Karen's documentary is the most comprehensive and well put together thing on the topic of polygamy I have seen and blows the "official narrative" out of the water. Everyone should watch and share "Woe Unto You, Scribes: The Hidden History of Polygamy"
Ladies! The interview with Ben Speckman is such a game changer! I watched it a couple days ago with my jaw on the ground. As an exmo i had few differing reaction; shock at the open acknowledgment of misinformation that members have been given. Happy for he future members to no longer believe blindly (trustingly, faithfully unquestioningly) will lead to fewer hearts being broken in the future. And lastly, I’m feeling really pissed that none of this was discussed, taught or acknowledged in 2019 or atleast not in my awareness as a devout, literal, busy leader member at the time my world blew up. Oh and one more thing that bugged (petty as it may be) his delivery felt pretty heartless and condescending. It felt that in his view, If I had been a good member I would have know all this stuff and wouldn’t have been so stalwart and rigid in my testimony. Once again, it’s always the individual that’s the problem. You just can’t win.
Sadly though, Ben is still a polygamist at heart. He clarified his stance and said he was misunderstood. He was rude, prideful and pathetic. He's just another dude with head in his pa*ts 🙊
I wish I could say something simple like "it will all be fine in the end" but it doesn't really work that way. People invest too much into the church and then get slapped in the face for it. I haven't decided yet to take my name off the records but I have no trust in the leaders and they are not prophets, seers and revelators. They are just a bunch of rich old men getting richer off the church. If I even had a desire to go to the temple again I wouldn't be able to get a recommend because of how I feel about the leaders. I am at a place where I am fine with where I am. Today I did go to my Niece's baby's blessing. Of course I am sick about the name they gave him "Brigham". I still believe in the Book of Mormon and Joseph and there is a chance that God will rescue the church but He could just as well start all over again. As far as heartless and condescending and blaming the members, well that is very prevalent in the church. A few years ago I watched a video of Bednar and he told us it was our fault for the delay of Jesus's return because we weren't righteous enough. I was smoking from the ears. That moron doesn't even understand the scriptures. The scriptures teach us that the whole world will be wicked and "all of your churches will be corrupt". We now just go by the Bible and the Book of Mormon and some of the D&C. And on the big things if it isn't in the Book of Mormon we just don't accept it. I pray for your wounds to heal my dear. God be with you.
Enjoyed watching this conversation with you two dear ladies. Karen did an excellent job on her documentary, her research was phenomenal!! You two are the best! ❤❤
I watched Karen’s documentary, it was GREAT!!!! I’ve shared with multiple family members. Thank you to both of you ladies. I’m eternally grateful for your efforts 💕🙏🏼
Just finished watching and it was great to see you ladies take a well deserved victory lap! Great job, Karen, your video is awesome and your website with all the sources is of equal value in my opinion! I think Brian Hales knows this truth is coming forth too. I noticed in this last interview with Greg he didn't call for anyone to be excommunicated and actually said the other side has some good points. I imagine that was hard for him to admit but think he may see the writing on the wall. :) Also the statement from Greg about a man having mulitple wives and its somehow one marriage baffles me and I can not understand how anyone could actually believe that.
“If my great great great grandparents did it then it was right.” What a troubling mindset. I would guess the same people wouldn’t say that their parents were right in all that they did.. interestingly you can find many historical examples of the children of devout polygamists rejecting it- Lucy Walker Kimball’s daughters, for example….
Uggh the emotional argument thing! I would love to ask Greg if he would have any emotions and maybe even some emotional arguments to make perhaps… if his wife desired more husbands and was told by church leaders she could go ahead and take more… oh and if he’s not ok to let her, he’ll be destroyed.
What a wonderful discussion. It couldn't be more clear. I agree! It is good news. It is so terrible how the Church members feel so free to throw Joseph under the bus, he who had lived without reproach and sacrificed so much, while Brigham Young, who deserves no such praise is so coddled and protected! The truth is coming! Hurray.
The polygamy deniers throw Brigham under the bus. The polygamy justifiers throw Joseph under the bus. The truth? Joseph and Brigham were both flawed. And should both be praised for their good works and thrown under the bus for their bad works. Which included the whoredom of polygamy.
Brian Hales asked Michelle what her end game was- revealing more about him than her. He had (has) an endgame in his research and the false narrative he created.
Brian Hales did not invent the historical evidence which clearly shows that Joseph Smith originated and practiced polygamy. That evidence began to be published in 1842, when the first reports of Smith's secret "spiritual wifery" practice were published in newspapers. The first historian to do serious scholarly research was Fawn Brodie 80 years ago. She researched the same historical documents that Brian Hales and every other historian has pored through, and she came up with a list of 48 certain or possible plural wives of Joseph Smith. Every legitimate historian since Brodie has concurred that Joseph Smith originated polygamy. So Brian Hales hasn't invented any "false narrative." I recommend that you read an article titled "Identifying the Earliest Mormon Polygamists, 1841-1844" by historian Gary James Bergera. Excerpts: "From Joseph Smith’s first documented plural marriage in 1841 until his death more than three years later, some twenty-eight men and 106 women (as civil and plural wives) entered the prophet’s order of celestial matrimony.[1] Given the secrecy surrounding Smith’s controversial (and illegal) practice, the exact number of these earliest polygamists may never be known. However, enough information in the form of diaries, letters, auto biographies, reminiscences, affidavits, statements, and family histories has accumulated since the early 1840s-coupled with reasonable inferences and educated guesses-to enable a compelling, albeit tentative, identification.[2] Based on the most convincing data presently available,[3] the following men either definitely or probably married additional wives with Joseph Smith’s permission prior to his death on June 27, 1844: James Adams, Ezra T. Benson, Reynolds Cahoon, William Clayton, Joseph W. Coolidge, Howard Egan, William Felshaw, William D. Huntington, Orson Hyde, Joseph A. Kelting, Heber C. Kimball, Vinson Knight, Isaac Morley, Joseph Bates Noble, John E. Page, Parley P. Pratt, Willard Richards, Hyrum Smith, John Smith, Joseph Smith, William Smith, Erastus Snow, John Taylor, Theodore Turley, Lyman Wight, Edwin D. Woolley, Brigham Young, and Lorenzo Dow Young. While the evidence in a few cases (i.e., Coolidge, Felshaw, Kelting, Page, and Wight) for an early plural marriage is circumstantial and conjectural, these twenty-eight men and their wives comprise the most likely candidates for membership in Joseph Smith’s inner circle of plural marriage participants... The abundant evidence for Joseph Smith’s Nauvoo plural wives was first published in Andrew Jenson, “Plural Marriage,” Historical Record 6 (May 1887): 233-34. Jenson was followed by Fawn Brodie, No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith, the Mormon Prophet, 2d ed., rev. and enl. (1945; New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971), 457-88; Thomas Milton Tinney, The Royal Family of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Junior (Salt Lake City: Tinney-Green[e] Family Organization Publishing Company, 1973); Danel W. Bachman, “A Study of the Mormon Practice of Plural Marriage before the Death of Joseph Smith” (1975); George D. Smith, “Nauvoo Roots of Mormon Polygamy” (1994); D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power (1994), 587-88; and most recently Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness. Although some readers may disagree in a handful of instances with Compton’s identifications of Smith’s Nauvoo wives,[74] I believe he is accurate. In fact, I am persuaded that the evidence allows for an additional four (if not more) plural wives-Mary Houston, Sarah Scott Mulholland, Mary Ann Frost Stearns Pratt, and Phebe Watrous Woodworth-bringing the total of Joseph Smith’s known Nauvoo plural wives to at least thirty-six."
Karen's documentary was very well done and is an important resource. A great overall summary that packs a punch to the official narrative. One note about William Clayton's 1874 affidavit - The affidavit was actually written by Joseph F. Smith with annotations added in pencil by Clayton. So the change from Clayton's July 12, 1843 journal entry where both Joseph and Hyrum presented the "revelation" to Emma, to where in 1874 it was just Hyrum who went to Emma, likely originated from Joseph F. Smith. However, at that specific portion in the draft 1874 affidavit, Clayton changed Joseph F. Smith's verbiage of "Joseph waited in the office" to "Joseph remained with me in the office." In addition, Clayton signed and had notarized the final 1874 affidavit. Therefore Clayton not only affirmed and sanctioned the change to where Hyrum was the only one who allegedly went to Emma but put his name to it as well. Overall, it highlights just how desperate Joseph F. Smith was to gather evidence against Joseph Smith and how Clayton could not keep his story straight.
