The beliefs and attitudes of the RLDS/Community of Christ church are seeping into Latter-day circles. We can see this in three major areas: polygamy denial, a fallen Brigham Young, and Temples are not necessary. In this interview, you can see from the more tense portions that this would have devolved into a barking episode if I had argued a side. I wanted to let Michelle talk and clarify her position. She did that on some issues but was vague on others. I believe Michelle brings up some valid points of discussion, but ultimately, the evidence that the Lord has sanctioned polygamy from time to time, including with Joseph Smith, is overwhelming. She seems to pick and choose what to believe and what to disregard based on her framework of polygamy denial. Several stretches are made with Abraham, David, Joseph Smith, and Brigham Young. Her "spirit of deception" argument was disturbing. A square peg does not fit into a round hole. I do really appreciate Michelle coming on the show and studying things out, though I disagree with her conclusions. For those of you supporting Michelle and accusing me of deleting comments, there are three things that happen: 1) Spamming-Some of you have resorted to spamming in response to comments. I found one example where there were over 28 of the same post. TH-cam automatically blocks spamming, thank goodness. 2) As you will see in my community guidelines, links are not allowed. There is a good reason for this based on the topics we tackle here. Several posts with links from Brian Hales and Don Bradley also didn't make it through. 3) This is for you of the despicable fringe. Several posts are held by TH-cam due to vitriolic language and profanity. This was targeted at President Nelson, the church, and commenters with a couple to me. This is not Reddit! I create an open forum for thought but not for toxic content. And lastly, if you are going to preach against the church or demean President Nelson, it won't get through. That is my rule.
Greg, you have admitted yourself that you have not studied this issue out. How can you disagree with her conclusions if you haven’t put in the time and effort to try and fully understand? Even if people disagree with her final conclusion on Joseph, she has done a great job of making a historical and scriptural case against polygamy, and has shown that there are many holes in the church’s polygamy narrative.
@@Commenter2121my problem comes from the denial of the temple and Brigham Young. From study, prayer and experience, I know the Temple is of God and has been from the time of Adam and Eve. Any belief that takes away from that doesn’t fit.
@@Commenter2121 That's why I had her on the show. But I am a well-versed studied of the scriptures. It's easy for me to say that Abraham didn't commit adultery. Imagine, using the term "Abrahamic Covenant" for an adulterer. Abraham was a prophet seer and revelatory already before and sought earnestly for righteousness before he ever met Hagar. It's easy for me to believe that Brigham Young was a prophet and not a murderer or at the minimum, a lustful man "on the prowl" and initiated polygamy through lies and a "spirit of deception." It's easy for me to see why the story of David and Bathsheba represents going beyond what the Lord has sanctioned.
@@WyoCutlass71 This comment shows that you aren’t aware of her work either. Michelle has constantly encouraged people to stay in the church and explained why she stays herself. She’s also acknowledged Brighams role in the church and has shared some deeply personal spiritual experiences she’s had at the temple. She is not anti Brigham or anti temple. She’s just not afraid to call out bad behavior when she sees it, and unfortunately Brigham said and did some very troubling things. Would you condemn Hugh B Brown for standing up against church leaders on the priesthood ban? Joseph Fielding Smith and Ezra Taft Benson made some horrific statements about our black brothers and sisters, luckily others had the courage to push back.
Between this, gay marriage, gender confusion, malevolent compassion, etc, it's no wonder president Nelson prophesied that “In coming days, it will not be possible to survive spiritually without the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost.” It's interesting to me how quickly the prophetic nature of that statement is being revealed. But he also did say to not delay, that time is running out.
So true! I see this happening too. Satans deceptions are so creative and calculating. I’m certain we will see more of them. I’ve got a warry eye out for AI
@@psmith535 Rock in a hat WAS NEVER a thing, but somehow dodo birds just love it. Joseph had the real deal urim and thumim, came with the plates. Then president dodo shows us the hat... brilliant. And recommends the jab with his BLACK mask on, More brilliance.
I love how the Virgin birth, the command for Abraham to sacrifice his son doesn't phase the average believer. But stuff like this becomes a stumbling block, why, because the impacts what the listener wants for themselves. If we listen to total selflessness, it would not impact us. We would trust that this and many other things that we would have a hard time understanding would work out with a loving God. I find it baffling that many people are not outraged with the idea that in other churches there is a belief, that people who lived and died without knowing the Savior just automatically go to hell. That should outrage people but often doesn't. But will get outraged at this. Human genius never ceases to amaze.
If your neighbor holding a position that conveys the right to speak to you for God we’re to tell you that you should kill your spouse would you at least need to think about it?
@@Kait272 I think you’re missing the point being made. The fact that he was commanded in the first place and got very near to actually following through _even though he was loath to do so_ should make you uncomfortable. If God told you to sacrifice your miracle child, you’d be pretty upset, too.
The Virgin birth isn't a good example to support your argument. It doesn't violate the laws of God that are specifically stated in scripture like polygamy does. Yes, there are examples of polygamy (e.g. Abraham) but if you carefully read the account of Abraham it was not something God commanded him to do. It was an idea that his wife came up with and she regretted it quite quickly and it brought a lot of discord and unrighteous in the family. Your example of Abraham being commanded to offer up Isaac is probably a better example along the lines of polygamy. However, if you think about this example, it also doesn't fit. This was a test and it ultimately pointed Abraham's heart to God the Father and the sacrifice that He would make of His Only Begotten. However, Abraham was not permitted to carry it out but we are to believe that polygamy is similar to this example even though polygamy was permitted to be carried out?
I'm in the camp that believes Joseph was not a polygamist. I feel like you can't PROVE Joseph was or was not practicing polygamy. But, I do think the bulk of the evidence, combined with reason and logic, support that he was not. In no particular order. 1. There are no known children from any women other than Emma. 2. Joseph's verifiable, contemporary statements opposed polygamy. Condemned polygamy. 3. The Book of Mormon (Jacob 2:24) clearly condemns what was done by David and Solomon having many wives as an abomination. D&C 132:38-39 is in direct conflict with what is said in the Book of Mormon stating that David and Solomon were given their multiple wives by God. 4. The original D&C 101 specifically addressed the issue, the accusation, of polygamy being leveled at the Church. That section says one man and one woman only while either are living. No additional wives or husbands while married to another. 5. Brigham and Emma were at odds. Emma maintained that Joseph never had any other woman. Brigham, in the 36th Semi-Annual Conference of the Church, Oct 1866, said, among other things, that, "Emma Smith is one of the damnedest liars I know of on this earth". He continued, accusing her of attempting to murder Joseph twice by poisoning him. Does this make sense? Does this seem consistent with the love letters and affection that was known to have existed between them? Or, does it make more sense that Emma knew Brigham better than any of us today know Brigham and that she knew he was up to no good. Brigham had to discredit Emma in front of his followers without discrediting Joseph. 6. What my heart tells me. I have done a lot of praying and soul searching on this. I might be wrong in my conclusions, but I feel in my heart and in my mind, based on the available information and my prayers, that Polygamy is not, and was not, from God.
@@BrianTerrill this is a weak response. For decades the smoking gun that “proved” JS polygamy was the claims of Sylvia sessions and Josephine Lyon. We know know via DNA Joseph was not the father. Huh.
@@KimballCodygreat point plus that darn High Council meeting in 1843 that has the attendees noting in their journals exact lines we read in section 132. Michelle is just not being honest with all the facts. She had an agenda and gets her reward nevertheless.
@@EKowallis I'm not against either one of them. I'm just tired of all the contention. Polygamy is such a difficult topic and i think there is... truth on both sides.
@@EKowallis Contention is born in anger and/or vanity. You are right that contending with things, true or not in friendly conversation is not contention. :>)
I am 65 years old, came of age in the 70’s. My dad was heavily engrossed in the controversy of blacks and the priesthood, on the side of getting rid of the ban and spoke openly against the practice. He told stories about how the subject nearly tore our ward apart. Lived in Granger, Utah. He, along with others that agree with him, was called deceived and an apostate, and treated very much the way Michelle is treated today. Most people were not willing to consider any other point of view. Then one day in June of 1978, he was no longer an apostate but there were still a lot of hard feelings and my family moved shortly after that. I wonder how many people commenting here has actually looked up any pieces of evidence that Michelle has offered and actually read for yourselves what Joseph wrote and said. So much is there for all to see in the Joseph Smith papers online for free. I agree that there are many things open for interpretation but Michelle’s evidence is as solid as any of the evidence provided on the other side of the issue. More compelling in my opinion having actually looked up and verified the evidence. But ya’ll can just wait for the prophet, apostles, and academics to do your thinking for you. But God works through the weak, simple and humble. And the phrase “every accredited historian agrees…” is just so pharisaical.
The Problem with you argument is that the women themselves bore a consistent testimony that they were married and sealed to Joseph Smith. These were women of honor and integrity who sacrificed so much to the lay the foundations of the Restoration. Our scriptural canon supports plural marriage. Section 132 is a revelation from God on the the authorized practice of plural marriage. In fact sexton 131 is the revelation is that have the most provenance. Moses denied the Priesthood to the entire house of Israel except for the sons of Aaron. Jesus Christ denied baptism while he was alive to anyone who was not a Jew. Those who entered into plural marriage do so by the authorization of Joseph Smith.
True. On top of that, the belief that Joseph did or did not practice polygamy is not going to save you one way or the other. It probably wont have much eternal significance at all in the end.... But some of her other views will have greater eternal significance for those who believe them. Like believing that the temple ordinance as we have it is not fully acceptable to God. Or her views on the priesthood. She seems to think that the fullness of the priesthood was received by Joseph and then taken away from the saints shortly after. She has also concluded that Brigham Young was psychopathic and insinuated that he might have been behind the destruction of the Nauvoo Temple. She often perpetuates the belief that the church leaders are lying to its members... and the list goes on. I do not think that she is an evil human but she is certainly not a prophetess as many now call her. I would be extremely weary of her views. It is not necessarily apostate to believe Joseph Smith didn't practice polygamy, but some of the other views she promotes are actually apostate. At some point she will be forced to chose between her teachings and the churches. And all those who follow her will have to make that same decision as well.
@@Kait272 unfortunately, you are one the deceived. Your biased and twisted comments are partially responsible for helping Michelle Stone deceive and divide the saints. You’re gonna be in for a rude awakening if you keep promoting and supporting everything Michelle does and says.
Thank you, Greg, for having Michelle on! She has done so much research on this! When I read Jacob's sermon even way back on my mission, it is so plain that polygamy is an abomination, a whoredom and a grosser crime. God wouldn't be OK and then not OK with changing doctrine. God speaks plainly and is unchanging. This now makes so much sense to me and speaks to my heart.
Are you still LDS? I’m so THANKFUL to believe neither. Each side makes God, Jesus, Joseph Smith, or the current LDS church and prophets A-holes. I am so so relieved and at peace to belief none of it. Such a heartbreak to be in between this entire mess.
Thanks, Greg, for having Michelle on. It's always good to hear people speak for themselves rather than what other people say about them. We need to be humble and willing to listen to both sides and to sincerely study it out for ourselves without assuming we already have all the answers.
See my original post. Michelle does not invite discussion from both sides. It would be wonderful if Michelle invited someone who doesn't share her belief on this topic on her channel to have an open discussion. Instead, comments that do not support her narrative are being deleted.
@@McKenzieLewis-t5h Please post the title of the episode(s) where a guest who does not share Michelle's views was invited to join in an open discussion.
@@ShelleyFrost-c4z In addition to the above mentioned, episodes 123 and 124 are with polygamist Benjamin Shaffer. She has been engaging with both sides as often as the polygamy side is willing to engage. Edit: also just fyi about disappearing comments, TH-cam comments go poof somewhat regularly. I’ve noticed if I have a link or even copy and paste, those comments tend to disappear.
If we can believe Joseph lied to protect the Church, why can't we believe that Brigham did the same? He made earlier statements that he introduced polygamy, not Joseph. Later, due to the persecutions over polygamy they needed to frame it as a Joseph doctrine because the Democrats told them it would make a stronger constitutional case. They lied later on to save the Church. Same argument. Same logic. It doesn't have to hurt belief in the modern Church.
@@PeterBrownscouts Well, yeah. The VAST majority of the “proof” that he was a polygamist just “happened” to show up just in time for the temple plot case, conveniently enough. Most apologists don’t have any idea what that is or why it matters. Well…it represents a motive for deception and mainstreaming polygamy by slandering Joseph, doesn’t it?
AMEN! We already have cleansed the Adam God doctrine Brigham put in the temple; And we already are cleansing the Church of the slavery and the Priesthood ban. We have already removed many things from the temple ceremony counter to The Book of Mormon. And it did not end The Church. God suffers mistakes of the past as he pointed out in Jacob 2-3 when he condemned the people of old for their practice of what HE called, the "ABOMINATION" and WHOREDOM" of polygamy.
Thank you Greg for allowing Michelle to speak! I may be one of the few members of the LDS church who rejects polygamy but remains active in church, I hold a calling, I attend the temple as often as I can (I love the temple!!!) I believe Russell M. Nelson is a prophet. I sustain the 12 apostles and I’m looking forward to listening to the messages this conference weekend. I believe the best sources for truth on the topic of polygamy are the Book of Mormon and what Joseph and Hyrum had to say about it. I feel the same way about polygamy as I do about the priesthood ban… we got it wrong! Let us repent and move on!
You're not alone! Most of us reject polygamy in our hearts but hold onto it for fear of what it might mean about our leaders and our faith tradition. But fear and love cannot coexist. We must choose one or the other
@@justinbarnum6442 trust me you are not one of the few. There are way more who believe this but are silent because of the attacks they’d receive. At least half the church believes polygamy was false.
Greg, I appreciate your willingness to engage with good faith actors who have a different perspective or your outright disagree with. While there were some moments that the both of you got emotional (it's a very emotional topic), you both handled it well.
One thing that people don't clarify enough is dynastic sealings. A lot of people equate sealing with marriage, but a large part of the confusion is the fact the Joseph was practicing dynastic sealings, the same as one person might be sealed to their parents to create a "web" of the exalting ordinance. Not marriage!
@christhompson2034 I was taught this years ago. Sealing for exaltation. Then, as I understand it, it was clarified that they are sealed to their own spouse, not the prophet, and corrections were made for married women to be sealed to their own husband's, or single sisters when they eventually got married.
Thanks for the conversation. I appreciate your good questions... and your and Michelle's respectful manners. Please do some more. I appreciate Michelle's ability to articulate such substantive responses and her encyclopedic knowledge gained by her incomparable research. I would encourage everyone to honestly consider the findings and evidences she, Jeremy Hoop, Rob Fotheringham and others are faithfully bringing to light. A mountain of issues. Let's just find the truth... And love, honor and obey our merciful Father and his Son.
Whitney Horning also wrote to great books and the Prices as well. There is a lot of scholarship and how is it that historians are so disinterested in all the documents that have come to light, with the publishing of the Joseph Smith Papers? Why is the Church inviting people to write books? Much of this information had not been available. Now it is. What is the threat? The truth will prevail unless we censor and threaten people with excommunication if they discover documents that go counter to the Church Historians preconceived narrative...
When I went to the Lord in prayer many years ago, asking about polygamy, the answer I received was to read what Joseph said about it. Everything in the church materials said that he supported polygamy. It wasn’t until two years ago that I learned that Brigham Young supervised the revision of Joseph’s words, condemning polygamy, to say the exact opposite. Joseph condemned polygamy at every opportunity. I have collected 13 instances showcasing this, although a 14th just emerged last week when Joseph’s copy of the BOM was shown publicly (Thanks Jeremy Hoop) and he wrote in the margins of Jacob 2 “one wife”. Thanks to the Joseph Smith Papers Project, I can now find the original documents and read for myself what Joseph and Hyrum consistently taught. Honestly, it is a lot to process through and like Michelle, I don’t have all of the answers about the temple or the LDS Church leadership, but I am grateful for the answer to a heart felt prayer. I now stand with Joseph, Hyrum, and Emma. God help us all!!!
