Michelle you are a treasure! Thank you for your hard work, your time, your willingness to put up with all the undeserved backlash! You have helped me more than I can say.
@ No one deserves to be treated badly and their character slandered. Regardless of whether there is disagreement, it can be done in a civil and respectful way. Not how I’ve seen you and others handle it.
If you would just read the gospel topics essays with an open heart and an open mind you would realize that the lies are incredibly messy and they were all delivered by the people you consider to be prophets of God
Holy firehouse of information, Batman! I’m definitely going to come back for a second listen. Excellent job on going through all of Hyrum’s polygamy quotes and remarkable finds in the wives, especially Catherine’s medical condition!
"Cut them off from among you as useless and dangerous branches...". I can certainly see the rotten fruit from Brigham's many polygamy branches. Polygamy and murder always go together.
Another standing ovation 👋👋👋👋for this!---another superb compilation of evidence that reveals highly suspect (if not outright manufactured) [non-]historical claims of polygamy. The jig is up. Again... BRAVA!
@@MichelleBStoneI am so encouraged that whenever Brian Hales goes on an interview and spews out his deceptions, the comments expose and are frankly embarrassing for him. Your work and that of others is paying off as the truth is coming out. I can’t wait for what can happen when we overcome the sins of Brigham.
Michelle, I have so much respect for you. ❤ I hope you can ignore the trolls here who can not attack you enough. I believe you have many more who love and support you and the important work you are doing. I pray for you! 🙏
MIchelle, I listen to your podcasts and especially with Palmer. Your discussions, research and conviction ring true to me. A friend of mine is related to Benjamin Franklin Johnson. He gave me a copy of the book, 'My Life's Review'. The cover quotes Joseph Fielding Smith, church historian, one of the greatest treasures of early Church history. My friend gave me this book because of our discussions related to polygamy and especially involving Joseph Smith in Nauvoo. He told me to read pages 106 and 107. Please take a minute and address either the book in general, or specifically the pages I mentioned. Thanks again for all you do.
An absolute masterpiece. I don’t believe any honest person could listen to this and believe that Hyrum practiced polygamy. This issue may be part of the ‘sifting’ that was prophesied, ironically by Heber C. Kimball, an unapologetic polygamist.
Exactly!! TBM are going to have to decide who they worship. As of now they worship the church as a whole but have no clue who christ is. We're being called to return to our roots and come to back to Christ!!
Thank you for all this research, And poor Mercy in her temple lot testimony trying to remember the other wives!!! I can't keep track of the stuff my husband accumulates but it would be very concerning if that stuff included extra wives.
Those family search pages were not always locked. It was only a little over 2 years ago when they locked them up. What happened was I went into the Joseph Smith Jr. profile and deleted all of the women who were posed as wives other than Emma. They quickly saw that someone had deleted them all, added them back on, and added the lock feature to prominent profiles.
@@MichelleBStone this is a real witness. I in fact tried to delete all 32 of those purported wives, and the next day when I went back to check on it, they had put them all back and locked the profiles. I kid you not, I really experienced this.
They did the same thing to Brigham Young's files as well. Couple of his wives are written in with false birthdays making them older than they really were. Once you see their birth certificate you can clearly see where they tried to change the birth year. I went in to fix it because that wife was one one of my ancestors. They locked me out
@@StompMom5 Oh wow, Family Search is a mess, and to think that is the database for temple work... Why don't we treat the work of the Lord's house with greater attention to detail?
This has always confused me. If the Smith brothers were so close why wouldn’t Joseph tell Hyrum? If anything Hyrum would have been more likely to accept it from his brother especially because Hyrum had already lost his wife. I never thought the Brigham story made sense. I’m not saying it’s not true - maybe Hyrum and Brigham had a connection over their loss of their wives. Maybe Joseph thought it would be easier coming from someone who understood that. But that is a lot of maybes. 🤷🏻♂️ Thank you for all of your work.
The more I hear the 'levirate marriage' argument, the more convinced I am that Brigham saw that as justification for a woman to have sex with multiple men, that's all.
Levirate marriages are widows only, ergo the original husband who has to be deceased and his oldest brother becomes husband #2. Never multiple partners for her, and usually multiple partners for the brother who inherits her.
You did really good on this one. I think for future vids, concerning getting right into the meat so people don't have an excuse to dismiss you from long winded emotional beginnings.
There is a point fairly early in the video where in an emotional moment she makes on of those anti-Utah/LDS/Brigham (part was at 37:20) comments that is more than problematic. I seriously suggest better editing, so less trouble comes later.
