@justinlabar Amen!!!

I've always maintained that the "sealings" that were done in those days were innocently done by those who were brand new to the sealing power and principle. We live now with over 170 years of experience with the sealing power. It was brand new to them and they were just learning about it.

Why wasn’t Emma Smith the first sealing then? A “prophet “ of God can’t even get sealed to his actual wife first? He decided to hide his other sealings from her. Wasn’t Emma like the 18th sealing instead of the first? How could you do that to your wife?

@@Eagle_Powers That's all between Joseph and Emma. It's their marriage, not yours. It's none of our business how they worked that out. It's also not appropriate for us in 2023 to judge how they used the sealing power back then because we are now operating with over 170 years of experience, clarifications, and understanding. It was new to them and they had to learn.

@@Eagle_Powers, perhaps because she did not support him being sealed to anyone else, and so she told him IF he did follow through with other women, she would NOT be sealed to him. 17 wives later, she came around. There are so many possible scenarios and we just can’t read into them all.

Hello Cindy! Welcome to the Ward! we're so glad to have you!

They’re the best!

Cindy is the crazy doll collector lady! She rocks.

@@obiwonkanoli no my Lo O o lo O O O po .

@shibainferno - Bahahahaha! My favorite comment. Shiba, you are awesome!

@@onandagus1 thank YOU so much for sharing your knowledge and experiences. Each of your episodes is 🔥from heaven, man. Thanks again

@@shibainferno Aw, I'm SO glad they're useful!

Actually, an episodic series where Don meticulously goes through the list would still be VERY helpful

@@vendingdudes I agree! But Jeremy will just update it again and again with more 3rd and 4th hand sources lol Jeremy's gotta keep those donations coming in somehow

Thanks, Chris!

​@@onandagus1Another question Don😊. I would LOVE to know your thoughts on the heavenly signs- the night Joseph picked up the plates. The army in the sky? That's one of my favorite stories🤍

@@StompMom5 That one intrigues me too. I've explored it a little but really need to explore it more. If the subject Joseph Smith and heavenly signs interests you, we need to stay in touch. While I haven't yet very fully covered the army in the sky, I've explored this subject *quite a bit* in other cases and have found some mind-blowing stuff! 😁

@@onandagus1 Quick question, do we have any of Joseph's journals, diaries, or letters on the topic of his polygamy (plural marriage) and his feelings towards it? I once saw a video done by a member where he said Joseph had written a symbol meaning "hell" in his journal on a particular day when he and Emma were having a heated disagreement about the issue. Is there any validity to this story or any written testimony from Joseph on the matter, short of the historical inference that he seemed to delay the practice due to his desire not to practice it out of revulsion or fear? Thanks!

Thanks, Wendy!

"crap"??? LOL. Do did you hear Don mention how many of Joseph's Adult wives WERE NOT PREGNANT??? ALL of the Young Girls Joseph Married were not pregnant either.

Thanks, Jacob!

I can't wait to read it. It's on order!! Thanks Don for all your info. The truth always comes out. Just grateful you've found all this! 🙏❤️⚘️

@@3-jalee Aw, thanks! I hope enjoy the book!

​@onandagus1 how do I access your articles about Alger and dating the plural marriage? Great content btw. I read your book on 116 pages

@jwnaugle - Thanks!! =D

not yet. just wait until Christ returns. this whole thing is a circle jerk.

@ChapinaUSA Thanks! =D

Glad you enjoyed it!

@JerrodGuddat I'm writing one.

@@onandagus1 Don, do you know how Emma might have discovered Joseph’s relationship with Fanny? What sort of activities would they be doing that would raise suspicion that the relationship was anything other than platonic? I’m thinking a letter? Hand Holding? That sort of thing, not just sexual.

@@mcable217Different accounts suggest different things. One account says unidentified "intimacy," another says a "sealing."

Agreed!

Glad you like them!

😅Nice!

LOL!

😃😄😁😆😅🤣

When you need real history it’s called the Bible. But that would refute almost everything that is spoken here.

@@Eagle_Powers i get it… so you’re one of those…

@randyfischer5082 RIGHT?! You've got it!

We’ve all tried to have a dialogue, but he won’t have it. I blocked him

@@ItsSnagret Good to know, Snagret. I'm still trying--just a little bit longer.

@@onandagus1good on you!