@@nadingos Well said! The church shouldn’t…but obviously WILL…ignore this. They dismiss these concerns as people “losing their faith” or being “lazy learners”…SO unbelievably condescending. They preach repentance, but as a church and as a literal matter of policy (according to Oaks), refuse to.
Just like the priesthood and temple ban were reversed I have hope that the church’s stance will change on this as well. The church has so many scholars, let alone the Joseph Smith Papers Project. I think it will inevitable, with scholarship, that the church’s historical stance on this will change.
@@brianbrown2237 Agree. Although it will definitely rattle the members and require a great deal of humility and repentance. Truth is worth it! Let’s submit to this cleansing process, because on the other side of it is greater light and truth.
It is so sad that you think the Church and its first seven prophets were evil for 100 years. But somehow, it can be "reformed" after 125 years. People say "the Lord will never allow the prophet to lead us astray"? How about Brigham Young, John Taylor, Joseph F Smith, ... Heber J Grant? They were all wrong, evil masterminds. But somehow, God, chose to straighten out His Church 20 prophets later? That is absurd.
Great interview and allowing your guest to talk. Thank you also for your honest pushback while still being respectful to someone we obviously disagree with.
Several years ago I read the book Putting on Christ and felt very compelled to seek the face of Christ. I spent a lot of time in the scriptures, the temple and in prayer. In asking God what he wanted me learn polygamy kept coming up. I had been fine with polygamy, wasn't excited to practice it, but had excepted it. So finally I started a very long and intense study of it and was very shocked at what I learned. I had assumed God wanted me to study it because he was going to bring it back. What I learned was the exact opposite. I no longer believe God ever commanded anyone to ever practice it and I no longer believe Joseph Smith ever practiced it. I had a very strong witness in the temple and also had a very special dream with Joseph and Emma explaining that they need to be exonerated! I'm still and active temple going member. My testimony is actually stronger!
@@BridgeBuilder-x4c Wow! I love that. None of God's children are an object to Him. If men were to put the shoe on the other foot, and consider the possibility that righteous women who have gone through life in a mostly subservient and often beaten down status to men throughout almost all of human history, that for their suffering they will be exalted in the next life and be blessed and glorified by having the privilege to be sealed to multiple men, and men will have the honor of serving with one wife among many of her other husbands …then that might not seem so exalted for men who believe in polygamy. [One of the reasons I try to treat my wife as nicely as I know how to (and she says I’ve gotten better over the years). I’m just trying to hedge my bet to make sure that she’ll want to be with me in the next life.]
Thank you for sharing this! Heavenly Father has also answered my question about polygamy…years ago. It has made it so much easier for me to totally embrace Heavenly Father and His guidance in my life
@@tennisgirl57 why would all 12 boys of Israel be under the covenant if polygamy wasn’t valid, only Leah‘s sons would be under the covenant. Also, how could you trust the temple ceremony if you don’t if you think from Brigam on they were lying. Also, you have to answer about Fannie Alger. All real historians say that Joseph practice polygamy and there is a lot of evidence.
We have dozens of recorded contemporary instances of Joseph, Emma and Hyrum denying, condemning and fighting against polygamy. I believe Joseph was honest.
Is it possible in your view that they condemned and fought against the unauthorized use of plural marriage, but not the authorized use? And if they believed God commanded it, it was not only okay but necessary?
What a tremendous interview! Thanks Greg, for lending your platform to a consideration of Truth on tough and precarious subjests. Michelle, thanks for your level-headedness, courage and boldness! I very much enjoyed the prductive coversation!
@@jaredshipp9207 "Evening at home and walked up and down the street with my scribe. Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives. On this, Joseph forbids it and the practice thereof. No man shall have but one wife." Joseph Smith, 5 October 1843
@@HistoricalMonogamyDoctrine "if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else. If he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified. But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment" God, July 12, 1843, as recorded in D&C 132
It doesn't matter what they did in the past, The Book of Mormon is for our day and God has explicitly given the command to have one wife and concubines ye shall have none. And God via Jacob, "Thus saith the Lord" has addressed the ancient practices of old, "26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.". Jacob 2:26. So any of the old people if their gross criminal practices of many wives are not the product of the great and abominable church of the devil getting hold of the record before spreading it throughout the nations is a moot point, God doesn't want it happening!
@Wh3nth3wick3drul3 the Great and Abominable church was created after the time of Christ if we actually want to follow the proper text of the Book of Mormon. 1 Nephi 13:4 shows it was created by the Gentiles. Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, and Solomon were not Gentiles. But even though you made an emotional pitch that distorted scripture, you got 18 likes
What Michelle says about a woman not giving her whole heart to her husband because she is afraid she will have to share him later. I have struggled immensely with this throughout an otherwise very happy marriage.
Jojo, my heart goes out to you having such a worry. One thing I've learned in life is that we sometimes unintentionally create our own misery through our own worries. I've done it. And in my case it's destroyed marriages. Just know that the power is in you to free yourself from this. It's not the doctrine/practice, it's the way you view it and deal with it. If I were to suggest a book, I would suggest 'the mindful path to self-compassion' by Christopher Germer. The first half of that book was eye-opening to me to understand how we create our own misery with what we ruminate on.
@@charinabottae Generally, I agree with your statement. However regarding polygamy, this is just another “your feelings are the problem, not the doctrine” statement, which is completely false. The doctrine and practice of polygamy itself is destructive. That has been thoroughly researched and proven across time.
“Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away…and it [this law] shall be with him…all the days of his life;…that he turn not aside from the [this] commandment” [JST Deut. 17: 14-20]. The “one wife” law!
thank you for such a candid, real, raw exchange. I thank both of you!!!! I love the temple and feel such great feelings there! I ask God's blessings on both of you!
Greg, I really appreciate you being brave enough to have Michelle on. She's probably studied this topic more than about anyone else at this point. I do get that it's really heavy and kind of a red pill but Michelle has volumes and volumes more of information that leads to her beliefs on this subject. I do appreciate the common ground you guys both found where it's acknowledged that polygamy would be hard and a lot of us men wouldn't want it.
@@ancientcosmicclock she has cherry picked her sources. She spins every point to fit the narrative she wants, and puts her own spin over the revelation to the prophets seers and revelators. She contorts the plain and simple wording of Jacob 2:30, as interpreted by Prophets, to mean something completely different.
@g71816 haven't both sides cherry picked? If we are honest, there are a lot of contradicting accounts and narratives in regards to polygamy. If you take every first-hand account of Joseph, talks, unedited journal entries, his personal notes in his BoM, all of it, are not for polygamy but anti-polygamy. She's one of the voices defending Joseph, and not labeling him a liar. The anti-mormons are picking the church apart on this subject, and waves of people are leaving over this, because they think Joseph was dishonest, and calling him a pedophile. Can't you see that she's defending him? What do you suggest she do?
@@g71816 Sorry but that accusation does not hold water. Michelle has sought to address every piece of evidence out there. She has also come forward with a boatload of new, very credible evidence and oddly is being snubbed. It is Jacob 1-3 that is being chopped up and misrepresented. And the evidence is, you cherrypicked one verse out of a very plain and simple talk, the words of which were the Lords own to Jacob. Quit wresting the scriptures to support a house of cards narrative. Thank you.
@@ancientcosmicclock Michelle has invited anyone on her show to present any missing evidence. So if you want to accuse her of cherrypicking, come on her show and bring your stuff.
Why did the LDS Church change this word, “fathers”? Are you aware that Jacob 3:5 says: "for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father” (singular) [It should say "fathers" (plural) but the LDS Church removed “fathers” in the 1981 Printing going forward] “-that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none,” [In the 1835 Book of Mormon it says "Fathers" because the commandment to have only one wife was the commandment going all the way back to Adam and Eve and forward to this present day, [all the fathers]. All past, present, and future generations are to have one wife]. This has always been the law of God in a marriage relationship. (Book of Mormon | Jacob 1-3)!
If polygamy was bad since the days of Adam that would mean Abraham was a sinner and committing sin and this verse cannot be true: "5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws." (Genesis 26:5)
@Hmcc0712 your answer contrifmdicts what the scriptures and God say. You just made that answer up. And for the record, Abraham had his name changed while he was still a practicing polygamist and "culturally" the people were practicing Sodomy and yet God befriended, appeared to and blest a polygamist but destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah. Your ownswer is totally wrong, and a strong reason I reject Evangelical Christianty. Those made up answers are common for them.
Another fantastic video! Thank you! I don't agree with her conclusions, but I'm glad to be able to hear her thoughts and research. Glad you did this interview.
Knowing how controversial this topic is, thanks for having Michelle on and respectfully letting her talk. She has compelling new evidence, and evidence that has been ignored that Joseph Smith was not a polygamist. Thank you for facilitating the important conversation and not censoring someone you may not agree with.
@@BridgeBuilder-x4c thank you! I really appreciate this. Being able to have a difference of opinion while having a civil conversation and respecting one another even after disagreeing. Building Zion… we are supposed to love those that are different than ourselves. That’s much more than tolerating. If we can’t even listen and respect, then how can we ever expect to love and care?
We should encourage everyone to be accurate and respectful of 132. We should all use the language of the doctrine as stated in Section 132, it is the doctrine of many wives and concubines.
Love that! And all us women can start pondering whether heaven is funner as a concubine or a plural wife.... Seriously 132 is that ridiculous. That magically appeared 8 years after Josephs martyrdom. Read the Deseret news Sept 1852, the August conference. A real eye opener.
I for one choose to believe Joseph. Everything I know about him reveals him as a moral, righteous, and honest man. If God commanded him to practice polygamy, he wouldn’t have denied it, let alone go slinking around behind his wife’s back for trysts with teenage girls and married women. He would have proclaimed it openly just like he did the First Vision. Remember what he said about that: “I had actually seen a light, and in the midst of that light I saw two Personages, and they did in reality speak to me; and though I was hated and persecuted for saying that I had seen a vision, yet it was true; and while they were persecuting me, reviling me, and speaking all manner of evil against me falsely for so saying, I was led to say in my heart: Why persecute me for telling the truth? I have actually seen a vision; and who am I that I can withstand God, or why does the world think to make me deny what I have actually seen? For I had seen a vision; I knew it, and I knew that God knew it, and I could not deny it, neither dared I do it; at least I knew that by so doing I would offend God, and come under condemnation.” How do you reconcile his declaration on the first vision with the claims of his cowardice, lies, and of sneaking behind Emm’a back when it comes to practicing polygamy? It doesn’t fit with his character. He wasn’t a coward or a hypocrite, and the certainly wasn’t a liar. He tried to root out polygamy wherever he found it in the church, even excommunicating those who practiced it. It would make him a hypocrite as well as a liar to do this if he was practicing it privately. Michelle, has done considerable research on this topic of polygamy. She goes to the original source documents and has a solid understanding of this period of church history. I am saddened and dismayed at the hateful comments that are pointed at her. In my opinion it doesn’t show LDS members in a good light. It is amazing to me how people who proclaim to follow Jesus, can be so hateful and vengeful.
It’s pretty apparent that Michelle has done considerable research but intentionally avoids the data that directly invalidates her claims. But I’m really happy she was on. We need these bad ideas exposed.
Thank you for that. Yes I agree on the Prophet Joseph Smith. We just don't like talking about him in the church. After trying to stomach these two for a few moments, the scripture came to mind..."ye shall have no disputations among you"....and this "interview" was more like Jerry Springer than any true doctrine and definitely DID NOT bring any spirit of truth or light by either one of them. "Itching ears" come to mind. What does this have to do with anything in our current lives moving forward? Nothing. Just fodder for the spiritually weak. No winner here, just discontent.
@@ca417pc9I’ve watched many of her videos. She doesn’t discount any evidence. She not only shows the evidence, but finds out what was happening historically at that time. One of the fascinating episodes to me was on the Whitney letter, which those who claim that Joseph practiced and taught polygamy point to as THE smoking gun. She retraced Joseph’s and Emma’s steps on the days preceding the letter and put it in context of what was going on at the time.
@@ca417pc9 Michelle was answering the questions Greg asked. If she is missing anything she has invited anyone on her podcast to engage. I have studied Brian Hales work, his best arguments and frankly it has been debunked on excellent scholarship. If you want to talk cherry picking, how come no one on the monogomy denier side is talking about the document called, "The Voice of Innocence?" Look up the transcript. It condemns every possible rendition of polygamy. This was voted on and accepted by the entire body of the Church in April of 1844, approx 2 months before the martyrdom. Joseph Smith presided, his voice was giving him issues so Phelps read it. The Joseph Smith papers won't include it in that portion of the papers. But Sidney Rigby is recorded to have commented that happened and the 2 AMENS to it are both recorded on those conference papers. Instead, The Church historians file it in 2 other places. One in the Relief Society minutes, and they imply Emma is the engine but the paperwork does not support their misleading narrative. Emma had it posted in the paper as was customary for Church policy. The 1844 printing of the D&C had been paused. Considering this was Joseph Smith's process and what we know he was doing to fight polygamy at the time--it is not a high leap to assume he had planned to insert this document to fortify the Lord's law of marriage, monogamy, in the D&C. But He was arrested and the presses did not resume until after the martyrdom. And oddly, it was not inserted but other items were. Ask Brian Hales why he ignores this document....
I can't remember how i know her but it may be through homeschool. Lived almost half my life in Lehi so if she's from that area i could've met her then. I did have a polygamist man take me to lunch to meet his wife and three kids and i really was so naive i had no idea what was going on until he asked me if i would join his family. He said his kids and wife had agreed to it already. His wife just looked at me. She seemed so sad and just.... Accepting? Like she was just accepting it as a real thing she'd make herself learn to live with or something. I thought for sure she'd get upset at her husband or me or that she'd laugh off the "joke", but when i realized they were so serious and that the three little kids looked so hopeful and excited about me being in their family i froze. I told him i didn't know because, well, i froze in complete shock. He apologized and we all left our separate ways. Later i overheard him talking about me and my body with his co-worker and was shocked and flat out disgusted. My old boyfriend was working there on a different project and yelled at him and threatened him to never talk like that about me again. He got mad at me for not standing up for myself. He was right. I should have. But like i said i was just in shock and dumbfounded and really embarrassed. I was his boss's boss, too, so it was serious.
my biggest issue with this whole argument is she sayin that polygamy was never of God... what on earth is she talking about, have you read 1Samuel? Have you read how Hannah was blessed in spite of her being in a polygamist relationship? Jacob being a polygamist saw the face of God and was called Israel in spite of him having 4 wives, if Polygamy was so bad why then did God bless these polygamist? I have my issues with the practice but the truth is, without it, we would not have a religion period. Hell, Jesus himself would not have a religion to be born into, after all, was not Joseph the descendent of Juda?... A product of polygamy? This woman is off the rails, DnC 50 people, that's all I'm going to say, and there are a LOT of people being deceived now adays.
Why don’t you watch the dozens of videos and papers written about this topic before just throwing out a blanket statement on this statement/question? People have done and are doing their own research as they have decided to STOP just believing the narrative they have been told. 🙄
@@tinariches6690 i have been watching her and following this story for some time time and she along with all the others that are saying that polygamy was not of God are full of it, thats why i speak with boldness. She along with the rest of polygamist deniers have zero authority first of all and are coming up with there own doctrines. We are LDS, not protestants, we believe in revelation not sola scriptura, and lastly, by there fruits ye shall know them. And what has been the fruits of denying polygamy? look no further the RLDS.
