Please consider supporting this podcast:
Links
Exonerating Emma (from the accusations of Brigham Young)
Maxine Hanks Discussing Emma, Relief Society, and Female Authority
William Clayton Affidavit Paper
Journal of Mormon Polygamy Homepage
Journal of Mormon Polygamy Podcast
Relief Society Minutes where Joseph said Emma had been Ordained
Jason Briggs’s interview (pg 23)
Dixon Interview (pgs 165–166)
Chrestensen Interview (pgs 1044–1045)
Forscutt Eulogy of Emma Smith: The Saints Herald – volume 26 (pgs 209 – 217)
Transcript
[00:00:01] Welcome to 132 Problems revisiting Mormon Polygamy for this important conversation on women’s voices in the church and more specifically, Emma’s ordination to expound scripture and exhort the church. For a variety of unforeseen reasons, I am recording this episode live with no editing or support, so it’s probably going to be a bit rough. I have been spoiled by my editor who tends to make me look good. So thank you for joining me anyway because this is a message I feel strongly needs to be shared. Um, also, as you know, this is being recorded and released conference weekend, but I’m recording it before I’ve had a chance to watch conference. So while I hope there will be many wonderful messages in conference, I won’t be able to respond to anything said until a future video. Instead, I am responding in part to the most recent bubbling up of the discontent and pain of so many women in the church when a prominent church leader, this time, Gerard Halvorson, unintentionally stepped on this lightly buried landmine of unaddressed and unhealed wounding that so many women in the church carry. The last time this happened on a large scale was when Sister Annette Dennis unintentionally aggravated these same wounds by saying and then posting. That the LDS Church gives gives more power and authority to women than any other religious organization. My video of responding to that giant brouhaha, which is right here, um, was released exactly 1 year ago today. So I think this is a fascinating series of events. And here we go again. In that last response, I made the point that the cause of this hot button topic, the struggles that women feel and experience in this church, go. was back to Emma. Emma was the original strong, I might even say feminist woman in the church who painfully bumped up against overbearing patriarchy. I know many people still react negatively to the word feminist, so I want to share my definition for that word. I have come to see a feminist as a woman who cares about the thoughts. Well, a person, not just a woman, a feminist is any person. Who cares about the thoughts, feelings, voices and experiences of of women. A person like me, a person like Joseph Smith, a person like Jesus Christ. And anyone who objects to that word, please listen again to the to the definition I just shared and recognize that caring about the thoughts, feelings, voices, and experiences of women is one of the ways that we, women and men are made after the image of God, because God has made it abundantly clear that he and she cares deeply about the thoughts, feelings, voices, and experiences of women. When we recognize this, we see that our feminism is actually a manifestation of our godliness. So I am reclaiming that word for myself. I did speak strongly in that video I made about exonerating Emma, but I very much hope that people who care about these issues from all sides will go back and watch it, because until we all clearly understand the genesis of these ongoing problems in our church, we will never be able to effectively address them. That video will of course be linked below. As I mentioned in that episode, when these issues erupted a year ago, I was somewhat distanced from it. I was actually out of the country when it happened. And I only heard about it after the fact, but this time it was different for a variety of reasons, many of which I am not free to talk about, which just makes things worse. This time it hit me square in the face and sent me reeling for several days, like so many women in the church who have been painfully subjected to a profound degree of patriarchy. I have many deep personal wounds that I carry. And that combined with recent events that created brand new patriarchal wounds that I was actively working through when this happened. All of that made it,
[00:04:12] made it hit particularly hard this time. I knew I could not respond while I was still struggling through the raw emotion, but that I needed to get through the trauma to the wisdom on the other side. That wisdom came as I listened to a group of strong, smart, beautiful feminist women. Here they are, let me share that slide. Katie Rich, Amy Mc McPhee Olives, and Abby Maxwell Hanson were um on a podcast discussing this on Mormon stories. And that is when specifically the insight came when they started talking about Emma. Because of how steeped I have been in the documents and in particularly in studying Emma’s and Joseph’s and their entire family’s own words, I was honestly astonished when I heard these wonderful women talk about Emma without any reference to her own words, but instead tell her story completely through the. With the lens and the words of Brigham Young, who was really her arch nemesis, who treated her atrociously, among other things, taking as many of the church assets as he could while loading her with all of the church debts, which she and her children struggled to pay off until nearly the end of her life. And also, he said, terrible and verifiably True things about her for decades, including his claim that Joseph, her husband, called her quote a child of hell and literally the most wicked woman on the earth, and said that there was none more wicked than she. Brigham also falsely accused her of poisoning her husband when in reality it was she who stayed up all night caring for him and healing him. And it was her who time after time took enormous risks and sacrificed much to comfort him, protect him, and keep him safe from those who would do him harm. Brigham even blamed her for her husband’s death. According to Emma, after Joseph’s death, she told Brigham and Heber, to their faces that the first two principles of their religion were deception and lying. That is an amazing quote. We really do not know Emma, and we do not pay enough attention to her own words. We absolutely should not allow Brigham Young to tell Emma’s story, yet that is what far too often happens. These women talking about Emma were feminists who cared deeply about women and about listening to women’s voice voices. And yet they didn’t even realize what they were doing, that they were unintentionally contributing to the silencing of the first incredibly strong feminist woman in the church, a woman who had the courage to stand up to the ascending malignant patriarchy and unrighteous dominion in powerful ways, and who paid an incredibly high price. Doing so, despite being pregnant and traumatized from the recent murder of her husband while she was left alone to care for their children and his aged mother and to try to protect herself from the men who were trying to destroy her and her family and take everything from them, these were the circumstances she was enduring as she stood up against these men. People in our own church don’t generally know her history, how to, how she had to fight to keep any of her husband’s papers, including the love letters he wrote to her and his translation of the Bible that he had entrusted to her care. We don’t know that the guards were that guards were set up around her home to harass her and her family, or that men forcefully entered her home and took her husband’s death desk with all of his papers in it, or that there were several. To to burn her house down with her, her and her children in it, or that even when Emma lent Joseph’s favorite horse to Brigham Young to ride in a parade in his efforts to put himself in Joseph’s shoes and the minds of all of the people, he had his secretary run it nearly to death before returning it to the point that according to Joseph Smith the Third, it never fully recovered. There is so much more. I really do hope people will watch that episode on Exonerating Emma. This incredible woman Emma Smith had her own voice and told her own story, but in addition to everything else she lost in her efforts to, along with her husband, bring forth new scripture and establish the gospel and the church, efforts that cost. Her nearly everything. In the end, even her own voice and the ability to tell her and her husband’s own story was taken from her, to the point that even strong feminist women who would certainly never want to silence another strong woman didn’t even realize what they were doing.
