribly slandered, wrongfully convicted. To clear his name is my motivation. I know that many of my friends on this path with me would say the same. I'll also add, I remain absolutely open to the possibility of Joseph having been a polygamist. If you don't believe me, I'll extend an invitation. If the historians can produce actual evidence, the likes of which we have for polygamists like Brigham Young and Heber C. Kimball, if you could produce actual evidence that Joseph was involved in polygamy, then I will publicly admit I've been dead wrong and even stop doing this podcast. The historians, however, they must produce actual evidence, not, not merely highly conflicted, agenda-soaked hearsay and frankly lies that only came decades after Joseph was dead. If the LDS Church or Community of Christ have any documents in their collections that they haven't released yet that can prove Joseph's connection to the practice, likewise, I'll cry uncle and I'll go away.
So with all that said, now we have to prove the historical case to you, which is exactly what we will do. In preparing for this podcast, I consulted with the best minds I know on the subject of Joseph Smith and polygamy. My friends that I, I mentioned before, who know this issue inside and out. We discussed at length how this subject could be presented in, uh, in the most effective way. What, what you would need to cover in order to lay it out in an understandable manner. After all, as the historians, they always say, the subject is messy. Uh, there's so many fuzzy facts, competing narratives, uh, so much, so much hearsay and contradictory material that it can get really hard to have a clear picture. So we discussed and debated the issue for months and came up with what we thought would be the most coherent way to teach people about this subject, so, so that they could be better informed and be able to make up their own minds again, based on good information. And from those discussions, I created a curriculum, a master class, if you will, on Joseph Smith and polygamy. A place where every subject and virtually every source related to the topic will be discussed methodically, thoroughly, and, and especially honestly, and hopefully be interesting enough to hold people's attention. There are lots of other incredible, fantastic discussions being done right now on various aspects of this topic, and I applaud every effort that's being made. But as for this show, if you want to know this topic in an orderly way, from A to Z, this is the place for you.
So as you join us on Still Mormon for our master class on Joseph Smith and polygamy, here's a short summary of what we will examine and show. First, we'll begin by doing something no historian has ever done before, that I'm aware of. We will give you a comprehensive chronological rundown of the largest collection of source material ever compiled related to Joseph Smith and polygamy during his lifetime, particularly from 1827 to 1844. We think that it's absolutely essential to have a clear picture of exactly what was going on while Joseph was alive, because without this picture, it is much harder to understand the tales that were told about him after he was murdered. And what you'll see throughout this presentation is the extraordinary efforts that Joseph, Emma, and Hyrum took to oppose polygamy during their lifetime. We will show you things that they're frankly likely to shock you, things the historians and experts have never told you. For example, the many times that Joseph worked with the Nauvoo High Council to excommunicate devious men for practicing polygamy. The number of occasions where he, where Emma and Hyrum, where they spoke out publicly in the strongest possible and unambiguous language condemning all forms of polygamy and plurality of wives. We will prove that the historians' claim that Joseph issued what they call carefully worded denials to hide his alleged practice of polygamy, that claim is categorically false. We will show that all of the scriptures that Joseph revealed and published, and not just in the Book of Mormon, condemn polygamy as a crime and a whoredom, equating it with adultery. You will see that regarding marriage, Joseph Smith established monogamy. That's right, monogamy as the official law of the church in scripture. You will see clearly the many times Joseph issued statements in newspapers that opposed the practice. The many lawsuits, lawsuits that Joseph entered into to sue people for slander and libel who had accused him and his brother Hyrum of practicing spiritual whoredom and polygamy. Joseph's private journal entries opposing the practice, his private conversations that were recorded that opposed it, the letters that condemned it, the number of times he and Hyrum gave sermons and taught publicly against it, and what Joseph, his wife Emma, and Hyrum tried to do to put a stop to the practice up until the day that Joseph and Hyrum were brutally murdered, leaving Emma a mourning widow. As we examine the baseless accusations leveled against Joseph Smith during his lifetime, we will demonstrate throughout all of this that there is not a single piece of verifiable evidence that Joseph or Hyrum ever practiced plural marriage. This, of course, includes the infamous and so-called journals of William Clayton, which we will prove cannot be said to be contemporaneous evidence at all. That in their present form, they were most likely created after Joseph's death, long after the events that Clayton's manufactured record describes, and therefore must be treated with extreme prejudice. We will also show what is missing from the historical record that we should expect to be there if we're going to conclude definitively that Joseph was a polygamist. We will prove that there is not a single letter from Joseph or anyone else, contemporaneous journal entry from Joseph or anyone else, public or private statement, documented ceremony, marriage certificate, or revelation of any kind that can connect Joseph to the practice. Next, after showing the chronology of events, we will thoroughly examine all of what the opposition calls evidence between 1827 and 1844 that the opposing side asserts as proof of Joseph's guilt, including the so-called Happiness Letter, the Whitney Letter, the Expositor incident, the Bennett accusations, Martha Brotherton, the supposed July 27th.