@@akpred sister that is a cop out, you dont get to see the face of God if you are in such terrible sin, hell you dont get to go to the temple like hannah did if you are living in sin. I understand that Grace is always there, but polygamy has played a vital role in the abrahamic traditions, and to say is not of God? That does not even make sense. This is why Joseph asked God the quesiton in the first place, thats why God told Joseph to prepare his heart. Jews oficially stoped practicing polygamy 1,000 AD... I mean its in the old testament, its part of the law of moses. I'm sorry but no shes wrong.
I saw a short of one of these polygamy deniers. He said the way you know the “truth” was taught to him. He said to take off your garments and then pray about it. Sounds like a perfect recipe to be deceived! For me, evidence that she has been deceived includes her inability to finish any of his counter arguments to its logical conclusion, the chaotic method in which she presents her arguments, bouncing from one to the other evidence when one is challenged, and her attacking the absolute wrong part of Greg’s counter arguments, blowing up portions that have nothing to do with his point. She is all chaos and confusion. That is not the Spirit. I myself tend to be chaotic, but when I have the Spirit of the Lord with me and it is necessary to do so, I can make concise and direct points that make perfect sense. It’s a fruit of the Spirit.
How about read the book of Mormon? Jacob 2:24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
The moment you start to take an objective look at the source documents, provennonce, and motivations, it becomes clear... Joseph, Hyrum, and Emma told the truth. Joseph always fought polygamy. Joseph was in alignment with Christs view on the matter as releaved in Jacob 2. But ultimately, the full knowledge comes by confirmation of the spirit as Moroni teaches. "By the power of the Holy Ghost, ye may know the truth of all things."
Absolutely spot on. Before I had even heard of Michelle Stone the voice of the Spirit gently revealed to me that polygyny/polygamy could not possibly be the eternal order of heaven and therefore is not a celestial principle. I was not even studying polygamy at the time. But in being tutored by the Spirit of Truth about other eternal principles, this truth was manifested so very clearly. Michelle is just the cherry on top to confirm what I already know.
@oshemer5066 I would believe what the Holy Ghost tells you after sincerely studying it out and praying in humility, sincerely seeking to know the will of the Lord no matter the cost. This is the only way to know anything for certain. Best wishes ❤️
Read 132 out loud all the way through with your spouse. Ask each other how you feel. Dont rely on others, it will be very clear. Not from god. Not a hard test. @@oshemer5066
@@oshemer5066 Joseph said himself, “some revelations are from God, some are from man and some are from devils.” I had a dark spirit try to move in me to persuade me to believe that Adam was God the father. When the scriptures are so clear (minus 132), I don’t think you need the spirit to confirm anything. Hold to the rod, not the arm of flesh.
Hagar absolutely was a slave. See Galatians 4:22-23 22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
Correct. Hagar and her son mocked Isaac and Sarah. Sarah was within her legal and spiritual rights. In the matrilineal patriarchy, it was Sarah's duty, authority and responsibility to birth, select and train up the next patriarch. It was not Abraham's right. This is also why Rebecca chose Jacob over Esau. There was no deception. It was her God given choice.
Just starting but I want to say that I really appreciate and respect you, Greg, for having Michelle on to explain her views herself. If men having many wives and concubines is part of the gospel of Jesus Christ, we each need to embrace it and defend it with everything we’ve got. If it isn’t, we must change our minds. It will be much better for us all if we get aligned with God’s view of this doctrine before standing before God ourselves.
I agree with this, 100%. This is a difficult issue at best. I don't think either side of the debate is slam dunk, and I wish we could discuss this with that understanding. Neither side is without evidence, so we should all come to the table with a willingness to sift through and assess the credibility of the various bits of evidence.
@@OmahaAreaLoya Yes, you really can find enough evidence on both sides to justify a choice of belief. Just like believing in a higher power or atheism, the golden rule or the survival of the fittest. I strongly believe this is intentional on God’s part. What kind of world and heaven do we want? If we could choose, would we choose this?
@@gwendolynwyne please do a response video- I’m dying over the false assumptions and that those who haven’t even really looked into this just dismiss it saying it can’t be true and is just an emotional response to not wanting polygamy.
@@gwendolynwyne completely. This “doctrine of many wives and concubines” needs to be investigated with both being possible. Especially considering Joseph Smiths own words. I have believed both ways and I am very at peace now with the way God has shown to me. It is in line with the scriptures.
She makes a lot of good points, as a widow I can relate as I have struggled with the handbook thankful for President Nelson encouraging us to study Priesthood and living up to our privileges
Brigham lied about Emma trying to kill Joseph, he lied about Oliver Cowdrey being a polygamist, he lied about Joseph saying that Hyrum would lead the church to hell, he lied about Emma conspiring with the mob to kill Joseph. I’m sure Greg would agree that these are lies. But lie about polygamy? No way, that’s just not possible….
@@knelson3326 That’s the attitude that is dangerous. It’s one thing to sustain leaders and follow their council when they lead in righteousness. It’s quite another to blindly obey and live in fear rather than speak out when you see a problem. I hope you don’t feel like you can’t think for yourself.
@@Commenter2121 The only thing I fear is your spiritual well-being. The point of sustaining is to forgive our leaders’ weaknesses. I don’t follow blindly, but doing so would be better than accusing them like Lucifer.
The daughter of Don Carlos didn't believe polygamy was of God. She wrote letter trying to convince her cousin Joseph F Smith that it was wrong. At 1:32
@@jacbox3889Why did the Lord provide for it in the Law of Moses then? Why didn’t Jesus nor any of his apostles in the New Testament ever condemn it? The Lord revealed to Joseph Smith that plural marriage is part of His law and part of the New and Everlasting Covenant.
@@oshemer5066 JACOB 1-3 and Jeremiah 23 will answer your question I think. Here is the LORD speaking through JACOB, condemning past, present and future polygamy: 1:17 Wherefore I, Jacob, gave unto them these words as I taught them in the temple, having FIRST OBTAINED MY ERRAND FROM THE LORD. 2:2...I come up into the temple this day that I might declare unto you the word of God. 22:5...know that by the help of the all powerful creator of heaven and earth I can tell you concerning your thoughts... 2:9...strict commandments which I have receive from God... 2:10...I must do according to the strict commands of God, and tell you concerning your wickedness and abominations....and under the piercing eye of the Almighty God. 2:11...I must tell you the truth according to the plainness of the word of God. For behold, as I inquired of the Lord, THUS CAME THE WORD UNTO ME SAYING: "Jacob, get thou up into the temple on the morrow, and declare the word of which I SHALL GIVE THEE...2:12 ...this is the word which I declare unto you...2:23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. for BEHOLD< THIS SAITH THE LORD: "This people begin to wax in iniquity; THEY UNDERSTAND NOT THE SCRIPTURES, FOR THE SEEK TO EXCUSE THEMSELVES IN COMMITTING WHOREDOMS, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son. -----NOTE: right here people claim that Jacob was wrong and didn't have the latest light and knowledge about David, Solomon, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses. Jacob makes it CRYSTAL CLEAR IT IS THE LORD REVEALING THESE WORDS. This just highlights one of the many theological contridictions of 132.... Now I continue with the exact words the LORD GAVE TO JACOB: 2:24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable to me, SAITH THE LORD. 25 Wherefore, THUS SAITH THE LORD, I HAVE LED THIS PEOPLE FORTH OUT OF THE LAND OF JERUSALEM, BY THE POWER OF MY ARM, THAT I MIGHT RAISE UP UNTO ME A RIGHTEOUS BRANCH FROM THE FRUIT OF THE LOINS OF JOSEPH. 26 Wherefore, I THE LORD GOD WILL NOT SUFFER that this people shall do like unto them of old. ((HMM Them of old is a very encompassing net--bringing them to the new world for a fresh start to establish a RIGHTEOUS people through MONOGAMY)) 2:27 Wherefore my brethren, 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; 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." ((note--there are actually 3 commandments that are addressed in this talk: pride, not caring for the poor and desiring/obtaining any more than one wife/concubines. Elder Bednar just said in conference, The Book of Mormon is a futuristic book and written for OUR DAY. I would add, that the Lord was already condemning the Church for not heeding The book of Mormon 2 years after the organization. I think Jacob makes it clear these are the LORD GOD OF HOSTS words condemning polygamy in the past, present, future, the old world and the new world. And remember, out of the thousands of records Mormon culled, Jacob's talk condemning polygamy made the cut. Another good one is Jeremiah 23...talking about the latter days. Another is D&C section 101 in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants law on marriage and it became 109 in the 1844 version at the time of the martyrdom. It stayed in the D& C until 1876 when D&C 132 was added. Now, The Book of Mormon went through some changes under Brigham. Footnotes were added, changes to how chapters and verses, some text changes and narratives added to influence how people were to interpret the doctrines. Jacobs talk really suffers because people do not read the full talk in context and it makes it much easier to wrest or twist the doctrines. A footnote was made to cause people to stumble and interpret Jacob as saying sometimes polygamy is authorized and footnotes to the brand new D&C132. One of the beauties of scripture study is the lively way the Spirit can speak to us at different eras and times of our lives and times in the world. The narratives are restrictive and sometimes lead our study astray. Personally I wish they would remove them, and also revisit how Jacob 1-3 is chopped up. Now we get to verse 30 and people like to pluck it out of 3 chapters which were just one chapter, and remove it from its context and claim this talk actually is teaching the opposite of what it is teaching. Astonishing. Then the Lord explains WHY his law of marriage is monogamy--because it breaks the tender hearts of women and fathers lose the confidence of their children. And this plays out in every scriptural account of polygamy and there is a great deal of evidence this is how it played out in modern times and continues unfortunately to play out. I stand with Elder Bednar, lets believe The Book of Mormon. I don't assume that all the apostles support 132. President Hinckley said on national television with Larry King, and I recall my jaw dropping at the time, that he did not think polygamy was doctrinal. It really puzzled for a long time until I read about the removal of the Priesthood ban. Hope that helps.
@@BridgeBuilder-x4c president Hinckley saying it’s not doctrine can also be interpreted to mean “it’s not a current teaching (doctrine) and practice of our church. You can argue it either way pretty easily IMO.
I would absolutely defend the practice in an eternal sense. My son’s first wife passed way leaving two small boys. He was single for a few years and then remarried and consequently had three more children with his new wife. I’m so grateful for BOTH of his wives and we love them both. Heaven would not be heaven without both of them. She is deceived.
Do we "pick" what Joseph and Hyrum actually said and did, or do we "pick" what their enemies accused, or bad late recollections decades after Joseph's death alleged?
I just want to be sure I'm following the careful, balanced reasoning of those who oppose and condemn Sister Stone when she simply says she believes Joseph Smith when he ALWAYS proclaimed he condemned polygamy and never EVER practiced it. See if I've got this straight, will you Brothers Brian, Jacob, David, et al . . .? * THE LORD GAVE Joseph Smith a direct and essential commandment for human salvation (marry your babysitters ...) and then ALSO TOLD JOSEPH TO .... * .... PRACTICE this anti-Book of Mormon commandment in order to have TONS of CHILDREN beyond your relationship with Emma, without ever producing ANY other children--except for those with your wife, Emma, * .... MAKE SURE there is NOT A SINGLE contemporary JOURNAL ENTRY about ANY of those earth-shattering unions of the Lord's prophet with any of those dozens of polygamous wives--even though they each kept regular journal entries of all important events in their lives (though DECADES LATER, other leaders will round them up & "jog their memories" & have them EACH SIGN BOILERPLATE AFFIDAVITS, which the unbiased judge at the "Temple Lot Trial" will aggressively dismiss as obviously coerced FRAUDS in their failed attempt to provide the necessary legal evidence that you, Joseph Smith, ever practiced polygamy), * .... ALWAYS DENY and LIE about the new commandment of institutional adultery (whoops, "polygamy"), & loudly condemn polygamy (whoops, "institutional adultery") at every opportunity, * (because, you know, the Lord giveth no commandments unto the children of men, save he shall prepare a way for them that they may then immediately deny that commandment & repeatedly lie about ever having received it), * (and because, you know, the same guy who had the . . . courage to walk out of the Sacred Grove & announce to the entire world they must repent & follow every guideline given to him directly by God himself, word-for-word, to have any hope of salvation from hell; this same pretty tough guy by most standards, then quakes, trembles, & cowers at the prospect of some Missouri or Illinois hick walking past him & accusing him of keeping some commandment given to him directly by the Lord--with a Samurai angel making sure he is on the team) * .... AND THEREFORE ALWAYS SNEAK AROUND in the dark--behind your wife's back--when adding to your teenage (& other men's wives) harem--as commanded by the Lord, * .... AND EXCOMMUNICATE ANY OTHERS you know of who preach or practice that same polygamy, * .... AND THEN PREACH and include additional verses & sections to the DC that clearly certify that the Lord's law of marriage is strictly MONOGAMOUS, * .... AND THEN ARRANGE FOR FUTURE LEADERS (long after your death) to ERASE those monogamous verses & sections (DC 101, et al), * .... AND HAVE THOSE FUTURE LEADERS REPLACE those clear monogamy verses & sections with the most ham-fisted & carnally-toned words of DC 132, which section suddenly CELEBRATES & COMMANDS having plenty of wives & concubines in order to satisfy any of those ole natural "desires" that may arise . . . which "desires" & accumulation of desire-quenching wives now become the top priority in a (male) saint's life) * .... AND HAVE THEM INCLUDE blatantly FALSE DOCTRINES throughout that newly-forged (I mean placed ... or ... added ... or displayed ... or ...) DC section, * .... AND have them ADDRESS your beloved WIFE and faithful matriarch of the Restoration, EMMA, in the threatening, debasing, HATEFUL TONES of that document, * .... AND HAVE THOSE SAME LEADERS declare the earthly practice of polygamy "ESSENTIAL for exaltation" & "MORE IMPORTANT than BAPTISM" and declare Monogamy the enemy of morality & source of prostitution & disease, * .... AND THEREBY, with all this ammo now available, PROVIDE anti-LDS GROUPS their GREATEST WEAPON (targeting potential investigators & vulnerable members) against reading the Book of Mormon, gaining a testimony of its truth, & joining the Lord's true and restored kingdom they could ever hope for in their deepest anti-LDS dreams . . . Am I following you folks, or did I miss a few direct commandments of the Lord to his founding prophet of the Restoration ... ? And you're mad at Sister Stone for doubting such "light-and-truth-filled" doctrines & related activities? Hmmm, I think, instead of all that, I'll just go ahead & believe and sustain the Lord's founding prophet of the Restoration, the Prophet Joseph Smith, when he ALWAYS exclaimed that he condemned polygamy & was a loving and faithful husband to his dear wife, Emma, who also clearly denied that her husband ever polygamized. Sure hope my decision doesn't get y'all too riled . . . Give it a try, yourself, my friend, & see how the Lord feels about that decision. Okay?
It’s so ironic how many criticize her for speaking against the current prophet (which she is careful not to do) but yet have no problem to disparage the prophet of the final dispensation, Joseph Smith, (second only to Jesus), Hyrum and Emma to justify the abominable practice he openly condemned until his dying breath. I will err on the side of defending Joseph’s character, his loyalty to Emma and faithfulness to doing all of God’s commandments-which did not include any form of deception or betrayal. Michelle’s research and quest for truth are so well admired and needed and bring peace to a topic that does not align with who we know God and Joseph to be.