[00:09:09] I don’t want to spend too much time on this, but I do want to respond to respond to one specific misunderstanding that was mentioned by one of these fantastic women. Abby Maxwell Hanson. Um, I’m sharing this. Abby, please know how much I love you and I love your heart. I’m not sharing this in any way to embarrass you or at your expense. I actually hope that we can have a wonderful collaboration going forward. I’m only sharing this because I’ve heard it. I’ve heard it before. And I haven’t yet talked about it. So I’m just going to play this one, clip from this great conversation. And you’ll all see who haven’t watched this, why I love Abby so much. She is just delightful and wonderful and very smart. And I’m just eager to clarify this one point. Before I really started to learn about Emma, I just had no idea what happened to her after Joseph Smith died. I was just kind of like, and then she just ceased living and like froze in time. And so when I learned things like, oh, she went on and married a never Mormon man, and that she did it on his birthday. Joseph Smith’s birthday, which was not a time to be getting married. It was at that’s December 23rd, 2 days before Christmas in the Dead of winter in a time when we didn’t have like electricity and heat. Like it was definitely a jab, but like, hey, I’m moving on because you, probably because you got 35 wives. Well, now I’m getting a new one and I’m moving off like. That was, that just floored me because that was, I didn’t realize she was a whole and complete human being outside of her association, association with Joseph Smith and the founding of the LDS Church. I absolutely love Abby’s point about our lack of knowledge and connection with Emma, our lack of understanding, how we just have not been told anything about her. And I want to respond to the one point she makes about about Emma being remarried on Joseph’s birthday. I agree that to our modern ears, not just our feminine ears, but our modern ears, Emma being married on Joseph’s birthday does sound very strange. Like it must. Be sending a message, but that really is a huge misunderstanding and a great example of presentism, which is mistakenly using our present understanding of the world to interpret past events events. Birthdays are such a big deal to us that it that it can be hard for us to realize that that is actually only a recent phenomenon. Throughout most of the 19th century and before, birthday celebrations were simply not a thing. Dates of birth were often recorded and found. The Bibles, but birthdays were not remembered, commemorated, or celebrated. As just one piece of evidence, I did a quick search through the Joseph Smith papers, and while Christmas is consistently mentioned, I didn’t, I didn’t find that Joseph Smith’s birthday was ever mentioned or celebrated. In the diaries kept on his behalf, there are many entries on his birthdays, but none of them are anything out of the out of the ordinary or include celebrations or even Any mention of his birthday. They just are run of the mill entries on that day just like any other day. There was also no mention of anything on Emma Smith’s birthday or on any of their children’s birthdays, and that is what we expect. So here’s a super quick overview. In general, other than apparently with Wilfred Woodruff, which would make a fascinating study for anyone interested, I’ll have to go into those details a little more because I was surprised that Wilfred Woodruff. celebrated his birthday regularly and spoke about it, which is very unique to him at this time period. I found that to be fascinating. But in general, other than him, birthday celebrations did not showing up in America until after the Civil War, after the Civil War
[00:13:00] and the beginning of the industrial revolution. I have my own theory about one part of what started this. On February 1918. In 62, less than a year into the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln issued Proclamation 87, which read, It is recommended to the people of the United States that they assemble in their customary places of meeting for public solemnities on the 22nd of February instant and celebrate the anniversary of the birth of the father of this of this country by causing to be read. To them his immortal farewell address. I think that’s so interesting that there was a general um statement put out a proclamation put out by the President of the United States asking everybody to celebrate the birth of of to celebrate the anniversary of the birth of the father of this country and note that the word birthday wasn’t used, which is interesting. It was the anniversary of birth. Um, birthday celebrations did start to show up mainly beginning with the upper class Americans, I think mainly back east, um, during the ensuing decades after this. So you start to begin to see the beginnings of it among the wealthy trickling down to the middle class, but they still were not common until the 20th century. And so let me just show one interesting verification of this that might help people understand a little more of what I am talking about. The melody of the song, the Happy Birthday song, Happy Birthday to You was first published in a book of songs for kindergarten in 1893. So that was at the end of the 19th century, right? 50 years after Joseph’s death. And, um, let me show you the slide. The song was actually good morning to all. There was no birthday song published in this book. It was that same melody. Good morning to all the kindergarten singer, um, kindergarten teachers could sing to their class. Um, but, uh, later in 1901, a few years later, a poem indicates the possibility that the song had already been adapted to birthdays. You can see at the bottom that it says a happy birthday to you, a happy birthday to you. But the earliest known publication of the birthday song wasn’t until 1922, where it was listed as an optional verse of the original Good Morning song. This image is actually from the 1927 um um publication. This is all known now because this was tried in a court of law a few years ago since the Happy Birthday song was ridiculously under copyright for many, many decades. But, um, that’s just an interesting story to show how the, the birthday song emerged at the same time period that birthdays began to become more commonplace. The, the, the celebration of birthdays began to become more commonplace. I think this was a fun bit of history, but the important point is simply that in the 1840s, people likely did not even remember their own, let alone anybody else’s birthday. The top of their heads because they did not commemorate or celebrate them. So it wasn’t a necessary item for them to remember. Um, as an example, last year, what I needed to find out the time of day that I was born, and I had to dig out my birth certificate to find out because it isn’t something I talk about or celebrate, so it’s not something that I remembered. Um, I also can only remember my children’s time of, um, birth if I happen to. Remember the specific story of the day that they were born. That’s a tall order for me with the number of children I have. But it’s not something I,
[00:16:39] I definitely know each of their birthdays because we celebrate those each year, right? So it is not unlikely that for most people before the 1900s, birthdays were the same, not something they automatically knew or thought about. Um, Amy also mentioned that since they didn’t have electricity, the, the middle of winter, two days before Christmas. It was a strange time to be married and and that, as she said, was definitely a jab that Emma was definitely doing an intentional jab to Joseph Smith. This is another easy assumption to make, but the interpretation actually doesn’t align with historical realities. First of all, again, before the 20th century, people were extremely accustomed to living without electricity, and life did not at all stop in the winter. For example, Christmas celebrations were very common. And in fact, there are a variety of reasons that Emma getting married on December 23, 1847 makes perfect sense. In past centuries before the 20th century, Christmas was actually a very popular day for weddings for a variety of reasons. And this is important to know before making assumptions about past wedding dates. It is also important to know that by far the most common days for weddings during this time period were Tuesdays and Wednesday. And Thursdays because preachers were less busy on those days than they were on weekends. For that reason, Fridays were less common and Saturdays were far less common, and Sunday being the Sabbath was completely off limits. So actually, when you look at it with this understanding, December 23, 1847 when Emma was remarried, was a Thursday, which was