Connor, you're the man! You never cease to amaze me. You have guts to keep pushing the envelope tackling topics like this. Especially at a time when the church excomunicates so often people who take publicly things that don't fit the official church historical narrative. And you do it with excellent honest original source research; and class. Good job brother! Keep it up!
The first presidency pushing the 'cure' for 2020 opened my eyes to many problems, but when I ask Heavenly Father where He wants me I am told to stay until further notice.
If we are to use the General Conference talks as a "litmus test" as the prophet has suggested, then I will test each talk and speaker by searching, pondering and praying. Is it true? Did Jesus Christ teach it? Do scriptures confirm it? I prayed if I should get the jab in order to accept a job during the pandemic because I was worried about my weak immune system. 2 direct answers from the Lord were: First, " I will protect you FROM the vaccine. (NO confirmation that it was actually good for my body) but Second, "Not all medical proffessionals are bad. Remember there are many good, genuinely concerned scientists and researchers, working around the clock trying to save their fellow brothers and sisters"
The First Presidency did not command you or any other member to be immunized .... My Father-in -Law and Mother-in-Law would have died had they not been immunized. My wife's cousin died because he wasn't immunized. The immunizations weren't advertised as a "cure" perse. The immunizations needed to be researched... There far more serious side effects that are tied to certain brands of immunizations. My wife and I were immunize4ed and we got a mild case of Covid. Members of our branch who skipped being immunized got much more serious cases of Covid than we did. We did not even consider getting any booster shots. That has been shown to be a very wise choice.
Leaders are not infallible and make mistakes certainly but to believe that adultery, false doctrine that influences the endowment, blood atonement, etc. are mere mistakes are amazing to me. We have to face our situation and realize with humility the need we have for Christ and his correction
Everyone keeps saying that Brigham was the person we needed to get us to Utah, but without his fault doctrines we might not have needed to even go west.
Considering that God promised the saints would not be moved out of their place, then they packed up and moved out before the temple was even finished tells us that they did not trust God, and his promise was not fulfilled. That should cause us to pause and reflect deeply on revelations given in the doctrine covenants.
@@prophetcentral That was CONDITIONAL prophecy.... Before you try to claim that conditional prophecies do not exist.... "Reflect deeply that the "Bible" contains them too!!!! A classic example is where Jonah prophesied that Nineveh would be destroyed if the people of Nineveh didn't repent ... The people of Nineveh repented and so they weren't destroyed. However, using your claim as a guide.... Jonah "falsely prophesied" that Nineveh would be destroyed and so the entire "Bible" must be "false" !!!!!
God has called polygamy ONLY a "Crime," "Abomination," "WHOREDOM" Section 132 is a salamander letter filled with false doctrines and statements. There is NO polygamy loophole.
We have an example of King Noah's priest, Alma changing his ways, repenting and leading righteously after learning from Abinadi. We too can repent, follow Christ and His leaders.
Well, when BY taught the Adam-God theory some apostles stated that they felt the Holy Ghost as Connor read in this video. So some of them believed it at least while BY was a prophet. I like the idea of relying on the Holy Ghost. The problem is people are people and see the Spirit where it is not. I think many confuse the Spirit with emotions and become delusional, proclaiming their own opinions as the truth. And it looks like neither the prophet nor the apostles are immune to that. I think we first need to study the Holy Ghost and understand how It manifests itself to the people.
Connor, I don't disagree with you 100%. I, however, appreciate your candor, courage. You don't kow tow and go along with what is popular or expected. As someone once said...."the opposite of courage isn't cowardice, it's conformity."
As a dedicated seeker of truth, I'm a fan of your musings based in fact and not conjecture or myth. When I became a convert, I believed everything. 50 years later, I've become a Free Thinker with one leader and His name is Jesus Christ. Seeking truth is a commandment Christ thought important to help shield us from the lies of Satan, the Father of All Lies. Thank you for exposing much of what we need to know to help shed ourselves of confusion and delusion. Apostasy is a fact of history and has always been prevalent before the destruction of nations. Truth helps us with recognition and protects us from The Man of Lawlessness when he comes as a counterfeit to the real Savior. I wonder how many who profess Christ as Savior and look forward to His return would be among those who would crucify Him again because He's not what they conjured Him to be. Thank you. I really like your shorter beard. It's much more modern and scholaresk. See you next Sunday!
You're the classic example of the LDS Protestant. They cant handle certain history or doctrine so they start leaning on their own interpretation of scripture, claiming they know the real origin of the faith, while sooner or later cutting themselves off from the Church and priesthood keys. As Joseph said, "There's no salvation between the two lids of the Bible without a legal administrator." Read D&C 76. A testimony of Jesus alone will get only as far as the Terrestrial Kingdom.
You mean like when they find out the sons of Lehi are Negros in America and that Jesus / Yahusha was black. Yes that will be hard. Joseph Smith said if he tried to bring out anything the people flew to pieces.
@@jaredshipp9207 You should take your blinders off and understand how clearly this issues is being put forth. More modern leaders are outright condemning the teachings of a former leader. Somehow, despite this, you try and exonerate the former leader. Accept the truth. You are in a church that has some truth, but apostacy is inevitable. Look to God not a man, not matter how much the man may be praised.
@@jaredshipp9207You’re on to something. Now go read everything Joseph publically said about polygamy and polygamists-as well as the canonized scriptures about marriage at the time of the martyrdom.
@lindsayashton1385 I have. He couldn't be forthcoming with everyone about plural marriage because, as we see with you and others, people can't handle it. You clearly don't believe in prophets and ongoing revelation after Joseph. Which means you don't believe in the Restored Church. Which means you believe Joseph (and the Lord) failed. So why am I talking to you?
It is interesting, and I believe Providential, that Section 101 was replaced with the current 101, which is a chastening from the Lord concerning Lusts & Covetousness among the saints.
I can't find that could you please provide the source? I know he said they discontinued the practice but when I saw that he said nothing about the doctrine. This is important because the fact that what I found he does not mention doctrine indicates to me that it could be a doctrine that is just not practiced any longer.
@@jacbox3889 okay well this also came out in the CES letter, and not to be argumentative or splitting hairs, But the way some explain this is President Hinckley, in the context of his answer that we do not practice it today, meant it's not doctrinal to practice it. He did not say it was a false doctrine. I think President Hinckley was kind of being very careful in his words like a lawyer splitting hairs. I get it can be argued either way. Larry King: You condemn it [polygamy]? Hinckley: I condemn it. Yes, as a practice, because I think it is not doctrinal.
The statement by Wilford Woodruff that "I will never lead you astray", was not included in the Manifesto, and was not voted upon by the church as binding. The current edition of the D&C gives the impression that this is the case, but, if you look at earlier editions (such as the 1961) edition, the "I will not lead you astray" quote is not included. So, the church is leading us astray about not leading us astray.
Jesus taught that even prophets can and do lead people astray, for none are perfect, and they will often be wrong, no matter how sincere, thus why he taught to not trust in them or any mortals as leaders. He didn't want anyone to be deceived.
@@MegaJohn144 I appreciate the logical swipe, but what is a quorum? The First Presidency and Twelve were established previous to Woodruff’s statement. Sure, I guess you can say the establishment of the First Presidency and Twelve wasn’t established by them. lol. But, the pattern is definitely there in the Bible, B of M, and D&C.
More women than men will earn a Celestial body, which is an immortal body of flesh and bones that has sexual organs like Adam and Eve. A Terrestrial or Telestial body is a body that is immortal that has no sexual organs. If there was only one more Celestial woman than man there would be polygamy in heaven. It is unbeatable logic. However, some people will never think logically. Rachel's womb was shut up by God, do Leah the less desirable wife, would gain favor from Jacob. The cries of God's faithful daughters that have no prospect of eternal marriage are also heard by God.
Plural marriage wasn't a false doctrine and began with Joseph. Like the priesthood restriction, people who can't emotionally handle either simply lay both at the feet of Brigham so they can tell themselves they're being faithful to Joseph and the Restoration.
@@jaredshipp9207 Show me one direct quote from Joseph Smith where he used the term “plural celestial marriage.” You won’t be able to because the term and doctrine wasn’t created by him, it was made up after he died. Joseph Smith can’t denounce a term and doctrine that didn’t exist while he was alive. Also read the Book of Mormon, every place it talks about the idea of a man taking more than one wife it is the wicked that are doing it and/or the practice is being condemned (Jacob 1-3, Mosiah 11, Ether 10). Also, every instance the practice of having more than one wife was instituted in the Book of Mormon, it was instituted after the death of a righteous leader (Jacob 1 - after the death of Nephi; Mosiah 11 - after the death of Zeniff; Ether 10 - after the death of Shez). We need to open our eyes and see and observe the patterns in scripture or we are going to find ourselves cut off.
@@geraldinesera8915 If you study the brutality perpetrated not only on African Americans, but also in any one who helped them, you will begin to understand why it was nessesarry to not give the priesthood to them for a while. If an African American held the priesthood during Brigham Young's day, it was a sign they were free, and they would be captured and sold into slavery for big money. Probably all Christian churches during Brigham Young's day would not give an African American the priesthood, even Abolitionists. There is record of two missionaries being killed in the Southern United States as late as the 20 th century, because the Church was friendly to African Americans. You look through your modern myopic view in judging Brigham Young.
Cause the Salvation of the gospel is what’s perfect, and none of them have contradicted in that effect. Exaltation on the other hand has changed throughout the history of the world. But even with that more context usually shows there isn’t contradiction. Policy’s, general doctrines, and practices are all subject to the influence of man since they’re not required to be perfect to obtain salvation or exaltation.
What member of the church fail to understand is no matter if Brigham was a prophet it still doesn't make him without sin or without earthly trials. He's a man, no different than any other human who is on this earth to be tested, he is not perfect, and I don't think he was even called to be a prophet, he took that mantle on himself. I also believe he bad mouthed Joseph and Emma because he wanted polygamy, it was never ordained of God - that was all Brigham and his circle of gross men that came up with that. The church is true, but he is just a man and he sinned, I totally agree we need to call it for what it is, discuss it, accept that is was never ordained of God or Joseph and then move on and focus on the Savior. We have brains, don't just accept things because that is what we've grown up to think is true, we ask others to join our church and give up the beliefs they were taught (cathothic, born again, etc.,) what makes us so different. Ponder, pray, and learn, I don't think any man that has walked this earth is flawless or without sin, except Christ him self. I'm so glad people are discussing this topic, Brigham Young needs to be called out and Joseph needs to have his name cleared, it's about dam time! I can say without any remorse I don't like Brigham Young, the things he preached about women are disgusting. His head got too big and he sounds like a narcissist, I feel bad for the women who married him out of fear.
Where did Brigham get all the keys to be prophet? He strong armed his control of Nauvoo running off his competition and then Nauvoo lost its charter and with no militia Brigham and his followers got ran out. There is no account of Brigham receiving all the priesthood keys which he would need to be a legitimate prophet.
As a great-great grandson of BY and "still Mormon" but does that make the church true? All religions have a purpose. The Book of Mormon speaks of two church on the earth today! And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth. (Book of Mormon | 1 Nephi 14:10) In my opinion, when Brigham Young took on polygamy, he put the LDS Church into the "whore of all the earth," and the abomination of polygamy [Jacob 1-3] is part of the "church of the devil." The Prophet Joseph NEVER taught or practiced polygamy and was true to what the Lord revealed to him [D&C 42:22-26 and D&C 49: 15-17 and former section 101 of 1835] ! Why would the Lord warn us of "false prophets" if it was not true? To me Brigham Young was one of these "false prophets." And all those after the Prophet Joseph Smith are not prophets but "presidents" of the LDS Church, in my opinion! Click on my picture icon, it will reveal my testimony of the truth. I like to think I am a member of the "church of the Lamb of God." I agree with you Connor that the 4 false doctrines you mentioned in this podcast are false doctrines!
Brigham was dishonest with his business partners, always seeking the upper hand. He was in the lumber business, the cattle business, he owned a liquor distillery, and a brewery, and a variety of other businesses. When Brigham died, he was the wealthiest man west of Chicago with today’s equivalent of $200 million. At the time of Brigham‘s passing, the majority of saints didn’t have a pot or a window.
Brigham held much of church wealth in his name due to government persecutions due to polygamy. Around Brigham’s death and until the 1910s much of the Churches wealth was held in private hands. Context context context
I was listening to Jacob 5 this morning about good roots and the tree going bad and grafting. It reminded me of your Sunday musings (which I always look forward to and enjoy so much, my old friend). Thank you for the courage to call many of these things out and your continued desire to get to the roots of the gospel of love and doctrine of Christ. Keep speaking. Keep making us think about the hard things as we examine our individual hearts and stop unrighteousnessly judging those around us. We are learning to love as the Savior did. We are practicing the gospel.❤ miss you tons. Hope you and your family are well and you help straighten Lehi city out while you are there:)
I can't wait for part two! The problem that lies in the idea that the church can correct it's past mistakes is that the false doctrine, taught by Brigham, is woven too deep into the fabric of the church, and if we were to pull on those strings the whole thing would come apart.
Not so, only that part that is false. How glorious it would be if we shed this evil past and go forth in righteous. Then, and only then, would we have the power of God with us. Until then, we are just a shell of what we could be.
Book of Mormon is still true and Joseph Smith is a prophet. Maybe we did forsake Zion and didn't reach the place in our hearts to have 'all things in common', but God will read our hearts and judge.
Being a part of the Church doesn’t save us entirely from every ambiguity of doctrine that might be introduced. Life needs opposition, and being in the Church is part of life. The Lord tests his people, and invites them to receive revelation on their own. The standard of orthodoxy in the Church has always been what it was throughout Bible times-unanimity of the elders/apostles. The question is, which of these doctrines met that standard (either as temporary policies or eternal truths)?
And yes, it’s absolutely OK to leave the church when false doctrine is taught and the modern church sets policy precedent that you cannot question them. These false church doctrines, btw, are not strictly held by BY, they are many lies, deceptions, and false teachings promulgated in our day and age.
@@davidjanbaz7728 Coming from one who embraces apostate sectarian Christianiaty, while wholly rejecting the Restoration, your critique on these things holds exactly no weight.
Facts God NEVER tells us to follow a prophet, EVER Church leaders can and do lead us astray Brigham was NEVER called by God to be a prophet or to replace Joseph The corporation that exists today is not the Lord’s 2 Nephi 28 describes the current LDS Corp Mormon 8 describes the LDS Corp further 3 Nephi 16:10 sums up the current situation. Keep in mind, this is a message from the Father, delivered to us, the readers of the Book of Mormon, directly from our Savior.
I watched the video Gwendolyn had on polygamy and the scriptures, it seemed to follow from the scriptures that we were in trouble for practicing polygamy and were warned and told to stop but it also said in the scriptures that god would not abandon his people despite these mistakes. That makes me feel reassured that we are still his people to help gather Israel in the last days. I think it’s possible he was wrong but didn’t quite understand that he got it wrong. At least I hope. God let’s us have agency and I think that god allowed the mistakes and in the end it would benefit us as a people in some ways. But I don’t think it is doctrine. I’ve gotten to the point where this all the pain and suffering from this will be worth it if… 1. We help save the constitution as a people 2. We help guide the world away from polygamy because of our mistakes. Birth rates are starting to decline and this will be pushed at some point if Christ doesn’t come first. It feels we are needing to figure out polygamy now for what might be proposed in the future.
This is an incredible exposition of the early history of the church as it relates to four very problematic doctrines taught earlier which have since been repudiated. I am so grateful to Connor for sharing.
Hey Connor, another video very well done! Just one request - could you provide links to your sources? Not all are created equal and I’d like to verify them to see the providence of the quotes from which they came. 1852 seems to be a big year of doctrinal innovation! Also, I’m surprised the Church is still going with the idea that “there have been times when God has commanded His children to practice plural marriage.” About a year from now, we’ll be studying about this from the Come Follow Me manual.
I got baptized in the Restored church at age 19 after a profound spiritual manifestation when I was pondering what I read in the Book of Mormon. It was made known to me that Jesus Christ is the Savior of men and we can have hope through him and we are children of God. Though I grew up in Pocatello Idaho, which has lots of Mormons, I had not believed in or known these things. I became very zealous about the gospel and the church and spent time searching the scriptures and the conference talks and church manuals and history books. I have mostly read the Book of Mormon since my baptism, but also loved the Doctrine and Covenants and the church history stories. So I just accepted the narrative about Joseph instituting polygamy by revelation. Seemed weird but I had received unmistakable confirmation from the Spirit about his role in the Restoration, so I figured Gods thoughts are higher than my thoughts, and accepted plural marriage thinking it was done by calling from those with priesthood keys or whatever. There was the verse in Jacob 2 that was used to make me think sometimes God commanded it to raise up seed unto himself.I hadn’t really questioned it until I saw your videos. I appreciate what you shared and I am convinced that it didn’t come from Brother Joseph. While I feel that is a very serious and awful thing that they deceived me, I am also sticking with the Brighamite Branch because I believe this is where the Priesthood is despite the weakness or even wickedness of certain members or even leaders or presidents. I admire the work of the current leadership though they may be wrong on some things, I suspect they are more righteous and devoted to God than me, though I love Jesus and strive to follow Him. I pray the Book of Mormon is read more and testimonies are shared far and wide so more people can know the glorious true doctrines of the restoration and get baptized if they want.