Greg looks like he’s screaming inside through this whole interview 🤣😂 Good job Greg for talking with Michelle and listening, even when it hurts. Michelle knows her stuff!!! 👏
Well, this was a lot to take in. Great job Greg, for being willing listen to Michelle's scholarship on the subject. Thanks for letting her speak and preparing great questions.
And it was admirable since it is clear you disagree. Michelle is the top scholar on Joseph Smith and polygamy. Brian reverts to name calling which I was honestly surprised to see in your opening paragraph. I thought you were on the most part respectful in the interview. And anyone can lose it a bit in a back and forth they feel passionate about. But really, the "polygamy deniers?" Not loving that political tactic. I could counter with the "monogamy deniers"--which I try not to, because we are all trying to be respectful and stick to a discussion of the facts. Quite frankly, Brian is out of date... And Don already fessed he was hired on the bias he was to prove Joseph is a polygamist....
Good interview. D&C 132 "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..." Do we seriously believe the Lord ever justifies concubines (sex slaves)? Think about that single issue and then ask yourself: seriously, the Lord says it is JUSTIFIED to have sex slaves? Great job Michelle. I invite all true seekers after more truth and light to watch the videos of Michelle, Gwendlyn, Rob, Jeremy, and Whitney. Thank you, Greg, for hosting this wonderful woman.
There is no doubt that, like portions of the Bible, (namely the Deuteronomists) D&C 132 was tampered with. And this is the perfect example. This is also why scribes (historians) are listed as hypocrites by Jesus. Our own historians have engaged in malpractice, whether intentionally or ignorantly. In section 25 Emma is an "elect lady", but by section 132, she is threatened with destruction seven times. Does that make sense?
@@avoice423 NOT SO. But even if it was so, then 132 teaches of a caste system for women in Heaven. 132 is filled with false teachings. Time to actually read it and apply Alma 32 As Greg said, he finds it DIStasteful, and not "SWEET" and DELICIOUS"
Webster defines a concubine: a woman with whom a man cohabits without being married: such as one having a recognized social status in a household below that of a wife or mistress. Oxford dictionary: ... (in polygamous societies) a woman who lives with a man but has lower status than his wife or wives. A mistress. King's College: a woman who cohabits with a man to whom she is not legally married, especially one regarded as socially or sexually subservient; mistress. (among polygamous peoples) a secondary wife, usually of inferior rank. Even if we disregard the historical definition of a concubine--which would be historical malpractice--we would have to define what is a "wife of lower status." Obviously, a concubine is not a wife of higher status. How many lower status categories could there be? Do we seriously think our Savior would ever establish a system in His Plan of Salvation for hundreds of thousands of His daughters to be consigned to be a "wife" of, 2nd, 3rd, 4th class as a member of a concubine? No, sex slave quite aptly describes a woman who is in a concubine. Eventually the LDS church leaders will disavow Brigham's polygamy doctrine, just as they have done with Adam-God, blood atonement, and the blacks holding the priesthood.
I love Michelle Stone. She has helped me find peace with how I felt God viewed me as a woman for the majority of my life. I actually feel like Heavenly Father loves me now instead of feeling like an object. Thank you Michelle for the hours upon hours of research you have done.
Words are inadequate to describe the first time I read 132 as a seminary student. It was soul crushing. I had a natural love for Heavenly Father and Jesus, and a budding passion for their words in scripture. I tried to understand what I clearly see as verbal nonsense in 132. Ask an English teacher to read this! I found some false doctrines in it, but no one ever wants to talk about it. So 132 had great dissonance for me. It was Elder Bednars talks on the teacher is no better than the student, and President Nelson's admonishment to "hear Him" where I finally felt free to trust my heart, mind, and soul that polygamy is an abomination! I appreciate the work that both sides of the polygamy discussion have done. Now it is time for Brian Hales and other historians to get caught up on the topic. I am not all about changing the Church. But my family knows that I believe Joseph, I believe the Lord and the words he gave to Jacob--that polygamy is an abomination. What has happened to Jacobs talk condemning polygamy: it gets wrested, chopped in pieces, verses pulled out to support what D & C literally calls, the Doctrine of Multiple Wives and Concubines! Funny how no one wants to talk about who gets to be the concubines--a Heavenly caste system! My testimony of my Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ have grown by leaps and bounds. I have greater love for my husband. I am now able to fully trust my heart with God. That childhood love for the Lord has been restored! Thank you Michelle!
21 Min. With all due respect, my question for Greg would be, "How close was Joseph to Joseph? How close was Emma to Joseph? How close was Hyrum to Joseph?" All three of them were clear in their contemporary, verifiable statements regarding polygamy. They said polygamy was wrong; an abomination. Yes, the reality is that there had to be someone lying. It was either Joseph, Emma and Hyrum or those who were pushing for polygamy. I believe Joseph, Emma and Hyrum.
That's such a load of crap. None of you "I believe Joseph crowd" really believe Joseph. It's not like you say, "Well l, while I don't believe Joseph instituted plural marriage, Brigham was also a prophet and had the prophetic mantle to do it." No, your immediately conclusion is that if Joseph didn't start it, it wasn't legitimate. Which shows its about the issue for you, not what Joseph did or didn't do. Each of you revisionists would throw Joseph under the bus just as fast as you have Brigham and other prophets.
@@jaredshipp9207 Name one prophet of the restoration that has anywhere near the connection to heaven that Joseph did. I believe Joseph because I believe the BOM, temple, Pearl of great Price, JST, work for the dead. I believe Joseph when he said “What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one”, because I see the fruits of his work as the fruits of Christ.
@@4rcgoodwin And that kind of faulty thinking is why we have people writing off everything from Brigham Young, eventually apostatizing and cutting themselves off from the Church, while telling themselves they are being loyal to Joseph and the Restoration.
Mosiah 11: 2 “he did not keep the commandments of God, but he did walk after the desires of his own heart. And he had many wives and concubines. And did cause his people to commit sin.” Did Brigham Young read this and believe it? NO. Listen to the Prophet Jacob: “This people [if we liken the scriptures to ourselves in these last days, what did Brigham Young do?] begin to wax in iniquity [starting with a lie]; 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” (Book of Mormon | Jacob 2:23). “Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.” (Book of Mormon | Jacob 2:24)!
@@kencard6657 He is talking of King Noah. He was wicked, and the Lord did not give him his wives and concubines. This is not comparable to Brigham Young
@@whazthatusay The Lord never gave anyone "many wives and concubines" The sleep upon our people is deep, and we must arise and awaken. We are still under condemnation for not harkening to what we have received, even the covenant of the Book of Mormon.
You forgot Jocob 2:30 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 As Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were and imho are still prophets and they were commanded of and by the Lord for His people to raise up seed unto Him, the Lord, we may now disagree with it but at the last day will not be able to deny that He, the Lord, did directly command His people via His prophets.
@@magapefarmshomestead6453 you have reading comprehension issues. But the good news is you can learn to overcome those issues. Briefly... "these things" consistently only refers to one thing in this chapter, the whoredoms and abomination of, many wives and concubines. (aka, the things they "ought not to have done") In verse 30, the preceding conditional clause - "for if I will raise up seed unto me I will command my people"--- lacks adversative markers establishing its nature to be in contrariety to what was previously stated. "Otherwise" isn't introducing a clause counter to a conditional clause adversative to the prevenient text. "Otherwise" is a conjunctive adverb, introducing an adverbial clause of condition, expressing what will happen if a certain condition is not met. It's in indicative mood. It isn't acting as an adverb modifying the verb phrase "command my people" in the apodosis of the previous clause. It's not indicating that the command is in a different manner or in antithesis. If it were, the subordinate clause "they shall hearken unto these things" would then lack a proper coordinating conjunction linking it to the previous part of sentence. Even then, it still lacks an adversative marker; "for" isn't adversative and isn't interposing something in contrariety to the previous text.
The hypocrisy of wondering how it’s possible for Joseph F Smith to have lied, while at the same time accusing the Prophet Joseph Smith of having lied about his polygamy.
When Greg says at the hour mark “I don’t want anything to do with it” shows his own soul is testifying to him how gross it is. Why say that if there is nothing wrong with it? It’s the light of Christ testifying to you.
Ether 10: 5 “Riplakish did not do that which was right in the sight of the Lord, for he did have many wives and concubines” Did those who lived polygamy read this?!
@@kencard6657 remember if there are any scriptures where someone ever practiced it, we can perform amazing mental gymnastics to prove they were exceptions so we don’t have to face the tough reality of making a mistake. Almost like we are anti repentance.
Michelle is awesome. I’m grateful for all her hard work. We should not lay polygamy at Joseph’s feet- especially when he himself publicly denounced the practice. It’s actually really cut and dry. Joseph was either a liar, a lethario and a pedophile… or he was telling the truth, and was not a polygamist. Polygamy is an abomination. Similar to other abominations BY introduced (like blacks and the priesthood, blood atonement, Adam God, etc)
It’s awesome to see Michelle on this channel. Well done. Her work is exceptional and needs to be heard. Polygamy still weighs on the hearts of women and children and should be condemned. It’s not of God as she beautifully points out. God cares about the hearts of women and children ALWAYS not sometimes with exception “when He sanctions polygamy”. Why would anyone believe that of God 😢 Praise to the truth of the Book of Mormon and Glory to God who is the great I Am ✨
Greg, I know you are catching heat for having Michelle on. I personally think it was a good choice and these are conversations that we need to have. As JSJr said (in quoting another), by proving contraries,' truth is made manifest,'. If JSJr did practice and teach polygamy, the truth is on your side and there is no need to fear the naysayers. If it isn't of God and JSJr never taught or practiced it, that will eventually be made known. Truth will prevail. I have come to learn for myself that polygamy is not a godly principle and I find a lot of Michelle's early church research to be quite insightful. I don't agree with her on many things but there are many things I do agree with her on. There is ample evidence on both sides of the argument to support your beliefs (pro- or anti-polygamy) - it really comes down to how much you dig into the original sources, read their journals and the actual words of JSJr rather than what others said he said.
I have enjoyed this episode and appreciated that you treated each other with respect. I am familiar with much of Michelles's well researched work and believe that she is indeed seeking to find truth.
No that would be eating more than one cookie but if I have a contract to distribute my cool new shoes with Walmart and another with target those are still both individual contracts between two corporate entities not one contract between three entities
LOL. If I eat one cookie , one cookie got eaten. It was a wonderful union between one man and one cookie. Especially if it's a Lemon Cream. Anti polygamy non logic is, if I eat another cookie two days later I've no longer only eaten one cookie at a time two days earlier. According to the naysayers, the moral to this story is... even if the Lord says to eat another cookie, never eat more than one cookie in your life regardless. The Scriptures cannot be broken and surely the Cookie Monster does NOT approve of your message either. BURP!! 🤢😂
“The principles of Plural Marriage were revealed for the benefit and exaltation of the children of men, but how much unhappiness has arisen through failure, on the part of some who have contracted this order of marriage, to conform to the laws that govern it! But does it arise through any defect in the order of the marriage system? O no; but from ignorance and the folly and wickedness of those individuals who enter into it, who abuse, rather than righteously obey, it. Lorenzo Snow
Are people so afraid admit that she could be right? What do you loose? I support and sustain our prophet and love this gospel but she very much could be right. Why do these men have to be perfect without any flaw when we have biblical evidence of flawed men called of God. Christ was and is the only perfect being to ever live. I have in my 40+ years tried to justify polygamy but over the past couple of years of personally looking into this THIS MAKES THE MOST SENCE! Yes it shatters some things but those things coupled with this information actually makes all of the pieces fit together. Do I think she is teaching through revelation? NO she is doing what any of us could do (and what God has asked us to do ) STUDY IT OUT! Then pray and ask. We are the main religion that teaches that and we are afraid to do it ourselves on this issue because we I think are afraid of what that means to us about Brigham Young and others. Joseph Smith was the prophet of the restoration. The church and its leaders are guides to lead us to Christ, but they are not the gospel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Beautifully said. So many people reject this idea because they think they would have to reject the church. They do not! You can reject that polygamy came from Joseph and still be a faithful believing member!
I love that only people who agree with, or are the prophetess MS, have been deemed to have studied it out. Many others have studied it out and we’ve arrived at a different conclusion. The two sides disagree, but only one side is disparaging prophets old and new and it’s not the side that disavows MS as a prophetess.
@Ehcfe Nobody said the prophets are perfect. But it should be understood that they are also not going to be able to teach and practice institutionalized adultery (as the plural marriage-denying revisionists see it) and yet retain priesthood keys. So anyone who wants to go down this revisionist road, if they are consistent, can't claim "plural marriage was never commanded of God" and yet honestly claim they believe in the Church or understood how priesthood keys work. This is precisely why coming to this revisionist conclusion, which agrees with neither scripture or history, goes so often hand in hand with apostasy. It's only been apostate sects that have pushed this idea. Now those of like mind within the Church are pushing the same falsehoods. Before they're sifted out anyway.
@@jaredshipp9207 That is plainly incorrect. Even if Brigham committed adultery it does not invalidate his keys. That is not how priesthood keys work, currently or anciently. As per the church handbook (38.2.6), unworthiness is not something that invalidates an ordinance, including ordinances that confer priesthood keys. If a stake president is excommunicated, for adultery, apostasy, or even murder, it does not invalidate any of the ordinations he performed. Otherwise, an investigation would have to be performed to discover when he became unworthy, and which ordinances and temple work would have to be redone. Alma the younger received his priesthood authority from king Noah (Msh 11:5), a man openly committing adultery and who killed Abinadi. If this does not invalidate Alma’s authority, you’ll be hard pressed to argue that Brigham’s keys would be invalidated for lying about polygamy’s origins. (Additionally, John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff were ordained by Joseph, not Brigham, so it’s a null point anyways.) Ultimately, we do not believe in a gospel of perfection. Jesus died so that we might not be condemned by the mistakes of our past. Just as God is eager to forgive us of our sins individually, even heinous ones, so too is He eager to forgive us institutionally. “Ordinances of the priesthood are valid if they are performed by authorized priesthood bearers in the prescribed manner.… The ordinance does not become invalid if someone involved is unworthy at the time he participates. The sanctity of the ordinance is violated, but not the validity. ” Rex W Allred (Melchizedek General Priesthood Committee), Liahona, March 1989
@bbbarham6264 You're confusing this with the ability to lead the Church, maintain one's prophetic mantle, and receiving continual revelation while living and teaching gross sin. Sorry, it doesn't work like that and those history revisionists who claim it does are simply trying to have their cake and eat it too. They don't have the courage of their own convictions and will attack the Church and its leaders from the inside, leading others to leave, while they themselves don't. That's what Michelle Stone is doing.
My heart is sad as I read through the comments here. As brothers and sisters can we feel the love of our Savior for one another? Can we pray for each other to find truth? Knowing whether or not God commands His children to live polygamy is very important because it is a direct reflection of the character and nature of our God. I believe that He is a God of love and He cares very deeply about the feelings of His children. Through much research and learning, I can now see in the scriptures and through sources of church history (Joseph Smith Papers) that polygamy is not a commandment from God and never has been! When I asked the Lord if Joseph practiced polygamy, I received a beautiful dream where He showed me that Joseph did not practice polygamy and he only loved Emma. I believe that the research and online sharing Michelle and others are doing is literally a manifestation of scripture that the truth is being shouted from the rooftops! The fruit of this truth is so beautiful! I am grateful for a loving God that cares deeply about the tender hearts of his daughters. 💕 If we won’t soften our hearts and open our eyes to the possibility of another narrative than this “false tradition of men” that we have been taught about polygamy, we will end up fulfilling the prophecies in the Book of Mormon that were given for us! Please don’t trust in the arm of flesh (as we are warned of in the Book of Mormon) to tell you what is true. Ask the Lord! This is my prayer for you all 🙏
Anyone that argues that Joseph didn't practice polygamy has to also argue that Joseph recieved false revelations and was likely decieved by Satan to ordain wicked men to be his quorum of apostles and lead the church who conspired to lie about polygamy and abuse women. You are basically shooting yourself in the foot and destroying Joseph's prophetic powers.
