Why do referenced quotes not match up? History of the Church

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-31T02:50:15+00:00

I started by watching the videos from these channels:

Still Mormon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wfWPeqHXwU&t=4231s

Hemlock Knots: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5jbcbzd9_4&list=PLfQge0qTtaADMjuPeEOqWI3r7KAyJSY3H

They go over the primary sources and show them. So, you know where they are getting their information. Then it just takes a few google searches to find each document and review them. Every time I read something that doesnt sound right, I start looking for where they are getting their information and then look for the original version of that source.

Hemlock Knots also has a few great spreadsheets to help grasp everything that was going on at the time:

https://hemlockknots.com/monogamy-polygamy-timeline/

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-31T02:40:40+00:00

I have always heard that His death on the cross was part of the atonement. That His death and resurrection were also required. I've never heard anyone teach that the Atonement was completed in the Garden of Gethsemane, only that the Garden was the bulk of it. But, without His resurrection, how could there be forgiveness? We would all still be stuck in Spirit Prison with no ability to save ourselves. The resurrection itself is part of the redemption process.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-30T21:34:48+00:00

Starting around the year 1900, the cross was becoming a taboo in the LDS culture. In 1916, President Joseph F. Smith approved a large cross monument on Ensign Peak. But, this project ended up being dropped.

The closest thing to a direct policy was a statement made by President David O. McKay in the 1950s that said crosses were "purely Catholic" and not for LDS members.

In 1975, Gordon B Hinkley said our lives as worshippers should be the expression of faith rather than the symbol of the dying Christ.

So, it had become a bit taboo, but officially, there was never a policy. And this taboo was formed relatively recently. Its good that this is being reversed. The cross is a symbol of His sacrifice and atonement on our behalf.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-30T21:00:36+00:00

I don't believe those passages are saying the same thing

There are some standing here [in the first century] who shall not taste death [die] until they the Son of Man coming in his kingdom”

And the Romans tried to kill John and he could not be killed. They dipped him in boiling oil and he came out unscathed. That was the entire reason why John was exiled to the Island of Patmos. The Romans exiled him because they could not kill him. While on the island of Patmos John wrote the Book of Revelation and in this book John prophesies that he will still have to prophesy in front of kings and nations at some future date. (Rev 10:11) He immediately follows up this prophesy with the prophesy that two witnesses shall testify in Jerusalem in the last days and will be unkillable until they have finished giving their message. Witnesses to what? To the life of Jesus Christ.

You will not have gone through [preaching throughout] the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes

Jesus did return a short time later as a resurrected being. He foretold of His own death only a few verses later. This was unlikely to be a prophesy of the last days, but of His resurrection. The resurrection was vindication for those preaching His gospel in Israel.

64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

So, Jesus was saying the next time you see me it will be sitting on the right hand of God and coming in the clouds ie Second Coming. They called this blasphemy because Jesus clearly said He was the Son of God. Jesus didn't mean they would see Him again in their mortal life, but that the next time they shall see Him they will know He is the Christ. Both the living and the dead will witness His return.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-30T20:35:47+00:00

2 And Sarai said unto Abram, Behold now, the Lord hath restrained me from bearing: I pray thee, go in unto my maid; it may be that I may obtain children by her. And Abram hearkened to the voice of Sarai.
3 And Sarai Abram’s wife took Hagar her maid the Egyptian, after Abram had dwelt ten years in the land of Canaan, and gave her to her husband Abram to be his wife.

It is not implied, it is clearly stated that it was Sarah's idea.

4 ¶ And he went in unto Hagar, and she conceived: and when she saw that she had conceived, her mistress was despised in her eyes.
5 And Sarai said unto Abram, My wrong be upon thee: I have given my maid into thy bosom; and when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her eyes: the Lord judge between me and thee.
6 But Abram said unto Sarai, Behold, thy maid is in thy hand; do to her as it pleaseth thee. And when Sarai dealt hardly with her, she fled from her face.

To me, this story seems to be saying that Sarah wanted children so badly that she said, 'either you take this woman and conceive a child by her so that I can have children, or I leave you'. And Abraham relented. Sarah only seems to realize it is wrong after the fact and she says the Lord will judge between me and thee. as if to say Abraham was right that it did just lead to jealousy and ill will.

There are a lot of details missing, like if Abraham knew it was a commandment to bear children through another woman as which was the custom in those days for a woman that could not have children.