You have a heart of gold Don, thank you for offering to do that, hope he takes you up on it. I've been tempted to block him but have restrained myself for some reason. Thank you again for ALL your work but most of all on the 116 pages 👍🙏

@@Canut0 Thanks, bro! =D

If Brigham was prophet and wanted to marry her, why would he need to say "... because she was married to Joseph." Are wives passed from prophet to prophet?

very true...well said. You made a good point there.

False equivalency.

🤣🫣💯👍🏼

@@joshua.snyder - Nope, he just pointed out the moral hypocrisy of current hard core liberals: "Joseph Smith is a scum bag because we was simply sleeping around but it's ok for me to kill my baby." Today's hard core liberals are moral hypocrites. Sorry, their own actions condemn them.

Funny how people think a man marrying two women is wrong, but a man sleeping with two women is okay.

@kevinpyne24 - Thanks, Kevin! I'm flattered that you bought my book for yourself for your own birthday. The sign in the heavens discovery blew my mind too!

@onandagus1 I liked it so much that I bought another copy for my parents! :) I'd buy all my siblings a copy if I had the budget for it! Thank you for all the work you've done!

It is a seminal book. The best scholarship the church has had since Hugh Nibley.

@onandagus1 I’ve watched/listened to like every single podcast featuring you and your book and polygamy research I can find because it’s so amazing! I shared enough videos with my dad that he decided to buy the book and passed it along to me when he finished it (the one where you talked about the engravings and the interpreters was what pushed him to buy it.) I have started reading it, but don’t have much time to actually READ as a mom with little kids and a part time job, so it’s going much more slowly than I would like. Any plans for an audio version any time soon…? For all us multi-tasking people who like to listen to lectures and academic papers for fun? 😂

@@gingersnaps215 'Glad you're loving the book, 'Ginger Snaps'! =D My publisher has a beef with how Amazon does their audio books and has thus deferred making this into an audio book. But I would love to have one made and have even talked with potential narrators. I'll pass along your preference--and hope they make one soon!

@rebekah.1234 - Rebekah, agreed. I think that, as you perceptively observe, polygamy, and even marriage itself, have strong esoteric aspects, like in the union of male and female in hermeticism. I am trying to comprehend as much as I can what Joseph was doing in all this, and the purposes of it, and I think there are layers and layers of meaning to it.

@@onandagus1 Absolutely! It's like putting a giant, complicated puzzle together. Grateful for all your work! It's really helpful amid all the rumors and fog that's out there about this topic

You guys need to wake up. God already told us marriage is between a man and a woman period! Not between a man and WOMEN!!!!

@@Eagle_Powers Tell that to Jacob... how did he reconcile being married to Leah and then Rachel?

@@ChapinaUSA Did God marry them or command him to take them both as wives or did Laban deceive him?

😅I sympathize with their condition. I am currently practicing "zerogamy," but hoping to change that!

Thanks, Landon! The "yeah baby" may even be a bit literal for this one!

Kris just paid Bill Reel for a personal therapy session. I'd be pissed too if I paid Bill Reel $100 just for him to say "ChuRcH BAd. CHurCh BaD. ChuRCh BAd" for an hour lol

@@GwPoKo Lol!!!!