@@justinbosley692 But we don’t have to believe he was a liar and adulterer, and Brigham was above reproach. Unlike all of the general authorities and the vast majority of the church, I choose to believe Joseph, Hyrum and Emma. If, in the end, I’m wrong about their integrity? Well…then I have much bigger problems to wrestle than Joseph’s marital status.
@@justinbosley692 No. All of Joseph’s revelations on polygamy were against it’s practice…repeatedly calling it an abomination, in keeping with scripture. Joseph, very obviously, didn’t write 132. A ten year old could compare the writing in 132 to ANYTHING Joseph took down and see it’s worlds apart in difference. Repeatedly…over and over again… in private record AND in public utterances, he adamantly eschewed polygamy and threatened its proponents and practitioners with disciplinary measures.
She did not want her children to be groomed into polygamy. I don't either. All my children and grandchildren know that polygamy is an abomination. Not everyone bought into the false doctrines that lead to slavery in Utah. I can hold my own conviction to believe the Lord, that polygamy is an abomination.
@@BridgeBuilder-x4c I’m not sure about that. Joseph F Smith practiced plural marriage, and Hyrum stated that Mary Fielding sat in as proxy for his first wife’s (Jerusha) sealing to him.
@@oshemer5066 Not sure I get what you are saying. Emma did not want her children to become polygamists and that is what Brigham was practicing before they left Nauvoo. This was a big rift as well as other things. Yes, Hyrum was sealed to one woman for eternity, his first wife after her death. Mary went west with the Saints where she was left to live in horrible poverty. Mary died when Joseph F. Smith was young. Watch Michelles episode on this.
Greg, I love the episodes where you dig into politics; however, this was painful. Michelle Stone is an expert on this topic. She knows the scriptures, history, and every other detail about this crazy topic. Any other expert would present the information as if they were the expert and not be challenged by someone who doesn't have her knowledge. While it's a huge time commitment, I think it would be helpful for you to watch all her episodes, look at the references, and then ask the questions. BTW, polygamy has wrecked havoc among many men in the way Michelle described. You're fortunate to now know any of them.
Over where I live we're surrounded by them. It's so potent that the practice of it is frequently brought up. People believe it is coming back and if it is coming back (be it from God or not) we better find out for ourselves so we can defend the truth. Seeing what I've seen and knowing what I know, the Book of Mormon is right. It is a whoredom and abomination!
The Church not addressing the polygamy narrative bolsters all those still practicing it and all the abuses. Now that I have spent the time to review all put forward by Brian Hales, the Church's leading experts, Don Bradley, and others on his side--And all Michelle's work along with Whitney Horning and Jeremy Hoop--and studied every scripture relating--it is difficult to understand how it is we cannot dispose of this once and for all! Stop the bleeding... Stop the cries of the women and children--and men.
Yes Greg is not familiar enough with the crazy amount of details on the subject. Unfortunately, that was exposed with bad reasoning and arguments and ignorant challenges.
But we are so grateful that he did have Michelle on! Others choose not to have her on their platforms because they know she knows her stuff. They would rather just talk about her instead, Jacob Hanson.
You, the commenters agreeing with you and absolutely Michelle does not understand her scriptures. Or should I say... will not understand them. Righteous plural marriage has never been a sin as is proven by the scriptures.
To rephrase @cwicshow pinned comment: Oh no, our church is in trouble. The book of Mormon teachings are seeping into our church. The meaning of being faithful to your wife will change forever!
I was not expecting Michelle to be so articulate and knowledgeable. She answered every question calmly, and clearly. However, the fact that every prophet since Joseph Smith would have to be deceptive and a liar revealed the greatest amount of concern to me. I know President Nelson is God’s Prophet and does NOT have a deceptive spirit. There is much I don’t understand but I’ve asked many questions of God, and God has each time pointed me to the words of President Nelson. In his biography, Insights” written by Sheri Dew, at the very end it reveals that the most difficult commandment we will be asked to live in the latter days will be to follow the prophet. I’m sticking with the prophet.
By the power of the Holy Ghost-you can know the truth of ALL things. A woman in my ward, who homeschools her kids like me, said she was going to stop teaching math and teach deeper gospel topics because there could be another mom in their house soon (referring to the topic of polygamy). Her husband was on the stake high council. IT IS A BIGGER DEAL THAN PEOPLE REALIZE. How can you not love her! Using reason and logic to the edifying of the body of the church. She may not have it all right but neither does the culture of the church. Thank you, Greg, for letting her talk on your platform. At least we can all agree, along with Joseph, that we need some clarification on the topic.
THAT'S NUTS! Homeschool dad here (non bunker-building). However... what if polygamy did come back? Half the church would leave. I'm glad those days are gone and I hope they don't come back in my time, but I suppose they could. And so, I wonder what huge things will come to us in our time that will squeeze the believers, any ideas? The trans/homo/identity stuff is from the outside-in. I wonder what may test the saints from the inside to such a degree (from the prophet).
Did she honestly jump to the conclusion we'd be recommencing the practice? On what basis? Where is she pulling this from? Also, math is...ehhhh...sort of important, so instead of not teaching math, she could just add on more Gospel centered education. I am totally sold on it as a Celestial principle, but I'm also always wary of people that become enamoured with the law. Laws are not give for our indulgence, but to perfect the Saints. If the Brethren reinstitute it, I'll support it, but I think it is dangerous to either desire or expect it, lest we fall into temptation and away from our covenants.
@@TheYgdsha! I totally agree. I told the stake pres about it and he just laughed. Love my stake pres (husband is his secretary), but it’s annoying when it’s so close to home. She is the ward primary pres too 🙄
@@bloviaxit’s not coming back. Read The 2018 church news article (Sep 16?)-Elder Cooke basically says it’s not coming back. If you want I’ll find the quote. Pres Hinckley also said on Larry king Live that polygamy was not doctrinal and he condemns it. Of course, people are going to interpret it how they want, but to me it’s pretty clear. Also, we don’t need something major like plural marriage to wreck the church, a jibby jab was bad enough 😉 Heck, in my ward right now, elephants and donkeys can’t even get along right now
At the hour mark, Greg is being ridiculous. He ignores D&C 42 “he shall cleave unto her and NONE else” and then argues that polygamous marriage (poly = many) is still an agreement between one man and one woman. Sheer wresting of the scriptures. I agree that polygamous marriages were not agreements between one man and all his wives at once, but you cannot ignore D&C 42. “None else.”
No, you’re missing what he is saying. He is saying those women were not sealed to more than one man which would be polyandry. They were married for time to one man and then sealed to another man to make dynastic connections for the afterlife which is how they understood it at that time. Polygamy is one man sealed to many women, polyandry is one woman sealed to many men; as those early Saints understood it. The women weren’t sealed to more than one man n their lifetime therefore they didn’t practice polyandry. That was his point.
@@amynazzaThis is more evidence that 132 is NOT of God. Christ did not encourage men to build kingdoms for themselves in the afterlife. He did not even want his apostles considering who would have the most important position in relation to Him.
It is called WOKE MATH. I live in California. 1 plus 1 and 1 plus 1 can equal either 2 or 4--it is up for interpretation... And, it would be racist to focus on getting the correct answer.
Greg, I love your channel! This was a ballsy interview, so I tip my hat to you. But if your going to dance with the bull, you need to do your homework. You really should have watched some of Michelle's key episodes before the interview to better inform your questions. You spent the majority of the time rehashing basic things she has addressed at nauseum on her channel. She generally does not "cherry-pick" as you assert several times. She thoroughly (and verbosely) addresses both sides of the argument and faces contrary evidence fairly. Michelle rightfully declares this to be an important topic and each of us LDS need to face it with courage, open hearts and with ears to hear. The reason your comments are filled with emotion is because this information radically changes our worldview of "modern prophets" and requires us to really scrutinize our centralized institution. For many, this information has shattered unfounded testimonies. But for others (like me) it has initiated a spiritual revival. My first reaction to this information was similar to yours. But after study and prayer, the spirit has promptly taught me. This isn't RLDS doctrine. It's simply truth. Joseph taught us to embrace truth, despite it's origin. I have no intention of leaving the church and hope that this discovery can serve as a fire that will turn us towards the Savior in a meaningful way. You seem keen to frame this topic as a binary (e.g., Brigham was either a true prophet or conspirator against Joseph's life, Abraham was either a perfect man or an adulterer). Reality (as you well know) is much more nuanced. @18:30, again your "natural trail" assumes a binary (e.g. polygamy was from God vs. a conspiratorial cabal to cover it up). Reality is always more complicated. One possible angle is that the Brighamites' justification of polygamy comes from a misunderstanding of Joseph's doctrine of sealing (here is one attempt to alternatively explain this doctrine: scriptures.info/scriptures/tc/glossary/adoption). There is strong evidence that Joseph was "sealing" people to him, both male and female. Most of the females were pregnant and husbands even participated in the ordinance [ref the work of Don Bradley]. Those that were zealous about spiritual wifery (concept adopted from other revival religions of the time) sought justification for the practice and found it in this idea of sealing. I don't think the Brighamites were necessarily explicitly "lying" about Joseph, they were simply very motivated to find a prophetic justification for their understanding. They may have even felt very strongly that the practice was righteous. The "cabal" theory is unlikely. There is a beautiful scriptural word for this phenomena: apostasy.
Thanks for commenting. I have done my homework but did not want to speak much in this interview. I'll do that another time. My goal was to let her speak and give her opinions and conclusions. I wanted to put light on this and the best way is for her to do it herself.
@@CwicShow Fair enough. Good stuff. Thanks for reading my comment. You're a good man and I really enjoy learning from you. I especially love the Bruce Porter stuff.
Interestingly, for years the Community of Christ rejected the idea that Joseph was married to multiple wives. They have since accepted that he probably did, even though he, Emma and the leaders of church from testified from the pulpit that there was a doctrine that taught polygamy.
I don't think the Community of Christ church has authority to officiate in the saving ordinances we receive in the temple. That is paramount above all else.
I think she clearly demonstrated her mastery of this topic. I think there is a lot we don’t know about this. But I do agree with the fact that the book of Mormon is a powerful witness against many wives and concubines.
@@shanestone5563Jacob obviously states that generally men should have 1 wife and 0 concubines, but then in Jacob 2:30 he clearly says thay God may command the men to differ from the former commandment in order to raise up seed unto Himself.
@@cameronhoward99 It does not clearly say that. It doesn't even unclearly say it. In fact, nobody interpreted it that way for over twenty years until Orson Pratt pulled that interpretation out of his nether regions.
I think you are wrong, Greg. Her argument is totally valid. Also if you read in the Nemenhah record, Christ Himself explains what he says about polygamy
She is right. Joseph Smith was only married to Emma. In a copy of the Book of Mormon, he wrote "One Wife" in the margin. In History of The Church published by Deseret Book on behalf of the church in 1980, Joseph has his scribe write down to hold those accountable that teach, preach or practice polygamy. So she is right that Joseph Smith was NOT a polygamist. The sealings to women were NOT marriages, but Law of Adoption sealings that has nothing to do with marriage, but rather being sealed to Priesthood leaders as a church family. Wilford Woodruff changed this is 1894 to be sealings to father's rather than Priesthood leaders. So Joseph Smith was NOT a polygamist at all!
I am 26 minutes into this podcast and two things stand out like a sore thumb: first, Ms. Stone forces many, many ambiguous sources and evidences to support her main proposition: Joseph Smith, good (and never bought in to the practice of polygamy) and other leaders bad. If the issue is whether polygamy is a true, doctrinally based practice, why the need to save Joseph from the rest of the bad actors except out of a naïve need to protect her view of the world and testimony. Joseph Smith just as easily could be lumped in with the rest of the bad actors and polygamy could still be, a false principle. To me, this suggests that Ms. Stone is not intellectually honest and is subconsciously motivated by a narrative she is trying to make fit. The second thing I noticed is that Ms. Stone very knowingly and intentionally stops short of criticizing modern day prophets such as President Nelson and President Oaks. The logical extension of what she preaches condemns these brethren, but she seeks to protect her church membership. If she were seeking truth earnestly, she would follow it wherever it leads. To “cancel“ 4-5 early prophets and presidents of the church (but not Joseph Smith), but shy away from canceling modern prophets again shows a certain naïveté. Selective cancellation of prophets will not preserve her membership.
Loved your comment! Michelle hesitates to call the early Church leaders "liars" but has no problem referring to them as "lustful and power-hungry". She accuses them of the heinous abomination of committing whoredoms but protects them from being viewed as "liars"??? - even though she clearly says they all lied about Joseph Smith's polygamy and D&C 132! Pretty funny stuff. For some reason she just can't bring herself to throw the prophets all under the bus completely! Her position is ridiculous.
Michelle is awesome. Joseph did nothing less than condemn polygamy until the day he died. Then Brigham and his buddies went to work revising history to make it look like their religified adultery had begun with Joseph.
He condemned polygamy, not Celestial Plural Marriage. Big difference between the two. Polygamy is when a man decides to take more than one wife. Celestial Plural Marriage is when a prophet calls a man to take on more than one wife. It's a calling that can only be extended by the prophet and is not for the general membership of the church. That is why men were excommunicated from the church for practicing polygamy.
@@philapos I'm sorry. I just don't buy the claim that Joseph engaged in equivocatory word games like that. I understand your argument, I just don't agree with it.
Ya know, I can’t say one way or the other. But I believe Joseph Smith to be a man of character, the Book of Mormon is the word of God, and Jesus is the Christ. I’m sure we’ll find out about all of the secrets during the millennium.
Greg, Thank you very much for inviting Michelle on your show, and allowing her to have her say. I think you both handled your disagreements very well, and I hope you have her on again some time, because there are still so many questions that need answers.
Will be interesting to see what they do when William Clayton's journals get released. One lf the guys working on them says there is a lot of challenging things in them and that they give us much more detail on how polygamy was practiced.
Respect to Greg for having Michelle on. We need trusted platforms likes Greg’s where we can have these discussions without people accusing the other of “apostasy” - these are legitimate conversations we should have a no seeker of truth should be afraid to have them.
People like her is why President Nelson said “One of our greatest challenges today is distinguishing between the truths of God and the counterfeits of Satan. That is why the Lord warned us to “pray always, … that [we] may conquer Satan, and … escape the hands of the servants of Satan that do uphold his work.” The Power of Spiritual Momentum
So then you side with the liars that wrote the Nauvoo Expositor and killed Joseph Smith. Or do you believe Joseph was honest. “What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one” JS
When Hyrum Smith, who had been appointed Prophet, Seer, and Revelator by the time, declared in general conference, only around 3 months before his death, with "the power of God," that "it is lawful for a man to marry a wife, but it is unlawful to have more, and God has not commanded any of you to have more," was he wrong, or right?
How can you say that the original 101 “one man one wife” makes room for polygamous marriage when it literally says this…. ….”Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again. It is not right to persuade a woman to be baptized contrary to the will of her husband, neither is it lawful to influence her to leave her husband. All children are bound by law to obey their parents; and to influence them to embrace any religious faith, or be baptized, or leave their parents without their consent, is unlawful and unjust. We believe that husbands, parents and masters who exercise control over their wives, children, and servants and prevent them from embracing the truth, will have to answer for that sin…..” Women were also encouraged to leave their husbands (even members of the church) to be in polygamous marriages if they can find someone with “higher keys.” What about these sources??