the last possible day to be married before Christmas, which was one of the most common days to be married. The majority, there’s there’s more to this as well. The majority of Navvo residents had left in the exodus, leaving Navu as a veritable ghost town with no religious presence. Emma was married to Lewis Bideman by a Methodist circuit rider who traveled between various locations where a reverend may be needed. Emma married Louis on the Thursday before Christmas when the Reverend was in town, likely with no awareness that it was Joseph’s birthday. It is easy to misread this through our modern lens, but the historical context of her marriage date doesn’t point to anything other than a young, struggling single mother who desperately needed help, protection, and companionship and found them in Louis Bideman. That’s, that’s the story that this woman was married in a very simple service in her home a few days before Christmas when the Reverend was in town when the traveling Reverend was in town. I really hope that clears things up on this question of whether Emma was sending a message and and whether we should read something into the fact that um she was married on Joseph’s birthday. I really think that so many of the ideas we have about both. And Joseph Smith need the same level of scrutiny rather than just, um, our tendency to, to put our assumptions on these things without really studying them out, putting them in their historical, historical context, gaining a more, um, thorough understanding of everything, of all of the sources of what may be going. On we need to do all of those things before we just make assumptions. I, I really hope that this little bit of history we’ve we’ve gone over will clear up at least the question of Emma getting married on Joseph’s birthday and that way whenever anybody hears this idea going forward, we will all have the um confidence to speak up and correct the misunderstanding. Um, I’ll go on to say that hearing this discussion of Emma and remembering that what initially caused the entire brouhaha was a discussion about Section 25, the revelation to Emma, all of that made me yet again acutely aware that all of this, the entire history of women’s place and struggle in our church, which I recently discussed, let me get that slide
[00:20:48] with, um, Maxine. Hanks in this episode right here, there it is, which I recently discussed with Maxine Hanks, who was yet another woman who got caught up in this ongoing predicament, this struggle of women in the church and the confusion and questions it causes so often for so many of us, all of this really does come back to Emma Smith. Again, I hope people will watch this episode. I’m going to refer to it a little bit more going forward. I would love to make this into another full episode on Emma’s life. There is still plenty more to say. But for now, I will instead refer people to the two episodes I have already done that will be linked below, and I will focus on Emma’s legacy and what she taught and continues to teach us today. And there’s a reason I want to do this. In her revelation. The revelation to her, the Lord told Emma through Joseph that she would be ordained by Joseph to expound Scripture and exhort the church. On March 17, 1842, at the inaugural meeting of the Relief Society, now I’ve got to get back to this slide. There it is. Joseph read that revelation to the relief society and quote, stated that she, Emma, was ordained to those responsibilities at the time the revelation was given. This is something that we as a church. In my opinion, do not pay nearly enough attention to the fact that Emma Smith was ordained by God under the hand of Joseph Smith in 1830 to expound Scripture and exhort the church. The profound insight I had, the wisdom that came on the other side of the painful emotions of this past week, was that this is an ongoing prophecy that in many ways has yet to be fully fulfilled. And that it has as much to do with us as a church as it ever had to do with Emma. I was out planting seeds in my garden, doing kind of therapy and crying as I was thinking about these things and listening to these things when that understanding descended in the most profound, beautiful way. I realized that since Emma Smith was called by God through Joseph Smith to expound Scripture and exhort the church, which I assert she did in many ways throughout her life. It is our responsibility as the church to seek out and heed and hearken to her expositions and exhortations when servants of God are called to. Speak. The people are called to listen. Those go together, right? We are supposed to heed the messages that servants of God are supposed to give. Emma was called as a servant of God in multiple ways. She was chosen by God to be present in order for Joseph to initially receive the golden plates. He was told he could not even get them if she wasn’t with him from the. From the beginning, God made it abundantly clear that Joseph could not even begin, let alone complete the work of translation and restoration without Emma working right beside him. She repeatedly risked danger to help and and gave her all to help him protect the plate. There’s a wonderful story of her hearing a rumor that people were coming to get them. And she, being an excellent horsewoman, ran out to a field and found a horse and rode it to where Joseph was working, galloped all the way there, and warned him that the plates were in danger. There are so many more stories that I don’t have time to go into, but my goodness, she was so deeply invested in this work. I talk about some of those things more in the episode that I did on Emma. Emma was Joseph’s scribe as well as his partner. This work was their calling together as a couple, each one of them chosen and ordained by God as the first elder and the elect lady. In addition, she was chosen by the women and or and sustained by Joseph as the head of the female, I should say ordained by Joseph, as he said, as the head of the female organization parallel to the male organization with equivalent and complementary priesthood power and authority. If this seems like a strange claim to anyone, please go back and watch that recent conversation I had with Maxine Hanks so you can hear her incredible insights.
[00:25:23] And Emma was called and ordained by God to do exactly what we would expect God’s servants to do expound Scripture and exhort the church. Unfortunately I do not have time today to track down every testimony Emma Bore of the Book of Mormon and the Restoration, but I will share several of her testimonies, and right now I will share the testimony that she gave at the end of her long life that she lived, she lived her entire life in ongoing active testimony to the truths that she believed. I usually focus on the other on different parts of her final heartfelt testimony, but today I right now want to focus on her testimony of the Restoration and the Book of Mormon. She said, I know Mormonism to be the truth and believe the church to have been established by divine direction. I have complete faith in it. Though I was an active participant in the scenes that transpired and was present during the translation of the plates and had cognizance of things as they transpired, it is marvelous to me, a marvel and a wonder as much so as to as much so as to anyone else. My belief is that the Book of Mormon is Of divine authenticity. I have not the slightest doubt of it. I am satisfied that no man could have dictated the writing of the manuscript unless he was inspired. She also said, I have been called apostate, but I have never apostatized nor forsaken the faith I at first accepted, but was called so because I would not accept their newfangled notion. Emma, by her own testimony until the end of her long life, had complete faith in the restoration and knew the Book of Mormon to be the word of God and knew her prophet, her husband Joseph Smith, to be a prophet of God. Emma, at great hazard to herself and her young family, refused to accept the false doctrines that the scriptures she helped bring forth directly opposed. Emma and her in her consistent and ongoing testimony and dedication to the Book of Mormon and the Restoration and the doctrines they teach, was fulfilling her assignment to expound scripture and exhort the church. Therefore, I want to spend the rest of this conversation in this and the next episode that will be part two of this of this um series focusing on Emma’s testimonies and in the next episode on the scriptures that she dedicated her entire life to bring forth and defend. That she proclaimed her entire life were the word of God in so many ways. Emma does stand as a servant of God and a founder of this church right beside her husband, who until the end of her life she firmly