Part 2. In my opinion, Don wants to re-believe in Joseph that he is misconstruing what he can to put Joseph back on the pedestal. To take from the Fanny Alger episode (I recall), Don views Joseph more positively, based in part on good things he did, like nurture Emma when she was sick and take time to play with his kids. Ask any woman whose been cheated on by her husband. Do you think she views cooking meals, and taking the kids out to play catch as justification for the negatives like infidelity? Given my profession I'd bet the percentage of women who would give a crap would be less than 1%. I'd also argue that the "no sex" concept doesn't hold true with Nancy Marinda, who is one of the women on Don's list. Yes, she was married to Orson Hyde at the time. However, if you go back a bit further, it's not hard to imagine that Joseph had a thing for her and came back around when he could. Joseph was living with then-teenager Nancy Marinda in 1832 when he was taken out of the house to be tarred and feathered along with Sidney Rigdon. I acknowledge the historical evidence to suggest that this was due to Joseph's advances on Nancy are weak. However, we for sure know that he lived with her in her house with her parents, and that he married her polygamously 10 years later. The MO also fits Joseph marrying Fanny Alger (housemaid living with Joseph) and multiple others living in Joseph's house, such as the Partridge sisters (with whom he held a sham/second wedding to deceive Emma after she said Joseph could marry them, because he was already married to them in secret). Another problem is that the marriage to married women who were already pregnant explicitly violates Joseph's revelation on polygamy. Again, read D&C 132. You are only allowed to marry virgins. Again, you try to make one thing okay (arguing Joseph wasn't after sex demonstrated by marrying pregnant women) and create another problem (Joseph was violating the very revelation he supposedly received on polygamy). I also love the silence on the husband's of these women, claiming not much is known. A lot is known. How about Henry Jacobs and how his wife was basically stolen by Joseph, and then by Brigham Young after Joseph died. Of course, church history paints Henry as an uncaring father, but the historical record indicates that he was interested in seeing his family, but was chased off by Brigham. Most of the women were married to members, even an apostle, and others missionaries. So, it cannot realistically be argued that Joseph married these women to give them an opportunity to be sealed and exalted. I also enjoyed the connection with Joseph and Orson about the angel and the sword. Obviously, this is done to downplay the silliness of Joseph's claim (to multiple women) that he had to marry them because an angel with a drawn sword appeared and said he would kill Joseph unless he married them (coercion much?). There's a problem though. Orson is about as reliable of a witness as Joseph Noble. Don discredits Joseph Noble's recounting of when the first marriage occurred in Nauvoo by showing his problem with dates and that his claim that he performed the marriage in his house, which didn't exist until the following year, was not possible. I generally agree with the historical work here done by Don. The problem is that Orson Hyde is just as unreliable. Orson claimed to witness the transfiguration of Brigham Young, which was a pivotal event that assured Brigham's succession as prophet. The only problem is that Orson wasn't in America at the time of the transfiguration speech. So, Orson is just as unreliable as Noble. Thus, why would we believe his comment about the sword in the sky (which is completely unrelated to polygamy) as corroborating Joseph's claim about the angel telling him to practice polygamy, when Orson has already lied (or at best misstated) about witnessing some other religiously significant event? This is poor analysis on Don's part in my opinion and is akin to believing what you want and finding partial data to support it. It's like how apologists will believe Lucy Smith's retelling of events that support Joseph as the prophet, but discredit her statements from the same breath that would suggest Joseph plagiarized Lehi's dream from a dream Joseph Sr. had prior to Joseph getting the plates. Or how apologists will cite to Martin Harris' statements in support of the BOM, but discredit his statements that there was never a mention of the priesthood until years after the supposed restoration. BTW, who is Orson Hyde? He was an apostle. Orson was upset about polygamy when he learned that Joseph had married his wife. However, Orson apparently got over it once Joseph allowed him to start taking polygamous wives. Orson continued this practice throughout his life, marrying 7 women in total. He married a 21-year old when he was 58, and had 5 children with her (so clearly some sex). He married a 22- year old when he was 59. His last wife was 18-years old when he was 60. He obviously had sex with his wives, having over 30 kids total. He obviously married much younger women. Where did he learn polygamy? Joseph Smith; and no members can claim Orson went off the rails as he was an apostle, you know, a prophet, seer, and revelator. In fact, but for a re-ordering of the apostles shortly before Brigham died, Orson, not John Taylor, would have been the prophet. In summary, I simply want to point out that the thesis and arguments made in this video are highly flawed (almost all of them). Cardon attempts to pass this "pattern" off as completely debunking the argument that Joseph was motivated by sex to take polygamous (or polyandrous) wives. Don uses the word refutes, which is appropriate as Don likely recognizes his thesis does not conclusively debunk/establish anything. However, even then, I would submit that the word refutes is generous given the weakness of the pattern presented and the glaring holes that are left unaddressed or inadequately addressed by creating this apologetic narrative. Joseph had sex with some (possibly all) of his wives. Fact. Get over it. If you want to still believe Joseph is a prophet of God, then you need to accept this and find a way to still believe. But don't self-delude yourself by watching this video and thinking that it answers all of the horrors and problems that the history of Mormon polygamy poses to Joseph's credibility.

Well thought out arguments. There are lot of holes to these ideas and Cardon gets too excited claiming presenting this as groundbreaking proof which it is certainly not. Not having sex with a few nauvoo wives does not prove anything about JS's motives. The critical example of a beautiful hot young woman was Fanny. Don talks about it being a proto-polygamy case but doesn't go into detail about how it doesn't fit his model. JS could have committed adultery got caught by Emma and was confirmed an adulterous affair by Oliver and then fabricated polygamy to cover up his sins to not lose trust of the membership of the church and justify his actions to Emma. In order to cover up his sins, he could have laid low and try to construct a "righteous polygamy" by trying to marry only pregnant women. After many years when people get warmed up to the idea, he goes and has sex with non polyandrous marriages. I think it is far fetched to say that JS doesn't have sexual motives just because he married some polyandrous wives. And I would say marrying wives with children makes this even worse. To promote some kind of lineage you are actually destroying an existing family by not just tearing away someone's wive but also their children. How would have the former husbands have felt? In Jacob 2 it talks about the pain and suffering of the women due to polygamy. This also applies to the husbands. Both men and women have their hearts torn out and stomped on by JS polygamy. Does this seem like a commandment from an loving Heavenly Father?