And ironically, Joseph and Hyrum taught that a man or woman should not leave their non believing spouse to join the Saints. They understood that families needed to stay together.
What year was this created? It wasn't in response to the Nauvoo Era... have you studied why this particular section was added? What aspects of marriage in early Colonial America was experiencing? This quote is used AS IF it was in response to Nauvoo which it wasn't.
@@zionssuburb This was written in 1835 as a response to accusations against the Saints in Ohio, during a time they were accused of polygamy due to many cochranites joining the church, and due to the law of consecration. It was reiterated in Nauvoo multiple times as result of continued polygamy accusations in Nauvoo. Cowdrey was gone by Nauvoo so the continued use of this statement shows that it was repeatedly perpetrated with Joseph’s support up until his death.
Thank you Greg for hosting this episode. It was apparent you were a bit frustrated at times, and I appreciate you working through that. Although Michelle comes across more argumentative than she means to, I believe the Church desperately needs additional prophetic direction on this matter. You hosting this discussion helps to raise awareness which I pray will lead our Prophet to seek that revelation.
This has already been answered. Revelation isn't going to come because Michelle Stone and other spiritually immature members can't emotionally handle the issue of plural marriage.
I also hope it is addressed by the prophet and other leaders because it has become a dividing point for many members, and a reason for others to fall away from the church.
These three verses should end the debate. Although the question posed is about divorce, Jesus’s answer is very telling. He reaffirms that the pattern from the beginning has not changed, one man and one women, leaving their father and mother and cleaving to each other. He rebukes them for resting the scriptures, which means no deviation from this was ever condoned or commanded by God. This is again confirmed in the Book of Mormon multiple times and in D&C 42. How many witnesses do we need? Matthew 19:4-6 4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
And, we have zero scriptural accounts of God actually commanding polygamy. In Jacob God says he suffered and the women and children suffered. 132 is so filled with statements counter to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We have only a suspect copy written in the hand of a suspect person. God is hearing the cries of us women--can the brethren open their ears? And bring it before the Lord as they did the Priesthood ban?
For what purpose? So sealings to second wives will cease? To make you feel better about history? Because it is not just the modern church history. Go listen to David Alexanders testimony. He had a problem with poligamy until the lord gave him his testimony, he even stated that he would have loved to have lived in that time, if i remember correctly. I also have a testimony of it. I think i know why this is an issue and i belive many will leave the church over it.
@@avoice423 The purpose would be for prophets, seers, and revelators to inquire with the Lord whether the latter portions of D&C 132 contain true doctrine, considering the pain it causes so many members of the church. It is similar to the priesthood ban, many leaders believed and taught false doctrine until there was enough pressure to reconsider the narrative. This is a top reason that people leave and I know many that have studied it out and prayed for comfort or confirmation of its truthfulness but feel nothing but darkness. I’ve conversed with David Alexander a number of times, he’s not the angel that so many paint him out to be. If you want to better understand why this issue is so damaging for so many, I’d encourage you to read The Ghost of Eternal Polygamy.
@@avoice423 I’d love to hear more about your testimony of polygamy and how you’ve obtained it. I’ve studied this topic for years and 1000’s of hours and the more I’ve learned the more I know it’s not from God, despite trying to understand it and make peace with it.
@@Commenter2121 why do you want to know? It seems you have already made your mind up. Go listen to David Alexanders testimony. The Lord is not going go interfere with your agency. I think the key to gaining the testimony is to be willing to except and live it if the Lord so chooses. My personal testimony is private between me and the Lord. He began telling me things over 14 years ago. It is not new to me. I am concerened many will leave the church over this issue.
So like David ended up doing as well... just what was the evil(s) Solomon was doing?? In David's case, we already know the sin wasn't having many wives. It was what he was doing with and to those wives AND... lusting other men's wives. Murder Too. So again... what whoredoms were they doing?? How about sleeping with more than one wife at a time, would that be a whoredom and defilement of chastity? How about they were also indulging and allowing or forcing women to sleep with each other, would that be a whoredom?? What about not treating all wives equally and breaking their hearts, would that be a abomination in the eyes of God?? You have just learned the difference between righteous plural marriage and not.
Said the Zoramites to Alma. Do you believe that John Taylor was wrong when he received a revelation teaching that the church can never abandon polygamy?
It’s simple. EITHER the modern leaders of the church and all past proponents of Joseph’s polygamy were lying…or Joseph, Hyrum and Emma were. By supporting the current presidency, you are absolutely saying that Joseph was a liar. There is no room at all for middle ground on this.
Sorry Greg, you were clearly playing word games at one point. One man and one woman doesn’t leave the door open for polygamy. I laughed out loud when you made that argument! That being said I’ve never heard of this woman but she made some good points and I’m glad you had her on the show.
I do t think he was playing games or word games, as you put it. It makes perfect sense to me. Just offering a different perspective. Not trying to argue.
Michelle says "I would invite people to tell me what abomination does God sometimes command, that He only sometimes wants for His own purposes". Greg mentions the abomination of the murder of Laban that God commanded and she glossed right over it saying "So we need to murder the hearts of our wives and children"? What? Sorry Michelle but since you didn't seem to catch it when Greg said it, I want to highlight it again here: Besides polygamy, MURDER is also an "abomination" that God sometimes commands for His own purposes! So now you can stop saying that "God would never command an abomination".
What if she is right? What if Brigham was a fallen prophet? Worse, what if he was no prophet at all; what if he was a usurper? Would God‘s plans be frustrated? would the entire church be false? I don’t think so. God‘s plans cannot be frustrated. The Book of Mormon remains true, no matter what. And this church remains Christ’s Church, even if imperfect, even if damaged, even if wrong in certain key instances. I know this much. The Book of Mormon says only bad things about polygamy, but it has a whole lot to say about the “remnant of Jacob.“ Jesus Christ himself, after the resurrection, and after his brief sermon on the mountain, spoke about nothing but the remnant of Jacob. That is the focus of the Book of Mormon. And it was pretty much close to the sole focus of Joseph Smith. In the fall of 1844, he planned to travel to the Rocky Mountains to find a place to live with the Lamanites, who are among the Native Americans. But he died, obviously, and then Brigham Young came to the Rocky Mountains, but he did not live peacefully with the Lamanites. The church took a hard turn into apostasy when it took on polygamy. In my view, we barely survived it. It’s a real mercy that the Lord arranged to have polygamy quashed in this church. It’s one of the proofs to me, in fact, that the Lord does direct this church. But he can do it only through imperfect humans. We do the best we can.
Mormon 8 36. ...and your churches, yea, even every one, have become POLLUTED because of the pride of your hearts. D&C 124 32 But behold, at the end of this appointment your baptisms for your dead shall not be acceptable unto me; and if you do not these things at the end of the appointment ye shall be rejected as a church, with your dead, saith the Lord your God. The Nauvoo house was never finished. Church was rejected. 3 years later, both smith prophets were murdered. D&C 124 45 And if my people will hearken unto my voice, and unto the voice of my servants whom I have appointed to lead my people, behold, verily I say unto you, they shall not be moved out of their place. 46 But if they will not hearken to my voice, nor unto the voice of these men whom I have appointed, they shall not be blest, because they POLLUTE mine holy grounds, and mine holy ordinances, and charters, and my holy words which I give unto them. They did not listen and were moved from their place. All the way to SLC. The time of the gentiles is up. The gospel will go from them back to the house of israel. (3 nephi 16: 10-11)
Well said. And that is why I still believe. Alma, although a wicked priest of Noah, still held the priesthood. His power or authority wasn't truly efficacious until he repented. Michelle is correct, we are still under condemnation for not taking the Book of Mormon as seriously as we should.
@@evamat According to many, if polygamy originated from Brigham Young, it would invalidate his keys and the modern prophets. This is plainly incorrect. It is not how priesthood keys work, currently or anciently. As per the church handbook (38.2.6), unworthiness is not something that invalidates an ordinance, including ordinances that confer priesthood keys. If a stake president is excommunicated, for adultery, apostasy, or even murder, it does not invalidate any of the ordinations he performed. Otherwise, an investigation would have to be performed to discover when he became unworthy, and which ordinances and temple work would have to be redone. Alma the younger received his priesthood authority from king Noah (Msh 11:5), a man openly committing adultery and who killed Abinadi. If this does not invalidate Alma’s authority, you’ll be hard pressed to argue that Brigham’s keys would be invalidated for lying about polygamy’s origins. (Additionally, John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff were ordained by Joseph, not Brigham, so it’s a null point anyways.) You might ask, “wouldn’t this mean the Catholic Church still has keys?” The answer is still no. The Catholic Church abandoned the apostolic order, relevant ordinances, and permanently adopted false creeds and doctrines. Whereas we have not, and have rejected false doctrines taught by Brigham. Ultimately, we do not believe in a gospel of perfection. Jesus died so that we might not be condemned by the mistakes of our past. Just as God is eager to forgive us of our sins individually, even heinous ones, so too is He eager to forgive us institutionally. “Ordinances of the priesthood are valid if they are performed by authorized priesthood bearers in the prescribed manner.… The ordinance does not become invalid if someone involved is unworthy at the time he participates. The sanctity of the ordinance is violated, but not the validity. ” Rex W Allred (Melchizedek General Priesthood Committee), Liahona, March 1989
Based on many of the comments here, it’s safe to assume that many have not been open minded enough to at least engage with her research and try and understand her position. If nothing else, she has made an effective case against polygamy being from God and has shown that there are many holes in the polygamy story we’ve all been told. More and more historians are acknowledging that she’s raising some valid points and that some of the accepted narrative needs to be revisited. We should all be striving for the truth of our history and if that challenges your long held beliefs or makes you uncomfortable, I’m sorry but that’s just life. Church leaders have been wrong before and the Book of Mormon warns us of holding to false traditions and ideas. I believe that the story the church tells on polygamy takes more people out of the church than any other issue, I think it’s exciting that there is more to the story.
Or she is wrong and this is the enticing spirit which has led her and many others from denying the priesthood. I choose to follow the prophet today, president Nelson over Michelle. He is sealed to two women. Michelle teaches false doctrine. She teaches the same as the churches who formed who didn’t like Brigham young
@@6barbers There is a precedent for prophets and apostles being wrong. Luckily there have been others with the courage to push back and bring positive change. You’re right, she could be wrong but I just hope people are willing to hear someone out before making judgment.
Each marriage is between one man and one woman. This has nothing to do with supporting polygamy. It is simply how they did it. A polygamous man had several marriages, not one big marriage.
@@CwicShow This is the argument that current fundamentalist polygamists make. It is a laughable justification for polygamy. It’s like trying to explain how a man can cleave to one wife while also being married to other women at the same time. I know you’re smarter than that.
@@CwicShow And by this logic it is only men who practice polygamy (aka Celestial Marriage) because women only mary one and they just have to accept it be cut off. LOL, polygamy is such an obvious whoredom and abomination.
The beliefs and attitudes of the RLDS/Community of Christ church are seeping into Latter-day circles. We can see this in three major areas: polygamy denial, a fallen Brigham Young, and Temples are not necessary. In this interview, you can see from the more tense portions that this would have devolved into a barking episode if I had argued a side. I wanted to let Michelle talk and clarify her position. She did that on some issues but was vague on others. I believe Michelle brings up some valid points of discussion, but ultimately, the evidence that the Lord has sanctioned polygamy from time to time, including with Joseph Smith, is overwhelming. She seems to pick and choose what to believe and what to disregard based on her framework of polygamy denial. Several stretches are made with Abraham, David, Joseph Smith, and Brigham Young. Her "spirit of deception" argument was disturbing. A square peg does not fit into a round hole.
I do really appreciate Michelle coming on the show and studying things out, though I disagree with her conclusions.
For those of you supporting Michelle and accusing me of deleting comments, there are three things that happen:
1) Spamming-Some of you have resorted to spamming in response to comments. I found one example where there were over 28 of the same post. TH-cam automatically blocks spamming, thank goodness.
2) As you will see in my community guidelines, links are not allowed. There is a good reason for this based on the topics we tackle here. Several posts with links from Brian Hales and Don Bradley also didn't make it through.
3) This is for you of the despicable fringe. Several posts are held by TH-cam due to vitriolic language and profanity. This was targeted at President Nelson, the church, and commenters with a couple to me. This is not Reddit! I create an open forum for thought but not for toxic content. And lastly, if you are going to preach against the church or demean President Nelson, it won't get through. That is my rule.
Greg, you have admitted yourself that you have not studied this issue out. How can you disagree with her conclusions if you haven’t put in the time and effort to try and fully understand? Even if people disagree with her final conclusion on Joseph, she has done a great job of making a historical and scriptural case against polygamy, and has shown that there are many holes in the church’s polygamy narrative.
@@Commenter2121my problem comes from the denial of the temple and Brigham Young. From study, prayer and experience, I know the Temple is of God and has been from the time of Adam and Eve. Any belief that takes away from that doesn’t fit.
@@Commenter2121 That's why I had her on the show. But I am a well-versed studied of the scriptures. It's easy for me to say that Abraham didn't commit adultery. Imagine, using the term "Abrahamic Covenant" for an adulterer. Abraham was a prophet seer and revelatory already before and sought earnestly for righteousness before he ever met Hagar. It's easy for me to believe that Brigham Young was a prophet and not a murderer or at the minimum, a lustful man "on the prowl" and initiated polygamy through lies and a "spirit of deception." It's easy for me to see why the story of David and Bathsheba represents going beyond what the Lord has sanctioned.
@@creativegenecircle That is absolutely not true, you clearly have not tried to understand her motivations.
@@WyoCutlass71 This comment shows that you aren’t aware of her work either. Michelle has constantly encouraged people to stay in the church and explained why she stays herself. She’s also acknowledged Brighams role in the church and has shared some deeply personal spiritual experiences she’s had at the temple. She is not anti Brigham or anti temple. She’s just not afraid to call out bad behavior when she sees it, and unfortunately Brigham said and did some very troubling things. Would you condemn Hugh B Brown for standing up against church leaders on the priesthood ban? Joseph Fielding Smith and Ezra Taft Benson made some horrific statements about our black brothers and sisters, luckily others had the courage to push back.
Between this, gay marriage, gender confusion, malevolent compassion, etc, it's no wonder president Nelson prophesied that “In coming days, it will not be possible to survive spiritually without the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost.”
It's interesting to me how quickly the prophetic nature of that statement is being revealed. But he also did say to not delay, that time is running out.
So true! I see this happening too. Satans deceptions are so creative and calculating. I’m certain we will see more of them. I’ve got a warry eye out for AI
And he lied about the gene therapy being safe and effective. 🤷♀️
@@psmith535 Rock in a hat WAS NEVER a thing, but somehow dodo birds just love it. Joseph had the real deal urim and thumim, came with the plates. Then president dodo shows us the hat... brilliant. And recommends the jab with his BLACK mask on, More brilliance.
President Nelson is arguably the worst president the church has ever had. I’m looking forward to a change very soon.
He misleads about what the veil is, and whose face we seek behind the veil. If President Nelson gets important things like that are wrong, then what?
Michelle seems like a thoughtful, kind person. My heart goes out to her for what she experienced in 2020 and 2021.
I cannot even begin to imagine... Such a hard story.
