@@amurdo4539 100%

He perfectly shows that people will believe anything to remain comfortable.

@@krismurphy7711 Most people would define Mormonism as a "high-demand religion". Much easier in many ways to leave it.

@@amurdo4539 Please. We all know that you can barely be a Mormon and be in The Church.

As a straight white male, I bet Mormonism "works" for Bushman. I congratulate him on his privilege.

Thanks

He is

Yet the same church never lied to me…and the church is overwhelmingly good. I read church history in my teens and was never blindsided by lesser known facts that challenged others later. I also try not to have a fundamentalist certainty in choosing which historical interpretation I believe. We don’t yet have all the facts on the controversial issues, just a bunch of best guesses. What I am a fundamentalist about is my personal experiences with God. That Prof. Bushman states his goal of presenting church history in a way that be taken seriously by secular skeptics should inform the way a Latter Day Saint reads his work.

It's lying to you right now. Can't change the fact that dna proves the book of mormon is not true amongst many, many other things. ​@anonanon2396

@@anonanon2396 I love your thoughtful comments, Anon! I have a feeling you and I could really have fun philosophizing together. Your comment here made me think about suggesting an awesome book I am reading called, Divine Patterns, by Roger Connors. It’s fantastic!

That's not how I found out, but I think it would have been, if both were available. I'm sorry you were lied to, like me. I'm glad you're out.

@anonanon2396 People lived and died testifying to know the book a mormon was translated from golden plates. The fact that it was a rock in a hat proves that they didn't know what they said they did. That's called lying. If you told them there was a rock and a hat, they would call you a liar. Indoctrinated people with brain damage have a hard time figuring things out.

Wow no way, that's so cool

Hope you enjoy it

@@mormonismwiththemurph I did and was disappointed at the same time.

Thanks

No problem!

Aw thanks

Couldn’t disagree with you more….

I agree wholeheartedly!!! That book finally gave me a correct version of Joseph outside the Church’s cleanses version or Brodie’s awful speculative version. It was well measured and a wee charitable. Nevertheless, I believe Bushman changed the trajectory of the narrative and the Church learned from it and began to see the light that transparency is a better route than what was presented prior. Great interview and glad Bushman is still active in his work and communications.

@@dianemiller6540and why? Some substance would be helpful than just “I couldn’t disagree with you more”. Why even comment unless there is some intelligent response?

@@daleclark7127”all response is intelligence” Jailbait Joe.

@@paulhallett1452 now it makes sense. Thanks for confirming what appeared to be obvious.

Thanks, it was a honour and was very nervous/excited for the opportunity

Same here. I haven't shared my most powerful spiritual experience with anyone yet. I don't know how people will react or if they will believe me.

Totally agree brother! Not only that but he told the pastor and was severely criticized. If you told someone such a personal and sacred experience only to get rejected and criticized you'd be reluctant to share as well!

Which 1st vusion?????

@@marquitaarmstrong399 If you Google "first vision of Joseph Smith" you can read about it on the church's website. I'd share a link but KZfaq shadow bans links.

@@marquitaarmstrong399 vusion??? 😂

Thank you!

Glad you enjoyed it!

My pleasure!

According to Jewish rabbis you are wrong. They see all sorts of hebraisms in the Book of Mormon

@@suem6004 Of course there would be Hebraisms present. His source reference was the KJV Bible. However, concepts like eternal matter is Hellenistic.

Some attribute this idea not to Hellenistic thought but to Kabbalistic thinking. Joseph was taught by the Kabbalist Alexander Neibaur before he wrote the King Follett Discourse.

HE did. My understanding is that "The Rock in a Hat Method" was used at time for "revelations."

Kris is very much against the church and any truth claims of Joseph, but I think he is correct in this case. The Urimm and Thummin were used to receive several of the revelations in D&C! This could have also been the case for the seer stone, as they viewed it as interchangeable with the stones from the stone box. So yeah, he did use it throughout his life. That being said, he didn't have the priesthood when he was translating the plates. He grew in faith and in power throughout his life, and he very well could have outgrown the need for the stone in his later years. One way to look at it is like a training tool. He used it to receive revelations in his early years, and as he grew in spirit, he may have not needed it for certain things. To restate, he very much did use these tools for receiving multiple of the recorded revelations in the D&C.