believed and declared to be a prophet of God. Because I have so often heard people claim either that we can’t know the truth about polygamy or that we shouldn’t worry about it, we need to start with a warning given to us as the church by Mormon himself in the Book of Mormon. So before I go to the testimonies about and from Emma Smith, I want to go to this one concern that I hear. This is one part of the teachings of the Book of Mormon that we will focus on on this in this episode. In my opinion, Mormons’ crucial words speaking of Jesus in 3 Nephi 26 are not given nearly the attention they require. If they would, none of us could ever claim that there are things we can’t know, that we just need to wait until the next life to ask God. That is antithetical to so many teachings in the Book of Mormon, including these verses. This is, as I said, 3526, starting with verse 8. And these things have I written which are a lesser part of the things which he, Jesus taught the people, and I have written them to the intent that they may be brought again unto this people from the Gentiles according to the words which Jesus hath spoken. And so from us, right, from the Gentiles, we are the Gentiles, but we can also apply it to ourselves to the people who the greater word will be brought forward to. And when they shall have received this, which is expedient, they should have first to try their faith. And if it so be that they shall believe these things, then shall the greater things be made manifest unto them. And if it so be that they will not believe these things, then shall the greater things be withheld from them unto their condemnation. Behold, I was about to write them all which were engraven upon the plates of Nephi, but the Lord forbade it, saying, I will try the faith of my people. The Book of Mormon is only the first installment of the
[00:30:16] words of Christ that God is waiting eagerly to give us, but we can only receive more once we are willing to believe what we have been given. As the Book of Mormon itself repeatedly teaches, this means being willing to lay aside our false traditions and soften our hearts to see where we may have erred. One area I strongly believe we have erred in addition to polygamy is in this very notion that we can’t know the truth of some things like polygamy. It’s interesting that this idea is generally only applied to issues that are difficult or uncomfortable for us. We would rather say we can’t understand why God would do something like command polygamy. Then acknowledge that God never did, that it was our own error. The same thing used to be said about the priesthood ban, that someday we will understand why God wanted. Um, people of African descent to not be allowed to hold the priesthood or be given temple, um, access to the temples. We used to say that and blame it on God and act like we just can’t understand why when we very easily could understand why it was our own error. I would, I would suggest that whenever we tend to want to say this that we just can’t understand, maybe it’s that we don’t want to understand. The Book of Mormon beginning with Nephi has much to say about this false idea that there are some things we simply can’t understand. It has so much to say. When layman and Lemu shared a similar sentiment that they that God makes no such things known unto them, Nephi rebuked them with these words. This is verse Nephi 15, starting with verse 8. And I said unto them, Have ye inquired in the Lord? And they said unto me, We have not, for the Lord maketh no such thing known unto us. Behold, I said unto them, how is it that ye do not keep the commandments of the Lord? How is it that ye will perish because of the hardness of your hearts? Do ye not remember the things which the Lord hath said, If you will not harden your hearts and ask me in faith, believing that ye shall receive with diligence in keeping my command. Surely these things will be made known unto you. That is how we can know the truth. Whenever we say God’s not going to tell us, we can’t know the truth of this. It is evidence that we are not doing what Nephi tells us to do, that, that we have hard hearts and we do not, and that we are hardening our hearts and we are not asking in faith believing that we shall receive and we are not being diligent in keeping the commandments according to Nephi. That’s what we Signaling when we say that the same teaching stated by the first private prophet writer in the Book of Mormon, Nephi, is book ended by the last prophet writer, Moroni prophet writer. Moroni 10:5 says, and by the power of the Holy Ghost, ye may know the truth of all things. And in a perfect chaotic structure, the same message is taught at least twice in the middle of the Book of Mormon. Alma teaches us that we can be given to know the mysteries of God according to the heed and diligence that we give. This is from Alma 12. Therefore, he that will harden his heart, the same receiveth the lesser portion of the word, and he that will not harden his heart to him is given the greater portion of the word until it is given unto him to know the mysteries of God until he know them in full. And they that will harden their hearts to them is given the lesser portion of the word until they know nothing concerning his mysteries, and then they are taken captive by the devil devil and led by his will down to destruction. Now this is what is meant by the chains of hell. Do you see the common element of having a hard heart versus a soft heart, having faith to believe versus saying we can’t know. Giving heed and diligence versus ignoring what we’ve already been given, Jesus himself powerfully taught the same message during his personal ministry among the Nephites, also in the middle of the Book of Mormon. 3rd Nephi, chapter 28, 27. I’ll read verses 28 and 29, and verily I say unto you, whatsoever thing ye shall ask the Father in my name shall be given unto you. Therefore, ask and ye shall receive, knock and it shall be opened unto you,
[00:34:41] for he that asketh receiveth receiveth, and unto him that knocketh it shall be opened. This is also the exact same teaching that so strongly resonated with the young Joseph Smith and led him to his first prayer. James 1:5. If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God that giveth to all men liberally and upbraeth not, and it shall be given him when we are when we. there are things about God’s interactions with man, especially on an issue as central as the nature of marriage that we simply can’t understand. We are revealing more about ourselves than we are about God. The word of God on this question of whether there are things of God we cannot understand in this life has been firmly. Established by numerous powerful witnesses, Nephi, Alma, Mormon, James, and Jesus himself, plus several others. If we refuse to believe it, it is because there are things we don’t want to know. It shows that we prefer to ignore these scriptures and say things completely contrary to them. We prefer that over believing the scriptures and asking. Perhaps that is because we are too afraid to soften our hearts. Perhaps because we are afraid of what God may reveal to us and how it may upset some of our long held traditions. It’s so sad to be in a position where we are afraid to believe what the scriptures actually. Say and what the spirit actually testifies again in order to protect our false traditions. I would encourage all of us to strive to overcome this fear and this adherence to the false belief that God cannot or will not teach us the truth of marriage and polygamy, which God has actually been teaching us for a very long time. May be far more important than we realize. The Book of Mormon has much to say about marriage and polygamy, but we have not paid attention to it and believed it. Instead, we have found a weak loophole to try to explain away all of the clear and repeated teachings in the Book of Mormon about polygamy. We will go over this in the next episode. This is a problem. Mormon’s warning and third Nephi that I read just a few minutes ago, which tells us that our refusal to believe the clear teachings in the Book of Mormon results in our being under condemnation. That warning was repeated by the Lord through the Prophet Joseph Smith. It’s recorded in Doctrine and Covenants 84 and starting at verse 54. And your minds in times past have been darkened because of unbelief and because you have treated lightly the things you have received which vanity and unbelief have brought the whole church under condemnation, and this condemnation resteth upon the children of Zion, even all, and they shall remain under this condemnation until they repent and remember the new covenant, even the Book of Mormon and the former commandments which I have. Given them