I love how the Virgin birth, the command for Abraham to sacrifice his son doesn't phase the average believer. But stuff like this becomes a stumbling block, why, because the impacts what the listener wants for themselves. If we listen to total selflessness, it would not impact us. We would trust that this and many other things that we would have a hard time understanding would work out with a loving God. I find it baffling that many people are not outraged with the idea that in other churches there is a belief, that people who lived and died without knowing the Savior just automatically go to hell. That should outrage people but often doesn't. But will get outraged at this. Human genius never ceases to amaze.
If your neighbor holding a position that conveys the right to speak to you for God we’re to tell you that you should kill your spouse would you at least need to think about it?
Thank you. Good observations. Thank you again.
@@Mike-rt2vp thanks Mike well said
@@Kait272 I think you’re missing the point being made. The fact that he was commanded in the first place and got very near to actually following through _even though he was loath to do so_ should make you uncomfortable. If God told you to sacrifice your miracle child, you’d be pretty upset, too.
The Virgin birth isn't a good example to support your argument. It doesn't violate the laws of God that are specifically stated in scripture like polygamy does. Yes, there are examples of polygamy (e.g. Abraham) but if you carefully read the account of Abraham it was not something God commanded him to do. It was an idea that his wife came up with and she regretted it quite quickly and it brought a lot of discord and unrighteous in the family.
Your example of Abraham being commanded to offer up Isaac is probably a better example along the lines of polygamy. However, if you think about this example, it also doesn't fit. This was a test and it ultimately pointed Abraham's heart to God the Father and the sacrifice that He would make of His Only Begotten. However, Abraham was not permitted to carry it out but we are to believe that polygamy is similar to this example even though polygamy was permitted to be carried out?
Super glad you allowed Michelle to give her perspective! Even if you disagree with her is important to hear both sides.
I'm in the camp that believes Joseph was not a polygamist.
I feel like you can't PROVE Joseph was or was not practicing polygamy. But, I do think the bulk of the evidence, combined with reason and logic, support that he was not.
In no particular order.
1. There are no known children from any women other than Emma.
2. Joseph's verifiable, contemporary statements opposed polygamy. Condemned polygamy.
3. The Book of Mormon (Jacob 2:24) clearly condemns what was done by David and Solomon having many wives as an abomination. D&C 132:38-39 is in direct conflict with what is said in the Book of Mormon stating that David and Solomon were given their multiple wives by God.
4. The original D&C 101 specifically addressed the issue, the accusation, of polygamy being leveled at the Church. That section says one man and one woman only while either are living. No additional wives or husbands while married to another.
5. Brigham and Emma were at odds. Emma maintained that Joseph never had any other woman. Brigham, in the 36th Semi-Annual Conference of the Church, Oct 1866, said, among other things, that, "Emma Smith is one of the damnedest liars I know of on this earth". He continued, accusing her of attempting to murder Joseph twice by poisoning him. Does this make sense? Does this seem consistent with the love letters and affection that was known to have existed between them? Or, does it make more sense that Emma knew Brigham better than any of us today know Brigham and that she knew he was up to no good. Brigham had to discredit Emma in front of his followers without discrediting Joseph.
6. What my heart tells me. I have done a lot of praying and soul searching on this. I might be wrong in my conclusions, but I feel in my heart and in my mind, based on the available information and my prayers, that Polygamy is not, and was not, from God.
@@dougknighton5348 in the case of Eliza Snow, who was a plural wife to Joseph, she was unable to have children.
@BrianTerrill cool story bro. Now go through through list of over 30 women and explain why they produced zero children with Joseph
@@BrianTerrill this is a weak response. For decades the smoking gun that “proved” JS polygamy was the claims of Sylvia sessions and Josephine Lyon. We know know via DNA Joseph was not the father. Huh.
@@KimballCodygreat point plus that darn High Council meeting in 1843 that has the attendees noting in their journals exact lines we read in section 132. Michelle is just not being honest with all the facts. She had an agenda and gets her reward nevertheless.
@@daleclark7127 Citation, please?
I can't wait for the day when all will be revealed!
This has already been revealed, but it will continue to be affirmed in the future. She'll still deny it.
@@EKowallis I'm not against either one of them. I'm just tired of all the contention. Polygamy is such a difficult topic and i think there is... truth on both sides.
@@alisadunn5443 Stating the truth is NOT contention.
@@EKowallis Contention is born in anger and/or vanity. You are right that contending with things, true or not in friendly conversation is not contention. :>)
But wait, lds claim to have prophets who should be able yo get answers and revelation for the church. Hmmm
I am 65 years old, came of age in the 70’s. My dad was heavily engrossed in the controversy of blacks and the priesthood, on the side of getting rid of the ban and spoke openly against the practice. He told stories about how the subject nearly tore our ward apart. Lived in Granger, Utah. He, along with others that agree with him, was called deceived and an apostate, and treated very much the way Michelle is treated today. Most people were not willing to consider any other point of view. Then one day in June of 1978, he was no longer an apostate but there were still a lot of hard feelings and my family moved shortly after that. I wonder how many people commenting here has actually looked up any pieces of evidence that Michelle has offered and actually read for yourselves what Joseph wrote and said. So much is there for all to see in the Joseph Smith papers online for free. I agree that there are many things open for interpretation but Michelle’s evidence is as solid as any of the evidence provided on the other side of the issue. More compelling in my opinion having actually looked up and verified the evidence. But ya’ll can just wait for the prophet, apostles, and academics to do your thinking for you. But God works through the weak, simple and humble. And the phrase “every accredited historian agrees…” is just so pharisaical.
@permaprepper8130 Thank you for adding this context.
The Problem with you argument is that the women themselves bore a consistent testimony that they were married and sealed to Joseph Smith. These were women of honor and integrity who sacrificed so much to the lay the foundations of the Restoration. Our scriptural canon supports plural marriage. Section 132 is a revelation from God on the the authorized practice of plural marriage. In fact sexton 131 is the revelation is that have the most provenance.
Moses denied the Priesthood to the entire house of Israel except for the sons of Aaron. Jesus Christ denied baptism while he was alive to anyone who was not a Jew.
Those who entered into plural marriage do so by the authorization of Joseph Smith.
True. On top of that, the belief that Joseph did or did not practice polygamy is not going to save you one way or the other. It probably wont have much eternal significance at all in the end....
But some of her other views will have greater eternal significance for those who believe them. Like believing that the temple ordinance as we have it is not fully acceptable to God. Or her views on the priesthood. She seems to think that the fullness of the priesthood was received by Joseph and then taken away from the saints shortly after. She has also concluded that Brigham Young was psychopathic and insinuated that he might have been behind the destruction of the Nauvoo Temple. She often perpetuates the belief that the church leaders are lying to its members... and the list goes on.
I do not think that she is an evil human but she is certainly not a prophetess as many now call her. I would be extremely weary of her views. It is not necessarily apostate to believe Joseph Smith didn't practice polygamy, but some of the other views she promotes are actually apostate. At some point she will be forced to chose between her teachings and the churches. And all those who follow her will have to make that same decision as well.
@@voicesoftherestorationyou obviously haven't done your research if you think the women bore a consistent testimony!
@@tennisgirl57couldn’t have said it better!
It's clear to see that Satan is using this topic to divide the saints and he's being successful.
I know, it is astonishing that so many good men and women support "abominations" and "whoredoms" ("*" thus said the Lord)
@@Kait272 unfortunately, you are one the deceived. Your biased and twisted comments are partially responsible for helping Michelle Stone deceive and divide the saints. You’re gonna be in for a rude awakening if you keep promoting and supporting everything Michelle does and says.
@@Kait272🙌🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼
@@christinebuck310 OR…there is a return to the core gospel underway…a miraculous spiritual renaissance…sweeping aside false doctrines.
And she’s leading the charge
Thank you, Greg, for having Michelle on! She has done so much research on this! When I read Jacob's sermon even way back on my mission, it is so plain that polygamy is an abomination, a whoredom and a grosser crime. God wouldn't be OK and then not OK with changing doctrine. God speaks plainly and is unchanging. This now makes so much sense to me and speaks to my heart.
Are you still LDS? I’m so THANKFUL to believe neither. Each side makes God, Jesus, Joseph Smith, or the current LDS church and prophets A-holes. I am so so relieved and at peace to belief none of it. Such a heartbreak to be in between this entire mess.
@@natalies4375 Sorry to hear...
@@BridgeBuilder-x4c It’s definitely been a heartbreaking loss.
This entire dialogue is a testament to me to be careful who you marry 😂😂😂. That decision will impact SO MUCH for the rest of your life 😂😂😂.
Thanks, Greg, for having Michelle on. It's always good to hear people speak for themselves rather than what other people say about them. We need to be humble and willing to listen to both sides and to sincerely study it out for ourselves without assuming we already have all the answers.
See my original post. Michelle does not invite discussion from both sides. It would be wonderful if Michelle invited someone who doesn't share her belief on this topic on her channel to have an open discussion. Instead, comments that do not support her narrative are being deleted.
@@ShelleyFrost-c4z she has had those who dispute her views on her channel.
@@McKenzieLewis-t5h Please post the title of the episode(s) where a guest who does not share Michelle's views was invited to join in an open discussion.
Michelle has had on her channel MANY that don’t believe the same has she does. Brian Hales, Todd Compton, Don Bradley, and several others.
@@ShelleyFrost-c4z In addition to the above mentioned, episodes 123 and 124 are with polygamist Benjamin Shaffer. She has been engaging with both sides as often as the polygamy side is willing to engage.
Edit: also just fyi about disappearing comments, TH-cam comments go poof somewhat regularly. I’ve noticed if I have a link or even copy and paste, those comments tend to disappear.
If we can believe Joseph lied to protect the Church, why can't we believe that Brigham did the same? He made earlier statements that he introduced polygamy, not Joseph. Later, due to the persecutions over polygamy they needed to frame it as a Joseph doctrine because the Democrats told them it would make a stronger constitutional case. They lied later on to save the Church.
Same argument. Same logic. It doesn't have to hurt belief in the modern Church.
@@PeterBrownscouts Well, yeah. The VAST majority of the “proof” that he was a polygamist just “happened” to show up just in time for the temple plot case, conveniently enough.
Most apologists don’t have any idea what that is or why it matters.
Well…it represents a motive for deception and mainstreaming polygamy by slandering Joseph, doesn’t it?
AMEN! We already have cleansed the Adam God doctrine Brigham put in the temple; And we already are cleansing the Church of the slavery and the Priesthood ban. We have already removed many things from the temple ceremony counter to The Book of Mormon. And it did not end The Church. God suffers mistakes of the past as he pointed out in Jacob 2-3 when he condemned the people of old for their practice of what HE called, the "ABOMINATION" and WHOREDOM" of polygamy.
Thank you Greg for allowing Michelle to speak! I may be one of the few members of the LDS church who rejects polygamy but remains active in church, I hold a calling, I attend the temple as often as I can (I love the temple!!!) I believe Russell M. Nelson is a prophet. I sustain the 12 apostles and I’m looking forward to listening to the messages this conference weekend. I believe the best sources for truth on the topic of polygamy are the Book of Mormon and what Joseph and Hyrum had to say about it. I feel the same way about polygamy as I do about the priesthood ban… we got it wrong! Let us repent and move on!
Ditto
Yes
Amen! Totally agree!
You're not alone! Most of us reject polygamy in our hearts but hold onto it for fear of what it might mean about our leaders and our faith tradition. But fear and love cannot coexist. We must choose one or the other
@@justinbarnum6442 trust me you are not one of the few. There are way more who believe this but are silent because of the attacks they’d receive. At least half the church believes polygamy was false.
Greg, I appreciate your willingness to engage with good faith actors who have a different perspective or your outright disagree with. While there were some moments that the both of you got emotional (it's a very emotional topic), you both handled it well.
Actors is a good way of describing her.
One thing that people don't clarify enough is dynastic sealings. A lot of people equate sealing with marriage, but a large part of the confusion is the fact the Joseph was practicing dynastic sealings, the same as one person might be sealed to their parents to create a "web" of the exalting ordinance. Not marriage!
@christhompson2034 I was taught this years ago. Sealing for exaltation. Then, as I understand it, it was clarified that they are sealed to their own spouse, not the prophet, and corrections were made for married women to be sealed to their own husband's, or single sisters when they eventually got married.
The Church admits they really don't know exactly what Joseph's doctrine was about sealings. That is food for thought.
@@BridgeBuilder-x4csources please, too many people make up stuff these days
@@BrianTerrill Ok. it is late, so will grab that tomorrow.
Thanks for the conversation. I appreciate your good questions... and your and Michelle's respectful manners. Please do some more. I appreciate Michelle's ability to articulate such substantive responses and her encyclopedic knowledge gained by her incomparable research. I would encourage everyone to honestly consider the findings and evidences she, Jeremy Hoop, Rob Fotheringham and others are faithfully bringing to light. A mountain of issues. Let's just find the truth... And love, honor and obey our merciful Father and his Son.
Whitney Horning also wrote to great books and the Prices as well. There is a lot of scholarship and how is it that historians are so disinterested in all the documents that have come to light, with the publishing of the Joseph Smith Papers? Why is the Church inviting people to write books? Much of this information had not been available. Now it is. What is the threat? The truth will prevail unless we censor and threaten people with excommunication if they discover documents that go counter to the Church Historians preconceived narrative...
When I went to the Lord in prayer many years ago, asking about polygamy, the answer I received was to read what Joseph said about it. Everything in the church materials said that he supported polygamy. It wasn’t until two years ago that I learned that Brigham Young supervised the revision of Joseph’s words, condemning polygamy, to say the exact opposite. Joseph condemned polygamy at every opportunity. I have collected 13 instances showcasing this, although a 14th just emerged last week when Joseph’s copy of the BOM was shown publicly (Thanks Jeremy Hoop) and he wrote in the margins of Jacob 2 “one wife”. Thanks to the Joseph Smith Papers Project, I can now find the original documents and read for myself what Joseph and Hyrum consistently taught. Honestly, it is a lot to process through and like Michelle, I don’t have all of the answers about the temple or the LDS Church leadership, but I am grateful for the answer to a heart felt prayer. I now stand with Joseph, Hyrum, and Emma. God help us all!!!
Thank you for your thoughts.
@@nadingos Well said!
The church shouldn’t…but obviously WILL…ignore this.
They dismiss these concerns as people “losing their faith” or being “lazy learners”…SO unbelievably condescending. They preach repentance, but as a church and as a literal matter of policy (according to Oaks), refuse to.
Just like the priesthood and temple ban were reversed I have hope that the church’s stance will change on this as well. The church has so many scholars, let alone the Joseph Smith Papers Project. I think it will inevitable, with scholarship, that the church’s historical stance on this will change.
@@brianbrown2237 Agree. Although it will definitely rattle the members and require a great deal of humility and repentance. Truth is worth it! Let’s submit to this cleansing process, because on the other side of it is greater light and truth.
It is so sad that you think the Church and its first seven prophets were evil for 100 years. But somehow, it can be "reformed" after 125 years. People say "the Lord will never allow the prophet to lead us astray"? How about Brigham Young, John Taylor, Joseph F Smith, ... Heber J Grant? They were all wrong, evil masterminds. But somehow, God, chose to straighten out His Church 20 prophets later? That is absurd.
Great interview and allowing your guest to talk. Thank you also for your honest pushback while still being respectful to someone we obviously disagree with.