Hi, I look at it as simply part of the pride cycle that God's people are always in on some level. Words of Mormon starting verse 14 --as it introduces King Benjamin tells us how the Lord eventually fixes things.
I read the book "wihtout disclosing my true identity " now I know That the corporation of the Church of later day saint have nothing to do with Joseph Smith.
This was sooooooo well done! Conner, I don’t know how you pulled it off, but you just destroyed Brigham Young’s credibility as a prophet in a non excommunicatable manner, lol. I, too, think we can repent of his awful doctrines (as a church and people) and move forward. Also, I can imagine it took you quite a while to do this research and compile all this information. Thank you! I have waited for a presentation like this so I could send it out to about ten TBM friends and family who are unconvinced that JS was a monogamist or puzzled as to what to do about BY. Thanks again!!
Love your comment! And Connor's presentation. When you have truth--from the scriptures, and Brigham Young's own self condemning words, what can anyone really say? Step out of the chains of Section 132 "principle & doctrine" of "many wives and CONCUBINES" folks, super liberating!
The infallibility of the Prophet, and the Church cannot have been that far in the wrong is false doctrine. When we base our testimony with the Prophet being our Chief Cornerstone instead of Christ, we are walking on thin ice...
This is a long conversation I have been having constantly for the last two years, and I haven't been able to organized it as well as you have here. Can someone inform CWIC media about this.
I hope it registered what you pointed out Thomas Bullock saying since he is one of the people we get the King Follett discourse from and who recorded the talk in the grove.
6:15 the Saints thrived because of Brigham Young? Absolutely not. The Saints were dirt broke, sodbuster poor, largely because of the heavy taxation Brigham put on them. 10% tithing plus 10% interest if they were not able to pay. Many of them, ultimately losing their animals and their property for not being able to “pay a full tithe“ to him. Keep in mind that Brigham Young, nor any of the apostles were required to pay any tithing. Do as I say, not as I do. Read the autobiography of Elder Charles Derry for a really good look at what it was like to be under Brigham‘s Tyranny.
@@tinkeringengr There are sources like Hemlock Knots (who cite all their statements to back up things like this). If you read about their tithing timeline it has these entries and the year that it happened. BY was considered filthy rich during his tenure as the Pres of the Church. He tried to make the position of President pass on to his sons to keep the legacy going but it didn't work for whatever reason. In the end the church had to pay off BY's families something like $600,000 in 2020 USD to make clean breaks with the church's assets and BY's assets.
@@tinkeringengr It was a vote held by the 12 shortly after the martyrdom of brother Joseph. I am sick of looking it up every-time I find a lazy learner asking for it instead of researching the matter themselves. The 10% interest I had not heard, but I know there were taxes placed by the territorial governor... I also know that the fast offering was established after the Saints had fled west. Brigham also made it a point to rob the bishops storehouse to fund his many wives and refused charity to the poor widow that did not agree to be wed again. Brigham also tried to give away the church buildings the saints had built. He wanted them to be an inheritance to his children. Just a warning, if you ever get a copy of the Book of Mormon without the headings and chapter points, I would not read it. You might become aware of other things that are contrary to the operations of the Church today verse what the Book of Mormon outlined.
@@tinkeringengr I’ve read that particular fact in a few different places over the last few years, but I believe most recently in Charles Derry’s autobiography. That book is easily available online. It’s very enlightening. He was a very faithful man, a convert to the church over in England, and then he migrated to the United States, and then went west to the Salt Lake Valley. He lived amongst the early latter-day Saints and what he experienced there is very eye-opening. Food shortages for some but not all, starvation of some, Brigham’s tyranny, Brighams horrible abuse of many people. Throughout my church membership I’ve been led to believe that Brigham Young was a wonderful leader and a godsend to the people and the early church. Without him the church would have never prospered, yada yada. But now I more accurately understand what a tyrannical leader he really was. The abuse that he handed down to those who disagreed with him. the many wives who switched husbands occasionally moving up the ranks of the priesthood ladder. Couples who refused to go through the temple and take blood oaths were sometimes disrobed and their bodies painted in human feces publicly. Certain men were castrated when not in compliance with the wishes of certain church leadership. those no longer wishing to live under tyrannical rules would willingly leave their possessions and try to sneak away to California or back to the east in the middle of the night. Many were caught by Brigham’s goons and suffered death for trying to escape. Brigham‘s doctrine of blood atonement was practiced on many occasions. A man or woman might be encouraged to have their own bloodshed for them by experiencing “the celestial smile“ by having their throats cut from ear to ear, their blood spilled upon the ground, and then their bodies buried. Brigham taught that it would be an honor to die that way, being found clean of all sin on the other side of the veil. Brigham was a lifelong Freemason, a very dark individual, and certainly was not called by God to be his prophet and leader. Brigham called for the murders of most of the Timpanogos Indian tribe shortly after reaching the Salt Lake Valley. Brigham called for the murders of various travelers, passing through the area trying to get to California. Brigham frequently had his goons steal cattle from various travelers. Most notably is the murders of 120 people traveling from Arkansas to California. These innocent travelers were either shot or beaten to death with clubs at Brigham‘s command. For nearly 16 years people lied for Brigham and covered up the truth duringan intense federal investigation. Children six years and younger at Mountain Meadows were brought back to the Salt Lake Valley and distributed amongst Mormon families. 17 children in total. An 18th girl, a little seven-year-old was discovered in the wagon load of children. She was unloaded because she was old enough to “tell tales”. She was taken just over a hill where she was beaten to death with a club. All of the assets belonging to these 120 travelers were collected, their teams and wagons, their household furniture, their money, their clothing, and their large herd of cattle. Even the clothes they were wearing was removed from their dead bodies. Everything was taken back into town and presented to Brigham Young. Brigham gladly accepted all of the treasures, and the little children, but always denied any involvement. All of the men involved in this most atrocious and evil thing that happened on American soil kept their knowledge vague and adamantly denied Brigham‘s involvement. When John D Lee realized that his adopted father, Brigham Young had thrown him under the bus and blamed everything on him he had a change of heart, called for a scribe, and sang like a canary. He told in detail, how Brigham had arranged everything and how he had his own personal troops carry out every detail. The Book of Mormon speaks frequently about secret combinations and an abominable church that would become apostate and polluted. It’s speaking specifically about Brigham Young hijacking the restored church away from Joseph Smith the Prophet, by way of Secret Combinations and muder. The scriptures talk frequently about lying‘s, deceiving‘s, priestcrafts and muder’s. It’s very obvious who and what the Book of Mormon prophets were talking about.
Would you ever do a podcast with Jacob Hansen on polygamy? I think it would be interesting to have you speak to him since you have a different approach to polygamy compared to Michelle Stone. I think it would make for a much more interesting conversation
I hope this makes sense as I'm no scholar. But this is the way I've seen the discussion from both sides. Connor uses sources that would be used to prove anti mormon talking points wrong and defend Joseph. Jacob uses those same sources to prove anti mormon talking points wrong as well. BUT the same sources to prove Joseph practiced polygamy in the way Brigham did. So if those sources are wrong on some things, why are they not wrong on Polygamy. I also don't understand this need to defend polygamy by members. The church doesn't defend it.
@puddles609 I think the reason some people try to defend polygamy comes from trying to reconcile the doctrine of Eternal Families with the reality that there are people who have been married more than once in this life. The other reason why some members defend polygamy is because 3 different presidents of the Church who are regarded as prophets claim the practice was allowed by God. If polygamy is not from God, one could conclude that it was adultery. That would mean that God who members of the Church claim is at the head of this Church allowed 3 presidents of His Church to practice and teach adultery. The same God that had no problems preventing Abimelech twice from taking either Sarah or Rebekah as wife. But suddenly God is not able to reach His prophets and call them to repentance. Same God that took the Golden plates from Joseph Smith and prevented him from translating when he was not obeying his commandments suddenly is shy to send angel to Brigham, John Taylor and Wilford Woodruf and command them to stop adultery. In summary claiming that polygamy is always a sin opens a lot more questions than it answers.
@@WyoCutlass71 I prefer Connor's musings to stay the way they are. It's refreshing to hear honesty without it being attacked and defended. Jacob and Greg do it for a job, to draw viewers, get likes. Connor has no personal motivation other than bringing Truth to those willing to listen.
Just because blood atonement is not necessary today, does not mean it wasn't in cases before. Fielding Smith did not deny his words before. Requirements often change as the world changes. I think Brigham was too forward thinking. The world was not ready. How said that Brigham was wrong for his day?
Hey Connor, when you read quotes, you should show the sources as well as the quote. It'd just make things easier for those who are wanting to learn more.
@@HMcC0712 That was my thoughts. Why would a 50 year old man need to marry more wives to raise up seed unto the Lord when there are usually more men than women... Young men that wanted families... Whereas Brigham used his wives as a status symbol.
Seems to me as if someone who shared Brigham Young's beliefs in the false doctrines of blood atonement and polygamy MAY have reincarnated decades later as Chad Daybell.
chad was just a adulterous monster and he and valerie murdered kids for fun period....sounds like they had a lot of demons talking to them and maybe even inviting them into their lofe and talking to them
I think Brigham said things to see who would believe his BS. He said, people dressed like pilgrims live on the moon. Furthermore, he said people live on the sun. The above is paraphrasing...not verbatim.
What you are stating was second hand claims from some member's journals and scientists of Joseph Smith's and Brigham Young's time openly stated that there was life on the moon ,sun, Mars, Venus. In fact the claim that there was canals on Mars which testified that there was for instance life on Mars.
Paraphrasing is right. You're attributing the somewhat erroneous "Quakers on the moon" quote from Joseph Smith to Brigham Young. This is just misleading.
@@Misa_Susaki You are misquoting the 2nd hand claims of a mere member who claimed that he overheard Joseph saying that tthe inhavitants of the moon were "dressed LIKE Quakers""""!!!! So WAY TO GO you just fabricated your very own non-existent quote. So YOU are the one being misleading!!!!! NO the quotes come from some run of the mill members who made some after the fact claims of what they claim that they overheard Joseph Smith say in their journals .... You won't find those comments in any Church canon or any of Joseph Smith's recorded sermons. IF Joseph Smith believed that .... History shows that like the King Follett discourse that Joseph would have preached it from the pulpit. Considering the claims of scientists of the time.... That claim wouldn't have been anymore controversial that the claims that scientists were viewing buildings and canals through their telescopes... WHERE do you thikk that the "canals on Mars" claims came from??????? You want to ignore the fact that well respected scientists of the day were stating that the moon ,Mars, Venus and the Sun were all inhabited and they "backed up" their claims by stating that they'd seen the evidence of advanced civilizations through their telescopes. That "evidence" included buildings , canals and even claims of seeing the people through their telescopes... Even "IF" Joseph Smith speculated that their were people on the moon and speculated how they might have dressed.... His speculations ( IOWs - NOT via divine revelation!!!! ) would have been based in the "scientific" "knowledge" of his day. In our more "enlightened" day it's easy for anti-s like yourself to scoff at what was widely discussed "scientific fact" that there were people living on the other planets and the moon and even the sun. What so called "Christians" want to sweep under the rug is that there were also many "Christian" preachers on record who also put in their two cents speculations concerning life on the moon , Venus, Mars, and the Sun. Of course since scientists now want to colonize other planets and the moon and since it'd be hard for an 19th Century guy to describe space suits.... It really wouldn't shake my faith at all to find out that Joseph Smith MIGHT HAVE instead received a revelation concerning future human colonies of other planets and/or the moon with Joseph trying to describe what a space suit might look like. It's way past time for you to spill the beans to then tell us all about your own w/o any error at all beliefs?????
@@Misa_Susaki The quote is from a telling many many years after the fact and Smith was conveniently DEAD. And like you said, BY did not say it. Smith may or may not have said it.
Connor, I don't have your email address, so maybe you will see this here. I have a quote I thought you might be interested in, if you haven't already seen it. It is from a conference talk given in April of 1996 by Elder Earl C. Tingey quoting President Hinckley. Elder Tingey reports being in a recent regional training meeting where President Hinckley expressed concern that members of the Church may have a tendency to take on the ways of the world. Hinckley said: "We don't adopt them immediately, but we slowly take them on, unfortunately." I hope this is helpful. It goes along with President Hinckley's other statement I have heard you use about taking on the slow stain of the world.
Can’t wait for part 2. I agree with you 100% that we need to face these things head on and stay and encourage people to stay and learn to “distinguish truth from error”. With much the research I have done into Utah history, specifically settler/native relations, it has been my experience that acknowledging the horrors and mistakes of the past, on all sides, leads to healing and reconciliation. Keep talking my friend!
Haha that comment summed up my experience with this channel so well haha. I love you Connor and your insights! I definitely don't agree with all your takes, but I appreciate them and you help me question and solidify my beliefs and thoughts! You help me think deeply!
Jacob Hansen from "Thoughtful Faith" has done videos destroying the false notion that Joseph Smith didn't practice polygamy. We have too many prudes in the Church who can't live with the fact that Joseph Smith was BOTH a Prophet & an absolute "Chad".
ive read so many church brigham books and 16 minutes in im hearing stuff i dont think ive ever read..... guess i have more reading to do....the more i learn the more dissonance i feel and im just ...eh...this adam god thing sounds soooo weird
@@rhyde0731 i havent used the church website since it was revised a couple years ago....once i realized they had cut whole chapters in some teachings of the prophet manuals and put rainbow lgbt tree of lifes on primary manuals i stopped using their stuff for the most part. Ive got a lot of old church books and books written by or on behalf of a bunch of apostles and prophets so overall i know more church history then most lds people its just that obviously stuff like what conner is talking about isnt in all those cause edits have happened since before i was born
@@wufflerdance9481 I ask because they came out in 2014 but are largely unknown to the average member. Elder Ballard told CES employees they should know them (the essays) like the back of their hand - yet most members don’t even know they exist. Very interesting to me.
at this point....i feel like we need Christ's 2nd coming mostly to fix all the false teachings that are happening in his name and dont make sense anymore ...... what a mess I see why conner needs a part 2 on this topic......a lot of stuff
What about the Latterday lamanite prophet good enough for Conference in 1947 but no longer discussed? 2 Nephi 3:24. Perhaps there's more to the narrative. Perhaps not.
I was under the impression you were going to make an argument proving that Joseph didn't practice polygamy. But simply saying 'There's no evidence' isn't enough. There's so much evidence, both primary sources (see Oliver Cowdery's accusation regarding Fanny Alger, Sidney and Nancy Rigdon responding to the Happiness Letter, or the diaries of many of Joseph's wives, as well as some of the men who officiated at some of the ceremonies, like Newell K Whitney) and contemporary sources. Waving away the mountains of evidence for Joseph's polygamy and polyandry as Brigham Young's grand conspiracy is not an argument, it's just a claim, and an irresponsible one at that. As much as I would love to blame everything on Brigham Young, Joseph Smith had his problems too.
ruclips.net/video/bLbLQR95zj8/видео.htmlsi=pvr1ZkMSFOk3FW1l This is the best video synopsis on this complicated subject that I’ve found. It specifically analyzes the evidence you reference.
I’ve done a separate musing on this in more depth already. The “primary” sources you cite are full of holes and as I make clear in that other musing, people at the time, and now, allege Joseph was sleeping with women while all it appears he was doing, if anything, was eternal sealing in a broad familial sense-not temporal marital relations with their conjugal allowances.
@cboyack The major problem with dismissing the evidence is that the evidence FOR the most essential church events are just as dubious, if not more so. Even the origin of the doctrine of eternal marriage comes from D&C 132 originally, at least scripturally. The First Vision has very suspicious documentation, the BoM translation story has contradictory accounts from much later, the Doctrine & Covenants revelations, or the Endowment. So why do you look at some sources with historical skepticism, but accept others at face value?
I love ur content brother! U keep it real. I don't believe Brigham was a prophet. His way or the highway. Lots of people ended up murdered under him. I want to believe the current brother is a prophet but can't wrap my head around decisions they continually make. While I feel confused about the church the gospel I live. Jesus 2024!
@wheels636 That's literally the *opposite* of what @b-rad3013 was saying. Following Jesus Christ in all things is the *only* way to have the whole meal, and is the farthest thing from picking and choosing according to our own desires. There are certainly a lot of falsehoods taught in the church (unless you believe God commanded 8-year-olds to not be baptized because of the sins of their adopted homosexual parents, or that we should be "strongly urged" to alter our DNA, and many more examples that are too many to list here), and we need to carefully and prayerfully discern truth from error, and separate the wheat from the chaff. Do you believe in prayer, or do you believe there are some things one doesn't need to pray about (2 Nephi 32: 8)? Do you believe we should simply accept everything we're told from authority figures, or that we should find out the truth -- with all of its nuances -- for ourselves (Moroni 10: 4-5)? Do you believe the gift of discernment should be ignored, or sought after (Doctrine and Covenants 46: 8)?
@@wheels636 so we should get our daily download from 501 c3 corporation on what to think? Not think for ourselves? If you believe The “cafeteria member” statement you are devoid of critic thinking. I feel sorry for you
@@MagnusTheBiased-tw6zy The commandments are hard for some to live. Always have been and always will be. I believe the church is Jesus Christ's true church. Sad so many want to pick it apart.