1842 Revelation to n k Whitney, purported land deeds gifted to alleged wives, the lot, Family Bible, the charges of adultery, etc. We'll cover the whole of their argument during Joseph's life, and you will see that none of what they claim is anything more than weak correlation without causation and rumor and accusation that was simply never corroborated or verified.
After examining the sources from 1827 to 1844, we will prove that what the contemporaneous historical record actually shows is that Joseph was faithful to his only wife, his beloved Emma, as he very publicly declared. We will show that there is simply no evidence whatsoever that he ever engaged in sexual relations with anyone other than Emma. We will show that it is essential to prove conjugal relations in order to establish that Joseph was engaging in polygamy without sex; after all, it cannot be said to be plural marriage.
We will show that the only direct allegation of sexual relations, which incidentally came in 1892, 49 years later, and the other very few claims and innuations of women being wives "in quote very deed" are fraught with tremendous inconsistencies and even blatant lies and cannot be trusted or verified. We will show that Joseph had no children with anyone other than Emma, something commonly known in the decades after he died and even begrudgingly acknowledged by most historians today. We will discuss the statistical impossibility that for over 8 years he had no children with any of his alleged wives, and how this fact alone should cause everyone to seriously doubt any claims that he was a polygamist with allegedly between 35 and 60 wives.
We will show that the evidence reveals that Joseph had deep and abiding love and loyalty for his only wife, Emma, and that the strength of their marriage must be acknowledged in weighing the totality of the evidence. We will also examine what is called evidence of those who were alleged and claimed to be Joseph's plural wives, and how we believe that the supposed evidence isn't supported by the historical record at all. We will demonstrate clearly that at best, in their decades later recollections, and it should be remembered, none of these women, not a single one, left any record whatsoever during Joseph's life, not a single letter, note, journal entry, nothing. The women who alleged they were married or sealed to Joseph, they either misremembered or misunderstood the events during Joseph's life. At worst, some even demonstrably lied about him and their connection to him.
Then we will show that the purported Revelation on quote Celestial plural marriage did not come from Joseph; that there's not a shred of evidence to tie him to it. We will prove that what the historians call the evidence of Joseph's connection to the alleged Revelation is nothing more than false accusations during his life that were never corroborated and decades-old hearsay made up of wildly contradictory tales from wholly unreliable accusers and from others whose memory was most likely compromised. Furthermore, we will show how Joseph clearly denied in his lifetime that he had ever received a revelation on polygamy, spiritual wifery, or any form of plural marriage.
We will also show that he did indeed have a revelation on monogamous eternal marriage, and how that true Revelation, which Joseph taught on a number of occasions publicly, that Revelation was twisted and rewritten after his death to sanction what Brigham Young and his followers later called Celestial plural marriage. We will show the history of how this altered Revelation was added to the LDS scripture in 1876, long after Joseph's murder.