She is saving people hours upon hours of time, it kind of feels ironic to ask Michelle to save someone from the effort of simply listening. If anyone needs to, take the speed to 2x until you are to the info you’re looking for,… and let’s remember, haters gonna hate. They’re always going to find a reason to diminish her work.
When she is talking about things that were taken out of our history, is that a recent thing? Or was that done a long time ago? By that I mean, was that done during Brigham Young’s time or since the Joseph Smith Papers came out? I am a convert from Atlanta, GA and sometimes I feel a bit lost when I’m listening to these things that have to do with places and cultures that are sort of foreign to me, so forgive me if I asked a stupid question.
Since you are a new convert, I would stay away from this channel. Just because Michelle says these things doesn’t mean they are true. This is a confusing issue and very difficult to sort out even by seasoned members of the church. I rarely listen because I think there is a dark feeling of criticism and contention here. Stick with the scriptures, the words of prophets and apostles and the basics and you’ll do much better. There were no video or audio recordings back then. There is so much conjecture and personal interpretations on this channel.
@@bonniesimoneI never said I’m a new convert. I joined the Church in 1979 when I was 19 years old. I grew up Southern Baptist in Metro Atlanta. I just was making the point that I didn’t grow up in Utah Mormon culture, with that history, or with pioneer ancestry. I have no reason to be proud of polygamy being in my family. I’m not at all invested in protecting polygamy. I haven’t ever heard “the beautiful stories” about how great it was. I didn’t know that Church leaders erased documentation and speeches and stories. I think Michelle has been able to show quite clearly with the documents that we have that polygamy is not of God. Ever since I joined the church I have felt that something was off about Joseph’s polygamy. It didn’t seem to fit with his character. I decided to do the same thing I have done many times through my years in the church and when I was investigating its truthfulness and pray about it. I don’t agree with everything I hear Michelle say, but the answer to my prayer has been that Joseph and Hyrum did not practice it. When I prayed about the question of how Brigham and the other leaders who practiced polygamy could be leaders in the true church and still do these things, my answer was that the Lord could still use them. Jonah was still the prophet, even though he disobeyed. And there are many stories throughout the scriptures of prophets and kings who the Lord used. I think God is so patient with us and He sees eternally, so He knows how all this will work out. If polygamy is part of the plan, I really don’t think that sounds like heaven in any sense that I can imagine. I want no part of it.
132 Problems: Help! Come Follow Me 2025 D&C November lesson is a historical malpractise TRAIN WRECK. What can be done?! Seriously. I can't in good conscience support the lesson statement that Joseph and Emma received it & the subtitle: Plural Marriage is Acceptable to God only when He commands it
Could someone that supports polygamy please address this in Doctrine and Covenants 132: 1 which states: Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines. There is no known istance in the bible that shows Isaac as having more than one wife or a concubine. This is a very serious contradiction to known biblical history. Any explanation would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Your comments are usually more intelligent than this. I understand that you view the Expositor as the one piece of evidence you need. I strongly disagree. It would be helpful to see you deal with the evidence presented in this episode. This evidence needs to be strongly considered in the Expositor discussion. I have provided strong arguments of why the Expositor affidavits are not solid evidence. I invite you to do the same with this evidence.
@MichelleBStone It looks like another of my comments was deleted, where I explained that recycling Hyrum's public denials of his involvement of polygamy is not good evidence. Especially when there was a gun pointed at his head if he did so. Which we saw in Carthage. Also: You claim that 132 magically popped out of Brigham's desk in 1852. Even though 132 was summarized in the expositor affidavits. Another one of your followers just claimed in her video (that you advertised) that the apostates created 132 before the Expositor came out so that their affidavits could match them. Can you not see how out of the ball park and contradictory both claims are? If not, then I see how out of the reach of logic you are at this point. And there is nothing much more to say.
Isn't that sad. Young widows bear the brunt of this false tradition. When a man is widowed or divorced, he is able to be married and sealed again no problem. When a woman is widowed, she faces huge challenges in our church. Many men refuse to date widows because they are already sealed and can't be sealed again. Young widows are far too often forced to face constant rejection from men who feel it is important to be sealed, or the terrible choice to sever their sealing from their deceased husband. It is sad that we let these false ideas continue to this day to create pain and unfairness for the least among us, who Jesus told us to care for. I hope people will be willing to look more deeply into these ideas and consider what the scriptures truly teach about God's establishment of marriage.
@@MichelleBStone You should take all that up with your stake president! Then maybe he'll finally have the guts to officiate Church Discipline on your behalf.
@@PresidentBrighamYoung Interesting that you feel qualified to tell my local leaders how they should fulfill their stewardships. Do you really think your prejudice should overrule their discernment? Such arrogance, all while hiding behind a fake profile. I'm not impressed.