Because he realized that people were just as gullible whether he used the stone as a prop or not.

I think it was a progression. Sources indicate he began with the urim and thummim for the 116 lost pages, then transitioned to the seer stone technique, and later he didn't even need instruments. This is just my opinion, but I think God provided these instruments to augment faith, but God can do anything and if we have enough faith these instruments become unnecessary. All the biblical instruments God uses items to strengthen faith of His servants... Moses' staff, Aaron's rod, clay for the blind man, anointing oil for the sick, etc., etc., etc.

Cheers!

Watch my episode with Jacob Hansen. There's lots of contemporary evidence supporting Joseph authoring D&C 132

Regardless of JS or BY authoring 132, the bigger issue is that the church later disavowed polygamy as doctrine despite it being a divine revelation. This calls into question if JS or BY or any LDS prophet is actually legitimate. Not to mention the disavowed doctrine of Adam/god theory, blacks in the priesthood or temple rights, etc. The normal Mormon response is to say mortal men make mistakes. True, but if the doctrine is from ongoing divine revelation, are you saying the Mormon god didn’t make it clear or understandable enough? BS, all of Mormonism tbh

​@@mikespage0123 the mormon church's own website still says polygamy was commanded by God. So that doctrine hasn't changed, the practice of polygamy has just stopped for now. Jacob 2:30 states that monogamy is the standard unless God commands otherwise. The preisthood ban was never doctrine, it was policy, the church changes policy all the time to best suit the time. Two good biblical examples of similar policies would be, the preisdhood being resitricted to the tribe of Levi, and Jesus' restriction on baptising gentiles. Both were changed when the time was right. Jospeh Smith was an emancipationist, blacks in the church had the priesthood prior to the 1852 ban. Unlike nearly every other protestant denomination, the church never had a churchwide policy of segregating congrations. Methodists and Baptists did not even allow blacks to worship in their churches. Exodus 7:1 and 4:16 says that Moses was a "god" to pharaoh and the people of Israel. Brigham used King James language when talking about how Adam was our father, the first prophet/patriarch of the human race. Jesus, in a sense, is a descendant of Adam. Modern prophets have clarified that teaching, as there were some members who didn't understand it properly. Language changes over time, you would expect modern prophets to update teachings so that the original intent and meanings are conveyed accurately to modern audiences.

LOL. Talk about your Freudian slips.

I concur. It's a fraud.

He says later he believes it's historical. Just a slip. :) At 57:00

@@josephrichins7211 Bushman might say that in public because he has to in order to maintain his status in the church, but privately, I guarantee you that he knows it's fake.

Thanks for watching haha

I think that at the moment we have a limited understanding of how perfectly God works in the life of every single person.

@@anonanon2396 That is a fantastic point! It’s a hopeful point! I tend to think ‘all or nothing,’ but God loves all His children (whether they are members or not)’ and is influencing their lives in ways that are best for them (while still adhering to their agency). Is that what you’re saying? If not, could you please expound on your comment? 😊

Great logical question. Globally, Mormonism is essentially meaningless. That's not to say that there aren't great Mormons out there, in the public eye, that are decent people. What I mean is statistically, it's really nothing, in the realm of religion. I don't make an appeal to numbers as proof of anything, but one must wonder why the "only true church" has such little impact, globally, after almost 200 years? Go onto the street and ask people who "President" Russel Nelson is. It would actually be quite a coincidence to get even one person in your sample to know who he is, especially outside of the "Mormon Belt"... I doubt, for instance, you'd find 1 in 100,000 people in Europe who have any idea who he is, and even less in Africa or Asian proper... Then ask who Pope Francis is...and you'll see the scale of the absurdity... I love the Mormon people, having been a faithful Mormon for over 34 years, and they do a lot of good in this world, but in total scope, it's just insignificant. You'd expect more for God's true church. Likewise, membership growth, which other than in Africa / South America, is flat-lined to negative. In Europe, it is negative. How can that be?

I think I can speak for many people that follow this channel, but we have all heard your complaints a million times at this point. I get it. You don't believe. Find something else that works for you.

@@amurdo4539 I have every bit as much right to comment and share as you. Your dismissive comment is cruel but I understand that you come by it honestly.