@@wheels636it's not the commandments that are a problem. It's leadership telling us something is a commandment, and then years later, telling us it was never a commandment. Case in point, Brigham teaching polygamy is required for the celestial kingdom. 40 years later, polygamy is not required. Imagine being a woman 40 years earlier and having your life threatened to be destroyed by God if you were not a polygamist wife. And then 40 years later it turns out that was not actually required. And yet that is precisely what happened. So it's not a matter of living the commandments. It's really a matter of deciphering what are actually God's commandments versus man-made commandments.
The argument that Adam God and blacks in the priesthood we're not doctrinal to me are very clear. After Brigham passed away the quorum of the 12 got together they brought back Orson Pratt and they voted to say Orson we agree with you it's not doctrine but we weren't going to go against Brigham. For blacks in the priesthood we admitted it was a mistake we don't know why to me that's pretty much admitting it's a mistake so it wasn't doctrinal. But there could be an element of doctrine versus practice. And this is the problem I get with polygamy. Some people will say President Hinckley said it's not doctrine but others argue that in that Larry King interview President Hinckley said it was not doctrinal to practice it anymore President Hinckley emphasized we don't practice it it's not in the program. I haven't seen any general authorities come out and say it was a false doctrine. So my thinking is maybe it is doctrine and that it's just not practiced anymore. When you consider Jacob in the House of Israel there are 12 sons that became the 12 tribes Jacob had those sons with four different wives kind of seems like God approved that? Also there is the kind of murky issue about Oliver cowdery taking a second wife, Ann Lyman, and he did it because he said Joseph and he received the revelation section 132 or at least the principle of plural marriage was given to them by revelation. But Oliver jumped the gun and got married outside of the permission or Revelation to the prophet to do so. I need to go look up the charges against Oliver when he was excommunicated I think in 1838 I don't know if plural marriage was one of the reasons.
My guess is part 2 will deal with plural marriage. Here is a preview of what Boyack (and those like him) claim: 1. Brigham Young and many other prophets and apostles not only lied about the origins of plural marriage but used those lies as an excuse to commit adultery for decades, as well as cause others to commit adultery. 2. Every prophet and apostle from Brigham up to President Nelson has either lied about the history of plural marriage or is at least wholly ignorant of it. 3. Doctrine & Covenants 132, only a fraction of which concerns plural marriage by the way, should be decanonized.
I agree with most of the premises you laid out in this video, attributing blood atonement, Adam-God Theory and the Priesthood ban to Brigham. But wholly attributing Polygamy to Brigham and ignoring the evidence Joseph practiced polygamy (the evidence that predates Joseph’s death, the LDS/RLDS split, and the Church’s legal battles decades later with the federal government) is outright irresponsible - Oliver Cowdery literally left the Church while Joseph was still alive because of the Fanny Alger incident - why do you ignore such data in order to affirm these revisionist narratives that Joseph never practiced any kind of polygamy in any shape or form when there is clearly evidence to the contrary?
There is no evidence that predates Joseph's death. There are no children. The legal battles cite largely unsigned affidavits from women decades later, the vast majority of whom didn't write them. Cowdery didn't leave, he was excommunicated for unfounded claims; no contemporary evidence exists of any sexual/marital relationship with Fanny.
@@cboyackYou are lying when you say there is no evidence. The letter Oliver wrote saying he saw Joseph, the hate Emma had towards Fanny, and the council minutes that discussed Fanny are all evidences that are contemporary no matter how many times you say otherwise. At least use correct language and say there is no proof instead of no evidence.
@@jonny6man Hatred from a woman that tried to get into bed with that woman's husband would be understandable, even if the husband said hell no. An honest man would have brought forward the advances and warned others about it. It would also be called a nasty affair.
@Veevslav1 Okay? Yeah, that's a possible scenario. The entire situation is still evidence for Joseph having sex with someone. Nobody should dismiss evidence as if it doesn't exist even if it is something small, and this incident and everything surrounding it isn't small evidence. It was enough evidence that people years later either lied about it or Joseph really did marry her.
Yes, Brigham taught false doctrine, no question, thank you Connor, for your research and talking about this. I’m with you, I believe Brigham did a great job leading the church after Joseph in a very difficult time but clearly taught some false and destructive doctrine that the church will forever wrestle with, especially polygamy and the priesthood ban that were absolutely not revelation, but came from Brigham’s own ideas. I firmly believe we have this today with abortion as the church had no stance on it in early days, then came out strongly against it, demanding anyone caught having an abortion, for any reason, or aiding in one, in any way, will be excommunicated. Today, the church is opposed to abortion, except in cases of rape, incest, or severe medical complications of the mother and/or fetus, and won’t be excommunicated. In 30 years, the church will likely change their stance again and say abortion is not recommended, when it can be avoided, but it’s the mother’s choice as all women have full agency over their bodies and decisions, and leave it at that. The church has softened its views on gay marriage as well. As Latter-day Saints, we need to understand that there’s very, very little revelation actually given to mankind over human history, and the main revelation we have is to love God by serving and forgiving one another, and love one another, and don’t judge as Christ atoned for us, and was resurrected, making it possible to be forgiven and return to God, and progress through the eternities with eternal life. Most everything doesn’t matter. We need to understand that virtually all scripture is history, genealogy and opinions, with very little actual essential revelation.
@@wheels636 Both of them are admitted apologists for the church. If Joseph did what the church says he did, then he was a fallen prophet, even the worse of liars and hypocrites because of what he said on record, while alive. He condemned it in the strongest language possible.
@@rilum97The Bible clearly records that the prophet Elijah took 500 Baal priests down to a river, and killed them all, just for having a different belief. Bizarre actions and teachings from many prophets.
@@rilum97 Actually, it shows that God foresaw and acted on the fact that prophets are fallible, because he had already established the quorums of the First Presidency and Twelve.
Mormon Polygamy History by Robert Wagoner says differently on Joseph. You bring this author up, but avoid the details in his book about Joseph's polygamy.
There's a lot of historical nuance you are missing on the Journal of Discourses, it is my understanding that the main problem with it, besides the content was the writers, I can't remember all there was on this, but the writers themselves were not as reliable as we'd like them to be. Additionally, Brigham's preaching style was one that was functional in context only, and written and out of context it was very "fire and brimstone" heavy and exaggerated on purpose. I'm sure that mixed in all of that there's also weird ideas that he genuinely had, but you can't just read the JoD without understanding its intrincacies first.
@@BridgeBuilder-x4c what was revealed at the July 12, 1843 High Council meeting? Do we have 1st hand accounts from those in attendance, people that were anti-polygamist, those that opposed Brigham Young? What did they say?
@@robca6013 The Lord was a master teacher. He certainly did not teach in parables to prevent people from learning it. What a ridiculous notion. Secret oaths, secret ordinances, secret abominations are akin to secret combinations, not teaching in parables. 2 Nephi 26 23 For behold, my beloved brethren, I say unto you that the Lord God worketh not in darkness. 24 He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world, even that he layeth down his own life that he may draw all men unto him. Wherefore, he commandeth none that they shall not partake of his salvation.
@@elchilero7091 Wow way to NOT get it!!!!! There are things that Heavenly Father won't reveal to the world or even to His own only Begotten Son... .... For instance when the 2nd Coming is going to happen.... Even Jesus Christ doesn't know the day, etc. !!!! Matthew 13 : 10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? 11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. 12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. 13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. -14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: 15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. 16 But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. 17 For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them. Paul did it too! : 1 Corinthians 3 : 2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
@@elchilero7091 Are you speaking of the temple ordinances which were already being put in place by Joseph Smith before Brigham Young became the 2nd prophet of this dispensation???? The first ordinances of baptism and the Gift of the Holy Ghost by the Laying on of hands by those who hold the proper authority are what is offered to the investigators and baptism and the Gift of the Holy Ghost are saving ordinances..... Many investigators have a hard time accepting those basic ordinances and so the sacred ordinances performed in the temple are a step that they need to get taught to them using the proper Thus more knowledge is taught when the convert is ready. Satan tries to sidestep that process especially recently because he has enticed people to put you tube videos of the endowment ordinances and people who are not ready get exposed to the sacred ordinances before they have even accepted baptism and the Gift of the Holy Ghost.. So there is nothing wrong at all with the "milk before the meat" process for those who are "infants" in the Gospel"!!!!
@@elchilero7091 Since you are quoting the Book of Mormon you'll need to read how and why ,etc. the Secret Combinations were done so that the secret combination types could overthrow the legitimate government through murder and then become personally super powerful and super rich from the stolen plunder which they offered to the gullible so that they would join the secret combination to add numbers to the secret combination so that they'd become so numerous they they could even defy nations' armies. You are barking up the wrong tree.... The secret combinations are currently infiltrating our government to overthrow it . The mafia, drug cartels and Communism fit the description of secret combinations NOT Brigham Young..
Suggestion: sometimes your audio isn’t synced up very well with the video. 😏 Otherwise, very well researched, and delivered! Thank you, because many of us have very faithful ancestors who sacrificed a great deal during polygamy days…in various ways. 🤔
"By their fruits ye shall know them." Isn't that how the scriptures teach us to have discernment? When I look at Brighams fruits it's really hard for me to think he was just a misguided yankee guesser. He showed his colors and where his heart was through his words and actions.
I need to know how you can say all this and still not find the truth? In order to have Faith, you have to have a correct understanding of the nature and character of God. Joseph cleared that in the Lectures on Faith. Brigham Young believed in a God that was different than the God that Joseph encountered in the grove. Later Wolford Woodruff changed the belief in God to remove the Adam God doctrine of BY and moved toward a more scripture based definition. Even Later, after quite a few books, McConkie and Fielding Smith furthered the definition, continue on and you have Hinkley letting us know how pro family we are and it is one man and one woman (spitting in BY face) and made a church wide proclamation. Then Russel Nelson goes and says that we have have excommed Gay couples be members of the church, taking the first step into accepting full homosexual and any other config to be accepted as proper. All of these men demonstrate a different understanding of the Nature an Character of God, so they cannot all be wrong. One last note, I would believe nothing BY taught, he was not a prophet...
Explain this: "I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire. 10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened...13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." (Daniel 7:9,10, 13-14) What is depicted here? The Ancient of days (Adam, the oldest man) sits on his throne. Who comes to Father Adam? The Son of Man. What was given to the Son? the dominion and kingdom are given to the Son from the Father. There you go, its right in the Scriptures. Can you believe the Scriptures as they are written, without twisting them to say something else?
As I listen to this musing, it becomes more and more evident to me how the story of Brigham Young, messed up the church. I personally like the church the way it is today. It's not perfect but it's a good organization and does much good. However, it concerns me that unless we change our narrative about Brigham Young, there always will be a chance for someone like him to raise to the general authority position and even become a prophet. That is my fear. Hopefully, that will not happen. I think right now we have very good men in the Quorum.
Well we do need to get own up to the history and exonerate Joseph Smith, Emma Smith and Hyrum Smith. And what leaves us vulnerable is the false doctrine that the Prophet cannot lead us astray--that the Lord will not allow it. It is not scriptural and it is cultish. The prophet is not the chief cornerstone--it is the Lord. I don't need to instruct the Church on this but I am bound to teach my children this truth.
the key to "true " restored Mormon Christians is the "authority" that they listen to which...should be the Holy Ghost..Alone. Once it is realized that the Holy Ghost within, is and should be the final authority....both prophets and leaders and servants will be put in their proper place...which is a tool of God and therefore a tool of the membership. Now in the OT God shows us the place of tools.....shall the axe wield itself against the one who uses it? " ...nope. Peace.
Indeed he did, I guess that shows his human side.many took his opinions as doctrine..it still happens today in the church..the Doctrine The Bible, The Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price, everything else falls outside the canon. Sure there are revelations and translations and understanding of doctrines, but the source is always the Holy Ghost and though not included in canon of scripture can be considered doctrine because truth cannot be refuted. However in such case they are only applicable to the salvation of whom the message is given. When is canonized then it becomes doctrine for the church
Concerning Blood Atonement. D&C 132:26 clearly teaches that there is something to this idea (i.e., that under certain conditions a person must have his/her own blood shed as part of the repentance and redemptive process - as well as spending a season in hell). I think that a careful search of the scriptures would produce more evidence of such an idea or doctrine, though it is almost unknown in the Church. Those who oppose any such idea are probably also opposed to capital punishment even for the worst crimes and generally softball sin, which it is hard not to do given current norms in our society (e.g., almost everyone has a close relative, friend or acquaintance who was, or is, “living in sin,” so how can sexual sin be very serious, or even be a sin at all, since “everyone is doing it,” and my son, daughter, father, mother, etc. (fill in the relationship) “is a good person” and certainly not guilty of a sin “next to murder,” or any sin at all, and surely does not deserve to be punished. Now a lot more needs to be said, and certainly the almost universality of what used to be seen as serious sexual sin in our society is a mitigating factor to one’s accountability. Only after a person guilty of such sin, or any other sin, is brought to a much higher and sufficient degree of understanding and accountability, which will not happen for almost everyone until they have long dwelt in the post-mortal spirit world, will their continued refusal to repent lead to divine punishment (suffering in hell, which is also rehabilitative or redemptive) and an eventual inheritance in the telestial kingdom. Back to point, I realize that those who believe Young introduced plural marriage believe that he concocted what is now D&C 132, so verse 26 cannot be used to justify some concept of blood atonement since it was not given to Joseph by revelation.
Yes Conner Brigham just wasnt able to understand things just like that poor missunderstood king Noah. You were doing great until you got to that part. No such thing as evil. His persecution of the people were far worse than the percecution from outside the church.
The office of Prophet is a unique and special calling. It occupies the space between God and man and functions as a conduit of information from God to man primarily in the form of foretelling and in the form of revelation. This office has only one requirement, only one, and that is that the message of the prophet is true. The message must perfectly convey that which God wants known. Each time. Every time. There is no wiggle room. People make mistakes sure, but Prophets cannot make mistakes when God reveals to them what he wants his people to hear. What most people don't understand, people like Jacob Hansen, is that testing the prophet's message for its truthfulness is not the end point of the Biblical mandate. The Biblical mandate is not to test the message, the Biblical mandate is to test the PROPHET by the message. This is where Jacob Hansen's Collective Witness Model fails massively. Brigham Young did not "float" the idea of Adam God. He did not say, "hey folks I have this idea, lets discuss and come to a consensus". Rather, he pressed upon the people that Adam God is, THUS SAITH THE LORD. and your eternal destiny depends on what you do with this doctrine. What we must do then is junk the Collective Witness Model and follow the Biblical mandate by discarding the Adam God Theory as false AND discarding Brigham Young. He is a false prophet. And so, my question stands, why does the LDS Church own a university named after a false prophet?
I get your point, but there’s a risk in dismissing a prophet entirely based on one or even many false doctrines. By doing so, we may miss out on other true revelations. Rather than rejecting the prophet, we should test each message carefully, no matter the source. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Here is one time Brigham said something I agree with, "I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not." I had 2 ancestors who were polygamists, and 1 who essentially gave it the test of Alma. He and his wife were unsure, but Brigham asked, so they brought a 19 year old girl into their home as a prospect, to help out. After the experiment, my ancestor told Brigham Young to "Go to Hell." Reading peoples accounts of polygamy, sadly, they went straight to marriage, realized it was hell--but by then the second wife was pregnant etc.
"Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty (!) authority, have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the Saints were told to do by their Presidents, they should do it without asking any questions. When the Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience, as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves, and wish to pave the way to accomplish that wrong...." Millenial Star Vol. 14 #38 quoting Joseph Smith. It brings to mind a lot of talks relating to water bottles of late... We have been warned and forewarned yet we ignore the warnings. The words of the apostles is not what we weigh words against, but the teachings in the scriptures is what we weigh the words of modern times against.
@@wayne2064 Would it not be better to find a clock that works rather than hope the broken clock is right when you need it? That only leaves 1338 out 1440 times each day when the clock is wrong. That is if we calculate it based on minutes. If it is seconds... it is wrong 86398 times each day to get 2 correct times.
@@Veevslav1 The teaching that the prophet cannot lead us astray if false and cultish. And, why would Nephi tell us to read Isaiah if a modern prophet is what we need? What does Jeremiah 23 mean? Who was Amos? A herdsman.
Connor, I think you should go back to listen to your musings on The King Follett Discourse and The Sermon in the Grove (both of which were excellent btw).
It might be comforting that if the church decides polygamy was never actually a true doctrine, they can rewrite history in they same way they have with blacks and the priesthood, and all we like sheep will just go along with the new narrative.
The Church hasn't rewritten history with either. Those, both in and out of the Church, who understand neither the history or doctrine of both are the ones who have rewritten it.
As far as the "keys of authority" goes, according to D&C 121 those who lie, or perpetuate a lie, have no keys unless they repent. There is no "keys" in the LDS church today. They can assume whatever they want. "That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness. 37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man. (Doctrine and Covenants | Section 121:36 - 37) amen.
Yup. It was dressed differently and called by a different name, but that was just putting lipstick on a pig. We should call it what it really was: human sacrifice.
Valerie Hudson has a great take on this subject that I believe is a helpful perspective. I couldn’t come close to articulating it and is worthy of some Google search for anyone interested.
The two trees is great and serves to help explain the reason for plural marriage. The problem is the revisionists are driven by emotion and don't want to hear it.