Next, we will show sufficient actual evidence that the Mormon practice of plural marriage was started by Brigham Young, Heber Kimball, and others long before they falsely claimed that Joseph began to teach Celestial plural marriage to them. We will prove that these men indeed believed in and even began practicing a version of polygamy which they themselves called spiritual wifery during their missions as Apostles in the British Isles in the late 1830s and early 1840s. We will show how they inculcated a group of men in Nauvoo, the quote Brethren of the secret priesthood, as William Clayton called them, in the doctrine of spiritual wifery and polygamy, and encouraged these men to take other wives secretly against Joseph's wishes and instruction.
We'll also examine the many outside influences that existed at the same time, like the Cochranites, the Oneida Brethren, and other influences that must be examined and acknowledged as having had a part in the development of Brigham Young's Mormon polygamy. We will show that Joseph Smith had no connection or affiliation with any of these.
We will next explain the significance of events beginning on April 1, 1845, when Brigham Young wrote in his journal, "I commenced revising the history of Joseph Smith at brother Richard's office. Elder Heber Kimball and George A. Smith were with me." We will show how this quote revising was a deliberate effort to falsely create the narrative that Joseph was the originator of Mormon polygamy and not themselves. In this discussion, you will see how many of those revisions are still present in the standard accounts of Mormon history today. The historians have never fully acknowledged these changes and how they have perverted the historical record. We will challenge them to recognize the fact that Joseph's history was altered and publicly admit that the numerous distortions passed down from Brigham Young, which are still being promulgated today, must be corrected.
Now, I, I need to pause for a moment to acknowledge something. It's, it's very likely that after all I've just shared today, there are still some of you, especially those of you who've studied this issue even a little, some of you are undoubtedly saying, "Yeah, that's all good and well, but what about all those people who claimed, you know, firsthand experience with Joseph teaching them about plural marriage? And especially the women who claim that they were married or sealed to Joseph?" I know what you're thinking. "I just can't believe it. Why would that many people lie?"
Well, maybe, maybe we should ask a different question. Perhaps instead of asking how that many people could lie, we should ask, "How could that many people be mistaken?" You see, it's, it's not merely as simple as a grand conspiracy of dozens of people lying. As you'll see, some people did lie, verifiably. We'll show that that includes my great-great-great-grandfather, Thomas Grover. But it, it's also entirely possible that many of the men and women who told tales decades after Joseph's death, they were just wrong in their understanding of events and recounted them incorrectly. When it comes to recollecting the past, we'll show that it's entirely possible for individuals and groups of people to be terribly mistaken. Indeed, memory science informs us that our memories, both individually and collectively, are highly susceptible to contamination from outside influences that can warp our understanding of the past. We'll show how this indeed happened in the telling of Joseph's history related to polygamy.
One of the most powerful outside influences that shaped the individual and collective false memories of the Latter-day Saints was the 30-year administration of Brigham Young. We'll show how his tenure as governor and church president had a profound effect on the shaping of Mormon history. We'll explore the economic, political, and social climate he created and the power he held. We'll discuss his doctrines and governance and the effect these had on the Saints. We will recount Brigham's contribution and response to the many privations and sufferings of the Latter-day Saints during this period. We will show the profound impact that his implementation of plural marriage into the Restoration had on the whole body of the Saints and the backlash that followed regionally and nationally from the U.S. public to the federal government and the U.S. Army.
We will show the effectiveness of Joseph's son's mission to Utah in the 1860s when Joseph III, Alexander, and David Smith came to Utah proclaiming that their father had never practiced polygamy. The result of their labors was the conversion of large numbers of Utah Latter-day Saints away from the LDS Church. As we highlight this entire extraordinary period in Mormon history, we will see how these many pressures influenced the actions of the Latter-day Saints and their individual and collective recollections of Joseph's life.