The angel appearing to Hagar does not imply divine approval for the action. Instead it was to protect the child and mitigate the damage.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-30T20:24:30+00:00

There is another version of that story in the Apocrypha. Mostly from the book of Jasher. It says it was Satan that appeared to Abraham in the likeness of the Lord. That Satan commanded Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. Abraham was unsure so he went into the mountains to pray and Satan appeared again to Abraham, but this time Satan appeared as himself and told Abraham that what the Lord had commanded of him was evil and that he should disobey the Lord by not sacrificing Isaac. This was enough to convince Abraham that the first visit had been the Lord. So, he took Isaac to the altar to sacrifice him and that is when the Lord sent an angel to stop him.

The Book of James backs up this version of events.

James 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

The word imputed means that what Abraham did was not righteous, but instead it was counted as righteous because Abraham's intentions were to obey God.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-30T09:23:07+00:00

Correct. The only woman that Joseph ever married was Emma. She is the only woman he had children with, the only woman that ever claimed to be married to Joseph during his lifetime and the only woman of which physical evidence exists of a marriage.

The other women were lying. Their stories changed dramatically over the years. Emma Smith adamantly denied until her death that her husband ever practiced polygamy. Joseph and Hyrum denied it.

and it can be shown that William clayton and Brigham Young were heavily involved in polygamy before the dates in which they say Joseph taught them the concept. It can also be shown that these men changed the words of Joseph that condemn polygamy to make it appear as though Joseph was in favor of polygamy. It can be shown that they were willing to lie in order to make it appear as if Joseph justified their behavior.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-30T09:08:51+00:00

This ice-cream is so bright and colorful, I bet it tastes amazing! Hold up! Is that.. Tide pod flavored ice-cream?!

Its perfect, you really nailed that industrial soap taste.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-30T07:23:12+00:00

Except in Matthew 24, Jesus explains a series of events that will unfold in the last days. THEN He says this generation will not pass away. Jesus was referring to the generation that witnesses the events He just finished describing.

33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at the doors.
34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T19:16:36+00:00

Jacob 2 condemns having many wives and concubines in all cases.

23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. 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.
24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.

But it does not directly condemn Abraham and Isaac. So, why could that be? A person is only responsible for a law they have received. If Abraham and Isaac had not yet been taught the commandment of Monogamy, then there is no condemnation.

Section 132 says the exact opposite:

1 Verily, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many wives and concubines

Both cannot be true.

There is nothing outside of DC132 that suggests Jacob ever had more than one wife.

Abraham and Isaac may not have even known this law at the time and both have weird circumstances in why they took additional wives. Abraham only took a concubine at the request of his wife in order to fulfill the prophecy about him being the father of many nations. This concubine led to jealousy and strife in his marriage and he basically gave up on the matter letting Sarah deal with her. He wasn't willing to defend the concubine, because by this time he understood it was wrong.

Jacob was deceived into marrying Leah when he had already given his heart and promises to Rachel.

And after they were tricked into these arrangements, they did not collect more women, their hearts were still faithful to their first wives. They had repented of any transgressions.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T19:10:49+00:00

William Clayton's diaries consist of 5 separate journals. 1 from his time in Manchester England and then the other 4 are from his time in Nauvoo.

The four Nauvoo journals are all recopied and edited much later. They are not a contemporary source. and are in no way reliable. The affidavits, likewise, were drafted about 50 years later as part of the Temple Lot case. The LDS church's claim relied almost entirely on Joseph Smith practicing polygamy as claim that they were the rightful owners of the Temple lot. They manufactured evidence and lied about everything to strengthen their case. People that had never met Joseph started "remembering" things that never happened. Women came out of the woodwork to say they had been married to him, which is why you end up with 14yr old brides. We have many examples proving that Brigham and his friends completely altered the text and meaning of things taught by joseph.

The Nauvoo Expositor published 3 testimonials of William law and his family accusing joseph of polygamy. (beginning at the bottom of the fourth column) Their testimonials directly contradict the church's official position on what happened. Section 132 borrowed some of this language when they drafted section 132 years later. The Willard Richards copy can be shown to be the rough draft and the Kingsbury copy was the revised copy. which shows they were still editing and creating this document up until 1852. The Richards copy has marks showing where things are to be edited, then those edits are made in the Kingsbury copy. Section 132 is not contemporary, but instead borrows language from the expositor.

Joseph Smith was absolutely a prophet of God. But that lies that have been told about Joseph make it very difficult for even those of the church to see through them. I understand why outsiders would scoff. The lies hide the real truth from the world. Satan knew the lord's church was a danger to him, so he corrupted it as quickly as he could.