I speak as a Latter-day Saint forced into polygamy when my first wife who left me and left the Church refused to give permission for my sealing to her to be cancelled, so my second wife was given no choice but to be sealed to me as my second polygamous wife in the temple and thus to my first wife if she was to have the temple sealing she had been taught to hope for all her life. The nonsense we were told doctrinally to try and justify this was a major contributor to us losing any trust that the General Authorities have the first clue what they are doing, and concluding they are definitely not listening to a nice or rational God. The paper trail of idiotic doctrinal context for this we were told without explanation led eventually to D and C 132 promising a first resurrection to anyone who is sealed regardless of whether they get divorced later, confirming that Bruce R McConkie's Deadly heresies rant was wrong - being sealed in the temple IS the same thing as a Second Annointing guarantee of exaltation, having your 'calling and election made sure' - regardless of your behaviour and choices thereafter. This is why the Church doesn't cancel temple sealings the moment a sealed couple get a legal divorce, which would be the rational thing to do if sealing is conditional upon faithfulness to God and each other as it is presented. It turns out it is nothing to do with a conditional covenant. It is a spell cast upon you by the temple priesthood like a curse from a wicked fairy in a fairy tale and the only people who can lift it are the First Presidency, who we were told by Area Seventies not to even bother asking because they would say no. Nothing to do with your own wishes or choices or faithfulness. They have in the latest iteration of the Handbook apparently changed the rhetoric at last to something about respecting people's choices, but we will have to see if that actually changes their control freakery about this. What amazes me is how in years of anguished debate about polygamy in the Church I've never seen anyone address the simple issue that as soon as you add eternal marriage to the doctrinal equation you have to have polygamy. You can't have one without the other, and this just doesn't seem to occur to most faithful Latter-day Saints who love the temple but rail against polygamy. Polygamy is not an issue if you believe all marriages are dissolved at death and the afterlife heaven involves more than enough joyful blissing out with Jesus to make worrying whether you are doing marriage or not still totally irrelevant on those mainstream Christian models. But as soon as you try to make the messiness of real life human relationships and marriages into eternal marriage you open a pandora's box of complications that cannot be resolved without really complex polygamy. Even taking divorced marriages out of the equation, millions of people are widowed and remarry and have more children. How can you possibly force someone to choose between those healthy loving marriages eternally? And the LDS church screws this up into even more dysfunctions by insisting only the women have to make that choice because men can have as many wives as they like. If you get rid of polygamy, eternal marriage is dead, or if you keep it as is it is a system of cruelty that leaves millions of spouses and children abandoned with no place in the system, or only as exchangeable property passed around the sealed eternal marriages of people who were not their spouse or parent in mortal life. So the Church has only one choice rationally - drop eternal marriage all together or allow women to be sealed to more than one husband the same as men can be sealed to more than one wife, which results in a lot of spouse sharing! Joseph Smith already modelled that with his sealings to women married to other men. Unwilling to take either of those choices assertively, although both are slipping in under the radar as they endlessly tweak the rules, the General Authorities have instead continued to lose their minds and instead just announced that men can be sealed to a previous unmarried sexual partner who has died ... as long as their current eternal wife gives permission to add that concubine to their eternal marriage! You couldn't make it up. Do an episode about THAT Connor, I dare you. It's in the latest General Handbook update. With as always zero explanation of WHY. To repeat, because it seems unbeleivable bearing in mind the rest of Jacob, the First Presidency is now authorising men to be sealed to their unmarried sexual concubines in the temples while they already have sealed wives. Or technically as long as they have the permission of a living legal wife who is not a Church member sealed to them. That's another scenario allowed by the wording of this now policy. I wonder if this will turn out to be another of Dallin Oaks' 'temporary commandments'.
Marriage and family are naturally eternal. It's an eternal universal natural law of nature, completely separate from what man made religions may teach.
It is a mess. Section 132 is a Salamander Letter. The Church admits they do not know what Joseph taught as doctrine per sealings. So I don't know how they can be so sure he was a polygamist. There is reason to believe there is eternal marriage in Heaven. If so, why are people trying to sort out the logistics? That is what got Abram and Sarai to deny the power of God and use arm of flesh to solve the fact Sarai was barren.
Much like the Proclamation on the Family, the view of Brigham and his prophetic mantle is quickly becoming a real sifter in the Church. His critics tend to underestand neither the man or usual points they bring up to discredit him (Adam-god doctrine, blood Atonement, etc.) And, more often than not, they have either left the Church or are on their way out. Those who actually do understand the history and doctrine see a similar pattern with plural marriage, the priesthood restriction, and the temple endowment. All began with Joseph and expanded by Brigham. Joseph was the architect, Brigham the builder. But apostates, both in and out of the Church, like to lay anything they don't like at the feet of Brigham so they can still feign loyalty to Joseph and the Restoration.
@Hmcc0712 I stand with both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. Both were prophets. You reject one prophet while claiming loyalty to another. And in so doing, you're rejecting the prophets today who you know would not agree with you. You, and those like you, are apostates. And it's all because you're weak, scripturally illiterate, and can't handle the issue of plural marriage. It's got nothing to do with what Joseph did or didn't do.
What about the Adam-God theory do we not understand? Brigham Young was pretty clear on it, I think. Honestly, it feels to me like something that could get someone excommunicated for teaching in the church today. It seems like heresy on the level of Gnostic teachings in the primitive church. Be careful who you call an apostate. Things aren’t as black and white as they seem in the teachings of the church
What about the Adam-God theory do we not understand? Brigham Young was pretty clear on it, I think. Honestly, it feels to me like something that could get someone excommunicated for teaching in the church today. It seems like heresy on the level of Gnostic teachings in the primitive church. Be careful who you call an apostate. Things aren’t as black and white as they seem in the teachings of the church
I think the idea is that there are WAY more righteous women than men, so there won't be any left-overs. I feel like this totally appeals to the pride of women.
@@Washingtontree The way Brigham spoke about women, he sure didn't believe that there were more righteous women. Never heard him praise them, unless it was praise for their servitude.
I'm no scholar. But it's my understanding that over the four thousand year biblical history, from Genesis to the Apostles, Gods servants have taught different things and introduced new doctrines. Even the Saviors Gospel seems contradictory to all the former. So did they by their own differences prove themselves to be false prophets. Or worse, does it prove God to be a false God? Why can't it be that God provides what is necessary for our advancement as needed and for his own purposes? The inclination to disparage our prophets and servants, I think is premature. And I think the designation is to destroy our trust in God, and to take it upon ourselves to know what is best. At my conversion to the LDS Church, I became succinctly aware that my life and life in Gods spirit are an eternity apart. So if Gods servants are a little clumsy in steering, it is better to be a little clumsy in God than to be a total stranger to God, relying on myself alone. Otherwise that would make me the falsest of prophets, an accuser of my Brethren, and a law unto myself. Personally I love and admire Brigham Young. And I don't care what anybody says about him in criticism. The LDS Missionaries who introduced me to their Church were youthful and had essentially no experience in life. Yet they brought to my home and heart the spirit of the eternal God who showed me in a vision that they were his servants. Gods endorsement is greater than my judgment.
BY often told people that JSJr told him things that could not be corroborated. His recollections of what JSJr would tell him were always a way to add weight/authority to what he, BY, was stating. He was a liar and slandered Emma and JSJr and Hyrum (and anyone else who crossed him) in order to bully and convince others that he was right. Do I think that people should leave the church b/c of BY? No, but I can understand why they would. Knowing now what I know about BY, if I was a Utah Mormon, I hope I would have had enough sense and courage to leave Utah and the Utah church. The LDS church has spent the last 100 yrs trying to repent (undo) the mistakes of that era and still hasn't completely done it. But, I believe in the keys of the kingdom, I just think that BY's keys were not valid (121:34-46) and those keys may not have been valid for several decades.
I still say that Joseph Smith was a polygamist based on the research Ive done. But I will say that I am deeply frustrated that "the church" has not had deeper discussions on this and many other topics over time. I am a devout believer but also understand why there are critics and why some who have fallen away are frustrated by shifts of "doctrine" or wildly opposing statements. Even the proclamation of the family has morphed into something much less than the original and its hurting family formation. I dont understand it. I cannot understand how it will be critical for me to survive spiritually in coming days and to receive revelation when I dont really see revelation from the church on key matters. I mean how in the heck could the apostles and prophets NOT be able to settle the blacks and the priesthood issue for decades? Instead I defended something incorrect and it does upset me that this could have been much more transparent along with MUCH of what Brigham young taught. If I need to have revelation to survive, but the leaders aren't revealing anything and cant straighten out divisive policy coming from their own offices, then what hope is there for the average member?
Do more research. See Karen Hyatt’s documentary “Wo Unto you Scribes: The Hidden History of Polygamy.” For a concise display of our history that demonstrates that Joseph, Hyrum, and Emma not only never practiced polygamy but were vehemently against it. When you realize that every bit of evidence accusing Joseph Smith of polygamy is all hearsay and so much of it is just provably false, then you can read Brigham’s D&C 132 and know that our Heavenly father would cease to be God if he treated and viewed his daughters in the manner that Brigham believed of women. The most damning evidence is Brigham and the early church leader’s own teachings and views on polygamy. King Noah couldn’t have written or taught a more condemning ideology. Let us stop accusing Joseph, but most importantly, our Heavenly Father of this heinous, abominable, whoredom.
There are many discussion on both these topics by LDS scholars. What exactly are you looking for? Are you waiting for the Church to put it on the home page of their website or as talks in General Conference or perhaps as a concluding speaker in Stake Conference? Errors were made on all fronts and it’s out there in black and white. Each had explanations but you have to dig deep into each topic.
Personal revelation is what we all need. It comes from companionship with the Holy Ghost, and/or perhaps from the second comforter. This only comes from understanding the doctrine of Christ as the Holy Ghost testifies to you, individually. It comes from a reliance on the Holy Spirit, God, and his son Jesus Christ, especially over the arm of the flesh.
@@diegolucero9910 I appreciate your response and respect it and I understand and believe that. Im saying Id like to see more of that in the higher levels of church. In the past decades, what revelation have we seen? Please dont say the proclamation which is not canonized and which we have butchered and picked and chosen from in the past decade. We dont even talk about family roles anymore which was in it and now marriages are falling apart . We have reduced it to undefined "equality". And we've had mixed and even bad messaging for the past several years. Joseph went and got answers and led the people and revealed things regularly despite wickedness all around him. Im still a devout member and even a well read defender but it does bother me that I defended blacks and the priesthood or other policy that was known internally in the higher ups as incorrect or maybe not correct for decades yet we were allowed to believe it was revelation. Could have simply gone through much of the major things and issued revelation on the core things that were wrong. Yet we always hear that they couldn't get answers or even anything like hard revelation yet we rank and file are supposed to? Again, Im not doubting revelation but the youth are being torn up by the things that were brushed under the rug and now in full light of day and most members cant explain it or show where we corrected these major things until the damage was done. I obey the word of wisdom yet when I read a hundred pages on how it came about, Im not even sure it was pure revelation but more the outcome of womens complaints about alcohol (probably justified ) and men retaliated against womens tea and bam....we have a WOW today used as a hardline hammer when its genesis was much more about moderation than exclusion. And then all of a sudden we are allowed Marijuana ? Thats a bit weird when we cant use a glass of wine or a single beer to decompress at the end of the day . Was marijuana the result of pure revelation or?? Thats all Im saying. I dont need to be guided in ALL things but it would be great if we could stay consistent and if we depart or change, have a conversation about it. I have a hard time defending the church with many things and the youth are looking for more than "believe" which worked out well for boomers but lets be honest...most boomers cant tell you 1/10th about the church that a 32 year old can today . Im always shocked at the elementary knowledge of boomers ...and I think thats because they never really had to defend much at all
If Brigham Young is a false prophet so is everyone after him but thats why we have lost so much because members think they know more than the Prophets.
@tinkeringengr The point she is making is if Brigham was guilty of lying about the origins of plural marriage, and using those lies as an excuse to not only commit adultery but cause others to do the same, so are many other prophets and apostles who also practiced plural marriage. And they could not have maintained their prophetic mantle or the priesthood keyin spite of that. This is the dilemma and danger of the false revisionist history the plural marriage deniers embrace, whether they fully realize it or not.
@@jaredshipp9207 Exactly, the implications are profound and I for one am following the truth wherever it leads. Not just being a Pharisee because thats how I was raised.
Thats funny you said the church, ie the people, are extremely infallible, which was a blunder in itself. You meant we are extremely fallible, point taken.
The root word for church is congregation, or the people. They're essentially synonymous, it's just that modern churches we treat more like corporations than groups of believers who worship together.
And this is a perfect example of why the spiritually immature in the Church, who embrace the garbage people like Connor Boyack, Michelle Stone, and others push, so often end up apostatizing.
@@jaredshipp9207 you're a Pharasee. Blindly believing you have the truth and ignoring whats in front of you. I for one look at the evidence before forming an opinion.
@@jaredshipp9207 Be spiritually mature then & blood atone ever white elder who marries a descendant of Cain or Ham. Have Native American slave concubines. Worship Adam as God. Marry other guys wives while they serve missions. And notify NASA that there are Quackers on the Moon. And be divinely inspired to use cement in your garden as a canal system, so that almost nothing will grow there for 150 years!
@@jaredshipp9207 Connor Boyack is attempting to lasso those who are waking up & pull them back into the echo thought cave dream world. He is one of many apologists inhibiting what you call apostasy. You are naive if you assume the phenomenon is isolated to spiritually immature individuals. Or individuals who haven't searched the scriptures or church history adequately.
Connor, you're the man! You never cease to amaze me. You have guts to keep pushing the envelope tackling topics like this. Especially at a time when the church excomunicates so often people who take publicly things that don't fit the official church historical narrative. And you do it with excellent honest original source research; and class. Good job brother! Keep it up!
Appreciate it. 👍🏼
The first presidency pushing the 'cure' for 2020 opened my eyes to many problems, but when I ask Heavenly Father where He wants me I am told to stay until further notice.
Similar story here. I hated them for so long, but I really strongly feel that they are there for a reason
If we are to use the General Conference talks as a "litmus test" as the prophet has suggested, then I will test each talk and speaker by searching, pondering and praying. Is it true? Did Jesus Christ teach it? Do scriptures confirm it? I prayed if I should get the jab in order to accept a job during the pandemic because I was worried about my weak immune system. 2 direct answers from the Lord were: First, " I will protect you FROM the vaccine. (NO confirmation that it was actually good for my body) but Second, "Not all medical proffessionals are bad. Remember there are many good, genuinely concerned scientists and researchers, working around the clock trying to save their fellow brothers and sisters"
Same here
The First Presidency did not command you or any other member to be immunized ....
My Father-in -Law and Mother-in-Law would have died had they not been immunized.
My wife's cousin died because he wasn't immunized.
The immunizations weren't advertised as a "cure" perse.
The immunizations needed to be researched...
There far more serious side effects that are tied to certain brands of immunizations.
My wife and I were immunize4ed and we got a mild case of Covid.
Members of our branch who skipped being immunized got much more serious cases of Covid than we did.
We did not even consider getting any booster shots.
That has been shown to be a very wise choice.
The prophet is only a prophet when we agree with him, it has always been so.
Leaders are not infallible and make mistakes certainly but to believe that adultery, false doctrine that influences the endowment, blood atonement, etc. are mere mistakes are amazing to me. We have to face our situation and realize with humility the need we have for Christ and his correction
Everyone keeps saying that Brigham was the person we needed to get us to Utah, but without his fault doctrines we might not have needed to even go west.
Good point! 👍👍
100%
@@christhompson2034 That doesn’t seem to be consistent with history.
Considering that God promised the saints would not be moved out of their place, then they packed up and moved out before the temple was even finished tells us that they did not trust God, and his promise was not fulfilled. That should cause us to pause and reflect deeply on revelations given in the doctrine covenants.
@@prophetcentral
That was CONDITIONAL prophecy....
Before you try to claim that conditional prophecies do not exist....
"Reflect deeply that the "Bible" contains them too!!!!
A classic example is where Jonah prophesied that Nineveh would be destroyed if the people of Nineveh didn't repent ...
The people of Nineveh repented and so they weren't destroyed.
However, using your claim as a guide....
Jonah "falsely prophesied" that Nineveh would be destroyed and so the entire "Bible" must be "false" !!!!!
Polygamy cannot be an "exception" to God's law of Monogamy and also required for exaltation.
God has called polygamy ONLY a "Crime," "Abomination," "WHOREDOM" Section 132 is a salamander letter filled with false doctrines and statements. There is NO polygamy loophole.
Excellent logic. It can't be both.
True, it's neither.
@@Posi2300 What about Moses, Abraham, and Jacob (Israel), et al?
@@bigfoot99 Did they live the teachings of Jesus?
We have an example of King Noah's priest, Alma changing his ways, repenting and leading righteously after learning from Abinadi. We too can repent, follow Christ and His leaders.
How about we counsel with the Holy Ghost?! He will NOT lead us astray! We need to utilize this most precious gift.
So far, this is the truest and best comment here😊
@justbob2133 Thank you! Why do people with the Gift of the Holy Ghost look to the arm of flesh for answers? I don't understand 😕
@@sherryhyde565It's because everyone seems to get different answers even when using what they think is the Holy Ghost..
@@sherryhyde565perhaps they don't actually have the gift yet but believed they had enough and didn't need more, so they didn't think to pursue it.