Then we will meticulously go through what's left of the remaining so-called evidence: the affidavits, the memoirs, sermons, newspaper articles, etc., issued by followers of Brigham Young and by enemies of Joseph Smith that only appear decades after Joseph's death. We will also cover other strange and at times contradictory statements made by people like William Marx, Leonard Sobey, Ebenezer Robinson, as well as the many things the historians don't address adequately that were said in Joseph's favor. We will go over everything we can find about any source of any substance.
As we conclude the examination of the historical sources related to Joseph and polygamy, you will see that what we are left with is only one thing: a question of credibility. You will get to decide who you believe, who's telling the truth, who's lying, who's possibly mistaken. You will get to decide, based on a much fuller understanding of the historical sources in context, if you believe the things that others said and wrote many, many years after Joseph's murder when he wasn't around to defend himself, or if you believe Joseph. And coincidentally, perhaps, we perhaps we ought to ask ourselves, "Why don't we believe Joseph?" For those who are Latter-day Saints, we should ask, and we should ask, "Why don't we believe the Prophet Joseph Smith and his wife Emma? His brother Hyrum, who was also a prophet, seer, and revelator? Why don't we believe them?"
This podcast will give you the opportunity to decide, based on a clearer understanding of the facts, who was more credible: Joseph, Emma, and Hyrum, or his accusers. Another very important part of this discussion will be to remember what Jesus said about fruit and how good and bad fruit can tell us the nature of people and things. We will show the fruits of polygamy historically and in the early days of the Utah church, and the fruits of those who practice it now. We will discuss the various arguments that have been used over time to justify the practice and we'll demonstrate that those arguments are based on poor and false reasoning. As we do, you'll see that no form of polygyny has ever produced good fruit; hence the reason why God calls it an Abomination.
We will make a thorough examination of what the scriptures say about plurality of wives and how every scripture that Joseph gave us, from The Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, to the Inspired Translation of the Bible, all condemn the practice and those who engaged in it. We will examine the traditional ways that scripture has been twisted and perverted to allow people to believe in polygamy and show how scripture only condemns and never supports the taking of multiple wives.
We will discuss a very important topic as well: what Joseph taught on the subject of sealing and adoption. This is something not really well-known. We will address these subjects very carefully. In doing so, we will acknowledge what we do know and what we do not know. As we explore his teachings, we will see that it is possible, even likely, that Joseph was teaching and perhaps even doing something entirely different and much more, much more noble and holy than most people have ever supposed.
Finally, to conclude the exploration of this subject, we will examine Joseph's actual fruits: his life, his character, what others testified of him, his mind, his heart, and most importantly, his greatest fruit, The Book of Mormon. Now, if you choose to watch this podcast, I commit to you that we will do the following: One, we will not simply tell you what we think happened. We will give you all the sources that we've based our conclusions on, and we won't make merely vague references of these sources. We will tell you the full context of every source, the who, what, when, where, why of each source, so that you know exactly where the sources come from.
As we do this, you will see a stark difference in approach between how we treat you and how the experts treat you, because they do not do that. They will tell you as though it's settled history what happened, often without telling you exactly how they get to their conclusions. We will never do that. We believe that you are intelligent enough that if you're given the full picture and an accurate understanding of the historical sources, that you can come to a reasoned conclusion for yourselves and you can determine if our view is more reasonable, more accurate, more truthful than what the experts claim the truth to be.
Also, we are working on a huge project that we'll discuss later to provide easy access to every source in its full context so that anyone who wants to can conveniently study the sources for themselves. They, and you, can decide for yourselves if we're being fair-minded and truthful about our representation of the material. Moreover, we will never ask you to trust us. We'll always encourage you to do your own homework and find out for yourselves what's true.