Hyrum Smith presented the revelation on celestial marriage before the Nauvoo high council on August 12, 1843 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 which Hyrum read is the same text as D&C 132 today. So all of this talk about William Clayton's journal being fabricated, and Brigham Young altering the document after Joseph's death to include the portions about plural marriage is just a wild conspiracy theory that is utterly refuted by a mountain of evidence. Austin Cowles was the counselor to William Marks in the Nauvoo stake presidency in 1843. Below is his affidavit, filed on May 4, 1844. That was seven weeks before Joseph and Hyrum Smith's death. "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." Austin Cowles and his fellow polygamy opponent William Law filed their legal affidavits in an effort to force Joseph Smith to renounce and abolish his "spiritual wifery" practice. Law also filed legal charges against Smith of "living in an open state of adultery with Maria Lawrence" on May 23, 1844. Smith responded by continuing to deny any involvement in polygamy and calling his accusers liars. Smith's response and attitude led directly to his and Hyrum's murders five weeks later. After their deaths, Smith's long-time associate Sidney Rigdon stated: "On Thursday evening we gave the history of Nauvoo, and the events that led to the death of the Smiths, which, of course, we traced to the introduction of the spiritual wife system; for all that know any thing about it, that it was the introduction of that system which led to the death of the Smiths, and that if that system had not been introduced, they might have been living men to-day."---March 15, 1845. "They introduced a base system of polygamy, worse by far than that of the heathen; this system of corruption brought a train of evils with it, which terminated in their entire ruin. After this system was introduced, being in opposition [to] the laws of the land, they, had to put truth at defiance to conceal it, and in order to do it, perjury was often practiced. This system was introduced by the Smiths some time before their death, and was the thing which put them into the power of their enemies, and was the immediate cause of their death."---June, 1846. I hope this helps you to understand that this whole theory that Smith had nothing to do with polygamy, and that it was actually started and practiced by Brigham Young or others, and that Young or someone else altered Smith's "revelation" after his death, is pure hogwash. EVERYBODY in Nauvoo who had heard about polygamy knew very well that Smith was its originator.
@@MichelleBStone Well, I hope you include this historical information: March 29. Since my last conversation with Joseph Smith which was on the 8th Jan’y I have ahd not association with him, as I do not with to associate with evil doers; he has in the meantime been using all his influence to destroy me, he has employed every vile and corrupt man and woman in the city over whom he has any power to circulate veil reports as false as the author of lies, about me and my wife, but he has failed to accomplish his object, for our names yet stand fair and untarnished in the estimation of the virtuous and the food; we find the better part of the community to be our friends; they feel disgusted with Smith’s course for it has been most disgusting lothsome to the virtuous mind, lust, falsehood, injustice, and cruelty have characterized his course wotwards me & mine in such an unparalleled degree that the unprejudiced could not but see it, and abhor the man and his base acts. 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.
Joseph wan't just "part of this secret inner circle." He concocted his spiritual wife doctrine and practice all by himself, and inducted about 100 of his most loyal, trusted disciples into it. Those people weren't his enemies. They were mostly his closest friends and highest -ranking church leaders. So it's not like those were a bunch of people who were practicing polygamy against Joseph's teachings. If Joseph hadn't originated the practice, no Mormons would have ever participated in it. Many years after the Nauvoo period, when RLDS leaders were claiming that Joseph had nothing to do with polygamy, Sidney Rigdon's son John swore this in a legal affidavit: "John W. Rigdon, being duly sworn, says: I am the son of Sidney Rigdon, deceased. Was born at Mentor, in the State of Ohio, in the year 1830, and am now over seventy-five years of age. My father, Sidney Rigdon, joined the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that year, and was in 1833 ordained to be Joseph Smith's first counselor which position he held up to the time Joseph the Prophet was killed, at Carthage jail, in 1844... "As to the truth of the doctrine of polygamy being introduced by the Prophet Joseph Smith, deponent further says: Joseph Smith was absolute so far as spiritual figures were concerned, and no man would have dared to introduce the doctrine of polygamy or any other new doctrine into the "Mormon" Church at the city of Nauvoo during the years 1843 and 1844, or at any other place or time, without first obtaining Joseph Smith's consent. If anyone had dared to have done such a thing he would have been brought before the High Council and tried, and if proven against him, he would have been excommunicated from the Church, and that would have ended polygamy forever, and would also have ended the man who had dared to introduce such a doctrine without the consent of the Prophet Joseph. "And deponent further says: Joseph the Prophet, at the City of Nauvoo, Illinois, some time in the latter part of the year 1843, or the first part of the year 1844, made a proposition to my sister, Nancy Rigdon, to become his wife. It happened in this way: Nancy had gone to Church, meeting being held in a grove near the temple lot on which the "Mormons" were then erecting a temple, an old lady friend who lived alone invited her to go home with her, which Nancy did. When they got to the house and had taken their bonnets off, the old lady began to talk to her about the new doctrine of polygamy which was then being taught, telling Nancy, during the conversation, that it was a surprise to her when she first heard it, but that she had since come to believe it to be true. While they were talking Joseph Smith the Prophet came into the house, and joined them, and the old lady immediately left the room. It was then that Joseph made the proposal of marriage to my sister. Nancy flatly refused him, saying if she ever got married she would marry a single man or none at all, and thereupon took her bonnet and went home, leaving Joseph at the old lady's house. Nancy told father and mother of it. The story got out and it became the talk of the town that Joseph had made a proposition to Nancy Rigdon to become his wife, and that she refused him. A few days after the occurrence Joseph Smith came to my father's house and talked the matter over with the family, my sister, Mrs. Athalia Robinson also being present, who is now alive. The feelings manifested by our family on this occasion were anything but brotherly or sisterly, more especially on the part of Nancy, as she felt that she had been insulted. A day or two later Joseph Smith returned to my father's house, when matters were satisfactorily adjusted between them, and there the matter ended."
@@randyjordan5521 there are reasons this still casts doubt in my mind. John Rigdon had financial reasons for coming to Salt Lake. It almost seems as if he was trying to make a deal for his the biography. Even more, his story about his father changed. He was 70 years old when giving his sister’s account, conveniently, no one was there to corroborate. I wonder this too, If Sidney Rigdon was so disgusted with Joseph at the time, like his son says, why not leave with the Laws, or start his own? But he didn’t, he even defended Joseph in the papers regarding the happiness letter. This information doesn’t pass the test for me. There seemed to be a lot of pressure at the time to gather affidavits.
@@MaddJacks Nothing you wrote here refutes the fact that Joseph Smith propositioned Nancy Rigdon in 1842. Two different men who were privy to the incident wrote letters to newspapers detailing the incident mere weeks after it happened. John Rigdon's affidavit just provides more detail. Here is what Sidney Rigdon said about Joseph Smith and polygamy shortly after his death: "On Thursday evening we gave the history of Nauvoo, and the events that led to the death of the Smiths, which, of course, we traced to the introduction of the spiritual wife system; for all that know any thing about it, that it was the introduction of that system which led to the death of the Smiths, and that if that system had not been introduced, they might have been living men to-day."---March 15, 1845. "They introduced a base system of polygamy, worse by far than that of the heathen; this system of corruption brought a train of evils with it, which terminated in their entire ruin. After this system was introduced, being in opposition [to] the laws of the land, they, had to put truth at defiance to conceal it, and in order to do it, perjury was often practiced. This system was introduced by the Smiths some time before their death, and was the thing which put them into the power of their enemies, and was the immediate cause of their death."---June, 1846. Sidney knew very well that Joseph had originated and practiced polygamy because Joseph had propositioned his own daughter. As for why Rigdon didn't leave Nauvoo along with the Laws, Rigdon and his family as well as newspaper publisher Ebenezer Robinson had moved to Pittsburgh to try to start a branch of the church beforeJoseph was killed. As John Rigdon's affidavit stated: "After that [the Nancy scandal] Joseph Smith sent my father to Pittsburgh, Pa., to take charge of a little church that was there, and Ebenezer Robinson, who was then the Church printer, or at least had been such, as he was the printer of the paper in Kirtland, Ohio, and a printer by trade, was to go with him to print a paper there, and nine days before Joseph Smith was shot at Carthage we started, reaching Pittsburgh the day before he was killed." When Sidney heard about Joseph's murder, he returned to Nauvoo, expecting to take the leadership of the church. But of course, Brigham Young and the other apostles shoved him aside. Sidney, unlike the other polygamy opponents such as Law and Austin Cowles, did not publicly expose Joseph's secret wife practice. In fact, after Joseph had Law excommunicated, Sidney visited Law and tried to mend the fences between Law and Joseph. Law wrote in his diary: "May 13. This day Sidney Rigdon came to my house and said that he came fully authorized to negotiate terms of peace. I told him to make his proposition. He said it was that if we would let all difficulties drop that we (Wilson Law, my wife Jane Law, R. D. Foster and myself[)] should be restored to our standing in the Church and to all our offices, and they would publish it in the papers. We told him that we had not been cut off from the Church legally, and therefore did not ask to be restored. He said that, he knew the proceedings were illegal and very wrong, and said they would publish that fact to the world if we won’t be satisfied. He said they wanted peace. I told him that if they wanted peace they could have it on the following conditions, That Joseph Smith would acknowledge publicly that he had taught and practised the doctrine of the plurality of wives, that he brought a revelation supporting the doctrine, and that he should own the whole system (revelation and all) to be from Hell; to acknowledge also that he had lately endeavored to seduce my wife, and had found her a virtuous woman, and that the persecution against me and my friends was unjust; if Smith and his followers will entirely cease from their abominations and fully undeceive the people as to those things, then I would agree to cease hostilities, otherwise we would publish all to the world." Joseph declined to renounce and abolish polygamy, so Law & Co. published the "Nauvoo Expositor".