You know what I find "interesting", your obsession over a current church Doctrine that you willingly entered into. You were sealed into the "New and Everlasting Covenant" when you went through the Temple with your husband. Did you not read the fine print?
Both vary from the words of the Savior: “Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?” Matthew 19:4-5
@@amandadangerfieldpiano Joseph also said that the Bible was the word of God insofar as it was translated correctly. So he created a loophole for his adultery.
@@randyjordan5521 She lives in a daisy chain of matriarchal confirmation bias and self-persecution-self-serving cherry-picked evidence, as it were. She is everything she claims to despise.
RUclips selects which comments it wants to show. If you go to the top of the comment and tell it to sort by "Newest First" instead of "Top Comments" you will see them all.
@@diydad6297 F'ing BS. They could give a flip. Michelle knows what she is doing. I know how RUclips works. It's like having 117k subscribers, 2k views and 166 likes. Half the comments are mine. She is as big a fraud as Mormonism.
@@randyjordan5521 I haven't deleted any comments. I have been told that youtube sometimes doesn't allow comments with other links. But I assure you, I haven't deleted any of your comments.
@@sophiamcl to Joseph Smith and Hyrum Smith they were the same. I keep asking if anyone can show me an instance of the term celestial plural marriage being used in Nauvoo. So far I haven't been able to find any instance, and nobody has presented me with one. The truth is, the term celestial plural marriage was created after the fact as a way to try to get around Joseph's and Hyrum's clear condemnations and prohibitions of polygamy -- by any name.
Calling it "plural" marriage makes infidelity and whoredoms okay🤣🤣🤣🤣 Try watching the episode rather than just commenting. I promise you we've all been where you are now. It just never make sense.
The two terms were used to describe the same practice. In William Marks' 1853 account of his 1844 conversation with Joseph Smith, he said that Joseph himself called it "this spiritual wifery practice." Also, Joseph's "plural widows" after Joseph's death called themselves Joseph's "spiritual wives." It was Mormon apologists who began trying to draw distinctions between those two terms. They used "plural marriage" to describe Joseph's "correct, authorized" practice, and they invented the idea that John C. Bennett had created a rogue, unauthorized practice called "spiritual wifery." In actual fact, there was no difference between what the two men were doing. To illustrate, in one of William Marks' statements re: Joseph and polygamy, he said that "Joseph and Bennett were the first two that went into it," referring to polygamy. So this whole idea that Bennett was doing something different from Smith has no basis in actual fact.
@@randyjordan5521 it is good to see some of the things you and I agree on. There is only one point in this comment that I see differently. The rest I couldn't have explained better myself.
Brigham was the right guy to teach Hyrum about polygamy. They both had lost a wife who they dearly loved, so Brigham knew well how to appeal to Hyrum's emotions. You can tell from Hyrum's polygamy talk on April 8th, 1844 that his right to keep his first wife was at the core of his belief.
The only problem is that Brigham didn’t teach anything of the sort to hyrum.. or he would have been excommunicated.. and truth be known.. Brigham was probably one of the group of men scheduled for a church court to be held for men who were found guilty of polygamy and scheduled for excommunication..
@@adamwineera LOL. If that is true, why did Joseph Smith have the polygamist Brigham Young preside over the excommunication trial of polygamy opponent William Law on April 18, 1844? Hyrum Smith initially opposed polygamy, but he had accepted it by the time Joseph dictated the "revelation on celestial marriage" to his secretary William Clayton on July 12, 1843. One month later, on August 12, Hyrum presented the revelation before the Nauvoo High Council to seek their vote to sustain it as church doctrine. Six men who were present in that meeting swore legal affidavits stating that the document Hyrum read was the same text as D&C 132 today. The first of those affidavits was filed on May 4, 1844: " In the latter part of the summer, 1843, the Patriarch, Hyrum Smith, did in the High Council, of which I was a member, introduce what he said was a revelation given through the Prophet; that the said Hyrum Smith did essay to read the said revealtion in the said Council, that according to his reading there was contained the following doctrines; lst the sealing up of persons to eternal life, against all sins, save that of sheding innocent blood or of consenting thereto; 2nd, the doctrine of a plurality of wives, or marrying virgins; that "David and Solomon had many wives, yet in this they sinned not save in the matter of Uriah. This revelation with other evidence, that the aforesaid heresies were taught and practiced in the Church; determined me to leave the office of first counsellor to the president of the Church at Nauvoo, inasmuch as I dared not teach or administer such laws. And further deponent saith not. AUSTIN COWLES." On March 29, 1844, William Law wrote this in his diary: "Hyrum smith was here a few days ago. He beg’d for peace; we told him of the corrupt operation which had been practiced upon us; he