Well, when BY taught the Adam-God theory some apostles stated that they felt the Holy Ghost as Connor read in this video. So some of them believed it at least while BY was a prophet. I like the idea of relying on the Holy Ghost. The problem is people are people and see the Spirit where it is not. I think many confuse the Spirit with emotions and become delusional, proclaiming their own opinions as the truth. And it looks like neither the prophet nor the apostles are immune to that. I think we first need to study the Holy Ghost and understand how It manifests itself to the people.
Awesome vid! I recommend putting the quote sources in the description so we can all have access to them. Keep up the good work!
Connor, I don't disagree with you 100%. I, however, appreciate your candor, courage. You don't kow tow and go along with what is popular or expected.
As someone once said...."the opposite of courage isn't cowardice, it's conformity."
One might say it’s popular to be an anti-polygamist today…
As a dedicated seeker of truth, I'm a fan of your musings based in fact and not conjecture or myth. When I became a convert, I believed everything. 50 years later, I've become a Free Thinker with one leader and His name is Jesus Christ. Seeking truth is a commandment Christ thought important to help shield us from the lies of Satan, the Father of All Lies. Thank you for exposing much of what we need to know to help shed ourselves of confusion and delusion.
Apostasy is a fact of history and has always been prevalent before the destruction of nations. Truth helps us with recognition and protects us from The Man of Lawlessness when he comes as a counterfeit to the real Savior.
I wonder how many who profess Christ as Savior and look forward to His return would be among those who would crucify Him again because He's not what they conjured Him to be.
Thank you.
I really like your shorter beard. It's much more modern and scholaresk.
See you next Sunday!
You're the classic example of the LDS Protestant. They cant handle certain history or doctrine so they start leaning on their own interpretation of scripture, claiming they know the real origin of the faith, while sooner or later cutting themselves off from the Church and priesthood keys. As Joseph said, "There's no salvation between the two lids of the Bible without a legal administrator." Read D&C 76. A testimony of Jesus alone will get only as far as the Terrestrial Kingdom.
You mean like when they find out the sons of Lehi are Negros in America and that Jesus / Yahusha was black. Yes that will be hard. Joseph Smith said if he tried to bring out anything the people flew to pieces.
@@jaredshipp9207 You should take your blinders off and understand how clearly this issues is being put forth. More modern leaders are outright condemning the teachings of a former leader. Somehow, despite this, you try and exonerate the former leader. Accept the truth. You are in a church that has some truth, but apostacy is inevitable. Look to God not a man, not matter how much the man may be praised.
@@jaredshipp9207You’re on to something. Now go read everything Joseph publically said about polygamy and polygamists-as well as the canonized scriptures about marriage at the time of the martyrdom.
@lindsayashton1385 I have. He couldn't be forthcoming with everyone about plural marriage because, as we see with you and others, people can't handle it. You clearly don't believe in prophets and ongoing revelation after Joseph. Which means you don't believe in the Restored Church. Which means you believe Joseph (and the Lord) failed. So why am I talking to you?
We must be thoughtful and discerning. It's not enough to say everything is okay or everything is wrong, both are lazy conclusions.
It is interesting, and I believe Providential, that Section 101 was replaced with the current 101, which is a chastening from the Lord concerning Lusts & Covetousness among the saints.
Pres Hinkley said polygamy is not doctrinal.
I can't find that could you please provide the source? I know he said they discontinued the practice but when I saw that he said nothing about the doctrine. This is important because the fact that what I found he does not mention doctrine indicates to me that it could be a doctrine that is just not practiced any longer.
@@kdeltatube It was said during the Larry King interview which can be found here on RUclips.
@@jacbox3889 okay well this also came out in the CES letter, and not to be argumentative or splitting hairs, But the way some explain this is President Hinckley, in the context of his answer that we do not practice it today, meant it's not doctrinal to practice it. He did not say it was a false doctrine. I think President Hinckley was kind of being very careful in his words like a lawyer splitting hairs. I get it can be argued either way.
Larry King: You condemn it [polygamy]?
Hinckley: I condemn it. Yes, as a practice, because I think it is not doctrinal.
The statement by Wilford Woodruff that "I will never lead you astray", was not included in the Manifesto, and was not voted upon by the church as binding. The current edition of the D&C gives the impression that this is the case, but, if you look at earlier editions (such as the 1961) edition, the "I will not lead you astray" quote is not included. So, the church is leading us astray about not leading us astray.
Jesus taught that even prophets can and do lead people astray, for none are perfect, and they will often be wrong, no matter how sincere, thus why he taught to not trust in them or any mortals as leaders. He didn't want anyone to be deceived.
@@MegaJohn144 I appreciate the logical swipe, but what is a quorum? The First Presidency and Twelve were established previous to Woodruff’s statement. Sure, I guess you can say the establishment of the First Presidency and Twelve wasn’t established by them. lol. But, the pattern is definitely there in the Bible, B of M, and D&C.
Yes, Brigham taught numerous false doctrines... including polygamy.
More women than men will earn a Celestial body, which is an immortal body of flesh and bones that has sexual organs like Adam and Eve. A Terrestrial or Telestial body is a body that is immortal that has no sexual organs.
If there was only one more Celestial woman than man there would be polygamy in heaven. It is unbeatable logic. However, some people will never think logically. Rachel's womb was shut up by God, do Leah the less desirable wife, would gain favor from Jacob. The cries of God's faithful daughters that have no prospect of eternal marriage are also heard by God.
Plural marriage wasn't a false doctrine and began with Joseph. Like the priesthood restriction, people who can't emotionally handle either simply lay both at the feet of Brigham so they can tell themselves they're being faithful to Joseph and the Restoration.
@@jaredshipp9207
Show me one direct quote from Joseph Smith where he used the term “plural celestial marriage.” You won’t be able to because the term and doctrine wasn’t created by him, it was made up after he died. Joseph Smith can’t denounce a term and doctrine that didn’t exist while he was alive. Also read the Book of Mormon, every place it talks about the idea of a man taking more than one wife it is the wicked that are doing it and/or the practice is being condemned (Jacob 1-3, Mosiah 11, Ether 10). Also, every instance the practice of having more than one wife was instituted in the Book of Mormon, it was instituted after the death of a righteous leader (Jacob 1 - after the death of Nephi; Mosiah 11 - after the death of Zeniff; Ether 10 - after the death of Shez). We need to open our eyes and see and observe the patterns in scripture or we are going to find ourselves cut off.
@@jaredshipp9207Here you are again in denial
@@geraldinesera8915
If you study the brutality perpetrated not only on African Americans, but also in any one who helped them, you will begin to understand why it was nessesarry to not give the priesthood to them for a while. If an African American held the priesthood during Brigham Young's day, it was a sign they were free, and they would be captured and sold into slavery for big money. Probably all Christian churches during Brigham Young's day would not give an African American the priesthood, even Abolitionists. There is record of two missionaries being killed in the Southern United States as late as the 20 th century,
because the Church was friendly to African Americans. You look through your modern myopic view in judging Brigham Young.
We see that the presidents of the church can contradict each other in rulings. How is this from God and not man?
Cause the Salvation of the gospel is what’s perfect, and none of them have contradicted in that effect. Exaltation on the other hand has changed throughout the history of the world. But even with that more context usually shows there isn’t contradiction.
Policy’s, general doctrines, and practices are all subject to the influence of man since they’re not required to be perfect to obtain salvation or exaltation.
What member of the church fail to understand is no matter if Brigham was a prophet it still doesn't make him without sin or without earthly trials. He's a man, no different than any other human who is on this earth to be tested, he is not perfect, and I don't think he was even called to be a prophet, he took that mantle on himself. I also believe he bad mouthed Joseph and Emma because he wanted polygamy, it was never ordained of God - that was all Brigham and his circle of gross men that came up with that. The church is true, but he is just a man and he sinned, I totally agree we need to call it for what it is, discuss it, accept that is was never ordained of God or Joseph and then move on and focus on the Savior. We have brains, don't just accept things because that is what we've grown up to think is true, we ask others to join our church and give up the beliefs they were taught (cathothic, born again, etc.,) what makes us so different. Ponder, pray, and learn, I don't think any man that has walked this earth is flawless or without sin, except Christ him self. I'm so glad people are discussing this topic, Brigham Young needs to be called out and Joseph needs to have his name cleared, it's about dam time! I can say without any remorse I don't like Brigham Young, the things he preached about women are disgusting. His head got too big and he sounds like a narcissist, I feel bad for the women who married him out of fear.
Where did Brigham get all the keys to be prophet? He strong armed his control of Nauvoo running off his competition and then Nauvoo lost its charter and with no militia Brigham and his followers got ran out. There is no account of Brigham receiving all the priesthood keys which he would need to be a legitimate prophet.
As a great-great grandson of BY and "still Mormon" but does that make the church true? All religions have a purpose. The Book of Mormon speaks of two church on the earth today!
And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth.
(Book of Mormon | 1 Nephi 14:10)
In my opinion, when Brigham Young took on polygamy, he put the LDS Church into the "whore of all the earth," and the abomination of polygamy [Jacob 1-3] is part of the "church of the devil."
The Prophet Joseph NEVER taught or practiced polygamy and was true to what the Lord revealed to him [D&C 42:22-26 and D&C 49: 15-17 and former section 101 of 1835] !
Why would the Lord warn us of "false prophets" if it was not true? To me Brigham Young was one of these "false prophets." And all those after the Prophet Joseph Smith are not prophets but "presidents" of the LDS Church, in my opinion!
Click on my picture icon, it will reveal my testimony of the truth. I like to think I am a member of the "church of the Lamb of God." I agree with you Connor that the 4 false doctrines you mentioned in this podcast are false doctrines!
Brigham was dishonest with his business partners, always seeking the upper hand. He was in the lumber business, the cattle business, he owned a liquor distillery, and a brewery, and a variety of other businesses.
When Brigham died, he was the wealthiest man west of Chicago with today’s equivalent of $200 million. At the time of Brigham‘s passing, the majority of saints didn’t have a pot or a window.
Brigham held much of church wealth in his name due to government persecutions due to polygamy. Around Brigham’s death and until the 1910s much of the Churches wealth was held in private hands. Context context context
And his wives would beg him for things, like a second dress, a rug, a stove, or a rocking chair. :(
He was cheap and abusive with his wives, so what, he had too many wives, who would want to deal with all their petty stuff.
I was listening to Jacob 5 this morning about good roots and the tree going bad and grafting.
It reminded me of your Sunday musings (which I always look forward to and enjoy so much, my old friend).
Thank you for the courage to call many of these things out and your continued desire to get to the roots of the gospel of love and doctrine of Christ.
Keep speaking. Keep making us think about the hard things as we examine our individual hearts and stop unrighteousnessly judging those around us. We are learning to love as the Savior did. We are practicing the gospel.❤ miss you tons. Hope you and your family are well and you help straighten Lehi city out while you are there:)
I can't wait for part two!
The problem that lies in the idea that the church can correct it's past mistakes is that the false doctrine, taught by Brigham, is woven too deep into the fabric of the church, and if we were to pull on those strings the whole thing would come apart.
Not seeing it you?
Not so, only that part that is false. How glorious it would be if we shed this evil past and go forth in righteous. Then, and only then, would we have the power of God with us. Until then, we are just a shell of what we could be.
Book of Mormon is still true and Joseph Smith is a prophet. Maybe we did forsake Zion and didn't reach the place in our hearts to have 'all things in common', but God will read our hearts and judge.
@@tinkeringengr amen 🙏
@@tinkeringengr amen 🙏
Being a part of the Church doesn’t save us entirely from every ambiguity of doctrine that might be introduced. Life needs opposition, and being in the Church is part of life. The Lord tests his people, and invites them to receive revelation on their own. The standard of orthodoxy in the Church has always been what it was throughout Bible times-unanimity of the elders/apostles. The question is, which of these doctrines met that standard (either as temporary policies or eternal truths)?
Superb work, Connor. So great to have all of these quotes in one place.
Did BY introduce false doctrine? Absolutely!
And yes, it’s absolutely OK to leave the church when false doctrine is taught and the modern church sets policy precedent that you cannot question them. These false church doctrines, btw, are not strictly held by BY, they are many lies, deceptions, and false teachings promulgated in our day and age.
A prophet (alone) can’t introduce orthodox doctrine. People often equivocate doctrine with orthodoxy.
Those who make that claim tend to not understand the false doctrine they're accusing him of teaching.
@jaredshipp9207 it's false anyway you can state it.
Adam was never a god : it's obviously false in relationship to authentic Biblical Christianity.
@@davidjanbaz7728 Coming from one who embraces apostate sectarian Christianiaty, while wholly rejecting the Restoration, your critique on these things holds exactly no weight.
Brigham was a murderer, as you've quoted many times, how can you not call this man evil?
Facts
God NEVER tells us to follow a prophet, EVER
Church leaders can and do lead us astray
Brigham was NEVER called by God to be a prophet or to replace Joseph
The corporation that exists today is not the Lord’s
2 Nephi 28 describes the current LDS Corp
Mormon 8 describes the LDS Corp further
3 Nephi 16:10 sums up the current situation. Keep in mind, this is a message from the Father, delivered to us, the readers of the Book of Mormon, directly from our Savior.
This post is the kind of apostate garbage that Boyack has attracted t9 his channel. One would thin that would give him pause but nope.
I watched the video Gwendolyn had on polygamy and the scriptures, it seemed to follow from the scriptures that we were in trouble for practicing polygamy and were warned and told to stop but it also said in the scriptures that god would not abandon his people despite these mistakes. That makes me feel reassured that we are still his people to help gather Israel in the last days.
I think it’s possible he was wrong but didn’t quite understand that he got it wrong. At least I hope. God let’s us have agency and I think that god allowed the mistakes and in the end it would benefit us as a people in some ways. But I don’t think it is doctrine.
I’ve gotten to the point where this all the pain and suffering from this will be worth it if…
1. We help save the constitution as a people
2. We help guide the world away from polygamy because of our mistakes. Birth rates are starting to decline and this will be pushed at some point if Christ doesn’t come first.
It feels we are needing to figure out polygamy now for what might be proposed in the future.
This is an incredible exposition of the early history of the church as it relates to four very problematic doctrines taught earlier which have since been repudiated. I am so grateful to Connor for sharing.
Hey Connor, another video very well done! Just one request - could you provide links to your sources? Not all are created equal and I’d like to verify them to see the providence of the quotes from which they came. 1852 seems to be a big year of doctrinal innovation! Also, I’m surprised the Church is still going with the idea that “there have been times when God has commanded His children to practice plural marriage.” About a year from now, we’ll be studying about this from the Come Follow Me manual.
I got baptized in the Restored church at age 19 after a profound spiritual manifestation when I was pondering what I read in the Book of Mormon. It was made known to me that Jesus Christ is the Savior of men and we can have hope through him and we are children of God. Though I grew up in Pocatello Idaho, which has lots of Mormons, I had not believed in or known these things. I became very zealous about the gospel and the church and spent time searching the scriptures and the conference talks and church manuals and history books. I have mostly read the Book of Mormon since my baptism, but also loved the Doctrine and Covenants and the church history stories. So I just accepted the narrative about Joseph instituting polygamy by revelation. Seemed weird but I had received unmistakable confirmation from the Spirit about his role in the Restoration, so I figured Gods thoughts are higher than my thoughts, and accepted plural marriage thinking it was done by calling from those with priesthood keys or whatever. There was the verse in Jacob 2 that was used to make me think sometimes God commanded it to raise up seed unto himself.I hadn’t really questioned it until I saw your videos. I appreciate what you shared and I am convinced that it didn’t come from Brother Joseph. While I feel that is a very serious and awful thing that they deceived me, I am also sticking with the Brighamite Branch because I believe this is where the Priesthood is despite the weakness or even wickedness of certain members or even leaders or presidents. I admire the work of the current leadership though they may be wrong on some things, I suspect they are more righteous and devoted to God than me, though I love Jesus and strive to follow Him. I pray the Book of Mormon is read more and testimonies are shared far and wide so more people can know the glorious true doctrines of the restoration and get baptized if they want.
Hi, I look at it as simply part of the pride cycle that God's people are always in on some level. Words of Mormon starting verse 14 --as it introduces King Benjamin tells us how the Lord eventually fixes things.
I read the book "wihtout disclosing my true identity " now I know That the corporation of the Church of later day saint have nothing to do with Joseph Smith.
Yep.@@TIMOTEO-y2o
This was sooooooo well done! Conner, I don’t know how you pulled it off, but you just destroyed Brigham Young’s credibility as a prophet in a non excommunicatable manner, lol. I, too, think we can repent of his awful doctrines (as a church and people) and move forward.
Also, I can imagine it took you quite a while to do this research and compile all this information. Thank you! I have waited for a presentation like this so I could send it out to about ten TBM friends and family who are unconvinced that JS was a monogamist or puzzled as to what to do about BY.
Thanks again!!
Love your comment! And Connor's presentation.
When you have truth--from the scriptures, and Brigham Young's own self condemning words, what can anyone really say?
Step out of the chains of Section 132 "principle & doctrine" of "many wives and CONCUBINES" folks, super liberating!
Maybe it was a “temporary commandment;)”
😂😂😂
The reason apologists will defend Young to the hilt, is to not discredit the line of succession. Way to sell your souls there Central Fratites.