My question is, *if* this was true, could she be confusing the law of adoption (the law of sealing people to himself) with marriage? How many others confused the two concepts?
@@MaddJacks I responded to your comment several days ago, but I don't see it here. I don't know if somebody is deleting my comments or what. To address your points: John Rigdon's affidavit confirmed the accounts of Joseph Smith's proposition to Nancy Rigdon which were reported by other witnesses mere weeks after the incident occurred. John's affidavit merely filled in some of the details. As for why Sidney didn't leave Nauvoo, he actually left shortly before Joseph's death to start up a branch of the church in Pittsburgh. He returned to Nauvoo upon hearing of Joseph's death, and attempted to take the leadership of the church, but of course Brigham Young and the other apostles shoved him aside. Sidney then returned to Pittsburgh and tried to establish his own church there. In his own church newspaper in 1845 and 1846, he stated that Joseph and Hyrum were killed because they started the spiritual wifery practice and lied about it. So there is no question that Sidney knew that Joseph was responsible for polygamy. Sidney did not expose Joseph over the Happiness Letter incident because that could have produced "mutually assured destruction." Joseph and Sidney both had their fortunes invested in the church and the Nauvoo economy. If Sidney had exposed Joseph in 1842, that would have probably forced Joseph to resign as church president and city mayor. That could have brought down the whole church and Sidney's power and fortune along with it. So he bit his tongue at the time. He moved his family to Pittsburgh in part to get them away from the brewing cauldron that Joseph's reckless behavior was causing. As for you comment " There seemed to be a lot of pressure at the time to gather affidavits," you have to understand the context of the situation. There was no question among Nauvoo insiders that Joseph Smith had originated and practiced polygamy. After the Brighamite Mormons went west in 1846, a group of anti-polygamy Mormons, who were NOT polygamy insiders, decided to start up a non-polygamous "restorationist" movement. That officially became the RLDS church in 1860. Because their position was anti-polygamy, they began an effort to argue that Brigham Young, rather than Smith, had started polygamy. So all of those 1869 affidavits were sworn to refute the RLDS apologists' propaganda. Because both pro and anti polygamy people all testified that Joseph had started polygamy, the RLDS apologists' effort was refuted. But here we are 150 years later, and people like Michelle Stone are still arguing the RLDS propaganda that was refuted 150 years ago.
22:26 Disclaimer (and his post under Karens video) Well, I sure hope that Ben Spackman opens his heart as part of the church history department. It's kind of like they are our congressman and are responsible for it all but they aren't looking into the truth that many of us ALREADY know to be true. Why not use good inspiration and good information??? Do they not pray before they go to work each day? Do they not ask to have their hearts open to truth? Are they not being humble and meek as Jesus taught after he came to those in America anciently as well as the sermon on the mount accounts? Why do the historians hearts remain hardened? Do they even truly read the Book of Mormon? However, I can't truly blame them, because a true prophet doesn't just base good inspiration on good information, he has a relationship with God who he should be in direct connection with and can give actual prophesy.
44:53 I just want to say, again, that even as an exmo I have zero need for Joseph to be a polygamist. The only motivated reasoning I could be subconsciously driven by could be; I want polygamy to have been of God so that a colossal mass faith crisis among the LDS membership is not in the near future. The majority of those I love are members. I care about people’s wellness, security. I never thought I’d value anything higher than Truth.
But truth is a way to find God. Mass Exodus means mass finding God....if the church doesn't come around God will do it himself, (which God already told us in the scriptures he would do.) The times of the Gentiles is coming to a close. The remnant of Joseph will be reuniting with the Jews with the books of truth and really understanding and acknowledging who the Savior is and what his gospel and doctrine are.
The problem is easily solved when you realize Joseph aimed to be a polygamist, but God thwarted him through the events of the Nauvoo Expisitor, thereby saving the Church and Joseph from further harm. God then let the Saints repeat the pattern of the Israelites by wandering 40 years in the wilderness until they gave up the deception of polygamy. History repeats itself. Israel, in ancient and modern times, repeatedly rebels against God. But both are still God's covenant people. Being the first to be scourged for their transgressions.
@@jaredvaughan1665Either way the church has wandered in the wilderness. Joseph or Brigham. The Book of Mormon is what we needed out of it anyway. We were supposed to be preaching the truth of the doctrine of Christ so the covenant people could have the words of their ancestors and not follow the traditions of their fathers. But we didn't do it and instead built houses of dead works and spent all of our time and money there.
I thought I read in “Joseph Fought Polygamy” by Richard and Pamela Price that the inner circle had a pamphlet called, “The peacemaker”. It uses the same language as the Expositor and 132.
Joseph Smith had a man named Udney Jacobs write that pamphlet as a "trial balloon" to advocate for polygamy. John D. Lee's 1877 "Confessions" states, speaking about the 1842-43 period: "During the winter Joseph, the Prophet, set a man by the name of Udney Hay Jacob to select from the Old Bible scriptures as pertained to polygamy, or celestial marriage, to write it in pamphlet form, and to advocate that doctrine. This he did as a feeler among the people, to pave the way for celestial marriage." The pamphlet caused outrage in Nauvoo, so Joseph had to deny any support for it. Putting it in context, it was published on December 1, 1842. That was mere months after the Martha Brotherton, John C. Bennett, and Nancy Rigdon scandals were publicized. So Joseph, having survived those scandals, pressed forward with polygamy a few months later by having a supposed third party non-Mormon write a pamphlet endorsing polygamy. Concurrently, LDS historian Todd Compton's research found that Smith took 14 "spiritual wives" between April 1841 and the publication of Jacobs' pamphlet. So Smith was already enthusiastically practicing what he was having Jacobs preach. By the way, Richard and Pamela Price were RLDS apologists, not legitimate historians. Every legitimate historian who has published on the issue of Mormon polygamy beginning with Fawn Brodie 80 years ago concurs that Joseph Smith originated and practiced polygamy.
@@randyjordan5521 Well for goodness sake. I suppose when you have a whole bunch of "legitimate" historians getting it wrong, God has to send the humble, not so legitimate historians to get it right and they are doing what God wants them to do.
@@icecreamladydriver1606 I again implore you to seek professional mental health counseling. Your condition is not improving. Legitimate historians work with actual historical evidence, hon. Not wild conspiracy theories such as Michelle Stone trades in.
@@MichelleBStone It's what John D. Lee reported, hon. Lee was one of Joseph Smith's closest and most loyal disciples. He had no motive to make up a false story 35 years after the incidents. Lee told that story as part of his confession, when he knew he was about to be executed. He was unburdening his soul and telling his own life experiences. It is OBVIOUS that Joseph Smith employed Udney Jacobs to write that pamphlet as a "trial balloon" because it came smack-dab in the middle of Joseph's frenzy to "plural marry" dozens of women and induct dozens of his followers into polygamy----just as legitimate historians over the last 80 years have researched and concurred on. The list of people whom you must call liars in order to maintain your wild conspiracy theories numbers more than a hundred.
Request: Will you please put something together we can take with us the Sunday next year D&C 132 is discussed that we can use to open up a discussion about this?
I couldn't even watch Brian on Cwik. I wonder if that was the plan on Greg's part. To have you first and then Brian. Did you know that Brian was coming on next? He should have had you on together.
@@jacbox3889 I actually think Greg is making this up as he goes. He had Jacob Hansen on to lie about me, then hesitantly agreed to have me on. Once I was in the interview, I realized his goal was to try to sabotage me with hard questions. I strongly think that when that failed he thought he better go a different route and have Brian Hales on after the fact. Watching his handling of the comments made that all pretty apparent. He is not handling this in a very respectable manner.
I couldn’t watch Brian on Cwik Show either. I tried and then had to shut it off. I just struggle so much with Brian. My respect level for Greg has went way down after seeing his interaction with Michelle. To me it’s so clear and my testimony of the restoration and God is sooo much stronger now.
Do we know which aspects of church history that the historian was saying would be corrected in the future? Also, anyone else notice that this episode was 1:32? How very fitting!
Ben made it ULTRA clear in the comment section of the Woe Unto You, Scribes video that he was absolutely NOT referring to polygamy - which was quite a disappointment. That's not to say it might not still happen without his blessing.....🤞🤞🤞
@@karenhyatt647 I believe the timing of that video was 100% meant to be! I appreciate that Ben didn’t mean for his words to be applied to the doctrine of many wives and concubines, but none of us gets to limit truth to just the thing we are thinking about. If a principle is true, then it’s true for everything. What he said about new information coming out and us needing to “unlearn” some (or many!) things? That is TRUE.