could not deny it, but said he was sorry as we had always been good friends to him and Joseph and had done much good for the church &c &c. I told him I was ready for an investigation before the Conference, and that I would bring their abominations to light; he said there would not be an investigation before [the] Conference, that they wanted peace. I told him then to cease their abominations, for they were from hell & that I knew it. He said they were not doing anything in the plurality of wife business now, and that he had published a piece against it; when I came to examine the piece refered to I found that it amounted to this, that no one should preach or practice such things unless by revelation (of course through Hyrum or Joseph). I told Hyrum that we stood on the defensive, we would defend the truth, we would defend ourselves both in character and in person." Because these accounts written while the events were unfolding confirm that Hyrum Smith did indeed accept and practice polygamy, Hyrum's public denials of it were obviously bogus. As I have stated many times on Michelle Stone's videos over the last two years: Joseph Smith instituted plural marriage as a secret practice among a small group of close, loyal, trusted disciples. Smith had all of his initiaties swear oaths to not reveal the practice, because of course it was against the law of the land and the published rules of the church. Those oaths went along with the temple endowment oaths of secrecy and loyalty, which Joseph instituted during the same period. Vestiges of those oaths still exist in the LDS temple endowment ceremony today. So, Hyrum's denials of polygamy which Michelle repeats in this video were in keeping with his oath to not admit to the practice. Michelle is simply in intellectual denial of the fact that Joseph, Hyrum, and all other Nauvoo polygamists publicly denied the practice. Until such time as Michelle intellectually and psychologicially accepts these established historical facts, she will remain deluded on these issues.
Brigham told the entire story of him talking to Hyrum about polygamy. He never said anything about using their dead wives as a way to convince him. Do you have any source to validate your explanation? (Also, you are misrepresenting Hyrum's April 8, 1844 sermons. I talk about it yet again in this episode.)
Hyrum needed those wives to get to the Celestial Kingdom. Much like the woman Hyrum had no real choice. Fortunately for Hyrum his brother had the keys unlike those other polygamous preachers, teachers, and practitioners.
It would be worth asking what benefits and losses Hyrum had for plural wives. For example if plural wives caused the Church to fracture similar to what happened in Kirkland the Smiths to include Hyrum would go broke again. So, Hyrum and Emma stood to risk their financial future on Joseph's decision about plural wives. I would suggest that in addition to moral positions plural wives cause a threat to Hyrum and Emma.
Michelle you are a treasure! Thank you for your hard work, your time, your willingness to put up with all the undeserved backlash! You have helped me more than I can say.
@ No one deserves to be treated badly and their character slandered. Regardless of whether there is disagreement, it can be done in a civil and respectful way. Not how I’ve seen you and others handle it.
@@sdfotodude Why are you worried about it?
@@Hmcc0712 Because she is leading people out of a church she is desperate to be a member of. The irony gives me a burning in my bosom.
@@Hmcc0712 She doesn't have to be a Brighamite. There are lots of churches that don't have polygamy as a Doctrine.
@@sdfotodude You basically make no sense.
Great Podcast Michelle! All your time and research is much appreciated. Keep up the good work! ❤
Thanks for including all the links! That is very helpful. It's crazy how messy this is... the lies are glaring!!
If you would just read the gospel topics essays with an open heart and an open mind you would realize that the lies are incredibly messy and they were all delivered by the people you consider to be prophets of God
Joseph said... For I will build my church, lie upon lie. And verily, it came to pass.
Michelle: Great find citing John Taylor's Temple Lot Testimony! "It (polygamy) was never taught. From 1830 until after Joseph's death". Well done!
Even Michelle would have to admit that many Mormons are pathological liars.
Holy firehouse of information, Batman! I’m definitely going to come back for a second listen. Excellent job on going through all of Hyrum’s polygamy quotes and remarkable finds in the wives, especially Catherine’s medical condition!
"Cut them off from among you as useless and dangerous branches...". I can certainly see the rotten fruit from Brigham's many polygamy branches. Polygamy and murder always go together.
Look no further than the current Brighamite branch of the Church, that you are all still members of and overtly confirms in their gospel topics essays
@@sdfotodudeI know her and she got her membrship out about a year ago.
@@ChristConvicted Hey @Michelle can you confirm this. I prefer "primary, contemporaneous sources"
@sdfotodude you are Michelle's biggest fan. I love it! 😅😂
Like the Church of Christ?
Another standing ovation 👋👋👋👋for this!---another superb compilation of evidence that reveals highly suspect (if not outright manufactured) [non-]historical claims of polygamy. The jig is up. Again... BRAVA!
@@tymarkham5049 thank you! ❤️
Thanks!
Thank you!