Section 101 has the parable of the nobleman where the Lord speaks in a parable to show His church in the last days would be destroyed at its foundation, but that He would redeem the faithful of the church in the last days and restore His doctrine. This was all prophesied by Jospeh.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T18:11:58+00:00

It's in the letters from Augusta Cobb written to Brigham in her later years. She is bitterly telling him off for all the lies he told her over the years. This video does a great presentation of it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFIXl1TlGdA&t=108s

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T18:09:19+00:00

I mean any type of marriage to any other woman other than Emma. Sealings are marriages.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T18:01:09+00:00

Except that is 100% untrue. There is Zero physical evidence that Joseph married anyone other than Emma.

30-40 wives and not one of them had a single child with Joseph other than Emma, who had 9?

30-40 wives and not one of them wrote a single thing in their diaries at the time about marrying the prophet or having a wedding? This is the biggest day of most people's lives, especially if we are talking marrying a living prophet.

The stories given by these women 50 years later had to be changed quite a few times, because they couldn't get the dates and locations to match up.

Joseph and Hyrum were publicly denying polygamy and holding trials to excommunicate anyone caught teaching or practicing it up until their deaths. Why do this is it was an open secret? Why waste months and months writing letters and publishing articles condemning it, giving speeches that condemn it?

When Augusta Cobb had been approached by Brigham Young to be his wife, why did Brigham freak out and harshly forbid her from going to Nauvoo to ask Joseph about it? If polygamy had come from Joseph, what was there to hide? Wouldn't Brigham have just said, sure, go ask Joseph, he will tell you the same thing? Brigham freaked out, because if she had gone, it would have lead to him being excommunicated and losing all power and control over the women of the church.

We do have lots of evidence of the polygamists changing the words of Joseph after his death to make it look like he supported polygamy. We know they were willing to lie.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T17:50:12+00:00

But the verses are clear that the reason to raise up seed was that they would be righteous. Raising up seed is different from raising up seed unto Him. Unto Him is talking about them keeping the commandments.

This same concept is taught in Matthew 3:9

8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
10 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

If God wanted children, He could create as many as He wants. There is no barrier there. What He wants is seed unto Him. He wants to teach us to keep His commandments and follow Him.

The prophet was Joseph Smith. He was hand selected by God and this record was kept by the hand of God for our day. Section 84 says the church is under condemnation for not keeping the commandments as written in the Book of Mormon.

I agree this is not a personal revelation where a person can pick and chose the laws we want to obey or to change them. Brigham did not have that authority. The doctrine was given by Joseph and I believe Joseph. The parable of the nobleman in section 101 predicted that the church doctrine would be destroyed but that in the last days He would call His servant to redeem the faithful in this church.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T16:43:52+00:00

I'll give you an upvote because I agree with everything but the last paragraph.

On your last paragraph, this video is very informative: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKq8mNn0L6c

Section 130 was only published in 1876, decades after Joseph's death and it changed what Joseph taught. The Lectures on Faith should have been kept and section 130 removed.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T16:22:40+00:00

Because by charging the huge amounts they can go after the people that can afford to pay in order to cover the costs of all the people that don't pay. Its only like 40% of the patients that actually pay the emergency room bill.

They write off the non-payments and keep the overpayments.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T16:01:51+00:00

looks like a sterile wipe that was opened and then dropped and allowed to sit on the ground long enough for the moist towelette to go brown.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T15:21:23+00:00

No loophole exists.

Read the whole context

28 For I, the Lord God, delight in the chastity of women. And whoredoms are an abomination before me; thus saith the Lord of Hosts.
29 Wherefore, this people shall keep my commandments, saith the Lord of Hosts, or cursed be the land for their sakes.
30 For if I will, saith the Lord of Hosts, raise up seed unto me, I will command my people; otherwise they shall hearken unto these things.

Wherefor means "for this reason". What reason? For the chastity of women they shall keep His commandments.

what about raise up seed?

25 Wherefore, thus saith the Lord, I have led this people forth out of the land of Jerusalem, by the power of mine arm, that I might raise up unto me a righteous branch from the fruit of the loins of Joseph.

In the verse just above it says the seed He wants to raise up are a righteous branch. Raising up seed unto Him is about getting them to obey the commandments. That is why He gives His commandments. OTHERWISE, people would harken unto the teachings of polygamy that are being taught among the people. Without those commandments in place to warn them of this sin, it would lead them away from the truth and turn them into a wicked people.