@@amurdo4539 For those of us who found something that was omitted from The Correlated Instructional Materials that we indoctrinated with in Junior Sunday School...Primary...Gospel Doctrine...Investigators Class...Priesthood...Relief Society...Mutual...Seminary...MTC...Institute... it no longer worked for us because we felt/fell BETRAYED AND UTTERLY LIED TO!! So when we see Mormon PROPAGANDA being continuously on sale for The World to buy, some of us feel the moral imperative to POINT OUT TRUTHS & FACTS... and I for one do so because I don't want what happened to me to happen to others. Even in 2024, The Church is not CELESTIAL HONEST!! They still are intellectually DISHONEST about a number of CORE HISTORICAL ISSUES.

@@Allthoseopposed The truth can be cruel. Did you not call Richard small-minded in another comment, as if you know anything about him? Talk about cruel. How is the clear resentment and bitterness that you have toward the LDS church helping you? Any therapist would tell you to leave a toxic relationship and move forward in your life. Far from being cruel, that would be the best thing for you to do.

Thanks I appreciate that, the more comments helps the video so it's grand lol

The Brethren HAVE BEEN AWARE and that is why so much was left out of Correlated Instructional Materials. THEY KNEW "The Rock in a Hat" translation method was a farce. They knew discussion of Joseph Smith marrying YOUNG GIRLS would not fly.

@noelhausler8006 We know Joseph said he was translating. We know he got almost everything wrong. I think it proves Joseph was capable of creating combing scripture

The thing that troo believing Mormons need to understand is that the Smith family was deeply involved in folk magic/treasure digging from at least 1820 until Joseph's embarrassing fraud conviction on March 20, 1826. Joseph had four to six years to hone his skills before he began making his claims about angels and golden plates.

@@randyjordan5521 still doesn’t explain how the BoM came to be. Nobody anti Mormon can explain how it came to be.

@@j.d.westphal6949it was plagiarized. Simple fraud. Lots of videos you can watch on it from some of the ex Mormon channels. You need to investigate further to find out the truth. You’ve been brainwashed and cannot see or hear clearly. Wake up!

@@j.d.westphal6949 " still doesn’t explain how the BoM came to be. Nobody anti Mormon can explain how it came to be." Your comment tells us that you haven't studied the issue very much. Joseph Smith's evolution from a folk-magician/treasure digger into a Biblical-style "prophet" was documented in newspapers as early as August 1831. Numerous of Smith's 1820's acquaintances related how he was planning to pretend to "find" a "Golden Bible." Alexander Campbell published the first in-depth, scholarly refutation of the BOM on February 7, 1831, including this statement: "This prophet Smith, through his stone spectacles, wrote on the plates of Nephi, in his book of Mormon, every error and almost every truth discussed in New York for the last ten years. He decides all the great controversies;--infant baptism, ordination, the trinity, regeneration, repentance, justification, the fall of man, the atonement, transubstantiation, fasting, penance, church government, religious experience, the call to the ministry, the general resurrection, eternal punishment, who may baptize, and even the question of free masonry, republican government, and the rights of man. All these topics are repeatedly alluded to. How much more benevolent and intelligent this American Apostle, than were the holy Twelve and Paul to assist them!!! He prophesied of all these topics, and of the apostacy, and infallibly decides by his authority every question. How easy to prophesy of the past or of the present time!! But he is better skilled in the controversies in New York than in the geography or history of Judea." So, Campbell recognized that the BOM was an attempt to resolve the sectarian conflicts of the day, rather than being an authentic history of people who lived in the Americas 2000-2600 years ago. A century ago, the Mormon scholar BH Roberts made an in-depth study of the BOM, and he concluded that Joseph Smith had the talents and the pre-existing source material, including an 1823 book titled "View of the Hebrews," by which to write the BOM on his own. Also, the BOM is not as impressive as most troo believing Mormons think it is: 15% of the text is copied directly from the KJV Bible, and another 2.5% is the repetition of "and it came to pass." Much of the rest is what BH Roberts called "wonder tales" and "the product of a juvenile mind." The amateurish nature of its stories, its repetitiveness, the shallowness of its characters and events, are dead giveaways that the book is a fraud. Not to mention the fact that the book is full of anachronisms, and there is no evidence that any of the people in its pages ever existed. We will probably never know every detail of the book's production, but because we know that it is a 19th-century fraud, the exact details don't matter.