@@MichelleBStoneI am so encouraged that whenever Brian Hales goes on an interview and spews out his deceptions, the comments expose and are frankly embarrassing for him. Your work and that of others is paying off as the truth is coming out. I can’t wait for what can happen when we overcome the sins of Brigham.
@@markstimson983 LMAO! I own you dipsh*t
Michelle, I have so much respect for you. ❤ I hope you can ignore the trolls here who can not attack you enough. I believe you have many more who love and support you and the important work you are doing. I pray for you! 🙏
"Hyrum's SUPPOSED polygamy"
Thank you! Wow, this is amazing information! Thank you again and again!
MIchelle, I listen to your podcasts and especially with Palmer. Your discussions, research and conviction ring true to me. A friend of mine is related to Benjamin Franklin Johnson. He gave me a copy of the book, 'My Life's Review'. The cover quotes Joseph Fielding Smith, church historian, one of the greatest treasures of early Church history. My friend gave me this book because of our discussions related to polygamy and especially involving Joseph Smith in Nauvoo. He told me to read pages 106 and 107. Please take a minute and address either the book in general, or specifically the pages I mentioned. Thanks again for all you do.
Another nail in the coffin. Thank you for your documentation.
Great episode!!! 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
You are amazing Michelle. Love these so much. Wish you were on paypal !
I just signed up for my channel, 132problems@gmail.com
@132problems
Thank you!
Well done.
Another banger!
An absolute masterpiece. I don’t believe any honest person could listen to this and believe that Hyrum practiced polygamy. This issue may be part of the ‘sifting’ that was prophesied, ironically by Heber C. Kimball, an unapologetic polygamist.
Yes, sifting yourself right out of the church.. Sad
So you believe Heber the creeper if it suits your narrative
@@lizamaclochlainn2024 I agree!
Exactly!! TBM are going to have to decide who they worship. As of now they worship the church as a whole but have no clue who christ is. We're being called to return to our roots and come to back to Christ!!
Thank you for all this research, And poor Mercy in her temple lot testimony trying to remember the other wives!!! I can't keep track of the stuff my husband accumulates but it would be very concerning if that stuff included extra wives.
Those family search pages were not always locked. It was only a little over 2 years ago when they locked them up. What happened was I went into the Joseph Smith Jr. profile and deleted all of the women who were posed as wives other than Emma. They quickly saw that someone had deleted them all, added them back on, and added the lock feature to prominent profiles.
Is this true?! I can't tell if this is a true story, or if you are being facetious. :)
@@MichelleBStone this is a real witness. I in fact tried to delete all 32 of those purported wives, and the next day when I went back to check on it, they had put them all back and locked the profiles. I kid you not, I really experienced this.
@@prophetcentral that is amazing!
They did the same thing to Brigham Young's files as well. Couple of his wives are written in with false birthdays making them older than they really were. Once you see their birth certificate you can clearly see where they tried to change the birth year. I went in to fix it because that wife was one one of my ancestors. They locked me out
@@StompMom5 Oh wow, Family Search is a mess, and to think that is the database for temple work... Why don't we treat the work of the Lord's house with greater attention to detail?
You need to do a video with Jim Bennet.
This has always confused me. If the Smith brothers were so close why wouldn’t Joseph tell Hyrum? If anything Hyrum would have been more likely to accept it from his brother especially because Hyrum had already lost his wife.
I never thought the Brigham story made sense. I’m not saying it’s not true - maybe Hyrum and Brigham had a connection over their loss of their wives. Maybe Joseph thought it would be easier coming from someone who understood that. But that is a lot of maybes. 🤷🏻♂️
Thank you for all of your work.
Nicely done, Michelle!
The more I hear the 'levirate marriage' argument, the more convinced I am that Brigham saw that as justification for a woman to have sex with multiple men, that's all.
Levirate marriages are widows only, ergo the original husband who has to be deceased and his oldest brother becomes husband #2. Never multiple partners for her, and usually multiple partners for the brother who inherits her.
You did really good on this one. I think for future vids, concerning getting right into the meat so people don't have an excuse to dismiss you from long winded emotional beginnings.
Getting into the meat would be slowly reading the Nauvoo Expositor affidavits....
@@jaredvaughan1665 I hear ya. That's not what I meant though. I just am referring to the core points she is expounding.
There is a point fairly early in the video where in an emotional moment she makes on of those anti-Utah/LDS/Brigham (part was at 37:20) comments that is more than problematic. I seriously suggest better editing, so less trouble comes later.
She is saving people hours upon hours of time, it kind of feels ironic to ask Michelle to save someone from the effort of simply listening.
If anyone needs to, take the speed to 2x until you are to the info you’re looking for,… and let’s remember, haters gonna hate. They’re always going to find a reason to diminish her work.