Two, we will address every one of the arguments that the experts make. As we begin, it's almost certain that some of you will say, "Yeah, but what, what about this? Or what about that? Or what about the other?" We understand that if you have heard or read anything about Joseph Smith and polygamy, you will most certainly have serious questions. We take those questions seriously. If the list of subject matter I just ran through has left you curious or wondering if there's still something else that needs to be covered, I commit to you that during the full length of this podcast, we will address all of those "what about this" or "what about that" questions that you or anyone may have. We will leave no argument unaddressed and no stone unturned. Pretty massive undertaking given the scope of the apologist claims, but we are up to the task.
Three, we'll do our best to engage in this effort with an attitude of humility and respect for the other side and their arguments. See, we may disagree on certain things, but we believe that they sincerely believe that they're right. That their work, expertise, and claims, those ought not be merely dismissed. And I, for one, I'm extremely grateful for the work of people like Brian Hales, Todd Compton, Don Bradley, Gary Bergera, Richard Van Wagoner, George D. Smith, Michael Quinn, Richard Bushman, James Allen, Cheryl Bruno, and others, as well as the incredible work of the team of historians on the Joseph Smith Papers project. Right now, they have made it so much easier to have access to the material we present, and they should be applauded for the work that they've done. And with that acknowledgment, as we challenge them in the various shades of their orthodox narrative, we will do so based on a close and thorough examination of the facts and not on conjecture, bias, or personal agenda.
Four, we will also acknowledge the different models the various historians use to interpret the source material and the model that we use to interpret the same material. We'll be transparent about all of that. We will at times offer our opinions as to what happened in various circumstances, most especially when available evidence leaves room for varying interpretation. But we will always do our best to distinguish between fact and opinion, what we can say for certain that we know and what we must admit that we do not know. We will not pretend that our opinions on those matters are facts, unlike other researchers, podcasts, and even expert historians do. We will be honest and respect your intelligence and your faith. We will do our utmost to be fair-minded and truthful about how we present the case for Joseph Smith being innocent of the allegations that he was the originator of Mormon polygamy.
Five, finally, and when I make a mistake, and I hope not to make them, but you know, being human, it's fairly likely. When I do, I will do my best to acknowledge it quickly and clear it up immediately. Those are my and our commitments to you as we make this case. You just might see that despite what the apologists and historians claim so loudly, the history about Joseph Smith isn't settled at all.
I should also add, I'm under no illusions that we'll be able to persuade all of you on our viewpoint. I've been doing this long enough. I have talked with so many people, enough people to know that there is a portion of you who will, you'll remain unconvinced for whatever reason, and that's okay. But I also believe, actually, I even know that if you will consider all of the information we present, at the very least, there is a very high probability that you will agree that the story about him is absolutely not what the historians say it is. I also know that many, maybe even most of you, will be able to say at the end, "Joseph, well, he's not a polygamist."
I'd like to end this episode with a final thought. Over the years, as I've talked with hundreds of people about this topic, occasionally somebody will ask, "Why does this really matter? Why do I need to concern myself with something that happened over 180 years ago? The church doesn't practice it today. Why worry about something that doesn't affect me now?" Well, for those of you who may have had those thoughts, some things to consider: We've all heard Churchill's words, "Those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it." For Latter-day Saints, having an accurate knowledge of our history should be particularly important. And why? Well, The Book of Mormon tells us in the book of Mosiah, chapter 1, King Benjamin spoke to his three sons about the importance of preserving correct history. King Benjamin said, "I say unto you, my sons, were it not for these things which have been kept and preserved by the hand of God, that we might read and understand of his mysteries, and have his commandments always before our eyes, that even our fathers would have dwindled in unbelief, and we should have been like unto our brethren the Lamanites, who know nothing concerning these things, or even do not believe them when they are taught them, because of the traditions of their fathers which are not correct. Oh, my sons, I would that you should remember that these sayings are true, and also that these records are true. And behold, also the plates of Nephi, which contain the records and the sayings of our fathers from the time they left Jerusalem until now, and they are true. And we can know of their surety because we have them before our eyes."