Incredible book; incredible scholar. Mormonism falls flat on its face starting with the historicity of the Hebrew bible and followed by the highjacking of the persona of Jesus of Nazareth and his construction by early Christians into a man god.

Noted.

He is!

Exactly how stale was he? :-)

@@randyjordan5521 He was amazing!

I don’t know. It’s like we can eat anything with enough ketchup. The BoM just has no place in real ancient history. I have no reason to accept it as valid. It is not rooted by patriarchy like the OT or in the life, death, and resurrection of the Messiah like the NT. It is just a story being told by a 19th century religious figure. Nothing tangible truly supports any other conclusion.

I think that’s how a lot of Mormons feel. Trapped because their whole life, whole family, are stuck in a false church. And they aren’t exactly friendly to “apostates” - so they stay and just fake it. That’s why their attendance rates for church activity is low and their growth rate is low. Let’s hope it starts to crumble faster, for their own sake.

SPOT ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I recommend reading "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View" by D. Michael Quinn.

LOL. An "honored ancient tradition" that Joseph F. Smith strongly condemned.

@@randyjordan5521 My book recommendation (D. Michael Quinn) discusses exactly how the attitude towards folk magic, astrology, peep stones etc. shifted after Joseph's death.

GREAT POINTS! Yes, that stuff was always viewed as Satanic, and utterly evil. Yet, that really is a large portion of who the Smiths were as a people. They were absolutely occultists. And that was ABSOLUTELY hidden from me and essentially everyone else, until the internet let the Genie out of the Bottle. Now we are gas-lit about it. Yup, if it was so awesome and normal, why hide it? Oh, I've an answer...because it wasn't so awesome and normal. It was weird, false, and absurd.

uh, converts can be sealed to their deseased spouses in the temple even today. All proxy work in the temple is "go back on time" or whatever it was you were trying to say?

Thanks, I don't control how many ads there are

I subscribed to youtube premium as I listen to youtube enough that the ads were too annoying :)

Maybe if Bushman started quoting Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery, instead of everyone else, no one would have any need to mischaracterize him. Of course, you're a Book of Mormon Central employee who enjoys quoting John L. Sorenson who plagiarized the Two Cumorahs theory from RLDS members from as far back as 1911.

The Book of Mormon remains ahistorical (so - objectively: the whole thing is a fraud and an imposition and must be opposed, and Jesus remains not a liar - such that no restoration could ever possibly be needed - and Boylan and Trav demonstrate the irresolvable problems by their responses thereto - specifically in dialogue with protestants- God’s permissive will permitting a couple of polys to allow heretics’ epistemological bankruptcy to point the way home. PS: Speaking of permissive will - let those unpublished revelations rip! Isn’t there a guy who’s going to keep his hands of mid-level earth man god’s mouth? Heard about it on Mormon renegade podcast. That pod is phenomenal for getting under the hood of how mormonism impacts the way the human mind operates, even so.

For sure.. Hannah Stoddard and the Heartlander folks are always dissing LDS academic scholars like Richard and you as well, which to me doesn't reflect well at all on their positions and their character. That's one of my major beefs with them. They often misrepresent those who disagree with them and assign inaccurate ulterior motives to them.

@@philandrews2860 Bushman relies on an the anti-book “Mormonism Unvailed” [sic] to determine Joseph Smith translated the plates by reading from a rock in a hat without using the plates. That contradicts Joseph Smith’s statements, his history, the scriptures, comments he made in the Elder’s Journal and Oliver Cowdrey’s testimony who was allowed to translate per D&C 8-9 which explains the translation process was a revelatory one, not merely reading words. Even if the Prophet had a seer stone and used it to translate by reading words that appeared on it, everyone insists that he had to place the stone in a hat then shove his face into the hat to block out the light to be able to read the dimly lit words- a ridiculous scenario, because obviously he never figured out that he could read from the stone at night without a hat! But no, a hat was needed. Bushman nor you have the cognitive ability to realize the stone in a hat claim was created to mock the Prophet. Now he and you think Joseph Smith was stupid enough to shove his face into a hat and mumble words through it. And anyone who thinks otherwise is offending a sweet intelligent LDS scholar.