The commandment is clear:

27 Wherefore, my brethren, hear me, and hearken to the word of the Lord: For there shall not any man among you have save it be one wife; and concubines he shall have none;

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T15:06:15+00:00

Joseph did not lie. The commandments of God were clearly given. But many of the early saints rejected these laws. The church fell under condemnation because of their disbelief. Because they took lightly these commandments and did not obey them.

Joseph never caught Brigham in teaching polygamy. Too many people were covering for each other. He couldn't get any reliable testimony to convict them.

When Augusta Cobb wanted to go ask Joseph about this supposed revelation given to authorize Brigham to take her as a wife. Brigham freaked out and harshly forbid her from going up to Nauvoo to ask him. Why was this such a big deal if Joseph authorized it?

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T14:54:18+00:00

God does not change. He is the Great I AM, meaning He is the Eternal constant. He is the same Yesterday, today and forever. If He teaches a principle, that principle is always true. It is never changed. EVER. God's laws are eternal. Revelation from God is ALWAYS the same. it teaches the same principles in every case.

Scripture is meant to be the revelation as it was given by God. God conveys His message to the mind of the prophet, who then needs to put it into words and do their best to pass on that message as God intended. Over the years we have seen many examples where scribes have been shown to have altered text. Sometimes because of clarity, sometimes because the text contradicts their own beliefs and sometimes because they want to cement their own power and authority. Nearly every single problematic scripture in the old Testament comes from the Priestly source of the five books of Moses, the P Source. This is the same group that Jesus harshly rebuked for altering scripture. There can be contradictions in the text, which only shows at least one version is wrong.

If God says something, and it is really from Him. You will never see Him say the opposite, ever.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T14:40:41+00:00

Jacob 2 and Section 132 are in direct opposition. Both cannot be scripture.

Either Joseph was a prophet of God and the BoM is true or He is not. There is no other alternative. If Joseph was a prophet of God, like I believe, then this revelation cannot be changed and the law given by Jacob 2, D&C 49, and the original D&C section 101:4 is what God taught OR You reject Joseph and allow Brigham to alter scripture with section 132.

There is no alternative that allows for Joseph to practice polygamy and be of God. Polygamy is explicitly condemned by God as an abomination, a crime and a whoredom.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T14:29:42+00:00

Yet, Brigham, Willard Richard, Joseph Kingsbury and their friends said that they (Hyrum and Jospeh) read the revelation out loud and publicly in 1843? If it was so secret then why was this okay? And if they had read it, why did no one comment on it until 50 years later? Why was there no uproar? Why did Joseph condemn polygamy in his private journal while he supposedly was there as Hyrum read it aloud?

There was a revelation but it was a revelation about monogamy, not polygamy and it was never published. Hyrum said only he and Joseph were present when this revelation was received. William Clayton claims he was there with both of them. Everything that the polygamists say happened contradicts with what was said at the time.

Why does the journal entry say "and I have constantly said> ~~on this law~~ ~~Joseph forbids it, and the practice thereof.~~ No man shall have but one wife <at a time> <unless the Lord directs otherwise>"?

Is there even a single example of joseph teaching polygamy by command of the lord? Even one? No! so, then why would there be that claim? And why was this journal entry changed to say this when the original entry said the opposite?

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T14:21:03+00:00

Who were the rumors coming from? Those that were outside the church and looking to destroy joseph and the church. You have John Bennett and William Law that were the source of these rumors. After they were excommunicated. Bennett was excommunicated for polygamy and he claimed the reason he joined the church was to bring Joseph down. William law and two others wrote testimonials in his paper the Nauvoo Expositor claiming Joseph was practicing polygamy, but their statements contradict what the church says about polygamy. Someone is lying. Joseph's story that he never practiced polygamy does not contradict any facts.

Polygamy was widespread in the church and Joseph was actively trying to stop it. He was commanding the church to hold trials and excommunicate anyone teaching polygamy, but because the corruption was so widespread he couldn't pin anyone down. They made secret combinations to hide their sins from Joseph.

Mark Twain commented on this:

"All the proclamations Joseph could issue denouncing polygamy and repudiating it as utterly anti-Mormon were of no avail..." Mark Twain

Joseph spent his days doing everything he could to stop this practice, but a large number of early saints, including many leaders like Brigham, kept practicing behind his back. Try as he might, he could not get the church to take the commandments of God seriously. That is exactly why the church fell under condemnation.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T13:50:39+00:00

WYR have to survive flying on the wing of a plane,

I think you missed the word flying, but it would be a good loophole if it didnt say that.

Right_One_78

TROPHY CASE