The infallibility of the Prophet, and the Church cannot have been that far in the wrong is false doctrine. When we base our testimony with the Prophet being our Chief Cornerstone instead of Christ, we are walking on thin ice...
I do not find you annoying in the least! I love your work; please continue.
Conner can you give me an example of when BY taught a correct doctrine?
This is a long conversation I have been having constantly for the last two years, and I haven't been able to organized it as well as you have here. Can someone inform CWIC media about this.
CWAC Media, you mean? 😂
I hope it registered what you pointed out Thomas Bullock saying since he is one of the people we get the King Follett discourse from and who recorded the talk in the grove.
6:15 the Saints thrived because of Brigham Young? Absolutely not. The Saints were dirt broke, sodbuster poor, largely because of the heavy taxation Brigham put on them. 10% tithing plus 10% interest if they were not able to pay. Many of them, ultimately losing their animals and their property for not being able to “pay a full tithe“ to him. Keep in mind that Brigham Young, nor any of the apostles were required to pay any tithing.
Do as I say, not as I do.
Read the autobiography of Elder Charles Derry for a really good look at what it was like to be under Brigham‘s Tyranny.
Can you tell me where Brigham Young charged interest on tithing? And where they didn't pay tithing themselves?
@@tinkeringengr There are sources like Hemlock Knots (who cite all their statements to back up things like this). If you read about their tithing timeline it has these entries and the year that it happened. BY was considered filthy rich during his tenure as the Pres of the Church. He tried to make the position of President pass on to his sons to keep the legacy going but it didn't work for whatever reason. In the end the church had to pay off BY's families something like $600,000 in 2020 USD to make clean breaks with the church's assets and BY's assets.
@@tinkeringengr It was a vote held by the 12 shortly after the martyrdom of brother Joseph. I am sick of looking it up every-time I find a lazy learner asking for it instead of researching the matter themselves.
The 10% interest I had not heard, but I know there were taxes placed by the territorial governor... I also know that the fast offering was established after the Saints had fled west. Brigham also made it a point to rob the bishops storehouse to fund his many wives and refused charity to the poor widow that did not agree to be wed again.
Brigham also tried to give away the church buildings the saints had built. He wanted them to be an inheritance to his children.
Just a warning, if you ever get a copy of the Book of Mormon without the headings and chapter points, I would not read it. You might become aware of other things that are contrary to the operations of the Church today verse what the Book of Mormon outlined.
@@tinkeringengr I’ve read that particular fact in a few different places over the last few years, but I believe most recently in Charles Derry’s autobiography. That book is easily available online. It’s very enlightening. He was a very faithful man, a convert to the church over in England, and then he migrated to the United States, and then went west to the Salt Lake Valley. He lived amongst the early latter-day Saints and what he experienced there is very eye-opening. Food shortages for some but not all, starvation of some, Brigham’s tyranny, Brighams horrible abuse of many people.
Throughout my church membership I’ve been led to believe that Brigham Young was a wonderful leader and a godsend to the people and the early church. Without him the church would have never prospered, yada yada. But now I more accurately understand what a tyrannical leader he really was. The abuse that he handed down to those who disagreed with him. the many wives who switched husbands occasionally moving up the ranks of the priesthood ladder. Couples who refused to go through the temple and take blood oaths were sometimes disrobed and their bodies painted in human feces publicly. Certain men were castrated when not in compliance with the wishes of certain church leadership. those no longer wishing to live under tyrannical rules would willingly leave their possessions and try to sneak away to California or back to the east in the middle of the night. Many were caught by Brigham’s goons and suffered death for trying to escape. Brigham‘s doctrine of blood atonement was practiced on many occasions. A man or woman might be encouraged to have their own bloodshed for them by experiencing “the celestial smile“ by having their throats cut from ear to ear, their blood spilled upon the ground, and then their bodies buried. Brigham taught that it would be an honor to die that way, being found clean of all sin on the other side of the veil.
Brigham was a lifelong Freemason, a very dark individual, and certainly was not called by God to be his prophet and leader. Brigham called for the murders of most of the Timpanogos Indian tribe shortly after reaching the Salt Lake Valley. Brigham called for the murders of various travelers, passing through the area trying to get to California. Brigham frequently had his goons steal cattle from various travelers. Most notably is the murders of 120 people traveling from Arkansas to California. These innocent travelers were either shot or beaten to death with clubs at Brigham‘s command. For nearly 16 years people lied for Brigham and covered up the truth duringan intense federal investigation.
Children six years and younger at Mountain Meadows were brought back to the Salt Lake Valley and distributed amongst Mormon families. 17 children in total. An 18th girl, a little seven-year-old was discovered in the wagon load of children. She was unloaded because she was old enough to “tell tales”. She was taken just over a hill where she was beaten to death with a club.
All of the assets belonging to these 120 travelers were collected, their teams and wagons, their household furniture, their money, their clothing, and their large herd of cattle. Even the clothes they were wearing was removed from their dead bodies. Everything was taken back into town and presented to Brigham Young. Brigham gladly accepted all of the treasures, and the little children, but always denied any involvement. All of the men involved in this most atrocious and evil thing that happened on American soil kept their knowledge vague and adamantly denied Brigham‘s involvement. When John D Lee realized that his adopted father, Brigham Young had thrown him under the bus and blamed everything on him he had a change of heart, called for a scribe, and sang like a canary. He told in detail, how Brigham had arranged everything and how he had his own personal troops carry out every detail.
The Book of Mormon speaks frequently about secret combinations and an abominable church that would become apostate and polluted. It’s speaking specifically about Brigham Young hijacking the restored church away from Joseph Smith the Prophet, by way of Secret Combinations and muder. The scriptures talk frequently about lying‘s, deceiving‘s, priestcrafts and muder’s. It’s very obvious who and what the Book of Mormon prophets were talking about.
@@psmith535 Brigham's tell could have come from the pages of Ether. Riplakish comes to mind.
Would you ever do a podcast with Jacob Hansen on polygamy? I think it would be interesting to have you speak to him since you have a different approach to polygamy compared to Michelle Stone. I think it would make for a much more interesting conversation
I hope this makes sense as I'm no scholar. But this is the way I've seen the discussion from both sides. Connor uses sources that would be used to prove anti mormon talking points wrong and defend Joseph. Jacob uses those same sources to prove anti mormon talking points wrong as well. BUT the same sources to prove Joseph practiced polygamy in the way Brigham did. So if those sources are wrong on some things, why are they not wrong on Polygamy.
I also don't understand this need to defend polygamy by members. The church doesn't defend it.
Or Greg Madsen
@puddles609 I think the reason some people try to defend polygamy comes from trying to reconcile the doctrine of Eternal Families with the reality that there are people who have been married more than once in this life. The other reason why some members defend polygamy is because 3 different presidents of the Church who are regarded as prophets claim the practice was allowed by God. If polygamy is not from God, one could conclude that it was adultery. That would mean that God who members of the Church claim is at the head of this Church allowed 3 presidents of His Church to practice and teach adultery. The same God that had no problems preventing Abimelech twice from taking either Sarah or Rebekah as wife. But suddenly God is not able to reach His prophets and call them to repentance. Same God that took the Golden plates from Joseph Smith and prevented him from translating when he was not obeying his commandments suddenly is shy to send angel to Brigham, John Taylor and Wilford Woodruf and command them to stop adultery.
In summary claiming that polygamy is always a sin opens a lot more questions than it answers.
@@WyoCutlass71 I prefer Connor's musings to stay the way they are. It's refreshing to hear honesty without it being attacked and defended. Jacob and Greg do it for a job, to draw viewers, get likes. Connor has no personal motivation other than bringing Truth to those willing to listen.
@@Nunya45573 I’m not saying that they need to do a regular thing. I just think it would be interested in a conversation
Just because blood atonement is not necessary today, does not mean it wasn't in cases before. Fielding Smith did not deny his words before. Requirements often change as the world changes. I think Brigham was too forward thinking. The world was not ready. How said that Brigham was wrong for his day?
Hey Connor, when you read quotes, you should show the sources as well as the quote. It'd just make things easier for those who are wanting to learn more.
Nice job gathering all this information. I would ask that you cite the references explicitly so that people can look up the information themselves.
Amazing musing. Will be waiting for part 2. By the way I realized I am watching this from the Dominican Republic
All right, let’s see how many relatives Brother Brigham’s family produced. Raise your hand! 🙋🏼♀️ 5th great niece here. Lol
There would be many more without polygamy- he only had 57 children and 56 wives, all those women married monogamously would’ve had hundreds
@@HMcC0712 Love it. 1000% true!!!
@@HMcC0712I don’t think all of those were consummated
@@livinthedream4479 I’m not sure but I know many were neglected and without the opportunity to have children
@@HMcC0712 That was my thoughts. Why would a 50 year old man need to marry more wives to raise up seed unto the Lord when there are usually more men than women... Young men that wanted families... Whereas Brigham used his wives as a status symbol.
Seems to me as if someone who shared Brigham Young's beliefs in the false doctrines of blood atonement and polygamy MAY have reincarnated decades later as Chad Daybell.
chad was just a adulterous monster and he and valerie murdered kids for fun period....sounds like they had a lot of demons talking to them and maybe even inviting them into their lofe and talking to them
Chad day ell is a psycho path don't blame the church for his mental illness.
I think Brigham said things to see who would believe his BS.
He said, people dressed like pilgrims live on the moon. Furthermore, he said people live on the sun.
The above is paraphrasing...not verbatim.
What you are stating was second hand claims from some member's journals and scientists of Joseph Smith's and Brigham Young's time openly stated that there was life on the moon ,sun, Mars, Venus.
In fact the claim that there was canals on Mars which testified that there was for instance life on Mars.
Paraphrasing is right. You're attributing the somewhat erroneous "Quakers on the moon" quote from Joseph Smith to Brigham Young.
This is just misleading.
@@Misa_Susaki You are misquoting the 2nd hand claims of a mere member who claimed that he overheard Joseph saying that tthe inhavitants of the moon were "dressed LIKE Quakers""""!!!!
So WAY TO GO you just fabricated your very own non-existent quote.
So YOU are the one being misleading!!!!!
NO the quotes come from some run of the mill members who made some after the fact claims of what they claim that they overheard Joseph Smith say in their journals ....
You won't find those comments in any Church canon or any of Joseph Smith's recorded sermons.
IF Joseph Smith believed that ....
History shows that like the King Follett discourse that Joseph would have preached it from the pulpit.
Considering the claims of scientists of the time....
That claim wouldn't have been anymore controversial that the claims that scientists were viewing buildings and canals through their telescopes...
WHERE do you thikk that the "canals on Mars" claims came from???????
You want to ignore the fact that well respected scientists of the day were stating that the moon ,Mars, Venus and the Sun were all inhabited and they "backed up" their claims by stating that they'd seen the evidence of advanced civilizations through their telescopes. That "evidence" included buildings , canals and even claims of seeing the people through their telescopes...
Even "IF" Joseph Smith speculated that their were people on the moon and speculated how they might have dressed....
His speculations ( IOWs - NOT via divine revelation!!!! ) would have been based in the "scientific" "knowledge" of his day.
In our more "enlightened" day it's easy for anti-s like yourself to scoff at what was widely discussed "scientific fact" that there were people living on the other planets and the moon and even the sun.
What so called "Christians" want to sweep under the rug is that there were also many "Christian" preachers on record who also put in their two cents speculations concerning life on the moon , Venus, Mars, and the Sun.
Of course since scientists now want to colonize other planets and the moon and since it'd be hard for an 19th Century guy to describe space suits....
It really wouldn't shake my faith at all to find out that Joseph Smith MIGHT HAVE instead received a revelation concerning future human colonies of other planets and/or the moon with Joseph trying to describe what a space suit might look like.
It's way past time for you to spill the beans to then tell us all about your own w/o any error at all beliefs?????
@@Misa_Susaki The quote is from a telling many many years after the fact and Smith was conveniently DEAD. And like you said, BY did not say it. Smith may or may not have said it.
Connor, I don't have your email address, so maybe you will see this here. I have a quote I thought you might be interested in, if you haven't already seen it. It is from a conference talk given in April of 1996 by Elder Earl C. Tingey quoting President Hinckley. Elder Tingey reports being in a recent regional training meeting where President Hinckley expressed concern that members of the Church may have a tendency to take on the ways of the world. Hinckley said: "We don't adopt them immediately, but we slowly take them on, unfortunately."
I hope this is helpful. It goes along with President Hinckley's other statement I have heard you use about taking on the slow stain of the world.
Accepting the whoredom of polygamy makes it so much easier to take on the stains of the world. Romans 9. Jeremiah 23.
Can’t wait for part 2. I agree with you 100% that we need to face these things head on and stay and encourage people to stay and learn to “distinguish truth from error”.
With much the research I have done into Utah history, specifically settler/native relations, it has been my experience that acknowledging the horrors and mistakes of the past, on all sides, leads to healing and reconciliation. Keep talking my friend!
Haha that comment summed up my experience with this channel so well haha. I love you Connor and your insights! I definitely don't agree with all your takes, but I appreciate them and you help me question and solidify my beliefs and thoughts! You help me think deeply!
Glad to hear it!
Jacob Hansen from "Thoughtful Faith" has done videos destroying the false notion that Joseph Smith didn't practice polygamy.
We have too many prudes in the Church who can't live with the fact that Joseph Smith was BOTH a Prophet & an absolute "Chad".
Absolutely
Brigham did say Heber C Kimball was his prophet.
So you don't believe men are imperfect and make bad decisions? Polygamy was not a commandment of God. Says so right in the Bofm
ive read so many church brigham books and 16 minutes in im hearing stuff i dont think ive ever read.....
guess i have more reading to do....the more i learn the more dissonance i feel and im just ...eh...this adam god thing sounds soooo weird
Have you ever read the church essays on these topics on the church website? Have you heard about those?
@@rhyde0731 i havent used the church website since it was revised a couple years ago....once i realized they had cut whole chapters in some teachings of the prophet manuals and put rainbow lgbt tree of lifes on primary manuals i stopped using their stuff for the most part.
Ive got a lot of old church books and books written by or on behalf of a bunch of apostles and prophets so overall i know more church history then most lds people its just that obviously stuff like what conner is talking about isnt in all those cause edits have happened since before i was born
@@wufflerdance9481 I ask because they came out in 2014 but are largely unknown to the average member. Elder Ballard told CES employees they should know them (the essays) like the back of their hand - yet most members don’t even know they exist. Very interesting to me.
@@rhyde0731 They are historical fiction....
at this point....i feel like we need Christ's 2nd coming mostly to fix all the false teachings that are happening in his name and dont make sense anymore ......
what a mess
I see why conner needs a part 2 on this topic......a lot of stuff
Great presentation! I agree with your findings because I did the research and came to the same understanding.
It's amazing how they gaslight their members. The JWs do the same when their leaders receive "new light."
What about the Latterday lamanite prophet good enough for Conference in 1947 but no longer discussed? 2 Nephi 3:24. Perhaps there's more to the narrative. Perhaps not.
I was under the impression you were going to make an argument proving that Joseph didn't practice polygamy. But simply saying 'There's no evidence' isn't enough. There's so much evidence, both primary sources (see Oliver Cowdery's accusation regarding Fanny Alger, Sidney and Nancy Rigdon responding to the Happiness Letter, or the diaries of many of Joseph's wives, as well as some of the men who officiated at some of the ceremonies, like Newell K Whitney) and contemporary sources. Waving away the mountains of evidence for Joseph's polygamy and polyandry as Brigham Young's grand conspiracy is not an argument, it's just a claim, and an irresponsible one at that. As much as I would love to blame everything on Brigham Young, Joseph Smith had his problems too.
ruclips.net/video/bLbLQR95zj8/видео.htmlsi=pvr1ZkMSFOk3FW1l
This is the best video synopsis on this complicated subject that I’ve found. It specifically analyzes the evidence you reference.
I’ve done a separate musing on this in more depth already. The “primary” sources you cite are full of holes and as I make clear in that other musing, people at the time, and now, allege Joseph was sleeping with women while all it appears he was doing, if anything, was eternal sealing in a broad familial sense-not temporal marital relations with their conjugal allowances.
@cboyack The major problem with dismissing the evidence is that the evidence FOR the most essential church events are just as dubious, if not more so. Even the origin of the doctrine of eternal marriage comes from D&C 132 originally, at least scripturally. The First Vision has very suspicious documentation, the BoM translation story has contradictory accounts from much later, the Doctrine & Covenants revelations, or the Endowment. So why do you look at some sources with historical skepticism, but accept others at face value?
I love ur content brother! U keep it real. I don't believe Brigham was a prophet. His way or the highway. Lots of people ended up murdered under him. I want to believe the current brother is a prophet but can't wrap my head around decisions they continually make. While I feel confused about the church the gospel I live. Jesus 2024!
A cafeteria Member of the church? Pick and choose whatsoever fits your point of view?
@wheels636 That's literally the *opposite* of what @b-rad3013 was saying. Following Jesus Christ in all things is the *only* way to have the whole meal, and is the farthest thing from picking and choosing according to our own desires.
There are certainly a lot of falsehoods taught in the church (unless you believe God commanded 8-year-olds to not be baptized because of the sins of their adopted homosexual parents, or that we should be "strongly urged" to alter our DNA, and many more examples that are too many to list here), and we need to carefully and prayerfully discern truth from error, and separate the wheat from the chaff.