The only organization that fully agrees with Michelle that Joseph was not a polygamist is the dilusional Remnant Church and those who wish he wasn't and reject every testimony that says otherwise. But one can partially agree with her and appreciate the doctrinal views she has correct: The polygamy parts of 132 were inspired by man and/or the devil.
These sisters speak admiringly of Rob Fotheringham’s work and conclusions. If I recall correctly, his Church membership was withdrawn for apostasy-rightly so, in my view. But these sisters go further than Fotheringham’s purely historical approach. They say that God has revealed things to them beyond what the Church’s prophets and apostles have revealed and taught, and that God has inspired them to proclaim these things to the world. In this they are similar to Hiram Page, who claimed to receive revelation and proceeded to declare it outside of his stewardship. In this he was deceived by the adversary and acting contrary to the order of the Church, which the Lord immediately made clear (D&C 28). The lessons of this watershed moment in the Church’s infancy seem to be lost on these sisters, who by their claims to revelation are, whether they recognize it or not, setting themselves up as prophets in augmentation of (and arguably in opposition to) current Church leaders. But these sisters go further than Hiram Page. What they claim God has revealed to them is that the Church’s prophets and apostles knowingly and intentionally falsified and canonized revelation (D&C 132) in order to lead the Church to follow them in what these sisters call these leaders’ “abominations” for most of its 19th century history. As “accusers of the brethren” (a phrase whose underlying Hebrew roots is interesting to contemplate), they thereby strike at the heart of prophetic succession, and therefore the legitimacy and authority of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
How dare women think we can receive answers from God without asking men for permission😱 Especially of Christ and chastity. Heaven knows the men don't want to hear that women are taking a stand on this because we're no longer the obedient servants you'd like. Guess you'll have to have a long chat with God about that.
@@StompMom5 Anyone, woman or man, is entitled to revelation for their own personal life and within the responsibilities of their callings and assignments. No one, man or woman, is entitled to publicly declare revelation beyond or at variance with the united voice of the current First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. Those who do so while pretending to be faithful members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are wolves in sheep’s clothing, whether they realize it or not.
@@StompMom5 "How dare women think we can receive answers from God without asking men for permission" LOL! When the Mormon church gives women the priesthood and allows them to be leaders, then maybe you could do that. But I wouldn't hold my breath.
@ccardall Since when is discussing history a matter of authority? So we should never speak if our founding fathers without your permission? So you're now the prophet?🤣🤣 Head leader, king over all, boss clown, head nut..... you get the point. You have no authority whatsoever!! You're welcome to NOT listen but you don't get to tell people what they're allowed to say or do. Freedom of speech is still a thing even if you don't agree with it🤦♀️
Todd Compton, a legitimate historian, lists Martha as Joseph's 16th plural wife, and dates their sealing to August 1842. That was smack-dab in the middle of the Martha Brotherton and Nancy Rigdon scandals, when Joseph was propositioning women left and right. Joseph took at least 11 plural wives in 1842, with several others rejecting him.
@@randyjordan5521 she later married Heber C Kimball so she had reason to lie too. She was previously married as well but her husband did die. HCK IA strangely also the one said to have married or sealed her to Joseoh Smith The temple records show she was sealed to Joseph Smith in 1846 nit 1842.
@@allthingsarepossiblethruchrist "she later married Heber C Kimball so she had reason to lie too." LOL! Exactly what was her reason to lie? Did all of the people who testified that they were taught polygamy by Joseph Smith, and all of the women who said that they plural married Joseph Smith, and all of the people who opposed Joseph Smith's polygamy doctrine lie? You're talking about 120 or so people. Many of Joseph and Hyrum Smith's "plural widows" were sealed to Brigham Young or Heber C. Kimball "for time" after their murders. Even Hyrum Smith's legal widow Mary was sealed to Kimball. So what is your basis for your opinion that Martha Knight lied in her 1869 affidavit? " HCK IA strangely also the one said to have married or sealed her to Joseoh Smith The temple records show she was sealed to Joseph Smith in 1846 nit 1842." Martha's own affidavit stated that Kimball performed her plural sealing to Joseph Smith "in the summer of 1842." That was right in the middle of Smith's flurry of taking numerous plural wives, as well as the period when Martha Brotherton, Nancy Rigdon, and Sarah Pratt rejected plural marriage proposals from him or Brigham Young. All of these facts have been confirmed by numerous historians for more than a century now. After Joseph's death, and before the Mormons abandoned Nauvoo, many temple sealings were performed in advance of the move west: "On January 26 [1846] she was sealed to Joseph Smith for eternity and to Heber C. Kimball for time in the Nauvoo temple."---Todd Compton, "In Sacred Loneliness," p. 372. So there was nothing unusual at all about Martha's 1846 sealing to Smith and Kimball. Numerous similar sealings were performed during that period.
Every marriage is between two people (a man and a woman), even in polygamy. while I’m open to what you have to say, I was embarrassed for you when you argued against that idea. It made you lose credibility in my eyes as you seemed so unable to grasp that simple concept. With each new polygamous bride, the marriage vows would be between two people, the groom and the new bride.
@@StompMom5 I didn’t mean to place my comment as a reply to the comment about Kamala ads. I am a woman and am against polygamy but I want the arguments to be sound and not foolish. I was referring to this interview. I felt the argument about “A man A woman” was foolish and I was disappointed: ruclips.net/video/MhDe3nBul04/видео.htmlsi=IBDn6kJsV7evc8Z2
Oh my gosh, I felt like I interrupted Michelle more than she interrupted me, lol! We were quite a pair on this episode - it was an editing nightmare... 🤦♀️😂 Thanks for being patient with us both! 💜
@@karenhyatt647 Karen, do you have any thoughts on these statements? "On Thursday evening we gave the history of Nauvoo, and the events that led to the death of the Smiths, which, of course, we traced to the introduction of the spiritual wife system; for all that know any thing about it, that it was the introduction of that system which led to the death of the Smiths, and that if that system had not been introduced, they might have been living men to-day."---Sidney Rigdon, March 15, 1845. "They introduced a base system of polygamy, worse by far than that of the heathen; this system of corruption brought a train of evils with it, which terminated in their entire ruin. After this system was introduced, being in opposition [to] the laws of the land, they, had to put truth at defiance to conceal it, and in order to do it, perjury was often practiced. This system was introduced by the Smiths some time before their death, and was the thing which put them into the power of their enemies, and was the immediate cause of their death."---Sidney Rigdon, June, 1846.
Karen's documentary is the most comprehensive and well put together thing on the topic of polygamy I have seen and blows the "official narrative" out of the water. Everyone should watch and share "Woe Unto You, Scribes: The Hidden History of Polygamy"
Ladies! The interview with Ben Speckman is such a game changer! I watched it a couple days ago with my jaw on the ground. As an exmo i had few differing reaction; shock at the open acknowledgment of misinformation that members have been given. Happy for he future members to no longer believe blindly (trustingly, faithfully unquestioningly) will lead to fewer hearts being broken in the future. And lastly, I’m feeling really pissed that none of this was discussed, taught or acknowledged in 2019 or atleast not in my awareness as a devout, literal, busy leader member at the time my world blew up. Oh and one more thing that bugged (petty as it may be) his delivery felt pretty heartless and condescending. It felt that in his view, If I had been a good member I would have know all this stuff and wouldn’t have been so stalwart and rigid in my testimony. Once again, it’s always the individual that’s the problem. You just can’t win.
Sadly though, Ben is still a polygamist at heart. He clarified his stance and said he was misunderstood. He was rude, prideful and pathetic. He's just another dude with head in his pa*ts 🙊
I’m sorry that’s a really hard thing to go through!❤
I wish I could say something simple like "it will all be fine in the end" but it doesn't really work that way. People invest too much into the church and then get slapped in the face for it. I haven't decided yet to take my name off the records but I have no trust in the leaders and they are not prophets, seers and revelators. They are just a bunch of rich old men getting richer off the church. If I even had a desire to go to the temple again I wouldn't be able to get a recommend because of how I feel about the leaders. I am at a place where I am fine with where I am. Today I did go to my Niece's baby's blessing. Of course I am sick about the name they gave him "Brigham". I still believe in the Book of Mormon and Joseph and there is a chance that God will rescue the church but He could just as well start all over again. As far as heartless and condescending and blaming the members, well that is very prevalent in the church. A few years ago I watched a video of Bednar and he told us it was our fault for the delay of Jesus's return because we weren't righteous enough. I was smoking from the ears. That moron doesn't even understand the scriptures. The scriptures teach us that the whole world will be wicked and "all of your churches will be corrupt". We now just go by the Bible and the Book of Mormon and some of the D&C. And on the big things if it isn't in the Book of Mormon we just don't accept it. I pray for your wounds to heal my dear. God be with you.