I don’t think any faithful scholar thinks it’s “fake”. It’s just a later account than a couple others. It was designed to tell his story in the context of persecution against the saints. We all tell stories this way

@@carterbrown9695 WE ALL ARE NOT PROPHETS!!! WE ALL DO NOT CLAIM TO HAVE SEEN JESUS....GOD....GOD & JESUS. HOW MUCH DECEIT IS ALLOWED????

@@krismurphy7711 Prophets are just normal dudes. They pretty much have been from the Old Testament, through the New Testament and into modern day. Granted prophets are usually exceptionally good people, but literally anyone could become a prophet

@@carterbrown9695 Using that "logic" that explains Koresh, Jones, and all the TV Evangelists

@@krismurphy7711 Well I haven't been trying to completely explain what prophets are. I was merely describing a single condition of prophets, that is they are mortal and they behave like mortals. That doesn't mean everyone is a prophet, and doesn't mean I have to believe everyone who claims to be a prophet.

So younger Joseph Smith was not smart or creative enough to come up with a new idea..... writing on metal plates? What some TBMs rule in or rule out to allow their "faith" to survive it tortuous.

Sounds like you could use the teachings of the Savior in the Bible to let go of your angst and free yourself of these chains of pride.

you haven't even read "view of the hebrews" 😂 come back when you have, then try telling me with a straight face that's what Joseph based the BoM on. Gold and treasure run all throughout the Bible too, is that "occult" or "magic"? Oh don't forget the talking donkey, talking snake, ritually sacrificing animals; prophets using birds, sticks, and leaves for divination; prophets putting curses on people; prophets summoning bears to kill people, want me to go on? Maybe, just maybe, the people burning witches and reading their king James bibles every day were into some wierd stuff because the bible is full of weird stuff? It's a miracle the BoM doesn't have even a fifth of the occult crap that seeped into the bible over the millennia.

@@tybaltmarr2158 Thanks for commenting. I wish I could post a pic here so that I could show you my copy of View of the Hebrews all marked up and noted just like my scriptures. It’s nuts! For one there are more chiasmus in VOTH than in the BOM. Chiasmus seems to be a characteristic of the BOM that proves it authentically ancient, divinely delivered… So why do you think it is that we find them more abundantly in a book written only 5 years before the BOM was said to have been translated from golden plates…

@Allthoseopposed sorry to keep you waiting, wanted to take a look for myself. There are not more chiasmus in the VotH, and the ones that are there are very simple. Hebrew chiasmus are incredibly long and complex. For context, VotH has less chiasmus than any one of Shakespeare's works, while the BoM has significantly more than Shakespeare's works combined. Thanks for the challenge anyway, it's been a while since I'd read VotH, I'd forgotten how banal it was 😅

What he misses is that THAT does NOT make it true. LOL. So a Catholic or Muslim or Atheist who are happy with themselves are in the right Church/Religion/Belief System???

Richard in no way implied that it was not possible to live a good life in other religions or no religion at all.

@@krismurphy7711 This is indeed what people like Brigham Young would have said. BY's talk on The Kingdom of God as recorded in the JoD mentions how people in the Millennium will be allowed to participate in any lifestyle and religion they want to, as long as they recognize and follow the laws of the Kingdom. He explicitly says there will be Jews and Muslims during this time. The modern church continues this teaching in places like the older Preach My Gospel, where it mentions people like Muhammad and Buddha by name as inspired individuals who brought portions of God's revealed law to their people. I think it would be entirely congruent with published church doctrine to say that a lot of these people are in the right religions where they stand right now.

EXACTLY!!! Joseph Smith flat out LIED in the 1838 Version!! The 1838 canonized Version is almost the polar opposite to The 1832 Frist Version....AND WHEN THE CHURCH SAY IT "adds richness to the Accounts" I want to pull my hair out. Police Detectives, when they are interrogating a Suspect have them tell "their story" multiple times. And what are the Cops looking for? DIFFERENCES!!! Differences document that a Story is NOT true.

With all your comments it feels like you watched this with anti-Mormon tinted glasses ready to nitpick and find error wherever you could. Was there anything Mr. Bushman said you agreed with? I feel critics are really upset when an intelligent, educated, and honest person is a true believer because it really flies in the face of the oft touted claim the Latter-day Saints are all gullible, brain-washed, or in it for the power. How about we accept that there are intelligent people on Botha sides who have reached different conclusions.