Excellent work!!!
When she is talking about things that were taken out of our history, is that a recent thing? Or was that done a long time ago? By that I mean, was that done during Brigham Young’s time or since the Joseph Smith Papers came out?
I am a convert from Atlanta, GA and sometimes I feel a bit lost when I’m listening to these things that have to do with places and cultures that are sort of foreign to me, so forgive me if I asked a stupid question.
Not a stupid question at all. The records I discuss in this episode were changed in the early Utah era, under Brigham Young's direction. 🙂
@@MichelleBStonethank you! This entire segment of history is very complicated, isn’t it!? I’m definitely going to have to watch this episode again.
Since you are a new convert, I would stay away from this channel. Just because Michelle says these things doesn’t mean they are true. This is a confusing issue and very difficult to sort out even by seasoned members of the church. I rarely listen because I think there is a dark feeling of criticism and contention here. Stick with the scriptures, the words of prophets and apostles and the basics and you’ll do much better. There were no video or audio recordings back then. There is so much conjecture and personal interpretations on this channel.
@@bonniesimone you make it seem like she joined a cult. She is free to listen to whomever she pleases.
@@bonniesimoneI never said I’m a new convert. I joined the Church in 1979 when I was 19 years old. I grew up Southern Baptist in Metro Atlanta. I just was making the point that I didn’t grow up in Utah Mormon culture, with that history, or with pioneer ancestry. I have no reason to be proud of polygamy being in my family. I’m not at all invested in protecting polygamy. I haven’t ever heard “the beautiful stories” about how great it was. I didn’t know that Church leaders erased documentation and speeches and stories. I think Michelle has been able to show quite clearly with the documents that we have that polygamy is not of God. Ever since I joined the church I have felt that something was off about Joseph’s polygamy. It didn’t seem to fit with his character. I decided to do the same thing I have done many times through my years in the church and when I was investigating its truthfulness and pray about it. I don’t agree with everything I hear Michelle say, but the answer to my prayer has been that Joseph and Hyrum did not practice it. When I prayed about the question of how Brigham and the other leaders who practiced polygamy could be leaders in the true church and still do these things, my answer was that the Lord could still use them. Jonah was still the prophet, even though he disobeyed. And there are many stories throughout the scriptures of prophets and kings who the Lord used. I think God is so patient with us and He sees eternally, so He knows how all this will work out. If polygamy is part of the plan, I really don’t think that sounds like heaven in any sense that I can imagine. I want no part of it.
What date did Kathrine Phillips smith make this statement? how far way from her death did she make the statement?
What about Don Carlos, Samuel and William?
132 Problems: Help! Come Follow Me 2025 D&C November lesson is a historical malpractise TRAIN WRECK. What can be done?! Seriously. I can't in good conscience support the lesson statement that Joseph and Emma received it & the subtitle: Plural Marriage is Acceptable to God only when He commands it
@@stefanylclark7419 I will be releasing a video on it that I hope will be helpful.
Really, the so-called church is contradicting "your" beliefs. SMH
Could someone that supports polygamy please address this in Doctrine and Covenants 132: 1 which states:
Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines.
There is no known istance in the bible that shows Isaac as having more than one wife or a concubine. This is a very serious contradiction to known biblical history. Any explanation would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
I agree with you. One of many problems with this questionable section.
Theres a 3rd option, Joseph Wasn’t honest, and he faked his death.
The polygamy deniers have 100 Achilles' heels.
The Nauvoo Expositor Affidavits being one of many.
You mean whoredom deniers?
Your comments are usually more intelligent than this. I understand that you view the Expositor as the one piece of evidence you need. I strongly disagree. It would be helpful to see you deal with the evidence presented in this episode. This evidence needs to be strongly considered in the Expositor discussion. I have provided strong arguments of why the Expositor affidavits are not solid evidence. I invite you to do the same with this evidence.
You haven’t watched the episodes about this yet have you, or this one!
@@Hmcc0712truly. Some people post comments prematurely based upon gut reaction to the title. It is not an informed response.
@MichelleBStone
It looks like another of my comments was deleted, where I explained that recycling Hyrum's public denials of his involvement of polygamy is not good evidence.
Especially when there was a gun pointed at his head if he did so. Which we saw in Carthage.
Also:
You claim that 132 magically popped out of Brigham's desk in 1852.
Even though 132 was summarized in the expositor affidavits.
Another one of your followers just claimed in her video (that you advertised) that the apostates created 132 before the Expositor came out so that their affidavits could match them.
Can you not see how out of the ball park and contradictory both claims are?
If not, then I see how out of the reach of logic you are at this point.