Fantastic comment! So thoughtful, and I agree with you.
Please post a link to the specimen interview? Or how do we find it?
Enjoyed watching this conversation with you two dear ladies. Karen did an excellent job on her documentary, her research was phenomenal!! You two are the best! ❤❤
I'm very interested in taking to you about how you see the restoration and the doctrine. Is it a lot different than Brighamite teachings?
Documentary was great. I'll be sending it to my family toward the end of the year since next year we'll be studying the D&C/ Church History.
Love the “right under his nose” conversation and so much more. She says things so well!
I watched Karen’s documentary, it was GREAT!!!! I’ve shared with multiple family members. Thank you to both of you ladies. I’m eternally grateful for your efforts 💕🙏🏼
The original d&c 101 was the smoking gun for me. I was shocked when I learned that info that had been “cherry picked” out of the narrative.
True use of cherry picked.
Can you elaborate more? Where can I find the original D&C101?
Michelle, and thats a reason why I am not on CWIC Media anymore. I feel so sorry for the women in their families!!! Yuck.
A wonderful summary.. I am so grateful that this documentary has been made.. coolest..!!
Just finished watching and it was great to see you ladies take a well deserved victory lap! Great job, Karen, your video is awesome and your website with all the sources is of equal value in my opinion! I think Brian Hales knows this truth is coming forth too. I noticed in this last interview with Greg he didn't call for anyone to be excommunicated and actually said the other side has some good points. I imagine that was hard for him to admit but think he may see the writing on the wall. :) Also the statement from Greg about a man having mulitple wives and its somehow one marriage baffles me and I can not understand how anyone could actually believe that.
@ 28 minutes in: Perhaps Jacob 2:31-35 is an emotional argument but it is God making the argument not Michelle.
Yeah, that one blew me away.
Bingo! It is SO rediculous!
@@timoaks1372 Good point, women are in good company with our emotions.
We watched it yesterday. She did an amazing job.
I'm laughing at how stupid and gullible I was all of my life (I'm 48), thank you for taking the scales from my eyes.
You and me both🤣. I'm the same age and can't believe I didn't think to ask God until only a year ago
I'm 58, so you're a quicker learner than I am! 😅
Great conversations about a great documentary. So much truth.
“If my great great great grandparents did it then it was right.” What a troubling mindset. I would guess the same people wouldn’t say that their parents were right in all that they did.. interestingly you can find many historical examples of the children of devout polygamists rejecting it- Lucy Walker Kimball’s daughters, for example….
Joseph couldn’t retranslate the book of Lehi because it was lost but he could remember this revelation word for word?
Ooh, great point!
Uggh the emotional argument thing! I would love to ask Greg if he would have any emotions and maybe even some emotional arguments to make perhaps… if his wife desired more husbands and was told by church leaders she could go ahead and take more… oh and if he’s not ok to let her, he’ll be destroyed.
Bingo💥. Something the men refuse to think about. It's about female property
Yes! This!
What a wonderful discussion. It couldn't be more clear. I agree! It is good news. It is so terrible how the Church members feel so free to throw Joseph under the bus, he who had lived without reproach and sacrificed so much, while Brigham Young, who deserves no such praise is so coddled and protected! The truth is coming! Hurray.
The polygamy deniers throw Brigham under the bus. The polygamy justifiers throw Joseph under the bus.
The truth? Joseph and Brigham were both flawed. And should both be praised for their good works and thrown under the bus for their bad works. Which included the whoredom of polygamy.
Karen you are so fun the way you express yourself.
The documentary was very well done. Thank you for all of your efforts putting it together!
💯💖
Her documentary was excellent!! I'm looking forward to your conversation with her about it❤❤❤
Brian Hales asked Michelle what her end game was- revealing more about him than her. He had (has) an endgame in his research and the false narrative he created.
@@Hmcc0712 EXACTLY!!!
@@jaredvaughan1665 I used to think Joseph did it but now I don’t think historical data I have seen supports Joseph practicing it.
That's such a good point!!
Brian Hales did not invent the historical evidence which clearly shows that Joseph Smith originated and practiced polygamy. That evidence began to be published in 1842, when the first reports of Smith's secret "spiritual wifery" practice were published in newspapers. The first historian to do serious scholarly research was Fawn Brodie 80 years ago. She researched the same historical documents that Brian Hales and every other historian has pored through, and she came up with a list of 48 certain or possible plural wives of Joseph Smith. Every legitimate historian since Brodie has concurred that Joseph Smith originated polygamy. So Brian Hales hasn't invented any "false narrative."
I recommend that you read an article titled "Identifying the Earliest Mormon Polygamists, 1841-1844" by historian Gary James Bergera. Excerpts:
"From Joseph Smith’s first documented plural marriage in 1841 until his death more than three years later, some twenty-eight men and 106 women (as civil and plural wives) entered the prophet’s order of celestial matrimony.[1] Given the secrecy surrounding Smith’s controversial (and illegal) practice, the exact number of these earliest polygamists may never be known. However, enough information in the form of diaries, letters, auto biographies, reminiscences, affidavits, statements, and family histories has accumulated since the early 1840s-coupled with reasonable inferences and educated guesses-to enable a compelling, albeit tentative, identification.[2]
Based on the most convincing data presently available,[3] the following men either definitely or probably married additional wives with Joseph Smith’s permission prior to his death on June 27, 1844: James Adams, Ezra T. Benson, Reynolds Cahoon, William Clayton, Joseph W. Coolidge, Howard Egan, William Felshaw, William D. Huntington, Orson Hyde, Joseph A. Kelting, Heber C. Kimball, Vinson Knight, Isaac Morley, Joseph Bates Noble, John E. Page, Parley P. Pratt, Willard Richards, Hyrum Smith, John Smith, Joseph Smith, William Smith, Erastus Snow, John Taylor, Theodore Turley, Lyman Wight, Edwin D. Woolley, Brigham Young, and Lorenzo Dow Young. While the evidence in a few cases (i.e., Coolidge, Felshaw, Kelting, Page, and Wight) for an early plural marriage is circumstantial and conjectural, these twenty-eight men and their wives comprise the most likely candidates for membership in Joseph Smith’s inner circle of plural marriage participants...
The abundant evidence for Joseph Smith’s Nauvoo plural wives was first published in Andrew Jenson, “Plural Marriage,” Historical Record 6 (May 1887): 233-34. Jenson was followed by Fawn Brodie, No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith, the Mormon Prophet, 2d ed., rev. and enl. (1945; New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1971), 457-88; Thomas Milton Tinney, The Royal Family of the Prophet Joseph Smith, Junior (Salt Lake City: Tinney-Green[e] Family Organization Publishing Company, 1973); Danel W. Bachman, “A Study of the Mormon Practice of Plural Marriage before the Death of Joseph Smith” (1975); George D. Smith, “Nauvoo Roots of Mormon Polygamy” (1994); D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy: Origins of Power (1994), 587-88; and most recently Todd Compton, In Sacred Loneliness. Although some readers may disagree in a handful of instances with Compton’s identifications of Smith’s Nauvoo wives,[74] I believe he is accurate. In fact, I am persuaded that the evidence allows for an additional four (if not more) plural wives-Mary Houston, Sarah Scott Mulholland, Mary Ann Frost Stearns Pratt, and Phebe Watrous Woodworth-bringing the total of Joseph Smith’s known Nauvoo plural wives to at least thirty-six."
Yeah, that dude is a real work of art.
Karen's documentary was very well done and is an important resource. A great overall summary that packs a punch to the official narrative. One note about William Clayton's 1874 affidavit - The affidavit was actually written by Joseph F. Smith with annotations added in pencil by Clayton. So the change from Clayton's July 12, 1843 journal entry where both Joseph and Hyrum presented the "revelation" to Emma, to where in 1874 it was just Hyrum who went to Emma, likely originated from Joseph F. Smith. However, at that specific portion in the draft 1874 affidavit, Clayton changed Joseph F. Smith's verbiage of "Joseph waited in the office" to "Joseph remained with me in the office." In addition, Clayton signed and had notarized the final 1874 affidavit. Therefore Clayton not only affirmed and sanctioned the change to where Hyrum was the only one who allegedly went to Emma but put his name to it as well. Overall, it highlights just how desperate Joseph F. Smith was to gather evidence against Joseph Smith and how Clayton could not keep his story straight.
@@Eric_Martineau I'm actually working on that right now.
Hyrum Smith presented the revelation on celestial marriage before the Nauvoo high council on August 12, 1843 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 which Hyrum read is the same text as D&C 132 today. So all of this talk about William Clayton's journal being fabricated, and Brigham Young altering the document after Joseph's death to include the portions about plural marriage is just a wild conspiracy theory that is utterly refuted by a mountain of evidence.
