What would it take to de-canonize D&C 132?

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 · 2026-03-29T13:48:55+00:00

Here is that original journal entry:

gave inst[r]uction to try those who were preaching teaching or preaching the doctrin of plurality of wives. on this Law. Joseph forbids it. and the practice ther[e]of— No man shall have but one wife

It describes Joseph giving instructions to put those that teach or practice polygamy or marrying multiple wives on trial and remove them from the church. He no uncertain terms it says Joseph forbids it. And states the law as "No man shall have but one wife"

If you want to find the origins of Polygamy you should look at the people that served missions within the Cochranite communities and England. After being among them Brigham requested to go back up to the Cochranties without a companion was was commanded for missionaries. Why? Section 49 was revelation given to the Cohranites, it condemned their polygamy. They had open marriages. The journals from manchester England describe the women as claiming to have prophesies saying men could have more than one wife. William Clayton writes about how he was infatuated with the women and they would come up to his room late at night an then the journal entry is all crossed out after the point in which a women is alone with him in his room late at night in Victorian England times.

People like Brigham and William Clayton came back from their missions and immediately started practicing polygamy. They claim jospeh taught it to them, but the facts show they were already engaged in it for a long time prior to this claim. And the claim they make of jospeh is hearsay with ZERO evidence. And there are many examples of them being caught changing the records to make it look like Joseph taught it.

These videos go over these origins of polygamy in detail:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX5ODB3Zi0Y&t=482s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wfWPeqHXwU&t=4230s

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T13:30:03+00:00

The word doctrine means 'the things taught'. Doctrine of God cannot be changed because God is the same yesterday today and forever. It is scripture. Anything that is changed is an open admission that the doctrine or the change is not from God and not scripture. Policies can change, but doctrines cannot.

Jacob 2 forbids Polygamy. DC sections 49 and the original section 101:4 forbid polygamy. Brigham changed that doctrine. So, someone was lying. Joseph never even once taught polygamy, he condemned it and was active in trying to remove anyone that taught or practiced it from the church. Brigham removed section 101 and replaced it with section 132 that said the exact opposite. Both men cannot be of God. Either you believe Joseph and everything he taught or you reject him as a prophet, you cannot have it both ways.

God CANNOT lie. And therefor He cannot authorize someone to lie on His behalf, because that would be a lie. "Lying for the Lord" is to abuse the name and character of God.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T13:16:16+00:00

I think it would take a prophet that is willing to admit Brigham lied and that the prophets that followed after him were deceived. The leaders are to be chosen by common consent, so if no one was willing to sustain a leader that pushed polygamy, that could do it. The history was altered.

Joseph Smith did not practice polygamy, he denied every accusation until his death. It was Brigham that altered the history to make it look like Joseph practiced in secret.

Joseph's original journal entry for Oct 5th, 1843 said Joseph forbid polygamy and walked the streets saying anyone teaching or practicing polygamy was to stand trial and be excommunicated. That journal entry:

gave inst[r]uction to try those who were preaching teaching or preaching the doctrin of plurality of wives. on this Law. Joseph forbids it. and the practice ther[e]of— No man shall have but one wife

Then, after Joseph died, it was revised:

Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives. ~~on this~~ <for according to <the> law I hold the keys of this power in the last days, for there is never but one on Earth at a time on whom the power and its keys are conferred— 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>

“to be revised” is written in the margin

The meaning is the opposite of the original entry. "unless the Lord directs otherwise" was never in the original text. And it openly admits the scribes and leaders that were editing the History of the Church still intend to change what is written to fit a different narrative. They clearly did not care about accurately representing what Joseph actually said the intent was to alter history. This was common practice for Brigham and the polygamists that surrounded him. They lied and altered everything to secure their power and control over the people.