Do you believe in prayer, or do you believe there are some things one doesn't need to pray about (2 Nephi 32: 8)? Do you believe we should simply accept everything we're told from authority figures, or that we should find out the truth -- with all of its nuances -- for ourselves (Moroni 10: 4-5)? Do you believe the gift of discernment should be ignored, or sought after (Doctrine and Covenants 46: 8)?
@@wheels636 so we should get our daily download from 501 c3 corporation on what to think? Not think for ourselves? If you believe The “cafeteria member” statement you are devoid of critic thinking. I feel sorry for you
@@MagnusTheBiased-tw6zy The commandments are hard for some to live. Always have been and always will be. I believe the church is Jesus Christ's true church. Sad so many want to pick it apart.
@@wheels636it's not the commandments that are a problem. It's leadership telling us something is a commandment, and then years later, telling us it was never a commandment. Case in point, Brigham teaching polygamy is required for the celestial kingdom. 40 years later, polygamy is not required. Imagine being a woman 40 years earlier and having your life threatened to be destroyed by God if you were not a polygamist wife. And then 40 years later it turns out that was not actually required. And yet that is precisely what happened. So it's not a matter of living the commandments. It's really a matter of deciphering what are actually God's commandments versus man-made commandments.
The argument that Adam God and blacks in the priesthood we're not doctrinal to me are very clear. After Brigham passed away the quorum of the 12 got together they brought back Orson Pratt and they voted to say Orson we agree with you it's not doctrine but we weren't going to go against Brigham. For blacks in the priesthood we admitted it was a mistake we don't know why to me that's pretty much admitting it's a mistake so it wasn't doctrinal. But there could be an element of doctrine versus practice. And this is the problem I get with polygamy. Some people will say President Hinckley said it's not doctrine but others argue that in that Larry King interview President Hinckley said it was not doctrinal to practice it anymore President Hinckley emphasized we don't practice it it's not in the program. I haven't seen any general authorities come out and say it was a false doctrine. So my thinking is maybe it is doctrine and that it's just not practiced anymore. When you consider Jacob in the House of Israel there are 12 sons that became the 12 tribes Jacob had those sons with four different wives kind of seems like God approved that? Also there is the kind of murky issue about Oliver cowdery taking a second wife, Ann Lyman, and he did it because he said Joseph and he received the revelation section 132 or at least the principle of plural marriage was given to them by revelation. But Oliver jumped the gun and got married outside of the permission or Revelation to the prophet to do so.
I need to go look up the charges against Oliver when he was excommunicated I think in 1838 I don't know if plural marriage was one of the reasons.
My guess is part 2 will deal with plural marriage. Here is a preview of what Boyack (and those like him) claim:
1. Brigham Young and many other prophets and apostles not only lied about the origins of plural marriage but used those lies as an excuse to commit adultery for decades, as well as cause others to commit adultery.
2. Every prophet and apostle from Brigham up to President Nelson has either lied about the history of plural marriage or is at least wholly ignorant of it.
3. Doctrine & Covenants 132, only a fraction of which concerns plural marriage by the way, should be decanonized.
I agree with most of the premises you laid out in this video, attributing blood atonement, Adam-God Theory and the Priesthood ban to Brigham. But wholly attributing Polygamy to Brigham and ignoring the evidence Joseph practiced polygamy (the evidence that predates Joseph’s death, the LDS/RLDS split, and the Church’s legal battles decades later with the federal government) is outright irresponsible - Oliver Cowdery literally left the Church while Joseph was still alive because of the Fanny Alger incident - why do you ignore such data in order to affirm these revisionist narratives that Joseph never practiced any kind of polygamy in any shape or form when there is clearly evidence to the contrary?
There is no evidence that predates Joseph's death. There are no children. The legal battles cite largely unsigned affidavits from women decades later, the vast majority of whom didn't write them. Cowdery didn't leave, he was excommunicated for unfounded claims; no contemporary evidence exists of any sexual/marital relationship with Fanny.
@@cboyackYou are lying when you say there is no evidence. The letter Oliver wrote saying he saw Joseph, the hate Emma had towards Fanny, and the council minutes that discussed Fanny are all evidences that are contemporary no matter how many times you say otherwise. At least use correct language and say there is no proof instead of no evidence.
@@jonny6man Hatred from a woman that tried to get into bed with that woman's husband would be understandable, even if the husband said hell no. An honest man would have brought forward the advances and warned others about it. It would also be called a nasty affair.
@Veevslav1 Okay? Yeah, that's a possible scenario. The entire situation is still evidence for Joseph having sex with someone. Nobody should dismiss evidence as if it doesn't exist even if it is something small, and this incident and everything surrounding it isn't small evidence. It was enough evidence that people years later either lied about it or Joseph really did marry her.
Yes, Brigham taught false doctrine, no question, thank you Connor, for your research and talking about this. I’m with you, I believe Brigham did a great job leading the church after Joseph in a very difficult time but clearly taught some false and destructive doctrine that the church will forever wrestle with, especially polygamy and the priesthood ban that were absolutely not revelation, but came from Brigham’s own ideas. I firmly believe we have this today with abortion as the church had no stance on it in early days, then came out strongly against it, demanding anyone caught having an abortion, for any reason, or aiding in one, in any way, will be excommunicated. Today, the church is opposed to abortion, except in cases of rape, incest, or severe medical complications of the mother and/or fetus, and won’t be excommunicated. In 30 years, the church will likely change their stance again and say abortion is not recommended, when it can be avoided, but it’s the mother’s choice as all women have full agency over their bodies and decisions, and leave it at that. The church has softened its views on gay marriage as well. As Latter-day Saints, we need to understand that there’s very, very little revelation actually given to mankind over human history, and the main revelation we have is to love God by serving and forgiving one another, and love one another, and don’t judge as Christ atoned for us, and was resurrected, making it possible to be forgiven and return to God, and progress through the eternities with eternal life. Most everything doesn’t matter. We need to understand that virtually all scripture is history, genealogy and opinions, with very little actual essential revelation.
This shows that he was a false prophet.
I suggest going to Thoughtful saints a couple days ago. They layed out why Joseph Smith DID practice polygamy using the evidence from his day.
@@wheels636 Both of them are admitted apologists for the church. If Joseph did what the church says he did, then he was a fallen prophet, even the worse of liars and hypocrites because of what he said on record, while alive. He condemned it in the strongest language possible.
@@rilum97The Bible clearly records that the prophet Elijah took 500 Baal priests down to a river, and killed them all, just for having a different belief. Bizarre actions and teachings from many prophets.
@@rilum97 Actually, it shows that God foresaw and acted on the fact that prophets are fallible, because he had already established the quorums of the First Presidency and Twelve.
Mormon Polygamy History by Robert Wagoner says differently on Joseph.
You bring this author up, but avoid the details in his book about Joseph's polygamy.
This video is a great analysis of the evidence alleging Joseph’s Polygamy. I recommend it.
ruclips.net/video/bLbLQR95zj8/видео.htmlsi=NMxDOwrCftOPUGWF
There's a lot of historical nuance you are missing on the Journal of Discourses, it is my understanding that the main problem with it, besides the content was the writers, I can't remember all there was on this, but the writers themselves were not as reliable as we'd like them to be.
Additionally, Brigham's preaching style was one that was functional in context only, and written and out of context it was very "fire and brimstone" heavy and exaggerated on purpose. I'm sure that mixed in all of that there's also weird ideas that he genuinely had, but you can't just read the JoD without understanding its intrincacies first.
Was there a revelation given on July 12, 1843 to the High Council in Nauvoo? What was that the revelation?
Joseph Smith talked about it. See Michelle Stone's episode on section 132.
@@BridgeBuilder-x4c what was revealed at the July 12, 1843 High Council meeting? Do we have 1st hand accounts from those in attendance, people that were anti-polygamist, those that opposed Brigham Young? What did they say?
Why would Brigham need to be secretive if it was authorized?
Jesus Christ taught in parables. WHY did He do that if He was revealing saving truths?????
@@robca6013 The Lord was a master teacher. He certainly did not teach in parables to prevent people from learning it. What a ridiculous notion. Secret oaths, secret ordinances, secret abominations are akin to secret combinations, not teaching in parables.
2 Nephi 26
23 For behold, my beloved brethren, I say unto you that the Lord God worketh not in darkness.
24 He doeth not anything save it be for the benefit of the world; for he loveth the world, even that he layeth down his own life that he may draw all men unto him. Wherefore, he commandeth none that they shall not partake of his salvation.
@@elchilero7091 Wow way to NOT get it!!!!!
There are things that Heavenly Father won't reveal to the world or even to His own only Begotten Son...
....
For instance when the 2nd Coming is going to happen.... Even Jesus Christ doesn't know the day, etc. !!!!
Matthew 13 : 10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? 11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. 12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. 13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
-14 And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:
15 For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
16 But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. 17 For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.
Paul did it too! :
1 Corinthians 3 : 2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
@@elchilero7091 Are you speaking of the temple ordinances which were already being put in place by Joseph Smith before Brigham Young became the 2nd prophet of this dispensation????
The first ordinances of baptism and the Gift of the Holy Ghost by the Laying on of hands by those who hold the proper authority are what is offered to the investigators and baptism and the Gift of the Holy Ghost are saving ordinances.....
Many investigators have a hard time accepting those basic ordinances and so the sacred ordinances performed in the temple are a step that they need to get taught to them using the proper
Thus more knowledge is taught when the convert is ready.
Satan tries to sidestep that process especially recently because he has enticed people to put you tube videos of the endowment ordinances and people who are not ready get exposed to the sacred ordinances before they have even accepted baptism and the Gift of the Holy Ghost..
So there is nothing wrong at all with the "milk before the meat" process for those who are "infants" in the Gospel"!!!!
@@elchilero7091 Since you are quoting the Book of Mormon you'll need to read how and why ,etc. the Secret Combinations were done so that the secret combination types could overthrow the legitimate government through murder and then become personally super powerful and super rich from the stolen plunder which they offered to the gullible so that they would join the secret combination to add numbers to the secret combination so that they'd become so numerous they they could even defy nations' armies.
You are barking up the wrong tree....
The secret combinations are currently infiltrating our government to overthrow it .
The mafia, drug cartels and Communism fit the description of secret combinations NOT Brigham Young..
Suggestion: sometimes your audio isn’t synced up very well with the video. 😏
Otherwise, very well researched, and delivered! Thank you, because many of us have very faithful ancestors who sacrificed a great deal during polygamy days…in various ways. 🤔
Me too, sad and was not the sacrifice that the Lord was asking for....
"By their fruits ye shall know them." Isn't that how the scriptures teach us to have discernment? When I look at Brighams fruits it's really hard for me to think he was just a misguided yankee guesser. He showed his colors and where his heart was through his words and actions.
I need to know how you can say all this and still not find the truth? In order to have Faith, you have to have a correct understanding of the nature and character of God. Joseph cleared that in the Lectures on Faith. Brigham Young believed in a God that was different than the God that Joseph encountered in the grove. Later Wolford Woodruff changed the belief in God to remove the Adam God doctrine of BY and moved toward a more scripture based definition. Even Later, after quite a few books, McConkie and Fielding Smith furthered the definition, continue on and you have Hinkley letting us know how pro family we are and it is one man and one woman (spitting in BY face) and made a church wide proclamation. Then Russel Nelson goes and says that we have have excommed Gay couples be members of the church, taking the first step into accepting full homosexual and any other config to be accepted as proper. All of these men demonstrate a different understanding of the Nature an Character of God, so they cannot all be wrong. One last note, I would believe nothing BY taught, he was not a prophet...
Good Job doing your research!! The truth of this matter is in the Lectures on Faith. Lecture 5 is the key, let god reveal it.
Explain this: "I beheld till the thrones were cast down, and the Ancient of days did sit, whose garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool: his throne was like the fiery flame, and his wheels as burning fire.
10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened...13 I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him.
14 And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." (Daniel 7:9,10, 13-14) What is depicted here? The Ancient of days (Adam, the oldest man) sits on his throne. Who comes to Father Adam? The Son of Man. What was given to the Son? the dominion and kingdom are given to the Son from the Father.
There you go, its right in the Scriptures. Can you believe the Scriptures as they are written, without twisting them to say something else?
BY taught temporary commandments.
As I listen to this musing, it becomes more and more evident to me how the story of Brigham Young, messed up the church. I personally like the church the way it is today. It's not perfect but it's a good organization and does much good. However, it concerns me that unless we change our narrative about Brigham Young, there always will be a chance for someone like him to raise to the general authority position and even become a prophet. That is my fear. Hopefully, that will not happen. I think right now we have very good men in the Quorum.
Well we do need to get own up to the history and exonerate Joseph Smith, Emma Smith and Hyrum Smith. And what leaves us vulnerable is the false doctrine that the Prophet cannot lead us astray--that the Lord will not allow it. It is not scriptural and it is cultish. The prophet is not the chief cornerstone--it is the Lord.
I don't need to instruct the Church on this but I am bound to teach my children this truth.
the key to "true " restored Mormon Christians is the "authority" that they listen to which...should be the Holy Ghost..Alone. Once it is realized that the Holy Ghost within, is and should be the final authority....both prophets and leaders and servants will be put in their proper place...which is a tool of God and therefore a tool of the membership. Now in the OT God shows us the place of tools.....shall the axe wield itself against the one who uses it? " ...nope. Peace.
Why are you still a member of the LDS / Brighamite church?
My next musing addresses this question.
@cboyack i would suggest talking about how the high priesthood is given only by YHWH's own voice
Indeed he did, I guess that shows his human side.many took his opinions as doctrine..it still happens today in the church..the Doctrine The Bible, The Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price, everything else falls outside the canon. Sure there are revelations and translations and understanding of doctrines, but the source is always the Holy Ghost and though not included in canon of scripture can be considered doctrine because truth cannot be refuted. However in such case they are only applicable to the salvation of whom the message is given. When is canonized then it becomes doctrine for the church
Yes.
Concerning Blood Atonement. D&C 132:26 clearly teaches that there is something to this idea (i.e., that under certain conditions a person must have his/her own blood shed as part of the repentance and redemptive process - as well as spending a season in hell). I think that a careful search of the scriptures would produce more evidence of such an idea or doctrine, though it is almost unknown in the Church.
Those who oppose any such idea are probably also opposed to capital punishment even for the worst crimes and generally softball sin, which it is hard not to do given current norms in our society (e.g., almost everyone has a close relative, friend or acquaintance who was, or is, “living in sin,” so how can sexual sin be very serious, or even be a sin at all, since “everyone is doing it,” and my son, daughter, father, mother, etc. (fill in the relationship) “is a good person” and certainly not guilty of a sin “next to murder,” or any sin at all, and surely does not deserve to be punished.
Now a lot more needs to be said, and certainly the almost universality of what used to be seen as serious sexual sin in our society is a mitigating factor to one’s accountability. Only after a person guilty of such sin, or any other sin, is brought to a much higher and sufficient degree of understanding and accountability, which will not happen for almost everyone until they have long dwelt in the post-mortal spirit world, will their continued refusal to repent lead to divine punishment (suffering in hell, which is also rehabilitative or redemptive) and an eventual inheritance in the telestial kingdom.
Back to point, I realize that those who believe Young introduced plural marriage believe that he concocted what is now D&C 132, so verse 26 cannot be used to justify some concept of blood atonement since it was not given to Joseph by revelation.
🤢🤢🤮
Yes Conner Brigham just wasnt able to understand things just like that poor missunderstood king Noah. You were doing great until you got to that part. No such thing as evil. His persecution of the people were far worse than the percecution from outside the church.
The office of Prophet is a unique and special calling. It occupies the space between God and man and functions as a conduit of information from God to man primarily in the form of foretelling and in the form of revelation. This office has only one requirement, only one, and that is that the message of the prophet is true. The message must perfectly convey that which God wants known. Each time. Every time. There is no wiggle room. People make mistakes sure, but Prophets cannot make mistakes when God reveals to them what he wants his people to hear. What most people don't understand, people like Jacob Hansen, is that testing the prophet's message for its truthfulness is not the end point of the Biblical mandate. The Biblical mandate is not to test the message, the Biblical mandate is to test the PROPHET by the message. This is where Jacob Hansen's Collective Witness Model fails massively. Brigham Young did not "float" the idea of Adam God. He did not say, "hey folks I have this idea, lets discuss and come to a consensus". Rather, he pressed upon the people that Adam God is, THUS SAITH THE LORD. and your eternal destiny depends on what you do with this doctrine. What we must do then is junk the Collective Witness Model and follow the Biblical mandate by discarding the Adam God Theory as false AND discarding Brigham Young. He is a false prophet. And so, my question stands, why does the LDS Church own a university named after a false prophet?
I get your point, but there’s a risk in dismissing a prophet entirely based on one or even many false doctrines. By doing so, we may miss out on other true revelations. Rather than rejecting the prophet, we should test each message carefully, no matter the source. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Here is one time Brigham said something I agree with,
"I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him.
I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way.
Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves,
whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates,
or not."
I had 2 ancestors who were polygamists, and 1 who essentially gave it the test of Alma. He and his wife were unsure, but Brigham asked, so they brought a 19 year old girl into their home as a prospect, to help out.
After the experiment, my ancestor told Brigham Young to "Go to Hell."