Austin Cowles was the counselor to William Marks in the Nauvoo stake presidency in 1843. Below is his affidavit, filed on May 4, 1844. That was seven weeks before Joseph and Hyrum Smith's death.
"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."
Austin Cowles and his fellow polygamy opponent William Law filed their legal affidavits in an effort to force Joseph Smith to renounce and abolish his "spiritual wifery" practice. Law also filed legal charges against Smith of "living in an open state of adultery with Maria Lawrence" on May 23, 1844. Smith responded by continuing to deny any involvement in polygamy and calling his accusers liars. Smith's response and attitude led directly to his and Hyrum's murders five weeks later. After their deaths, Smith's long-time associate Sidney Rigdon stated:
"On Thursday evening we gave the history of Nauvoo, and the events that led to the death of the Smiths, which, of course, we traced to the introduction of the spiritual wife system; for all that know any thing about it, that it was the introduction of that system which led to the death of the Smiths, and that if that system had not been introduced, they might have been living men to-day."---March 15, 1845.
"They introduced a base system of polygamy, worse by far than that of the heathen; this system of corruption brought a train of evils with it, which terminated in their entire ruin. After this system was introduced, being in opposition [to] the laws of the land, they, had to put truth at defiance to conceal it, and in order to do it, perjury was often practiced. This system was introduced by the Smiths some time before their death, and was the thing which put them into the power of their enemies, and was the immediate cause of their death."---June, 1846.
I hope this helps you to understand that this whole theory that Smith had nothing to do with polygamy, and that it was actually started and practiced by Brigham Young or others, and that Young or someone else altered Smith's "revelation" after his death, is pure hogwash. EVERYBODY in Nauvoo who had heard about polygamy knew very well that Smith was its originator.
Hyrum was the 2nd President of the Church and should be added to all charts and lists.
@@tgaty5378 I'm actually working on my episode on Hyrum right now! I'm hoping it might be released next week.
@@MichelleBStone Well, I hope you include this historical information:
March 29. Since my last conversation with Joseph Smith which was on the 8th Jan’y I have ahd not association with him, as I do not with to associate with evil doers; he has in the meantime been using all his influence to destroy me, he has employed every vile and corrupt man and woman in the city over whom he has any power to circulate veil reports as false as the author of lies, about me and my wife, but he has failed to accomplish his object, for our names yet stand fair and untarnished in the estimation of the virtuous and the food; we find the better part of the community to be our friends; they feel disgusted with Smith’s course for it has been most disgusting lothsome to the virtuous mind, lust, falsehood, injustice, and cruelty have characterized his course wotwards me & mine in such an unparalleled degree that the unprejudiced could not but see it, and abhor the man and his base acts.
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.
If Joseph was part of this secret inner circle, and they were bringing people in, why would he have vetted so many of his enemies?
Joseph wan't just "part of this secret inner circle." He concocted his spiritual wife doctrine and practice all by himself, and inducted about 100 of his most loyal, trusted disciples into it. Those people weren't his enemies. They were mostly his closest friends and highest -ranking church leaders. So it's not like those were a bunch of people who were practicing polygamy against Joseph's teachings. If Joseph hadn't originated the practice, no Mormons would have ever participated in it.
Many years after the Nauvoo period, when RLDS leaders were claiming that Joseph had nothing to do with polygamy, Sidney Rigdon's son John swore this in a legal affidavit:
"John W. Rigdon, being duly sworn, says: I am the son of Sidney Rigdon, deceased. Was born at Mentor, in the State of Ohio, in the year 1830, and am now over seventy-five years of age. My father, Sidney Rigdon, joined the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that year, and was in 1833 ordained to be Joseph Smith's first counselor which position he held up to the time Joseph the Prophet was killed, at Carthage jail, in 1844...
"As to the truth of the doctrine of polygamy being introduced by the Prophet Joseph Smith, deponent further says: Joseph Smith was absolute so far as spiritual figures were concerned, and no man would have dared to introduce the doctrine of polygamy or any other new doctrine into the "Mormon" Church at the city of Nauvoo during the years 1843 and 1844, or at any other place or time, without first obtaining Joseph Smith's consent. If anyone had dared to have done such a thing he would have been brought before the High Council and tried, and if proven against him, he would have been excommunicated from the Church, and that would have ended polygamy forever, and would also have ended the man who had dared to introduce such a doctrine without the consent of the Prophet Joseph.
"And deponent further says: Joseph the Prophet, at the City of Nauvoo, Illinois, some time in the latter part of the year 1843, or the first part of the year 1844, made a proposition to my sister, Nancy Rigdon, to become his wife. It happened in this way: Nancy had gone to Church, meeting being held in a grove near the temple lot on which the "Mormons" were then erecting a temple, an old lady friend who lived alone invited her to go home with her, which Nancy did. When they got to the house and had taken their bonnets off, the old lady began to talk to her about the new doctrine of polygamy which was then being taught, telling Nancy, during the conversation, that it was a surprise to her when she first heard it, but that she had since come to believe it to be true. While they were talking Joseph Smith the Prophet came into the house, and joined them, and the old lady immediately left the room. It was then that Joseph made the proposal of marriage to my sister. Nancy flatly refused him, saying if she ever got married she would marry a single man or none at all, and thereupon took her bonnet and went home, leaving Joseph at the old lady's house. Nancy told father and mother of it. The story got out and it became the talk of the town that Joseph had made a proposition to Nancy Rigdon to become his wife, and that she refused him. A few days after the occurrence Joseph Smith came to my father's house and talked the matter over with the family, my sister, Mrs. Athalia Robinson also being present, who is now alive. The feelings manifested by our family on this occasion were anything but brotherly or sisterly, more especially on the part of Nancy, as she felt that she had been insulted. A day or two later Joseph Smith returned to my father's house, when matters were satisfactorily adjusted between them, and there the matter ended."
@@randyjordan5521 there are reasons this still casts doubt in my mind. John Rigdon had financial reasons for coming to Salt Lake. It almost seems as if he was trying to make a deal for his the biography. Even more, his story about his father changed. He was 70 years old when giving his sister’s account, conveniently, no one was there to corroborate. I wonder this too, If Sidney Rigdon was so disgusted with Joseph at the time, like his son says, why not leave with the Laws, or start his own? But he didn’t, he even defended Joseph in the papers regarding the happiness letter. This information doesn’t pass the test for me. There seemed to be a lot of pressure at the time to gather affidavits.
@@MaddJacks Nothing you wrote here refutes the fact that Joseph Smith propositioned Nancy Rigdon in 1842. Two different men who were privy to the incident wrote letters to newspapers detailing the incident mere weeks after it happened. John Rigdon's affidavit just provides more detail. Here is what Sidney Rigdon said about Joseph Smith and polygamy shortly after his death:
"On Thursday evening we gave the history of Nauvoo, and the events that led to the death of the Smiths, which, of course, we traced to the introduction of the spiritual wife system; for all that know any thing about it, that it was the introduction of that system which led to the death of the Smiths, and that if that system had not been introduced, they might have been living men to-day."---March 15, 1845.
"They introduced a base system of polygamy, worse by far than that of the heathen; this system of corruption brought a train of evils with it, which terminated in their entire ruin. After this system was introduced, being in opposition [to] the laws of the land, they, had to put truth at defiance to conceal it, and in order to do it, perjury was often practiced. This system was introduced by the Smiths some time before their death, and was the thing which put them into the power of their enemies, and was the immediate cause of their death."---June, 1846.
Sidney knew very well that Joseph had originated and practiced polygamy because Joseph had propositioned his own daughter.
As for why Rigdon didn't leave Nauvoo along with the Laws, Rigdon and his family as well as newspaper publisher Ebenezer Robinson had moved to Pittsburgh to try to start a branch of the church beforeJoseph was killed. As John Rigdon's affidavit stated:
"After that [the Nancy scandal] Joseph Smith sent my father to Pittsburgh, Pa., to take charge of a little church that was there, and Ebenezer Robinson, who was then the Church printer, or at least had been such, as he was the printer of the paper in Kirtland, Ohio, and a printer by trade, was to go with him to print a paper there, and nine days before Joseph Smith was shot at Carthage we started, reaching Pittsburgh the day before he was killed."