Later, Ammon, Aaron, and the sons of Mosiah took this idea with them as they preached among the Lamanites. Likewise, they knew that one of their principal tasks was helping the brothers and sisters among the Lamanites have a correct view of their history. The record says, "And it came to pass that they journeyed many days in the wilderness, and they fasted much and prayed much that the Lord would grant unto them a portion of his Spirit to go with them and abide with them, that they might be an instrument in the hands of God to bring, if it were possible, their brethren the Lamanites to the knowledge of the truth, to the knowledge of the traditions of their fathers which were not correct."
When speaking with King Limhi, Ammon, after clarifying to the king that he, Ammon, was not the Great Spirit, but that he was called by God's Holy Spirit to teach the king and his people, after this, the first thing that Ammon endeavors to teach the king is correct history. "Now, when Ammon had said these words, he began at the creation of the world, and also the creation of Adam, and told him all, all the things concerning the fall of man. And rehearsed and laid before him the records and the holy scriptures of the people which had been spoken by the prophets, even down to the time that their father Lehi left Jerusalem. And he also rehearsed unto them, for it was unto the king and to his servants, all the journeyings of their fathers in the wilderness, and all their sufferings with hunger and thirst, and their travail, and so forth. He also rehearsed unto them concerning the rebellions of Laman and Lemuel, and the sons of Ishmael, yet all their rebellions did he relate unto them. And he expounded unto them all the records and scriptures from the time that Lehi left Jerusalem down to the present time. But this is not all, for he expounded unto them the Plan of Redemption which was prepared from the foundation of the world. And he also made known unto them concerning the coming of Christ, and all the works of the Lord did he make known unto them."
Now, after their missions, Ammon, Aaron, and the sons of Mosiah remarked that they had been successful in helping the people have a correct view of their history. And it came to pass that the Lord began to bless them, in so much that they brought many to the knowledge of the truth. Yea, they did convince many of their sins and of the traditions of their fathers which were not correct. The king of the Lamanites acknowledged that he and his people had been convinced their history was wrong to the point where he says this about his ancestors and the stories they had passed down: "Now, these are the words which he said unto the people concerning the matter: I thank my God, my beloved people, that our great God has in goodness sent these our brethren, the Nephites, unto us to preach unto us and to convince us of the traditions of our wicked fathers." Imagine what it takes to come to a belief that your ancestors were wicked. This radical new understanding brought the king and his people to have an entire change of mind and heart to the point where they buried their weapons of war, and over a thousand of them would give their lives because of their new understanding.
Now, to drive this point home, The Book of Mormon is not recounting this story casually. There is a very important lesson here that we ought to observe. And the importance of that lesson is emphasized in Doctrine and Covenants 93:39: "And that wicked one cometh and taketh away light and truth, through disobedience, from the children of men. And because of the tradition of their fathers." Believers in the Restoration through Joseph Smith should remember that one of the greatest tools of the adversary to blind and ensnare people is to corrupt their history. Conversely, a significant part of the work of God is always to correct corrupted history so that His people can gain in light and truth.
Now, if you no longer believe in the Restoration, I'd offer the words of G.K. Chesterton: "The disadvantage of men not knowing the past is that they do not know the present." For those of you in the audience that are no longer believers, if you have a corrupted understanding of your history, especially related to your religious upbringing, you won't understand your present situation.
Finally, I can also understand that learning these things can be unsettling. I, I really get that. I understand it brings up lots of concerns and questions that challenge paradigms. But let's remember the words of Paul: "For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind." Most, most of all, you should remember Jesus' words: "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."
So, we invite you to join us as we embark on what's bound to be a, a crazy, at times harrowing, at times inspiring, maybe even fun, and certainly wild ride as we unsettle Mormon history on the Still Mormon podcast. Hey, don't forget to subscribe, like, comment, write a review, thumbs up, share based on your platform of choice. All of that helps the algorithms push this out to other people. Until next time, thanks for dropping by. Sure, there are no.