not only to say but to do according to that which I have written that they may bring forth fruit, meat for their father’s kingdom. Otherwise there remaineth a scourge and a judgment to be poured out upon the children of Zion. There were constant scourges, droughts, freezes, famines, plagues of locusts, attacking armies and more. All of those scourges were brought forth upon the church while it was actively living polygamy. Until the church was very nearly completely destroyed, just as the Book of Mormon clearly warned would happen to God’s people if they did not hearken to God’s long standing law of marriage. Let’s go over just a few of those verses now. Um, Jacob, the 2. Prophet writer in the Book of Mormon who like his brother Nephi had seen Christ, that 2 Nephi 11:3 and who had many revelations and the spirit of much prophecy wherefore he knew of Christ and His kingdom which should come and he labored diligently among his people that he might persuade them to come unto Christ. That’s in Jacob 16 to 7. He was the prophet charged and given the errand by God to deal with the wicked practices his people were beginning to indulge themselves in, of desiring many wives and concubines like David and Solomon of the old. Jacob goes on to to reprimand the people for what he calls these grosser crimes. After reproving them for their pride, the sin that always goes hand in hand with polygamy. Jacob goes on to say,
[00:39:33] starting in Jacob 2:23, the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes, the grosser crime of of polygamy. For behold, thus saith the Lord, this people begin to wax in iniquity. They understand not the scriptures, for they seek to excuse themselves in committing whoredoms because of the things which were written concerning David and Solomon, his son. The Book of Mormon makes it abundantly clear that anybody who seeks to use the Old Testament stories to excuse or justify the abominable practice of having many wives and concubines, which the Book of Mormon calls the the grosser crime, does not understand the scriptures. That makes the very first verse of Section 132 extremely problematic because it claims that Joseph Smith inquired to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Remember, Isaac was never a polygamist. 132 gets that basic point of Old Testament of the Old Testament. Actually wrong. And I have done episodes on all of these other prophets that it mentions that I recommend watching. I’ll go on, that it, um, just wherein I the Lord justified my servants, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and also Moses. Moses was also not a polygamist. I’ve done an episode on that. And now here comes this part. And David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines. The Book of Mormon claims that anybody who uses David and Solomon to justify this practice does not understand the scriptures. How can we claim that Joseph Smith would ask a question that had already been answered in the book of Scripture that he himself brought forth as he claimed by the gift and power of God? And please note that these verse, that this verse refers to the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines. In his sermon, Jacob goes on to explain in verse 24, Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines. Which thing was abominable before me, sayeth the Lord. The Book of Mormon consistently condemns and forbids the practice of having many wives and concubines and calls it an abomination. So how is it possible that in a true revelation to Joseph Smith, God would suddenly claim that having many wives and concubines is a doctrine? Could an unchanging God at one time refer to something as a as abominable, and then only a few years later refer to the exact same thing as doctrinal? That is a huge problem for the authenticity of 132 as a true revelation. And there are many, many more similar problems. The Book of Mormon clearly states that the very act of having many wives and concubines was the abomination David and Solomon were guilty of. 1:32 again directly contradicts the Book of Mormon when it says in verse 39, David and his wives and concubines were given unto him of me, and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife. There are dozens of profound contradictions that show up in 132. And that cannot be explained away. So what can we do with this? How can we understand it? This is where it is essential to understand the origin of Section 132 and a bit about the history of the doctrine and covenants. The supposed revelation that is now Section 132 was never Publicly seen until Brigham Young first presented it in August 1852, 8 years after Joseph and Hiram were murdered. He acknowledged that nobody knew it existed, and he claimed he had had it locked in his desk all those years, which makes no sense for several reasons that we don’t have time to go into right now. But even after being presented, it was not added to the doctrine of covenants until 1876, just one year before Brigham’s death, and just 14 years before the church would officially disavow polygamy. In addition, another critical change was made in that same 1876 edition of the Doctrine and Covenants, which, by the way, was neither presented nor accepted by common consent by the common consent of the people. The section on marriage had been included, let me see if this is the right slide. Yes, the section on marriage, it’s called marriage,
[00:44:22] had been included as section 101 in the first publication of the Doctrine and Covenants, that’s the 1835 version. And it was again included as section 109 in the 1844 edition. Joseph Smith was not only the president of the church, but also the head of the committee assigned to compile and arrange both versions of the doctrine and covenants. The statement on marriage that he and his committee included in the canonized scriptures of the church says. Inasmuch as this Church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication and polygamy, we declare that we believe that one man should have one wife and one woman but one husband, except in case of death when either is at liberty to marry again. When the first edition of the doctrine and covenants was completed, it was presented to the church for a vote and was accepted by common consent. In addition to the entire book being accepted, the statement on marriage was was seen as so critical that it was also presented separately and on its own for a vote, and it was accepted by unanimous common consent before being accepted as Caanized scripture in the church. Not only did Joseph Smith add this statement on marriage to the canonized scriptures twice, both in 1835 and 1844. He also published it multiple times in various newspapers in his efforts to fight the accusations that were repeatedly launched against him by his enemies and to root out the underground polygamists operating behind his back in the church. That was such a frustration to both him and Hiram and to Emma. They fought it constantly. Removing this canonized section of scripture was a huge deal, as was adding Section 132, especially since it was so controversial and contradictory, and since its origin was and is so questionable. The fact that this was done without the common consent of the people makes it even more problematic for any One who would like a refresher, the law of common consent was established clearly as the requirement for the church multiple times. For example, Doctrine Covenants 26:2 says all things shall be done by common consent in the church, and 28:13 says, For all things must be done in order and by common consent in the church, by the prayer of faith. The following edition published in 1880 after after the changes had been made, another publication came out in 1880, but it was printed after, as I said, after these changes had already been made and published and read for several years. That was eventually presented for a sustaining voting conference. But the book where the changes were actually made never was, and that after the fact obligatory sustaining vote of a book of scripture that had already been published and republished for years is a far cry from the law of common consent, which the original doctrine and covenants and the statement on marriage had been subjected to. I will add that this section on marriage was never removed from the church that Emma became a member of and that her sons were asked to lead the RLDS Church. In fact, even after the huge changes in the RLDS Church in the 1970s and 1980s, the changes that caused a massive schism and led to one branch being renamed the Community of Christ, both branches still include this section in their doctrine and covenants. It’s currently Section 111. Not nearly enough people know that Emma Smith left multiple testimonies about the fraudulent nature of the supposed revelation on polygamy. Section 132. This is knowledge that has too long been forgotten and that must be shared and acknowledged. It was sad for me to hear sincere Mormon feminists claim, matter of factly, that Emma burned the original polygamy revelation. When that story comes from Brigham Young and others of other, um, enemies of Joseph and Emma Smith, and when, especially when she left ample testimony of her own, claiming that that was absolutely not true. I want to share several examples of Emma’s words and Emma’s testimonies. First, I this interview from April 1867, 9 years before the revelation was added to the doctrine and covenants. Jason Briggs, an elder in the church during Joseph’s lifetime, wrote a great article breaking down the supposed revelation. He summed it up saying, We have examined this document by comparing it with the revelations contained in the books, meaning the canonized scriptures of the church, and finds that it contradicts them all in nearly all the essential points contained in it. And must therefore decide that it is spurious. We have also compared it with itself and find it equally contradictory and again must decide that it is that it is spurious. I have done the same thing multiple times,