When Sidney heard about Joseph's murder, he returned to Nauvoo, expecting to take the leadership of the church. But of course, Brigham Young and the other apostles shoved him aside. Sidney, unlike the other polygamy opponents such as Law and Austin Cowles, did not publicly expose Joseph's secret wife practice. In fact, after Joseph had Law excommunicated, Sidney visited Law and tried to mend the fences between Law and Joseph. Law wrote in his diary:
"May 13. This day Sidney Rigdon came to my house and said that he came fully authorized to negotiate terms of peace. I told him to make his proposition. He said it was that if we would let all difficulties drop that we (Wilson Law, my wife Jane Law, R. D. Foster and myself[)] should be restored to our standing in the Church and to all our offices, and they would publish it in the papers. We told him that we had not been cut off from the Church legally, and therefore did not ask to be restored. He said that, he knew the proceedings were illegal and very wrong, and said they would publish that fact to the world if we won’t be satisfied. He said they wanted peace. I told him that if they wanted peace they could have it on the following conditions, That Joseph Smith would acknowledge publicly that he had taught and practised the doctrine of the plurality of wives, that he brought a revelation supporting the doctrine, and that he should own the whole system (revelation and all) to be from Hell; to acknowledge also that he had lately endeavored to seduce my wife, and had found her a virtuous woman, and that the persecution against me and my friends was unjust; if Smith and his followers will entirely cease from their abominations and fully undeceive the people as to those things, then I would agree to cease hostilities, otherwise we would publish all to the world."
Joseph declined to renounce and abolish polygamy, so Law & Co. published the "Nauvoo Expositor".
My question is, *if* this was true, could she be confusing the law of adoption (the law of sealing people to himself) with marriage? How many others confused the two concepts?
@@MaddJacks I responded to your comment several days ago, but I don't see it here. I don't know if somebody is deleting my comments or what. To address your points: John Rigdon's affidavit confirmed the accounts of Joseph Smith's proposition to Nancy Rigdon which were reported by other witnesses mere weeks after the incident occurred. John's affidavit merely filled in some of the details. As for why Sidney didn't leave Nauvoo, he actually left shortly before Joseph's death to start up a branch of the church in Pittsburgh. He returned to Nauvoo upon hearing of Joseph's death, and attempted to take the leadership of the church, but of course Brigham Young and the other apostles shoved him aside. Sidney then returned to Pittsburgh and tried to establish his own church there. In his own church newspaper in 1845 and 1846, he stated that Joseph and Hyrum were killed because they started the spiritual wifery practice and lied about it. So there is no question that Sidney knew that Joseph was responsible for polygamy.
Sidney did not expose Joseph over the Happiness Letter incident because that could have produced "mutually assured destruction." Joseph and Sidney both had their fortunes invested in the church and the Nauvoo economy. If Sidney had exposed Joseph in 1842, that would have probably forced Joseph to resign as church president and city mayor. That could have brought down the whole church and Sidney's power and fortune along with it. So he bit his tongue at the time. He moved his family to Pittsburgh in part to get them away from the brewing cauldron that Joseph's reckless behavior was causing.
As for you comment " There seemed to be a lot of pressure at the time to gather affidavits," you have to understand the context of the situation. There was no question among Nauvoo insiders that Joseph Smith had originated and practiced polygamy. After the Brighamite Mormons went west in 1846, a group of anti-polygamy Mormons, who were NOT polygamy insiders, decided to start up a non-polygamous "restorationist" movement. That officially became the RLDS church in 1860. Because their position was anti-polygamy, they began an effort to argue that Brigham Young, rather than Smith, had started polygamy. So all of those 1869 affidavits were sworn to refute the RLDS apologists' propaganda. Because both pro and anti polygamy people all testified that Joseph had started polygamy, the RLDS apologists' effort was refuted. But here we are 150 years later, and people like Michelle Stone are still arguing the RLDS propaganda that was refuted 150 years ago.
22:26 Disclaimer (and his post under Karens video) Well, I sure hope that Ben Spackman opens his heart as part of the church history department. It's kind of like they are our congressman and are responsible for it all but they aren't looking into the truth that many of us ALREADY know to be true.
Why not use good inspiration and good information??? Do they not pray before they go to work each day? Do they not ask to have their hearts open to truth? Are they not being humble and meek as Jesus taught after he came to those in America anciently as well as the sermon on the mount accounts? Why do the historians hearts remain hardened? Do they even truly read the Book of Mormon? However, I can't truly blame them, because a true prophet doesn't just base good inspiration on good information, he has a relationship with God who he should be in direct connection with and can give actual prophesy.
Maybe they pray but to the wrong God.
44:53 I just want to say, again, that even as an exmo I have zero need for Joseph to be a polygamist. The only motivated reasoning I could be subconsciously driven by could be; I want polygamy to have been of God so that a colossal mass faith crisis among the LDS membership is not in the near future. The majority of those I love are members. I care about people’s wellness, security. I never thought I’d value anything higher than Truth.
But truth is a way to find God. Mass Exodus means mass finding God....if the church doesn't come around God will do it himself, (which God already told us in the scriptures he would do.) The times of the Gentiles is coming to a close. The remnant of Joseph will be reuniting with the Jews with the books of truth and really understanding and acknowledging who the Savior is and what his gospel and doctrine are.
@@MommaCrissa That is a bias view which is absolutely fine and helps me recognize that our epistemology differs.
The problem is easily solved when you realize Joseph aimed to be a polygamist, but God thwarted him through the events of the Nauvoo Expisitor, thereby saving the Church and Joseph from further harm.
God then let the Saints repeat the pattern of the Israelites by wandering 40 years in the wilderness until they gave up the deception of polygamy.
History repeats itself. Israel, in ancient and modern times, repeatedly rebels against God.
But both are still God's covenant people. Being the first to be scourged for their transgressions.
@@jaredvaughan1665Either way the church has wandered in the wilderness. Joseph or Brigham. The Book of Mormon is what we needed out of it anyway. We were supposed to be preaching the truth of the doctrine of Christ so the covenant people could have the words of their ancestors and not follow the traditions of their fathers. But we didn't do it and instead built houses of dead works and spent all of our time and money there.
@@jaredvaughan1665 Holy crap!! LET IT GO!!! Stop trying to be so manipulative
Karen is a rockstar now. Git some!!!!
I thought I read in “Joseph Fought Polygamy” by Richard and Pamela Price that the inner circle had a pamphlet called, “The peacemaker”. It uses the same language as the Expositor and 132.
Joseph Smith had a man named Udney Jacobs write that pamphlet as a "trial balloon" to advocate for polygamy. John D. Lee's 1877 "Confessions" states, speaking about the 1842-43 period:
"During the winter Joseph, the Prophet, set a man by the name of Udney Hay Jacob to select from the Old Bible scriptures as pertained to polygamy, or celestial marriage, to write it in pamphlet form, and to advocate that doctrine. This he did as a feeler among the people, to pave the way for celestial marriage."
The pamphlet caused outrage in Nauvoo, so Joseph had to deny any support for it. Putting it in context, it was published on December 1, 1842. That was mere months after the Martha Brotherton, John C. Bennett, and Nancy Rigdon scandals were publicized. So Joseph, having survived those scandals, pressed forward with polygamy a few months later by having a supposed third party non-Mormon write a pamphlet endorsing polygamy. Concurrently, LDS historian Todd Compton's research found that Smith took 14 "spiritual wives" between April 1841 and the publication of Jacobs' pamphlet. So Smith was already enthusiastically practicing what he was having Jacobs preach.
By the way, Richard and Pamela Price were RLDS apologists, not legitimate historians. Every legitimate historian who has published on the issue of Mormon polygamy beginning with Fawn Brodie 80 years ago concurs that Joseph Smith originated and practiced polygamy.
@@randyjordan5521 Well for goodness sake. I suppose when you have a whole bunch of "legitimate" historians getting it wrong, God has to send the humble, not so legitimate historians to get it right and they are doing what God wants them to do.
@@icecreamladydriver1606 I again implore you to seek professional mental health counseling. Your condition is not improving.
Legitimate historians work with actual historical evidence, hon. Not wild conspiracy theories such as Michelle Stone trades in.
@@randyjordan5521 that is such a worn out ridiculous narrative.
@@MichelleBStone It's what John D. Lee reported, hon. Lee was one of Joseph Smith's closest and most loyal disciples. He had no motive to make up a false story 35 years after the incidents. Lee told that story as part of his confession, when he knew he was about to be executed. He was unburdening his soul and telling his own life experiences.
It is OBVIOUS that Joseph Smith employed Udney Jacobs to write that pamphlet as a "trial balloon" because it came smack-dab in the middle of Joseph's frenzy to "plural marry" dozens of women and induct dozens of his followers into polygamy----just as legitimate historians over the last 80 years have researched and concurred on.
The list of people whom you must call liars in order to maintain your wild conspiracy theories numbers more than a hundred.
Request: Will you please put something together we can take with us the Sunday next year D&C 132 is discussed that we can use to open up a discussion about this?
YES! Fantastic idea, and I am definitely planning on it!
I couldn't even watch Brian on Cwik. I wonder if that was the plan on Greg's part. To have you first and then Brian. Did you know that Brian was coming on next? He should have had you on together.
@@jacbox3889 I actually think Greg is making this up as he goes. He had Jacob Hansen on to lie about me, then hesitantly agreed to have me on. Once I was in the interview, I realized his goal was to try to sabotage me with hard questions. I strongly think that when that failed he thought he better go a different route and have Brian Hales on after the fact. Watching his handling of the comments made that all pretty apparent. He is not handling this in a very respectable manner.