Reading peoples accounts of polygamy, sadly, they went straight to marriage, realized it was hell--but by then the second wife was pregnant etc.
"Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty (!) authority, have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the Saints were told to do by their Presidents, they should do it without asking any questions.
When the Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience, as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their hearts to do wrong themselves, and wish to pave the way to accomplish that wrong...."
Millenial Star Vol. 14 #38 quoting Joseph Smith.
It brings to mind a lot of talks relating to water bottles of late... We have been warned and forewarned yet we ignore the warnings. The words of the apostles is not what we weigh words against, but the teachings in the scriptures is what we weigh the words of modern times against.
@@wayne2064 Would it not be better to find a clock that works rather than hope the broken clock is right when you need it? That only leaves 1338 out 1440 times each day when the clock is wrong. That is if we calculate it based on minutes. If it is seconds... it is wrong 86398 times each day to get 2 correct times.
@@Veevslav1 The teaching that the prophet cannot lead us astray if false and cultish. And, why would Nephi tell us to read Isaiah if a modern prophet is what we need? What does Jeremiah 23 mean? Who was Amos? A herdsman.
Connor, I think you should go back to listen to your musings on The King Follett Discourse and
The Sermon in the Grove (both of which were excellent btw).
It might be comforting that if the church decides polygamy was never actually a true doctrine, they can rewrite history in they same way they have with blacks and the priesthood, and all we like sheep will just go along with the new narrative.
The Church hasn't rewritten history with either. Those, both in and out of the Church, who understand neither the history or doctrine of both are the ones who have rewritten it.
As far as the "keys of authority" goes, according to D&C 121 those who lie, or perpetuate a lie, have no keys unless they repent. There is no "keys" in the LDS church today. They can assume whatever they want. "That the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.
37 That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.
(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 121:36 - 37) amen.
Wasn't Brigham Young teaching...human sacrifice?
Is this no different than the occult practices of Baal worship talked about in the old testament?
no he never taught human sacrifice😂
No he never taught human sacrifice😂
Oh really? Of course you are being facetious.
He never said the words ...human sacrifice.
However, what was done is human sacrifice!!
Yup. It was dressed differently and called by a different name, but that was just putting lipstick on a pig.
We should call it what it really was: human sacrifice.
Valerie Hudson has a great take on this subject that I believe is a helpful perspective. I couldn’t come close to articulating it and is worthy of some Google search for anyone interested.
The two trees is great and serves to help explain the reason for plural marriage. The problem is the revisionists are driven by emotion and don't want to hear it.
@@jaredshipp9207I think you are driven by emotion- denial and not being able to handle the truth
Connor - who was the enemy in D&C 101:51?
I speak as a Latter-day Saint forced into polygamy when my first wife who left me and left the Church refused to give permission for my sealing to her to be cancelled, so my second wife was given no choice but to be sealed to me as my second polygamous wife in the temple and thus to my first wife if she was to have the temple sealing she had been taught to hope for all her life. The nonsense we were told doctrinally to try and justify this was a major contributor to us losing any trust that the General Authorities have the first clue what they are doing, and concluding they are definitely not listening to a nice or rational God. The paper trail of idiotic doctrinal context for this we were told without explanation led eventually to D and C 132 promising a first resurrection to anyone who is sealed regardless of whether they get divorced later, confirming that Bruce R McConkie's Deadly heresies rant was wrong - being sealed in the temple IS the same thing as a Second Annointing guarantee of exaltation, having your 'calling and election made sure' - regardless of your behaviour and choices thereafter.
This is why the Church doesn't cancel temple sealings the moment a sealed couple get a legal divorce, which would be the rational thing to do if sealing is conditional upon faithfulness to God and each other as it is presented. It turns out it is nothing to do with a conditional covenant. It is a spell cast upon you by the temple priesthood like a curse from a wicked fairy in a fairy tale and the only people who can lift it are the First Presidency, who we were told by Area Seventies not to even bother asking because they would say no. Nothing to do with your own wishes or choices or faithfulness. They have in the latest iteration of the Handbook apparently changed the rhetoric at last to something about respecting people's choices, but we will have to see if that actually changes their control freakery about this.
What amazes me is how in years of anguished debate about polygamy in the Church I've never seen anyone address the simple issue that as soon as you add eternal marriage to the doctrinal equation you have to have polygamy. You can't have one without the other, and this just doesn't seem to occur to most faithful Latter-day Saints who love the temple but rail against polygamy. Polygamy is not an issue if you believe all marriages are dissolved at death and the afterlife heaven involves more than enough joyful blissing out with Jesus to make worrying whether you are doing marriage or not still totally irrelevant on those mainstream Christian models. But as soon as you try to make the messiness of real life human relationships and marriages into eternal marriage you open a pandora's box of complications that cannot be resolved without really complex polygamy. Even taking divorced marriages out of the equation, millions of people are widowed and remarry and have more children. How can you possibly force someone to choose between those healthy loving marriages eternally?
And the LDS church screws this up into even more dysfunctions by insisting only the women have to make that choice because men can have as many wives as they like. If you get rid of polygamy, eternal marriage is dead, or if you keep it as is it is a system of cruelty that leaves millions of spouses and children abandoned with no place in the system, or only as exchangeable property passed around the sealed eternal marriages of people who were not their spouse or parent in mortal life. So the Church has only one choice rationally - drop eternal marriage all together or allow women to be sealed to more than one husband the same as men can be sealed to more than one wife, which results in a lot of spouse sharing! Joseph Smith already modelled that with his sealings to women married to other men.
Unwilling to take either of those choices assertively, although both are slipping in under the radar as they endlessly tweak the rules, the General Authorities have instead continued to lose their minds and instead just announced that men can be sealed to a previous unmarried sexual partner who has died ... as long as their current eternal wife gives permission to add that concubine to their eternal marriage! You couldn't make it up. Do an episode about THAT Connor, I dare you. It's in the latest General Handbook update. With as always zero explanation of WHY. To repeat, because it seems unbeleivable bearing in mind the rest of Jacob, the First Presidency is now authorising men to be sealed to their unmarried sexual concubines in the temples while they already have sealed wives. Or technically as long as they have the permission of a living legal wife who is not a Church member sealed to them. That's another scenario allowed by the wording of this now policy. I wonder if this will turn out to be another of Dallin Oaks' 'temporary commandments'.
@@mormoncivilwar6189 You bring up some interesting ideas. It sounds like this has been a big challenge to you, and you’ve thought about it a lot.
@@towardcivicliteracy Thankyou 👍 Yes, being at the sharp end of the Church's ongoing temple polygamy is a rough ride!
Marriage and family are naturally eternal. It's an eternal universal natural law of nature, completely separate from what man made religions may teach.
It is a mess. Section 132 is a Salamander Letter. The Church admits they do not know what Joseph taught as doctrine per sealings.
So I don't know how they can be so sure he was a polygamist.
There is reason to believe there is eternal marriage in Heaven. If so, why are people trying to sort out the logistics?
That is what got Abram and Sarai to deny the power of God and use arm of flesh to solve the fact Sarai was barren.
Thank you.
Much like the Proclamation on the Family, the view of Brigham and his prophetic mantle is quickly becoming a real sifter in the Church. His critics tend to underestand neither the man or usual points they bring up to discredit him (Adam-god doctrine, blood Atonement, etc.) And, more often than not, they have either left the Church or are on their way out. Those who actually do understand the history and doctrine see a similar pattern with plural marriage, the priesthood restriction, and the temple endowment. All began with Joseph and expanded by Brigham. Joseph was the architect, Brigham the builder. But apostates, both in and out of the Church, like to lay anything they don't like at the feet of Brigham so they can still feign loyalty to Joseph and the Restoration.
Tisk tisk!
It is you who don’t understand and won’t- you stand by brigham over JS, what Christ actually said and gods law
@Hmcc0712 I stand with both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young. Both were prophets. You reject one prophet while claiming loyalty to another. And in so doing, you're rejecting the prophets today who you know would not agree with you. You, and those like you, are apostates. And it's all because you're weak, scripturally illiterate, and can't handle the issue of plural marriage. It's got nothing to do with what Joseph did or didn't do.
What about the Adam-God theory do we not understand? Brigham Young was pretty clear on it, I think. Honestly, it feels to me like something that could get someone excommunicated for teaching in the church today. It seems like heresy on the level of Gnostic teachings in the primitive church. Be careful who you call an apostate. Things aren’t as black and white as they seem in the teachings of the church
What about the Adam-God theory do we not understand? Brigham Young was pretty clear on it, I think. Honestly, it feels to me like something that could get someone excommunicated for teaching in the church today. It seems like heresy on the level of Gnostic teachings in the primitive church. Be careful who you call an apostate. Things aren’t as black and white as they seem in the teachings of the church
Whatever will happen to all the extra left over men, without wives or children, in the Celestial Kingdom?
I think the idea is that there are WAY more righteous women than men, so there won't be any left-overs. I feel like this totally appeals to the pride of women.
@@jk-mx7so There won't be any. Can't get there without plural marriage.
@@Washingtontree The way Brigham spoke about women, he sure didn't believe that there were more righteous women. Never heard him praise them, unless it was praise for their servitude.
@@Nunya45573 Agree
@@Nunya45573 The way he spoke about women hurt my heart, and I’m sure it hurt God’s heart to hear his precious daughter’s spoke of that way.
I'm no scholar. But it's my understanding that over the four thousand year biblical history, from Genesis to the Apostles, Gods servants have taught different things and introduced new doctrines. Even the Saviors Gospel seems contradictory to all the former. So did they by their own differences prove themselves to be false prophets. Or worse, does it prove God to be a false God? Why can't it be that God provides what is necessary for our advancement as needed and for his own purposes?
The inclination to disparage our prophets and servants, I think is premature. And I think the designation is to destroy our trust in God, and to take it upon ourselves to know what is best. At my conversion to the LDS Church, I became succinctly aware that my life and life in Gods spirit are an eternity apart. So if Gods servants are a little clumsy in steering, it is better to be a little clumsy in God than to be a total stranger to God, relying on myself alone. Otherwise that would make me the falsest of prophets, an accuser of my Brethren, and a law unto myself. Personally I love and admire Brigham Young. And I don't care what anybody says about him in criticism.
The LDS Missionaries who introduced me to their Church were youthful and had essentially no experience in life. Yet they brought to my home and heart the spirit of the eternal God who showed me in a vision that they were his servants. Gods endorsement is greater than my judgment.
BY often told people that JSJr told him things that could not be corroborated. His recollections of what JSJr would tell him were always a way to add weight/authority to what he, BY, was stating. He was a liar and slandered Emma and JSJr and Hyrum (and anyone else who crossed him) in order to bully and convince others that he was right. Do I think that people should leave the church b/c of BY? No, but I can understand why they would.
Knowing now what I know about BY, if I was a Utah Mormon, I hope I would have had enough sense and courage to leave Utah and the Utah church. The LDS church has spent the last 100 yrs trying to repent (undo) the mistakes of that era and still hasn't completely done it. But, I believe in the keys of the kingdom, I just think that BY's keys were not valid (121:34-46) and those keys may not have been valid for several decades.
❤❤❤
Yes, so did Joseph Smith!
'Reconcile'. ... and the Earth has had several iterations of 'creation' over the billions of years.
I still say that Joseph Smith was a polygamist based on the research Ive done. But I will say that I am deeply frustrated that "the church" has not had deeper discussions on this and many other topics over time. I am a devout believer but also understand why there are critics and why some who have fallen away are frustrated by shifts of "doctrine" or wildly opposing statements. Even the proclamation of the family has morphed into something much less than the original and its hurting family formation. I dont understand it. I cannot understand how it will be critical for me to survive spiritually in coming days and to receive revelation when I dont really see revelation from the church on key matters. I mean how in the heck could the apostles and prophets NOT be able to settle the blacks and the priesthood issue for decades? Instead I defended something incorrect and it does upset me that this could have been much more transparent along with MUCH of what Brigham young taught. If I need to have revelation to survive, but the leaders aren't revealing anything and cant straighten out divisive policy coming from their own offices, then what hope is there for the average member?
Do more research. See Karen Hyatt’s documentary “Wo Unto you Scribes: The Hidden History of Polygamy.” For a concise display of our history that demonstrates that Joseph, Hyrum, and Emma not only never practiced polygamy but were vehemently against it. When you realize that every bit of evidence accusing Joseph Smith of polygamy is all hearsay and so much of it is just provably false, then you can read Brigham’s D&C 132 and know that our Heavenly father would cease to be God if he treated and viewed his daughters in the manner that Brigham believed of women. The most damning evidence is Brigham and the early church leader’s own teachings and views on polygamy. King Noah couldn’t have written or taught a more condemning ideology. Let us stop accusing Joseph, but most importantly, our Heavenly Father of this heinous, abominable, whoredom.
There are many discussion on both these topics by LDS scholars. What exactly are you looking for? Are you waiting for the Church to put it on the home page of their website or as talks in General Conference or perhaps as a concluding speaker in Stake Conference?
Errors were made on all fronts and it’s out there in black and white. Each had explanations but you have to dig deep into each topic.
Personal revelation is what we all need. It comes from companionship with the Holy Ghost, and/or perhaps from the second comforter. This only comes from understanding the doctrine of Christ as the Holy Ghost testifies to you, individually. It comes from a reliance on the Holy Spirit, God, and his son Jesus Christ, especially over the arm of the flesh.
@@diegolucero9910 I appreciate your response and respect it and I understand and believe that. Im saying Id like to see more of that in the higher levels of church. In the past decades, what revelation have we seen? Please dont say the proclamation which is not canonized and which we have butchered and picked and chosen from in the past decade. We dont even talk about family roles anymore which was in it and now marriages are falling apart . We have reduced it to undefined "equality". And we've had mixed and even bad messaging for the past several years.
Joseph went and got answers and led the people and revealed things regularly despite wickedness all around him. Im still a devout member and even a well read defender but it does bother me that I defended blacks and the priesthood or other policy that was known internally in the higher ups as incorrect or maybe not correct for decades yet we were allowed to believe it was revelation. Could have simply gone through much of the major things and issued revelation on the core things that were wrong.
Yet we always hear that they couldn't get answers or even anything like hard revelation yet we rank and file are supposed to? Again, Im not doubting revelation but the youth are being torn up by the things that were brushed under the rug and now in full light of day and most members cant explain it or show where we corrected these major things until the damage was done.
I obey the word of wisdom yet when I read a hundred pages on how it came about, Im not even sure it was pure revelation but more the outcome of womens complaints about alcohol (probably justified ) and men retaliated against womens tea and bam....we have a WOW today used as a hardline hammer when its genesis was much more about moderation than exclusion. And then all of a sudden we are allowed Marijuana ? Thats a bit weird when we cant use a glass of wine or a single beer to decompress at the end of the day . Was marijuana the result of pure revelation or?? Thats all Im saying. I dont need to be guided in ALL things but it would be great if we could stay consistent and if we depart or change, have a conversation about it. I have a hard time defending the church with many things and the youth are looking for more than "believe" which worked out well for boomers but lets be honest...most boomers cant tell you 1/10th about the church that a 32 year old can today . Im always shocked at the elementary knowledge of boomers ...and I think thats because they never really had to defend much at all
If Brigham Young is a false prophet so is everyone after him but thats why we have lost so much because members think they know more than the Prophets.
Why are the ones after him? Do you have specific examples of them leading the people astray? Honest question.
@tinkeringengr The point she is making is if Brigham was guilty of lying about the origins of plural marriage, and using those lies as an excuse to not only commit adultery but cause others to do the same, so are many other prophets and apostles who also practiced plural marriage. And they could not have maintained their prophetic mantle or the priesthood keyin spite of that. This is the dilemma and danger of the false revisionist history the plural marriage deniers embrace, whether they fully realize it or not.
@@jaredshipp9207 Exactly, the implications are profound and I for one am following the truth wherever it leads. Not just being a Pharisee because thats how I was raised.
Maybe it is time to read the scriptures not the interpretations and summaries...
I accept the idea that polygamy started with Brigham as a possibility. What do you think about Jacob/Israel and the 12 tribes coming from polygamy?
Thats funny you said the church, ie the people, are extremely infallible, which was a blunder in itself. You meant we are extremely fallible, point taken.
The root word for church is congregation, or the people. They're essentially synonymous, it's just that modern churches we treat more like corporations than groups of believers who worship together.
a far better question is: (Did Brigham ever teach anything that was true?), hum?
This is a great question.
And this is a perfect example of why the spiritually immature in the Church, who embrace the garbage people like Connor Boyack, Michelle Stone, and others push, so often end up apostatizing.
@@jaredshipp9207 you're a Pharasee. Blindly believing you have the truth and ignoring whats in front of you. I for one look at the evidence before forming an opinion.
@@jaredshipp9207 Be spiritually mature then & blood atone ever white elder who marries a descendant of Cain or Ham. Have Native American slave concubines. Worship Adam as God. Marry other guys wives while they serve missions. And notify NASA that there are Quackers on the Moon. And be divinely inspired to use cement in your garden as a canal system, so that almost nothing will grow there for 150 years!
@@jaredshipp9207 Connor Boyack is attempting to lasso those who are waking up & pull them back into the echo thought cave dream world. He is one of many apologists inhibiting what you call apostasy. You are naive if you assume the phenomenon is isolated to spiritually immature individuals. Or individuals who haven't searched the scriptures or church history adequately.