[00:49:28] and I have come to exactly the same conclusions. It is indeed, it does indeed contradict every other book of scripture, and it has all kinds of internal contradictions that make it impossible to accept it as the word of God. That it originated, I’m going back now to Briggs, that it originated in deception and fraud. There can be no doubt as these characteristics apply at every step in the progress of the scheme which it ostensibly inaugurates, meaning the same contradiction and deception. Um, applies to every step of the practice of polygamy. He goes on to address the claim that Emma burned the original and quotes his interview with her. Here’s what he quotes from his interview. I think I have it right here so you can see it. Yes, it was published in the Messenger. Briggs asks, Mrs. Bideman, have you seen the revelation on polygamy published by Orson Pratt in the SER in 1852? I have. Have you read it? Emma says, I have read it and heard it read. Did you ever see that document in rap manuscript previous to its publication by Pratt? I never did. Emma claims the first time she ever saw the revelation was after it was published in this year by Orson Pratt in 1852. Did you ever see any document of that kind purporting to be a revelation to authorize polygamy? I never did. Did Joseph Smith ever teach you the principles of polygamy as being revealed by him or as a correct and righteous principle? He never did. What about the statement of Brigham Young that you burnt the original manuscript of the Revelation? It is false in all of its parts, made out of whole cloth without any foundation in truth. How can we just ignore these words? How can we not listen to Emma’s voice, but instead prioritize the voices of her enemies? In another example, an English reporter, William Hepworth Dixon, visited America and stopped by Navvo and interviewed Emma in 1869. He wrote, Emma, Joseph’s wife and secretary, the partner of all of his toils, of all his glories, coolly, firmly, permanently denies that her husband ever had any. The wife than herself, she declares the story to be false, the revelation of fraud. She denounces polygamy as the invention of young and Pratt, a work of the devil brought in by them for the destruction of God’s new church. On account of this doctrine, she has separated herself from the saints of Utah and has taken up her dwelling with what she calls a remnant of the true church at Navvo. Here is another account. This is now another account written by JC Christensen. He wrote, I undertook the journey from Omaha to Navvo, Illinois on foot, 400 miles more or less, and landed there on the 11th day of September 1872. I inquired for Mrs. Emma Smith but was informed that she was now the wife of Mr. LC Bideman. I located their dwelling place and found them at home, introduced myself, told Sister Emma Smith Bideeman the object of my mission, and in a kind, loving way she consented to be to being questioned. She set a chair just in front of them and invited me to occupy. Mister Bideman sat to the left of me and Sister Emma to the right. My questions to her ran as follows. Sister Emma, were you at one time the the wife of the prophet? Yes, sir. Is it not a fact that he had other wives beside you? No, sir, I was his only wife to my knowing during his lifetime. Could he not have had other wives without you knowing it? No, sir. No one had a better chance of knowing of, of this than myself. Sister Emma,
[00:53:18] is it not a fact that Joseph Smith received a revelation favoring polygamy and spiritual wifery? No, sir. There was no revelation given through him on either spiritual wifery or polygamy, nor was that abominable doctrine taught either public privately or publicly before Mister Smith’s death. How about Brigham Young’s statement to the contrary, that Joseph Smith did receive the did receive the polygamy and Adam God revelation, and that he presented it to you by the hand of Mr. Clayton, and then after reading it, you got mad and tore it up and burned it. That is a base falsehood made out of whole cloth. Have you ever seen and read that feigned and assumed revelation on polygamy? Yes, sir. When and where did you first see and read that polygamy revelation? Right here in Navvo in the year 1853, published in Washington DC in a paper called The Seer by Orson Pratt. Christiansen goes on to write. This ended our conversation along that line. I thanked her kindly for having answered my questions so pointedly, bade her goodbye, never to meet her again in this life and probation. And now, having looked into her honest face and heard her frank testimony in person, I could not make myself believe that a woman standing on the brink of the grave, the mother of three noble, noble boys or men with whom I had formed an acquaintance, would. Or could tell a bare faced lie to be met in the day of accounts. Her life and character were above reproach. Whose testimony would be the most reliable? Brigham Young’s, the real father of the revelation on polygamy, Adam God, and the blood atonement doctrine. Who had broken both the law and the law, the law of God and the law of the land or that of Sister Emma, who had remained true to God, true to the last request made to her by her husband that she remain in Navvo and bring up their boys in the way they should go. She had honored both the laws of God and the laws of the land. I had to accept her testimony and hope to meet, meet her again. Now I’ll share yet another example. This was recorded by Edmund Briggs. He wrote, Sister Emma, in speaking of the condition of the church after her husband’s death, said to me, I was threatened by Brigham Young because I opposed and denounced his measures and would not go west, would not go west with him at that time. They did not know where they were going themselves. I have other documentation that supports that, but he told me that he would yet bring me prostrate to his feet. My house was set on fire several times, and one time wood was piled up at the side of the house and set afire. It burned the siding considerably and went out before we discovered it. It was either set on fire by accident or carelessness caught a fire a number of times. And went out of it, went out of itself when we did not discover it and put it out, but I never had any fear that the house would burn down as long as the inspired translation of the Bible was in it. I always felt safe when it was in the house, for I knew it could not be destroyed. She, he goes on to write. She spoke very affectionately of Joseph and said, I never had any reason to to oppose him, for we were always on the best of terms ourselves. Um, she spoke so endearingly of Joseph in confidence, tears filling her eyes that I could see she reverenced his very memory and had full faith in Joseph’s inspiration as a prophet of God. And she always denied to me in the most emphatic language that he taught or practiced polygamy. Again she said several times in conversation with me that the Utah Mormons had by their acts since the death of her husband made true all the slanders and vile things charged against the church. He then repeated Dixon’s powerful words and added, which shall we believe? Sister Emma, the elect lady, the prophet’s wife, or the bold, unsupported statement of Brigham Young is what the Book of Mormon calls the grosser crime, now what Mr. Young calls the only means of exaltation and glorification, and all this great change to rest on the uncertainty of a purported copy of a purported revelation claimed to be burned by a woman. It is all too absurd and a rebuke to good common sense. It cannot be entertained by an honest thinking,