Exactly. And Bushman's understanding of cosmology is not good.

D Michael Quinn agrees with Harper on the First Vision. Maybe give Quinn's article " JOSEPH SMITH’S EXPERIENCE OF A METHODIST 'CAMP-MEETING' IN 1820" published in Dialogue a read.

@noelhausler8006 Vogel wrote a 3 page letter to the editor in Dialogue. That's all I'm a aware of. If you're aware of something else then please make me aware. I don't really consider that a challenge.

@noelhausler8006 yeah that's what Vogel said in his letter to the editor and I wasn't impressed. It looks more like a lazy gotcha than an attempt to deal with Quinn's argument. Walter's whole schtick in his original 1967 paper and his 1969 exchange with Bushman in 1969 was that there was no evidence of a revival in Palmyra or anywhere close to it in 1820 to serve as a catalyst for Joseph's vision. Not only has Backman, Bushman, Harper, and Quinn et al shown that this is not true, but Quinn was able to show that there were revivals in Palmyra in 1818 which falls in line with Joseph's 1832 account which says that his search for truth was more of a process that started when he was twelve (1818) and continued to when he was 14 (1820). We have evidence of revivals in Palmyra and around it in both those years which severely cripples Walter's argument. Vogel has to move the goal posts by focusing on Joseph's family members joining churches in order to keep Walter's argument alive. He also doesn't deal with Quinn's footnotes where he documents several cases of Walters being dishonest with his sources.

@noelhausler8006 "He agree that there were no revivals in Palmyra in 1820" No he doesn't. He argued the opposite. That's the whole point of the paper.

@noelhausler8006 I just finished Backman's 1980 edition of that book and he most definitely does mention that exchange. He may not have in the first edition but he does in the second. I thought Bushman did fine. I think some people were expecting Bushman to match Walters source for source since Walters was known for being a source digger and overwhelming his opponents with information but instead Bushman just challenged his assumptions which is a more than fine approach to take. The 1969 special edition of BYU studies, Backman's book, Harper's work, and Quinn's work have built off Bushman's initial response.

Exactly right. It’s odd how the Mormon rationalization is always depending on the most improbable solution and if all else fails, just cite James 1:5 and tell people to pray for a good feeling. They never seem to consider that their spirit or feeling is evil, demonic, and/or satanic in nature. After all, scripture also says the heart is deceitful. Poor Mormons are really victims of their own church and it’s devastatingly sad for them given the consequences of following a false gospel from a false prophet (JS).

Interesting, well, my life has been so much better because of this gospel that I am a victim of that makes me believe these impressions and arguments. @mikespage0123

@@luisriquelme3044 sometimes victims don’t realize the depth of their predicament until it’s too late. That could be you, or sounds like it is you anyway. Good luck ❤️

​@@luisriquelme3044 people stay in abusive systems for all sorts of reasons. White men and the spouses of white men, particularly white men with status in the church, especially get lots of warm, fuzzies from it

@mikespage0123 fair enough, but victim of what precisely? In my ward, at least I've seen people living the best of their lives, people taken out of addictions and people living the most healthy family relationships. That's the part that I don't understand about the anti-Mormons and atheis. Why do they fight a lost battle against what is evidently good.

YES!!! I WANT MY OWN SEERSTONE!!!!

Occult? Where are you getting that from? Quinn? Maybe you should read William Hamblin's review of Quinn's book on magic in FARMS called "That Black Magic". He shreds it apart.

@@jacobmayberry1126 ummm, Bushman confirms it in this episode. 😐

@@Allthoseopposed really? He uses the word "occult"?

@@Allthoseopposed because I've read Bushman. He views seer stones and treasure digging as more of a type of "folk Christianity" rather than "folk magic" or "occult". That's more reminiscent of Quinn's scholarship. Seems like you're interpreting what Bushman says through a Quinn lens.

How many strong vibrant religious leaders have we seen? What is a common trait among those who were found to be scammers and worse??? SEXUAL DRIVE!!! Koresh...Jim Jones... How many televangelists?? Its the Achilles Heal for Dominant Male Religious Founders.

I’m amazed that curiosity about Biblical patriarchs’ polygamy continues to get play when it is completely unsupported by the JST (or any of Joseph’s writings).