Emma was not the first wife Joseph was sealed to.

@@williampaul7932 right. I don’t remember the exact number but I recall Emma was the 20th or so wife to be sealed to Joseph. I’m not sure if this is because Joseph was trying to keep things secret from Emma for as long as he could, or if it was withheld from her to induce her to go along with polygamy. Any way you slice it, it demonstrates that Emma was not Joseph’s soulmate and one true love like the modern church tries to portray.

@glenspendlove1309 Wonderful!! =)

aw thanks, Harry!

😂

The evidence showed that he was apposed to being married to anyone but emma but he did it to be obedient to what the Lord commanded.

What are his theories?

yah, but nah. Joseph definitely revealed plural marriage ... every serious historian knows it.

@@WARDRADIO Certainly, the easy thing is to believe all the evidence suggesting section 132 was revelation from God through Joseph, and recorded by William Clayton. When you begin to examine the credibility of those sources, and the motives they might have to lie, the waters get very muddy very quickly.

yeah, i don't get the "motives" thing. Do you think they liked polygamy? Do you think WE like it? Everyone frickin' hated it. That's where you lose me. EVERYONE hated it. The men hated it THE MOST. So I don't track with your "ew! Think of all they had to gain" argument. It was repulsive and everyone knew it. Regardless section 132 was definitely from Joseph... We've been over this...

@@WARDRADIO Furthermore, once you understand the true nature of God, you realize that polygamy cannot be of God. Godhood is to create posterity in Eternity, and monogamous marriage establishes the very foundation for that to occur. The creation story teaches that "God's image" is both male and female together, united as one. Perhaps that is why God's name Elohim is a plural term. Man or woman by themselves can only be half a God. It takes both to create life, and without that, there is no God. Only when husband and wife join together in heart and mind as one flesh can they together become one God. Polygamy destroys the unity of the couple necessary to fill the measure of our creation, and have our companionship sealed up in Godhood. In ancient days, powerful men were deceived by the adversary into taking multiple wives, and so were men in the Church also deceived in our day. Whether it began with Joseph or Brigham is less important than understanding that plural marriage has never come from God, and never will because it completely destroys God's plan for us.

@@WARDRADIO Nope. Michelle Stone is running well-documented circles around "every serious historian". Try to keep up.

I’m on to you Don. My guess is that in this episode you will make some new correlations when there are none. That way you can come up with some new fresh controversial ideas and it will draw more people to your book. I could be wrong but we shall see.

@@Eagle_Powers Proverbs 18:13

Don uses threads instead of ropes. @@Eagle_Powers

Well, compared to such an erudite scholar like you, User, Don is just a novice. Few possess the logical shrewdness that you do.

The Knock on Don is that he "hangs heavy weights on thin threads." @@WARDRADIO

It's just so weird to think of those women that way. Lol especially considering that Mark Twain thought of LDS women as ugly.

in our defense, we did over 3 hours with Don. And we plan to do more...

@@WARDRADIO I am trying to fish here for an interview with Don. And if you keep making noise, he will not take the bait. Lol. You guys always do a great job. I was just kind of setting it up for hammer's sake. Keep doing what you're doing because it is working. If you ever get time for me to come on and tell you about my family, I'm my own conversion to the church, just let me know. Again, you guys are the best show on KZfaq by far.

Thanks, Arthur. Keep up the good work!

😁

Ah, slippery slope! That Noble performed the marriage is mentioned during Joseph's lifetime, in 1842. And his inaccuracy is on specific things - chronology and self-centering. Otherwise he is often an accurate source.

@@onandagus1 I noticed in your explanation, you didn’t include the possibility that he was lying and this marriage never happened. Why is that?

@@justin-griffin Please re-read what I just wrote above. That the marriage occurred and was performed by Noble was published during Joseph Smith's lifetime - and not by Noble. Others also confirm the marriage. And since, as you reject in true obscurantist fashion, that we have plenty of other evidence that Joseph was marrying women, there's no reason to reject the evidence that this marriage happened.