And there is nothing much more to say.
If god is so against polygamy how is it that men can be sealed to more than one wife in the temple and women can not? 😊
Isn't that sad. Young widows bear the brunt of this false tradition. When a man is widowed or divorced, he is able to be married and sealed again no problem. When a woman is widowed, she faces huge challenges in our church. Many men refuse to date widows because they are already sealed and can't be sealed again. Young widows are far too often forced to face constant rejection from men who feel it is important to be sealed, or the terrible choice to sever their sealing from their deceased husband.
It is sad that we let these false ideas continue to this day to create pain and unfairness for the least among us, who Jesus told us to care for. I hope people will be willing to look more deeply into these ideas and consider what the scriptures truly teach about God's establishment of marriage.
@@MichelleBStone You should take all that up with your stake president! Then maybe he'll finally have the guts to officiate Church Discipline on your behalf.
@@PresidentBrighamYoung Interesting that you feel qualified to tell my local leaders how they should fulfill their stewardships. Do you really think your prejudice should overrule their discernment? Such arrogance, all while hiding behind a fake profile.
I'm not impressed.
@@MichelleBStone LOL, are you still upset you’re not a judge in Israel? 🤧😢
@@PresidentBrighamYoungI think you’re the one who criticized her leaders
👍
You know what I find "interesting", your obsession over a current church Doctrine that you willingly entered into. You were sealed into the "New and Everlasting Covenant" when you went through the Temple with your husband. Did you not read the fine print?
200 "likes" and 117k subscribers? Something smells fishy.
Why does polygamy trouble you as much as homosexuality troubles the current Brighamites?
Both vary from the words of the Savior: “Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?” Matthew 19:4-5
@@amandadangerfieldpiano Joseph also said that the Bible was the word of God insofar as it was translated correctly. So he created a loophole for his adultery.
Watching you deny Katherine SMITH disgusts me.
Joseph told me he is smitten for you.
Sorry, Joseph's taken. And I love his wife. You're barking up the wrong tree.
@@MichelleBStone Why aren't you following Her church?
The fact that you are deleting comments makes you no different than Brigham Young
Indeed. I have posted several comments which include historical documentation, but I don't see them here.
@@randyjordan5521 She lives in a daisy chain of matriarchal confirmation bias and self-persecution-self-serving cherry-picked evidence, as it were. She is everything she claims to despise.
RUclips selects which comments it wants to show. If you go to the top of the comment and tell it to sort by "Newest First" instead of "Top Comments" you will see them all.
@@diydad6297 F'ing BS. They could give a flip.
Michelle knows what she is doing. I know how RUclips works. It's like having 117k subscribers, 2k views and 166 likes. Half the comments are mine. She is as big a fraud as Mormonism.
@@randyjordan5521 I haven't deleted any comments. I have been told that youtube sometimes doesn't allow comments with other links. But I assure you, I haven't deleted any of your comments.
😏😡
I think it's unfair to conflate spiritual wifery with plural marriage. They are not the same.
@@sophiamcl to Joseph Smith and Hyrum Smith they were the same. I keep asking if anyone can show me an instance of the term celestial plural marriage being used in Nauvoo. So far I haven't been able to find any instance, and nobody has presented me with one. The truth is, the term celestial plural marriage was created after the fact as a way to try to get around Joseph's and Hyrum's clear condemnations and prohibitions of polygamy -- by any name.
Calling it "plural" marriage makes infidelity and whoredoms okay🤣🤣🤣🤣
Try watching the episode rather than just commenting. I promise you we've all been where you are now. It just never make sense.
The two terms were used to describe the same practice. In William Marks' 1853 account of his 1844 conversation with Joseph Smith, he said that Joseph himself called it "this spiritual wifery practice." Also, Joseph's "plural widows" after Joseph's death called themselves Joseph's "spiritual wives."
It was Mormon apologists who began trying to draw distinctions between those two terms. They used "plural marriage" to describe Joseph's "correct, authorized" practice, and they invented the idea that John C. Bennett had created a rogue, unauthorized practice called "spiritual wifery." In actual fact, there was no difference between what the two men were doing. To illustrate, in one of William Marks' statements re: Joseph and polygamy, he said that "Joseph and Bennett were the first two that went into it," referring to polygamy.
So this whole idea that Bennett was doing something different from Smith has no basis in actual fact.
@@randyjordan5521 it is good to see some of the things you and I agree on. There is only one point in this comment that I see differently. The rest I couldn't have explained better myself.
If Joseph came to you tomorrow and told you that an angel commanded him to marry you, what would you do?