I couldn’t watch Brian on Cwik Show either. I tried and then had to shut it off. I just struggle so much with Brian. My respect level for Greg has went way down after seeing his interaction with Michelle. To me it’s so clear and my testimony of the restoration and God is sooo much stronger now.
Fabulous documentary!
I truly appreciate you both.
Michelle - ADHD? 😂
Do we know which aspects of church history that the historian was saying would be corrected in the future?
Also, anyone else notice that this episode was 1:32? How very fitting!
Ben made it ULTRA clear in the comment section of the Woe Unto You, Scribes video that he was absolutely NOT referring to polygamy - which was quite a disappointment. That's not to say it might not still happen without his blessing.....🤞🤞🤞
@karenhyatt647 For five seconds I had a little respect for him but now he's made it clear he's just another adulterer
@@karenhyatt647 I believe the timing of that video was 100% meant to be! I appreciate that Ben didn’t mean for his words to be applied to the doctrine of many wives and concubines, but none of us gets to limit truth to just the thing we are thinking about. If a principle is true, then it’s true for everything. What he said about new information coming out and us needing to “unlearn” some (or many!) things? That is TRUE.
@@gwendolynwyne So true!!
@@gwendolynwyneWell said!!
Telegram please. NOT facebook. Facebook is awful.
Agreed. I deleted my account years ago and couldn't be happier
I guess it depends on the intended audience. The organization did not resonate with me. Who was the intended audience?
@@whyisgamora3721 All who want more information regarding polygamy.
The only organization that fully agrees with Michelle that Joseph was not a polygamist is the dilusional Remnant Church and those who wish he wasn't and reject every testimony that says otherwise.
But one can partially agree with her and appreciate the doctrinal views she has correct: The polygamy parts of 132 were inspired by man and/or the devil.
These sisters speak admiringly of Rob Fotheringham’s work and conclusions. If I recall correctly, his Church membership was withdrawn for apostasy-rightly so, in my view.
But these sisters go further than Fotheringham’s purely historical approach. They say that God has revealed things to them beyond what the Church’s prophets and apostles have revealed and taught, and that God has inspired them to proclaim these things to the world. In this they are similar to Hiram Page, who claimed to receive revelation and proceeded to declare it outside of his stewardship. In this he was deceived by the adversary and acting contrary to the order of the Church, which the Lord immediately made clear (D&C 28). The lessons of this watershed moment in the Church’s infancy seem to be lost on these sisters, who by their claims to revelation are, whether they recognize it or not, setting themselves up as prophets in augmentation of (and arguably in opposition to) current Church leaders.
But these sisters go further than Hiram Page. What they claim God has revealed to them is that the Church’s prophets and apostles knowingly and intentionally falsified and canonized revelation (D&C 132) in order to lead the Church to follow them in what these sisters call these leaders’ “abominations” for most of its 19th century history. As “accusers of the brethren” (a phrase whose underlying Hebrew roots is interesting to contemplate), they thereby strike at the heart of prophetic succession, and therefore the legitimacy and authority of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
How dare women think we can receive answers from God without asking men for permission😱
Especially of Christ and chastity.
Heaven knows the men don't want to hear that women are taking a stand on this because we're no longer the obedient servants you'd like.
Guess you'll have to have a long chat with God about that.
@@StompMom5 Anyone, woman or man, is entitled to revelation for their own personal life and within the responsibilities of their callings and assignments. No one, man or woman, is entitled to publicly declare revelation beyond or at variance with the united voice of the current First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. Those who do so while pretending to be faithful members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are wolves in sheep’s clothing, whether they realize it or not.
Rob Fotheringham is as much of a deluded hack as these women are.
@@StompMom5 "How dare women think we can receive answers from God without asking men for permission"
LOL! When the Mormon church gives women the priesthood and allows them to be leaders, then maybe you could do that.
But I wouldn't hold my breath.
@ccardall Since when is discussing history a matter of authority? So we should never speak if our founding fathers without your permission?
So you're now the prophet?🤣🤣
Head leader, king over all, boss clown, head nut..... you get the point. You have no authority whatsoever!! You're welcome to NOT listen but you don't get to tell people what they're allowed to say or do. Freedom of speech is still a thing even if you don't agree with it🤦♀️
What do you kbow about Martha Mcbride Knighton being a polygamist wife of Joseph Smith.
Go to her video she just did.
Karen Hyatt channel
1:22:35 for a list of all women
1:47:25 for Martha McBride
@@MommaCrissa thank you
Todd Compton, a legitimate historian, lists Martha as Joseph's 16th plural wife, and dates their sealing to August 1842. That was smack-dab in the middle of the Martha Brotherton and Nancy Rigdon scandals, when Joseph was propositioning women left and right. Joseph took at least 11 plural wives in 1842, with several others rejecting him.
@@randyjordan5521 she later married Heber C Kimball so she had reason to lie too. She was previously married as well but her husband did die. HCK IA strangely also the one said to have married or sealed her to Joseoh Smith The temple records show she was sealed to Joseph Smith in 1846 nit 1842.
@@allthingsarepossiblethruchrist "she later married Heber C Kimball so she had reason to lie too."
LOL! Exactly what was her reason to lie? Did all of the people who testified that they were taught polygamy by Joseph Smith, and all of the women who said that they plural married Joseph Smith, and all of the people who opposed Joseph Smith's polygamy doctrine lie? You're talking about 120 or so people.
Many of Joseph and Hyrum Smith's "plural widows" were sealed to Brigham Young or Heber C. Kimball "for time" after their murders. Even Hyrum Smith's legal widow Mary was sealed to Kimball. So what is your basis for your opinion that Martha Knight lied in her 1869 affidavit?
" HCK IA strangely also the one said to have married or sealed her to Joseoh Smith The temple records show she was sealed to Joseph Smith in 1846 nit 1842."
Martha's own affidavit stated that Kimball performed her plural sealing to Joseph Smith "in the summer of 1842." That was right in the middle of Smith's flurry of taking numerous plural wives, as well as the period when Martha Brotherton, Nancy Rigdon, and Sarah Pratt rejected plural marriage proposals from him or Brigham Young. All of these facts have been confirmed by numerous historians for more than a century now.
After Joseph's death, and before the Mormons abandoned Nauvoo, many temple sealings were performed in advance of the move west:
"On January 26 [1846] she was sealed to Joseph Smith for eternity and to Heber C. Kimball for time in the Nauvoo temple."---Todd Compton, "In Sacred Loneliness," p. 372.
So there was nothing unusual at all about Martha's 1846 sealing to Smith and Kimball. Numerous similar sealings were performed during that period.
I wish we could thumbs down the commercials!!! Kamala Harris is always there no matter what the channel! Uuugh.
Ever tried ad blocker? I'd never watch RUclips if I had to see ads
Fortunately, that will all be over in three more weeks.
Every marriage is between two people (a man and a woman), even in polygamy. while I’m open to what you have to say, I was embarrassed for you when you argued against that idea. It made you lose credibility in my eyes as you seemed so unable to grasp that simple concept. With each new polygamous bride, the marriage vows would be between two people, the groom and the new bride.
@readerreader6703 in your dreams
P e r v 🙊
@@StompMom5 I didn’t mean to place my comment as a reply to the comment about Kamala ads. I am a woman and am against polygamy but I want the arguments to be sound and not foolish. I was referring to this interview. I felt the argument about “A man A woman” was foolish and I was disappointed: ruclips.net/video/MhDe3nBul04/видео.htmlsi=IBDn6kJsV7evc8Z2
So great! Michelle--you talk too much---let your guest talk!!
Oh my gosh, I felt like I interrupted Michelle more than she interrupted me, lol! We were quite a pair on this episode - it was an editing nightmare... 🤦♀️😂 Thanks for being patient with us both! 💜
@@karenhyatt647 Karen, do you have any thoughts on these statements?
"On Thursday evening we gave the history of Nauvoo, and the events that led to the death of the Smiths, which, of course, we traced to the introduction of the spiritual wife system; for all that know any thing about it, that it was the introduction of that system which led to the death of the Smiths, and that if that system had not been introduced, they might have been living men to-day."---Sidney Rigdon, March 15, 1845.
"They introduced a base system of polygamy, worse by far than that of the heathen; this system of corruption brought a train of evils with it, which terminated in their entire ruin. After this system was introduced, being in opposition [to] the laws of the land, they, had to put truth at defiance to conceal it, and in order to do it, perjury was often practiced. This system was introduced by the Smiths some time before their death, and was the thing which put them into the power of their enemies, and was the immediate cause of their death."---Sidney Rigdon, June, 1846.
All the pieces of paper she ignored
I love it! I loved the documentary. @MichelleBStone you shine so bright. I love all your videos! 😍
Thank you ❤