[00:57:46] logical mind for a single moment. And the last one I’ll read right here is this portion of Emma’s final testimony with her sons. Joseph Smith III asked, What about the revelation on polygamy? Did Joseph Smith have anything like it? What of spiritual wifery? Emma replied, There was no revelation on either polygamy or spiritual wives. No such thing as polygamy or spiritual wifery was taught publicly or privately before my husband’s death that I have now or ever had any knowledge of. Did not he have other wives than yourself? He had no other wife but me, nor did he, to my knowledge, ever have. Did he not hold marital relations with women other than yourself? He did not have improper relations with any woman that ever came to my knowledge. I know that he had no other wife or wives than myself in any sense, either spiritual or otherwise. It is a shame that anybody has ever. It seems that we don’t have Emma’s own thoughts or words on polygamy. We absolutely do. I hope that from here on out, anybody speaking on any of these topics, polygamy, women’s voices, or women’s place in the church, and especially speaking about Emma Smith in any way, will take the time to listen to Emma’s voice. And I hope that in addition to listening to her, we will all take her words very seriously. and at least consider believing her. I desperately hope that people won’t just write her off and assume that she is lying just because of a bias based on a previously held belief that they formed before they had even read her words. Remember, we want to start by listening to women’s voices and by believing them. That should go for Emma, at least as much as for anyone else. I don’t have time to go in. To it here, but if anyone is finding themselves pushing back by thinking we should listen to and believe the voices of the women who were supposedly Joseph’s other wives, please be patient and willing to withhold judgment and consider that just as there was and is more to learn about Emma’s voice, there is also much more to learn and understand about those supposed testimonies of other women, other supposed wives. The the testimonies that you think that you have of women’s voices are not what you think they are is what I’m trying to say, and that just as these assumptions require careful investigation, those assumptions, and those sources require careful investigation as well. I want to quickly add one of the main documents that contradicts Emma’s consistent testimonies is the 1874 affidavit of William Clayton. William Clayton is a source that tells a different story than what than what Emma Smith tells. And so this is the main subject of a newly released peer reviewed paper in the Journal of Mormon Polygamy. My let me show you the Journal of Mormon Polygamy. You can know how to go ahead and find it. My co-author on the paper, Cheryl Bruno, does not agree with my conclusions about Emma and Joseph Smith, but we do agree that the affidavits that make up the majority of the evidence of Joseph’s polygamy, including the testimonies of women that you may be thinking of, are badly understood and need to. revisited. We explain many of our thoughts and discuss our process of writing the paper in this interview on the new Journal of Mormon Polygamy podcast. I hope everyone interested in this topic will read this paper and if interested watch the interview. Both are of course linked below. There is so much more that could be said about the problems with Section 132, but in this episode, I wanted to focus primarily on Emma’s own words and the words of those who knew her pet best. I’ll add a few of the words that were spoken about her at her funeral and that’s the last testimony I’ll give of her, Mark. gave her the funeral address. He quoted her second husband Louis Bideman as saying she was one of the noblest and best women that ever graced the earth. He also spoke Forscutt also spoke of Bideman’s strong denunciation of some in Utah who maligned her because she opposed what she believed to be the iniquities of their system. Forscott described Emma as chaste and retiring. Yet when things, when wrongs were perpetuated against her family, her, her sex, her friends or her faith,
[01:02:25] she was bold, intrepid, and public spirited. On such occasions she manifested a leading spirit of a very high and commanding order. This so well describes her involvement with the voice of innocence as just one example. When Hiram came under attack, being accused of being a womanizer, which Uh, which we tend to say, well, he was a polygamist, so maybe that’s what it had to do with, uh, she, and when that happened, Emma leapt into action. She held 4 overflowing meetings where she read the document Joseph and she commissioned and that she edited, and here is just one sentence of that powerful document, the voice of innocence, while the marriage bed and Child is honorable. Let polygamy, bigamy, fornication, adultery, and prostitution be frowned out of the hearts of honest men and to drop in the gulf of fallen nature where the worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched, and let all the saints say amen. It seems ludicrous to me to claim that this woman with this character and nature and the and the unalterable testimony she consistently gave, it’s I don’t know how to believe that she waffled back and forth about polygamy, accepting it at times and giving women to her husband only to change her mind a few minutes later and rant and rave at all of them. These claims all came decades later. There really is no reliable description of Emma I have ever seen that fits this schizophrenic narrative. Forscott testified that Emma had ever been true to her own highest conceptions of duty. He explained that she would not bow to authority or bend her um her integrity for gain if she thought it was wrong. Emma refused to follow the 12 in their false doctrines, and she also refused to contribute to exposes that would decry them. He um Forscutt wrote, she did not, could not, would not be made the tool of designing men as some others of less honor and unworthier fame have been for the sake of gain. She ever maintained her integrity. Even John Taylor had to acknowledge and testify to the integrity of Emma Smith. On January 15, 1845, 7 months after after Joseph’s death, he published the following in the Times and Season. Suppose we say a word concerning the prophet’s wife, Mrs. Emma Smith. She honored her husband while living, and she will never knowingly dishonor his good name while his martyred blood mingles with Mother Earth. Mrs. Smith is an honorable woman, and if we are not deceived, it is as. Far from the corrupt is as far from the corrupt insinuations of this 99th expose of Mormonism as a fixed star is from a gambler’s from a gambler’s lap lamp at midnight. A few newspapers had claimed that Emma was going to contribute to the expose they were advertising. The very idea that so valuable and beloved a lady could be coaxed into a fame of disgrace like the above is as cruel and bloody as the assassination of her husband at Carthage. That was John Taylor in Navvo, how things changed in Utah. Forscott said it would be. Suppose that those who loved her husband would all be her very faithful friends, and it is very probable that they would have shown her friendship of no ordinary kind had she been obedient to their counsel, but she was not. Soon after the prophet’s death, there was manifested a tendency which she Thought to be wrong and of which she did not hesitate to speak, the course pursued by the 12 who succeeded her husband in the watch care of the church and especially the course of President Young, she strong, strongly disapprobated. He referenced the many things she told me respecting him, speaking of Brigham Young. And said that Emma had said all the same things frankly and fearlessly to Brigham himself, quote, as all who knew her will feel assured she would do, he went on to say that while she disapproved of the policy then being pursued by the Utah church,