@@gwendolynwyne I'm shocked!!! Joseph Smith's take on OT polygamy mirrors his own in the 1800's

@@krismurphy7711 Kris I’m saying the Joseph Smith translation doesn’t corroborate. The polygamists started telling that story before they had access to the JST and church leaders repeated it for decades because the polygamists taught it. But it doesn’t hold up now that we have the documents and can see that 1) they weren’t tampered with as Brigham implied/accused Emma of doing, and 2) the only polygamy changes more strongly condemn those who did it, nothing elaborates Abram and Hagar or Jacob+ many wives as holy. I’m amazed that Murph and Bro Bushman repeat that story because it’s unsupported by the documents.

@@krismurphy7711I don’t think it’s their Achilles heel. I think they get into these positions so they can be deviants.

Lady, i don't mean this to be rude, but you sound like a crazy person lol. If you hate the church so bad you don't have to watch. I don't believe in hinduism, but I don't spend all my time watching Hindu videos and tearing them down. I don't make fun of their beliefs and hate on people for their faith and opinions.

@@dinocollins720yet you call her crazy. Pot calling the kettle black 😂 🍿

@@mikespage0123 sorry but no. Humans have debated and theorized over the creation of the earth and purpose for existence for thousands and thousands of years or more. To this day there’s no scientific consensus or proven theory to answer these questions. In fact, almost all people on earth that have ever lived, answer these questions through a belief in God. Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Mormonism, etc etc etc all bring this faith in God with accompanying customs, beliefs, and traditions. Just because someone believes differently than you do doesn’t make them crazy. What is crazy is being so upset and bugged at people’s beliefs and opinions that you obsess and spend your time and energy mocking them. The most rational thing is being respectful and open to other people’s beliefs because billions and billions of people think differently from you. So why spend your time getting upset and belittling people for opinions just because they’re different than yours?

@@dinocollins720 I’m never upset. You’re the one angrily typing a novel to argue basically with yourself 😂 I just called you a hypocrite for calling someone else crazy, yet attacking them the way you did. Crazy indeed

@@mikespage0123 I’m not angry only rational. And you’re the one that spends all your time attacking lds people. I made the initial comment on this ladies post because she made maybe 6 separate comments each paragraphs long. You are obsessed with attacking lds people and you know my words are true. You know everything in saying is spot on lol

Perhaps you can explain this so called conman description that would require the biggest conspiracy of individuals we could even imagine. Pejorative quickies are not persuasive nor have any intelligent substance.

@@daleclark7127 triggered ⬆️ 🤣

@@mikespage0123lol. Is that what you were hoping to do? Sorry if that is your objective and wonder why you even comment. Do you just troll on these videos and attempt to inflame others with no substance? I hope that’s not the case but have your fun if that is your thing. Have a good day and remember the golden rule if those things matter in your life.

@@daleclark7127 triggered twice! ⬆️ 😮 🤣

THE BOTTOM LINE? When Joseph Smith looked at HIS ROCK in his hat, and TOLD PEOPLE HE COULD SEE WHERE BURIED TREASURE WAS LOCATED.....HE WAS LYING!!!!!!!!!!! That ALL was FRAUD. FRAUD WAS CRIMINAL!!!

Conspiracy! Conspiracy! It's all utter nonsense.

How convenient. Try to unwind Joseph Smith's BS while using Brigham's.

Lol

@@mormonismwiththemurph What's with the laughter, Murph? Don't you believe the scriptures? Or are they not available in the UK? Or maybe you prefer Joseph Smith read words from a glowing rock that had to be placed in a hat to block out the light, because Joseph Smith wasn't smart enough to translate at night with a rock without a hat? The entire stone narrative is garbage, but you're falling for it. Learn to think. Learn scripture. Acquire a brain. See Abraham 3:19 and stop being the idiot at the end of the time and eternity-intelligence continuum. A rock in a hat. The whole idea was invented in the 1830s to mock the Prophet. Take a smart-pill.

This is a silly assertion.

So Bushman isn't a scholar??

Bushman is a fantastic scholar, with impeccable credentials. He was instrumental in the Joseph Smith Papers effort, and sits on it's National Board of Directors. The JSP effort is Church sponsored and endorsed 100%.

@@rodneyjamesmcguire Not impeccable. Let's not make him a god. And not forget how many people he has caused to leave the church. Thank goodness for others who work to review his work.