@@onandagus1 do you believe the evidence for this particular marriage is strong enough to hold up in court?

@@justin-griffin Testimony on it was given in court in the Temple Lot Case. But, to your question, who cares? Historians try to establish what most probably happened in the past, whereas lawyers try to prove things beyond a reasonable doubt. Do I believe that whether Joseph Smith practiced polygamy can stand up in court? Oh yeah.

No, not even close. Check out Don's recent podcasts with Michelle on 132 Problems. There is disagreement, to be sure, but also mutual respect.

Don... I'm an active member but the scripture I struggle with the most is D&C 132:64-65. That one really feels greatly of male favoritism/ submission etc.... I have always had a hard time with that and completely disagree with it. But I know sometimes the language back then was different than how we hear things now.

Your instincts are correct. This gave Joseph permission to do whatever he wanted. Regardless of how Emma felt. She should be destroyed according to God if she does not agree with it and even if she doesn’t Joseph could still practice polygamy. Isn’t that convenient?

@@StompMom5 Understood. That's perhaps the most difficult part of D&C 132. I'm doing further work on D&C 132 to understand the whole revelation, including that passage, much better. I can't say that that work will make this passage more palatable, but it will at least make it more understandable in its context. One idea for dealing with this passage would be to understand that Joseph was the one who put his revelations into words, and Joseph was under great stress in the circumstance since - the sources show - Emma was threatening divorce. Under that stress it would make sense that Joseph's own desperation and frustration leaked through into the text he dictated, making it more strident than it should have been.

@@onandagus1 That makes no sense at all. D&C is direct revelation from God. So is it Joseph speaking or God?

@@onandagus1 Nevermind I can answer that. It’s Joseph. Not God. Just Joseph either pretending to hear from God or maybe it’s the Angel of Light (Satan)

Basically, yes. Joseph proposed to his mother, Rachel Ivins, but she delayed in accepting the proposal. After Joseph died she married Jedediah M. Grant for time and Joseph for eternity, making Heber a spiritual child of Joseph.

Why should it be left alone?If those who by covenant, dedicated their time, talents, everything the Lord blessed them with, etc, and then learn the church has violated that trust, has perpetuated falsehood, and harmed many people, especially loved ones; why would they not warn others? "It becometh every man who hath been warned to warn his neighbor." Sound familiar?

@@joshua.snyder Because vengeance and lameness are bad traits.

@@wes2176 The whole Brighamite sect of Mormonism was founded on vengence and lameness. It was a temple covenant and penalty for over a century. It motivated Smith, Young and their contemporaries. Motes and beams.

It's not about vengeance, it's about saving as many members as possible from false teachings. Everything you need to know about this is at your fingertips. Internet, books, youtube, the Bible. Everywhere. It's not out of hate (all the time) it's out of love and longing for those who are misguided to come to the true Christ. I would love to have a discussion about this if you'd like.

@@vacuumpower2595 Sure, that's it.

@ryanfenn5610 Thanks, bro! =D

Thank yo

@user-pt8jt3lb3h Aw thanks!

Two birds of a feather right there...

LOL. So why was he in the Barn with VERY YOUNG Fanny Alger?

@@krismurphy7711 Are you paying attention to what you're watching? Also, would you be interested in having a conversation sometime?

No matter what you say, Kris just repeats the same debunked slander. You can say: Now we know Fanny was 18! And he'll keep saying she was 14 until judgment day

@@onandagus1 Step out of the accusatory fog. Remember Kris that Don was an atheist anti mormon for ten years. What his incentive in coming back and defending The Prophet? I respect you, but VERY YOUNG is according to our 21 century standards. Back then she was not considered a minor. Plus we have strong evidence that there is not sexual activity with Fanny. Best Wishes

@@landondecoursey1030 Don presented evidence in the last episode that she was 18 too.

You can read the testimonies of Wilford Woodruff. He also writes about it in his journal. The Lord showed him what would happen to the church if they did not stop the practice. He doesn't say this, but I believe the reason was because they were not progressing in unity, and living the Laws of Stewardship and Consecration. They weren't living the Law of the Priesthood in its fulness as well, which we don't have, but believe we could have if we started living the Laws of Stewardship and Consecration again.

"Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." Wilford Woodruff was the Prophet.

Between the Daybells and now the Frankes, people are bound to start associating the church with these abusive cults that are started by people who happen to have been LDS

💯 That's right. She got jealous and then turned against the principle.😔