Brigham was the right guy to teach Hyrum about polygamy. They both had lost a wife who they dearly loved, so Brigham knew well how to appeal to Hyrum's emotions. You can tell from Hyrum's polygamy talk on April 8th, 1844 that his right to keep his first wife was at the core of his belief.
The only problem is that Brigham didn’t teach anything of the sort to hyrum.. or he would have been excommunicated.. and truth be known.. Brigham was probably one of the group of men scheduled for a church court to be held for men who were found guilty of polygamy and scheduled for excommunication..
@@adamwineera LOL. If that is true, why did Joseph Smith have the polygamist Brigham Young preside over the excommunication trial of polygamy opponent William Law on April 18, 1844?
Hyrum Smith initially opposed polygamy, but he had accepted it by the time Joseph dictated the "revelation on celestial marriage" to his secretary William Clayton on July 12, 1843. One month later, on August 12, Hyrum presented the revelation before the Nauvoo High Council to seek their vote to sustain it as church doctrine. Six men who were present in that meeting swore legal affidavits stating that the document Hyrum read was the same text as D&C 132 today. The first of those affidavits was filed on May 4, 1844:
" In the latter part of the summer, 1843, the Patriarch, Hyrum Smith, did in the High Council, of which I was a member, introduce what he said was a revelation given through the Prophet; that the said Hyrum Smith did essay to read the said revealtion in the said Council, that according to his reading there was contained the following doctrines; lst the sealing up of persons to eternal life, against all sins, save that of sheding innocent blood or of consenting thereto; 2nd, the doctrine of a plurality of wives, or marrying virgins; that "David and Solomon had many wives, yet in this they sinned not save in the matter of Uriah. This revelation with other evidence, that the aforesaid heresies were taught and practiced in the Church; determined me to leave the office of first counsellor to the president of the Church at Nauvoo, inasmuch as I dared not teach or administer such laws. And further deponent saith not. AUSTIN COWLES."
On March 29, 1844, William Law wrote this in his diary:
"Hyrum smith was here a few days ago. He beg’d for peace; we told him of the corrupt operation which had been practiced upon us; he could not deny it, but said he was sorry as we had always been good friends to him and Joseph and had done much good for the church &c &c. I told him I was ready for an investigation before the Conference, and that I would bring their abominations to light; he said there would not be an investigation before [the] Conference, that they wanted peace. I told him then to cease their abominations, for they were from hell & that I knew it. He said they were not doing anything in the plurality of wife business now, and that he had published a piece against it; when I came to examine the piece refered to I found that it amounted to this, that no one should preach or practice such things unless by revelation (of course through Hyrum or Joseph). I told Hyrum that we stood on the defensive, we would defend the truth, we would defend ourselves both in character and in person."
Because these accounts written while the events were unfolding confirm that Hyrum Smith did indeed accept and practice polygamy, Hyrum's public denials of it were obviously bogus. As I have stated many times on Michelle Stone's videos over the last two years: Joseph Smith instituted plural marriage as a secret practice among a small group of close, loyal, trusted disciples. Smith had all of his initiaties swear oaths to not reveal the practice, because of course it was against the law of the land and the published rules of the church. Those oaths went along with the temple endowment oaths of secrecy and loyalty, which Joseph instituted during the same period. Vestiges of those oaths still exist in the LDS temple endowment ceremony today.
So, Hyrum's denials of polygamy which Michelle repeats in this video were in keeping with his oath to not admit to the practice. Michelle is simply in intellectual denial of the fact that Joseph, Hyrum, and all other Nauvoo polygamists publicly denied the practice. Until such time as Michelle intellectually and psychologicially accepts these established historical facts, she will remain deluded on these issues.
Brigham told the entire story of him talking to Hyrum about polygamy. He never said anything about using their dead wives as a way to convince him. Do you have any source to validate your explanation?
(Also, you are misrepresenting Hyrum's April 8, 1844 sermons. I talk about it yet again in this episode.)
@@adamwineera Check the Martha Brotherton affidavit, as it displays the availability of KEYS for Brigham.
@@whatsup3270that affidavit is DOA and smells like Brigham’s roasting soul in hell.
Michelle... blink rapidly if you are in need of help.
She's not the one that needs help. ;)
Back at you
Hyrum needed those wives to get to the Celestial Kingdom. Much like the woman Hyrum had no real choice. Fortunately for Hyrum his brother had the keys unlike those other polygamous preachers, teachers, and practitioners.
It would be worth asking what benefits and losses Hyrum had for plural wives. For example if plural wives caused the Church to fracture similar to what happened in Kirkland the Smiths to include Hyrum would go broke again. So, Hyrum and Emma stood to risk their financial future on Joseph's decision about plural wives. I would suggest that in addition to moral positions plural wives cause a threat to Hyrum and Emma.