[01:06:50] she was ready, as in days of old, to give her testimony to the great truths of the latter day work that she was not in sympathy with the policy of the church which now exists in Utah is a matter of history. But that she ever denied any portion of the great work of God, none will be able to prove. With polygamy and all its kindred evils, she was ever in deadly warfare, even down to the time of her death. He then repeats his own interview with Emma Emma, where she again denied to him that Joseph had any other wife or that there had been any revelation from God regarding polygamy. He then says that her testimony is in harmony with the history of the times in which her husband lived and may therefore be better accredited than statements made now by those practicing polygamy who need the support of the past to justify the present. Those were the final words spoken about Emma Smith at the end of her life. I haven’t included all of the words of and about Emma Smith, but I’ve included it enough to hopefully give you a taste of who this woman really was and how much was written by, of, and about her. I hope this has given some indication of the many words and testimonies we have from and about Emma Smith. There are many more we could read. Next week in part two of this series on the voices of women, I will focus more on the words of the scriptures that Emma dedicated her life to bringing forth, supporting, and promoting. I believe that Emma’s consistent testimonies that she repeatedly gave of the scriptures that actually did come from her husband, the Prophet Joseph Smith, can And should be seen as part of the fulfillment of her divine ordination to expound scripture and exhort the church. I will again assert that if we are part of the church, Joseph Smith spoke of in that revelation, we are called by that same revelation to give heed to the words of Emma Smith, as well as the scriptures she gave her. to help her husband bring forth, and that she testified of throughout her life. Before closing, I want to share one more scripture from the Book of Mormon that powerfully teaches us to never believe that there are things we cannot know or should not have faith to ask, and that I believe also has strong application directly to the false tradition of polygamy. I am a bit torn about reading this here since I’ve not yet laid out the Book of Mormon’s full teachings about polygamy, but hopefully it will set the stage for when we do that next week. Ether has always been one of my favorite books of the Book of Mormon, particularly Chapter 4, which is what I’ll read starting at verse 4. Behold, I have written upon these plates the very thing which the things which the brother of Jared saw. This is Moroni speaking. And there never were greater things made manifest than those which were made manifest unto the brother of Jared. Wherefore, the Lord hath commanded me to write them, and I have written them, and he hath commanded me that I should seal them up, and he hath also commanded me that I should seal up the interpretation thereof. Wherefore I have sealed up the interpreters according to the commandment of the Lord. For the Lord said unto me, they shall not go forth unto the Gentiles, us, until the day that they shall repent of their iniquity and become clean before the Lord. And in that day that they shall exercise faith in me, sayeth the Lord, even as the brother of Jared did, that they may become sanctified in me, then will I manifest unto them the things which the brother of Jared saw, even to the unfolding unto them of all my revelations. Sayeth Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Father of the heavens and of the earth. And all things that in them are how can we manifest faith like the brother of Jared when we’re too afraid to ask something as central and clear about the nature of marriage and our history of polygamy? If we have too much fear that we might shake up our our foundation of sand if we have so much fear that we won’t even ask those basic questions. How can we possibly progress to the kind of faith the Lord is telling is calling us to here in order to be given more of the Word of God? We believe that that God will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the kingdom of God. It’s incumbent upon us to prepare ourselves to be able to be worthy to receive those things, and the Book of Mormon teaches us how.
[01:11:28] And he that will contend against the word of the Lord contained in the Book of Mormon, let him be accursed, and he that shall deny these things, let him be accursed, for unto them will I show no greater things, sayeth Jesus Christ. If we are not being shown greater things, is it possible that it might be in part because we are refusing to believe what we have already been given? Polygamy is a magnificent example of that. And he that believeth not my words believeth not my disciples. This includes Emma and Joseph Smith, who even our own church currently teaches repeatedly lied in their consistent testimonies against polygamy. We. Refuse to believe the clear teachings of the Book of Mormon regarding marriage and just as Moroni warns, we therefore also refuse to believe the words of Joseph and Emma Smith, the servants of God. That is tragic. But he that believeth these things which I have spoken, this is an invitation to each of us. Him will I visit with the manifestations of my spirit, and he shall know and bear record, for because of my spirit, he shall know that these things are true, for it persuadeth men to do good. Good is such an important word. It means keeping the commandments and fulfilling the covenants of God, which includes the central covenant of marriage. God first used the word good, referring to the creation, and to Adam and Eve, the connection of Adam and Eve, who he created together, one and one and commanded to join together and become one flesh and commanded Adam to have no other partners but Eve. Um, polygamy has never persuaded men to do good. It does exactly the opposite. It creates things in men that are not godly, and, and in women it does not lead to good fruits, which is how we can recognize that it is not of God. And whatsoever thing persuadeth men to do good is of me, for good cometh of none save it be of me. I am the same that leadeth men to all good. He that will not believe my words, including God’s words on marriage in every book of scripture we have. That he that will not believe my words will not believe me that I am, and he that will not believe me will not believe the Father who sent me. For behold, I am the Father. I am the light and the life and the truth of the world. This is also an interesting part of this scripture. Brigham Young not only taught that polygamy was the necessary means of achieving exaltation, which means he did not believe the words of the scriptures. He fulfilled this warning that Maroni is giving us, well, that Jesus Christ is giving us. He, because he’d also taught that the atonement of Jesus Christ was limited in its effect and could not cleanse men and women from sins like immorality and and other sins. He taught that that the blood of Jesus was not sufficient, but that their own blood must be spilt. Just as Morona warns will happen in these verses in the Book of Mormon, Brigham Young’s deception about polygamy, I, I, meaning he was deceived about polygamy, caused him to fail to believe the teachings in the Book of Mormon and also um led him to fail to believe in the power and atonement in the in the power of the atonement of Jesus Christ. I’ll continue with. Verse 13, Come unto me, O ye Gentiles, and I will show unto you the greater things, the knowledge of which is hit up because of unbelief. A clear repetition of the teachings we have already read in Nephi and Alma and Mormon and so many other places. Come unto me, O ye house of Israel, and it shall be made manifest unto you how great things the Father. Ha hath laid up for you from the foundation of the world, and it has not come unto you because of unbelief. Behold, when shall when ye shall rend that veil of unbelief, which doth cause you to remain in your awful state of wicked wickedness and hardness of heart and blindness of mind, again, it comes to the hardness of heart, all of these same,
[01:15:45] um, cues that show up these same insights and invitations. This this veil of unbelief that like, for example, believing that there are difficult things about our history that we cannot know and really shouldn’t ask, right? Ah, that is our veil of unbelief. When we will render that, then shall the great and marvelous things which have been hid up from the foundation of the world from you. Yeah, when ye shall call upon the Father in my name with a broken heart and a contrite spirit, then shall ye know that the Father hath remembered the covenant which he has made unto your father’s, O house of Israel. These are incredible promises that I desperately hope we will all pay attention to and believe and seek to fulfill, seek to have fulfilled in our lives and in our church. I want to thank everybody for listening to this episode. Please, if you feel so inclined, share it. With others. I want these messages to spread, and please tune in next week as we continue to amplify Emma’s voice and seek to assist her in her work of expounding scriptures and exhorting the church in regard to polygamy. I will see you next time.