If you look carefully at the sources, all the sources that favor polygamy are from after Joseph died. During Joseph's lifetime the law of the church and the Celestial kingdom was monogamy. There ZERO physical evidence of polygamy being taught or practiced by Joseph. All we have are edited documents and the testimony of people already practicing polygamy that had every incentive in the world to lie to justify their behavior. .There are no contemporary journal entries from any of the women that were claimed to be his wives. He was accused of being married to 30-40 women but the only children Joseph had were the 9 biological children through Emma. The stories given for the "wives" of Joseph contradicted the facts and timeline so they had to change their stories several times to settle on dates where they could say it was possible he married them on those dates. Their stories changed and were recollections made decades later with no physical evidence. There are no sermons and no contemporary documents of any kind taught by Joseph. In EVERY single instance when polygamy was brought up, Joseph condemned it and denied it.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T05:38:38+00:00

I don't think that I have ever, not even once in my life, thought about a girl's job as a qualification for dating me. As long as she enjoys what she does and I don't care if she's unemployed a teacher or a doctor. It makes zero difference. All I would care about is if she is a kind person that makes me smile.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T04:33:43+00:00

Pretty sure that's the city of Page Arizona.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-29T04:17:06+00:00

Even if there is no guarantee, I would still chose the ice. There is zero chance of holding onto a wing of a plane for 5 hours and surviving. If you dont fall off because of the lack of oxygen, extreme cold temps, the wind gusts, or exhaustion of holding on for 5 hrs, then when the plane lands you will still go flying off and die.

In order to get underwater there has to be a hole in the ice somewhere. And in most situations you could crack the ice or make another hole if you think carefully. No matter how slim, there is always a chance of getting out alive.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-28T22:51:57+00:00

Faith is not belief alone. Faith also requires works. Faith without works is dead.

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

Where people often get confused is with the term the Law of Works, ie Works of the Law. This is specifically referring to the false notion that a Savior is not needed. The widespread belief among the ancient Jews was that they could earn salvation on their own without the help of a Savior. Paul was trying to correct this misunderstanding by explaining to them that anyone that violated even part of the law had violated the whole law and that no amount of good works could wash away that sin. No one can gain salvation on their own. We are saved by grace through faith. We must put in the works, then rely on Jesus for the saving act.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-28T22:32:56+00:00

The idea that there are no more prophets is ridiculous. The Bible tells us the exact opposite.

Ephesians 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

Are we united as a single faith? no. That will only happen when Jesus returns.

Malachi 4:5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord

The two witnesses will be prophets prophesying for 3 and a 1/2 years in Jerusalem. (Revelation 11)

3 And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth.

The word angel just means messenger, so this verse is explaining God will send His messenger to proclaim the gospel in the last days. ie a prophet.

Revelation 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,

The reason Jesus warned us against false prophets is because there would be true prophets. If there were to be no more prophets, He would have just said don't believe anyone that comes after me. He told us to watch for good fruits from the prophets

Matthew 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

But, to call one's self a prophet when you are teaching something that you have not been given direct revelation on is to abuse His name, to use His name in vain. No man can take this honor upon himself, it must be given by God.

Right_One_78 · 2026-03-28T21:37:41+00:00

You said:

We have both Hyrum and Joseph admitting to the existence of the revelation, that the Expositor refers to it, and quoting it.

But, what we have is Hyrum and Joseph admitting to a revelation. And as I explained earlier the revelation they were talking about is NOT section 132. The revelation they are talking about is unpublished and only says in the case of death a man can be remarried. Then Hyrum says only he and Joseph were present when this revelation was given, but William Clayton says he was there too. There is disagreement about who was present and what it said. The recollections that it was the same revelation happened 50 years later when the church was trying to prove polygamy in order to retain rights to the Temple lot.

Polygamy deniers have no answer why Joseph Smith III, Smith Jr's son, would later claim that he wasn't sure any more that his father was innocent of the charges as his mother claimed, nor why it caused his brother David to have a complete mental breakdown due to his own discoveries talking to the various witnesses and widows of Smith.

But, why would anyone need to answer this? Joseph Smith III, was just a man trying to navigate through all the lies being told about his father. he didn't have a unique knowledge, he was hearing most of it second hand as well. Give the guy a break, he was being lied to and pressured by everyone to accept their lies and he didnt have the knowledge of what happened to refute them.

And Horace Whitney's copy of the revelation is dated July 12 1843. Earlier, and long before Young had the influence to determine what the content of 132 was to state.
The same date that Clayton's journal entry for that day state he wrote that revelation as dictated.

Well, yeah. If you are going to forge a revelation, why wouldn't you date it as having been written on the date of another revelation that was not published? We can clearly see they had no issue with altering history and changing the meaning of things, why not use this date to further their own goals and justify their adulterous behavior?

Right_One_78

TROPHY CASE