Several years ago I read the book Putting on Christ and felt very compelled to seek the face of Christ. I spent a lot of time in the scriptures, the temple and in prayer. In asking God what he wanted me learn polygamy kept coming up. I had been fine with polygamy, wasn't excited to practice it, but had excepted it. So finally I started a very long and intense study of it and was very shocked at what I learned. I had assumed God wanted me to study it because he was going to bring it back. What I learned was the exact opposite. I no longer believe God ever commanded anyone to ever practice it and I no longer believe Joseph Smith ever practiced it. I had a very strong witness in the temple and also had a very special dream with Joseph and Emma explaining that they need to be exonerated!
I'm still and active temple going member. My testimony is actually stronger!
My testimony so so much more alive in Christ! I feel I now can completely surrender to His will. I know now for sure I am not an object to him.
❤
@@BridgeBuilder-x4c Wow! I love that. None of God's children are an object to Him.
If men were to put the shoe on the other foot, and consider the possibility that righteous women who have gone through life in a mostly subservient and often beaten down status to men throughout almost all of human history, that for their suffering they will be exalted in the next life and be blessed and glorified by having the privilege to be sealed to multiple men, and men will have the honor of serving with one wife among many of her other husbands …then that might not seem so exalted for men who believe in polygamy.
[One of the reasons I try to treat my wife as nicely as I know how to (and she says I’ve gotten better over the years). I’m just trying to hedge my bet to make sure that she’ll want to be with me in the next life.]
Thank you for sharing this! Heavenly Father has also answered my question about polygamy…years ago. It has made it so much easier for me to totally embrace Heavenly Father and His guidance in my life
@@tennisgirl57 why would all 12 boys of Israel be under the covenant if polygamy wasn’t valid, only Leah‘s sons would be under the covenant. Also, how could you trust the temple ceremony if you don’t if you think from Brigam on they were lying. Also, you have to answer about Fannie Alger. All real historians say that Joseph practice polygamy and there is a lot of evidence.
We have dozens of recorded contemporary instances of Joseph, Emma and Hyrum denying, condemning and fighting against polygamy. I believe Joseph was honest.
What about Abraham lying to Pharoah?
@@CryptoSurferWhen did he lie to a pharaoh? When he said his half sister was his sister?
@@DerekPayne1791 So half-truths aren't lies, or at the very least, deceptive?
@@JGAOK Yup Abraham lied and was in error for it.
Is it possible in your view that they condemned and fought against the unauthorized use of plural marriage, but not the authorized use? And if they believed God commanded it, it was not only okay but necessary?
What a tremendous interview! Thanks Greg, for lending your platform to a consideration of Truth on tough and precarious subjests. Michelle, thanks for your level-headedness, courage and boldness! I very much enjoyed the prductive coversation!
Much of what Michelle is saying makes sense to me. Shouldn’t we believe Joseph’s own statements over the decades later stories?
That's the lazy, spiritually immature approach by members who can't emotionally handle the issue of plural marriage and nuance.
@@jaredshipp9207 "Evening at home and walked up and down the street with my scribe. Gave instructions to try those persons who were preaching, teaching, or practicing the doctrine of plurality of wives. On this, Joseph forbids it and the practice thereof. No man shall have but one wife." Joseph Smith, 5 October 1843
@@HistoricalMonogamyDoctrine "if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else. If he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified. But if one or either of the ten virgins, after she is espoused, shall be with another man, she has committed adultery, and shall be destroyed; for they are given unto him to multiply and replenish the earth, according to my commandment" God, July 12, 1843, as recorded in D&C 132
@@jaredshipp9207It's exactly the reverse.
Your natural man is Dense AF and can only compute words smooth to your ego, polygamist are your king Noah.
@jaredshipp9207 and follow the prophet is maximum effort and spiritually independent.
It doesn't matter what they did in the past, The Book of Mormon is for our day and God has explicitly given the command to have one wife and concubines ye shall have none.
And God via Jacob, "Thus saith the Lord" has addressed the ancient practices of old,
"26 Wherefore, I the Lord God will not suffer that this people shall do like unto them of old.". Jacob 2:26. So any of the old people if their gross criminal practices of many wives are not the product of the great and abominable church of the devil getting hold of the record before spreading it throughout the nations is a moot point, God doesn't want it happening!
@Wh3nth3wick3drul3 the Great and Abominable church was created after the time of Christ if we actually want to follow the proper text of the Book of Mormon. 1 Nephi 13:4 shows it was created by the Gentiles. Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, and Solomon were not Gentiles.
But even though you made an emotional pitch that distorted scripture, you got 18 likes
What Michelle says about a woman not giving her whole heart to her husband because she is afraid she will have to share him later. I have struggled immensely with this throughout an otherwise very happy marriage.
It’s a very valid concern. Read The Ghost of Eternal Polygamy, many members feel the same way.
I'm sorry. The Historical Monogamy Doctrine site might contain the peace that you have so far been without.
Jojo, my heart goes out to you having such a worry. One thing I've learned in life is that we sometimes unintentionally create our own misery through our own worries. I've done it. And in my case it's destroyed marriages. Just know that the power is in you to free yourself from this. It's not the doctrine/practice, it's the way you view it and deal with it. If I were to suggest a book, I would suggest 'the mindful path to self-compassion' by Christopher Germer. The first half of that book was eye-opening to me to understand how we create our own misery with what we ruminate on.
Same for me.
@@charinabottae Generally, I agree with your statement. However regarding polygamy, this is just another “your feelings are the problem, not the doctrine” statement, which is completely false. The doctrine and practice of polygamy itself is destructive. That has been thoroughly researched and proven across time.
“Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away…and it [this law] shall be with him…all the days of his life;…that he turn not aside from the [this] commandment” [JST Deut. 17: 14-20]. The “one wife” law!
So what about in the levitical law where polygamy is allowed and commanded?
thank you for such a candid, real, raw exchange. I thank both of you!!!! I love the temple and feel such great feelings there! I ask God's blessings on both of you!
So grateful for Michelle Stone bringing all this to light!!!
Greg, I really appreciate you being brave enough to have Michelle on. She's probably studied this topic more than about anyone else at this point. I do get that it's really heavy and kind of a red pill but Michelle has volumes and volumes more of information that leads to her beliefs on this subject. I do appreciate the common ground you guys both found where it's acknowledged that polygamy would be hard and a lot of us men wouldn't want it.
@@ancientcosmicclock she has cherry picked her sources. She spins every point to fit the narrative she wants, and puts her own spin over the revelation to the prophets seers and revelators. She contorts the plain and simple wording of Jacob 2:30, as interpreted by Prophets, to mean something completely different.
@g71816 haven't both sides cherry picked? If we are honest, there are a lot of contradicting accounts and narratives in regards to polygamy. If you take every first-hand account of Joseph, talks, unedited journal entries, his personal notes in his BoM, all of it, are not for polygamy but anti-polygamy. She's one of the voices defending Joseph, and not labeling him a liar. The anti-mormons are picking the church apart on this subject, and waves of people are leaving over this, because they think Joseph was dishonest, and calling him a pedophile. Can't you see that she's defending him? What do you suggest she do?
@@g71816 Have you researched the topic?…like…AT ALL? It’s all right in the Joseph Smith papers.
@@g71816 Sorry but that accusation does not hold water. Michelle has sought to address every piece of evidence out there. She has also come forward with a boatload of new, very credible evidence and oddly is being snubbed. It is Jacob 1-3 that is being chopped up and misrepresented. And the evidence is, you cherrypicked one verse out of a very plain and simple talk, the words of which were the Lords own to Jacob. Quit wresting the scriptures to support a house of cards narrative. Thank you.
@@ancientcosmicclock Michelle has invited anyone on her show to present any missing evidence. So if you want to accuse her of cherrypicking, come on her show and bring your stuff.
Why did the LDS Church change this word, “fathers”? Are you aware that Jacob 3:5 says: "for they have not forgotten the commandment of the Lord, which was given unto our father” (singular) [It should say "fathers" (plural) but the LDS Church removed “fathers” in the 1981 Printing going forward] “-that they should have save it were one wife, and concubines they should have none,” [In the 1835 Book of Mormon it says "Fathers" because the commandment to have only one wife was the commandment going all the way back to Adam and Eve and forward to this present day, [all the fathers]. All past, present, and future generations are to have one wife]. This has always been the law of God in a marriage relationship. (Book of Mormon | Jacob 1-3)!
Good question.
Jeremy Hoop covered that very item in his latest video on "Still Mormon" from last week . . .
If polygamy was bad since the days of Adam that would mean Abraham was a sinner and committing sin and this verse cannot be true: "5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws." (Genesis 26:5)
@@BrianTerrillHe repented, made covenants when his name was changed and he was righteous overall, he made a mistake of following a cultural practice.
@Hmcc0712 your answer contrifmdicts what the scriptures and God say. You just made that answer up.
And for the record, Abraham had his name changed while he was still a practicing polygamist and "culturally" the people were practicing Sodomy and yet God befriended, appeared to and blest a polygamist but destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.
Your ownswer is totally wrong, and a strong reason I reject Evangelical Christianty. Those made up answers are common for them.
Another fantastic video! Thank you! I don't agree with her conclusions, but I'm glad to be able to hear her thoughts and research. Glad you did this interview.
Knowing how controversial this topic is, thanks for having Michelle on and respectfully letting her talk. She has compelling new evidence, and evidence that has been ignored that Joseph Smith was not a polygamist. Thank you for facilitating the important conversation and not censoring someone you may not agree with.
@@BridgeBuilder-x4c thank you! I really appreciate this. Being able to have a difference of opinion while having a civil conversation and respecting one another even after disagreeing.
Building Zion… we are supposed to love those that are different than ourselves. That’s much more than tolerating. If we can’t even listen and respect, then how can we ever expect to love and care?
We should encourage everyone to be accurate and respectful of 132. We should all use the language of the doctrine as stated in Section 132, it is the doctrine of many wives and concubines.
Love that! And all us women can start pondering whether heaven is funner as a concubine or a plural wife.... Seriously 132 is that ridiculous. That magically appeared 8 years after Josephs martyrdom. Read the Deseret news Sept 1852, the August conference. A real eye opener.
I for one choose to believe Joseph. Everything I know about him reveals him as a moral, righteous, and honest man. If God commanded him to practice polygamy, he wouldn’t have denied it, let alone go slinking around behind his wife’s back for trysts with teenage girls and married women. He would have proclaimed it openly just like he did the First Vision. Remember what he said about that:
“I had actually seen a light, and in the midst of that light I saw two Personages, and they did in reality speak to me; and though I was hated and persecuted for saying that I had seen a vision, yet it was true; and while they were persecuting me, reviling me, and speaking all manner of evil against me falsely for so saying, I was led to say in my heart: Why persecute me for telling the truth? I have actually seen a vision; and who am I that I can withstand God, or why does the world think to make me deny what I have actually seen? For I had seen a vision; I knew it, and I knew that God knew it, and I could not deny it, neither dared I do it; at least I knew that by so doing I would offend God, and come under condemnation.”
How do you reconcile his declaration on the first vision with the claims of his cowardice, lies, and of sneaking behind Emm’a back when it comes to practicing polygamy? It doesn’t fit with his character. He wasn’t a coward or a hypocrite, and the certainly wasn’t a liar. He tried to root out polygamy wherever he found it in the church, even excommunicating those who practiced it. It would make him a hypocrite as well as a liar to do this if he was practicing it privately.
Michelle, has done considerable research on this topic of polygamy. She goes to the original source documents and has a solid understanding of this period of church history. I am saddened and dismayed at the hateful comments that are pointed at her. In my opinion it doesn’t show LDS members in a good light. It is amazing to me how people who proclaim to follow Jesus, can be so hateful and vengeful.
Second! Thank you for this!
It’s pretty apparent that Michelle has done considerable research but intentionally avoids the data that directly invalidates her claims.
But I’m really happy she was on. We need these bad ideas exposed.
Thank you for that. Yes I agree on the Prophet Joseph Smith. We just don't like talking about him in the church. After trying to stomach these two for a few moments, the scripture came to mind..."ye shall have no disputations among you"....and this "interview" was more like Jerry Springer than any true doctrine and definitely DID NOT bring any spirit of truth or light by either one of them. "Itching ears" come to mind. What does this have to do with anything in our current lives moving forward? Nothing. Just fodder for the spiritually weak. No winner here, just discontent.
@@ca417pc9I’ve watched many of her videos. She doesn’t discount any evidence. She not only shows the evidence, but finds out what was happening historically at that time. One of the fascinating episodes to me was on the Whitney letter, which those who claim that Joseph practiced and taught polygamy point to as THE smoking gun. She retraced Joseph’s and Emma’s steps on the days preceding the letter and put it in context of what was going on at the time.
@@ca417pc9 Michelle was answering the questions Greg asked. If she is missing anything she has invited anyone on her podcast to engage. I have studied Brian Hales work, his best arguments and frankly it has been debunked on excellent scholarship. If you want to talk cherry picking, how come no one on the monogomy denier side is talking about the document called, "The Voice of Innocence?" Look up the transcript. It condemns every possible rendition of polygamy. This was voted on and accepted by the entire body of the Church in April of 1844, approx 2 months before the martyrdom. Joseph Smith presided, his voice was giving him issues so Phelps read it. The Joseph Smith papers won't include it in that portion of the papers. But Sidney Rigby is recorded to have commented that happened and the 2 AMENS to it are both recorded on those conference papers. Instead, The Church historians file it in 2 other places. One in the Relief Society minutes, and they imply Emma is the engine but the paperwork does not support their misleading narrative. Emma had it posted in the paper as was customary for Church policy. The 1844 printing of the D&C had been paused. Considering this was Joseph Smith's process and what we know he was doing to fight polygamy at the time--it is not a high leap to assume he had planned to insert this document to fortify the Lord's law of marriage, monogamy, in the D&C. But He was arrested and the presses did not resume until after the martyrdom. And oddly, it was not inserted but other items were. Ask Brian Hales why he ignores this document....
I can't remember how i know her but it may be through homeschool. Lived almost half my life in Lehi so if she's from that area i could've met her then.
I did have a polygamist man take me to lunch to meet his wife and three kids and i really was so naive i had no idea what was going on until he asked me if i would join his family. He said his kids and wife had agreed to it already.
His wife just looked at me. She seemed so sad and just.... Accepting? Like she was just accepting it as a real thing she'd make herself learn to live with or something.
I thought for sure she'd get upset at her husband or me or that she'd laugh off the "joke", but when i realized they were so serious and that the three little kids looked so hopeful and excited about me being in their family i froze.
I told him i didn't know because, well, i froze in complete shock.
He apologized and we all left our separate ways.
Later i overheard him talking about me and my body with his co-worker and was shocked and flat out disgusted.
My old boyfriend was working there on a different project and yelled at him and threatened him to never talk like that about me again. He got mad at me for not standing up for myself. He was right. I should have. But like i said i was just in shock and dumbfounded and really embarrassed.
I was his boss's boss, too, so it was serious.
So very sad. And it is the false narrative that bolsters the practice and suffering of polygamists today. They deserve our compassion and help.
my biggest issue with this whole argument is she sayin that polygamy was never of God... what on earth is she talking about, have you read 1Samuel? Have you read how Hannah was blessed in spite of her being in a polygamist relationship? Jacob being a polygamist saw the face of God and was called Israel in spite of him having 4 wives, if Polygamy was so bad why then did God bless these polygamist? I have my issues with the practice but the truth is, without it, we would not have a religion period. Hell, Jesus himself would not have a religion to be born into, after all, was not Joseph the descendent of Juda?... A product of polygamy? This woman is off the rails, DnC 50 people, that's all I'm going to say, and there are a LOT of people being deceived now adays.
Not to mention Jesus confirms polygamists Abraham and Jacob will be in Heaven in Matthew 8:11
Why don’t you watch the dozens of videos and papers written about this topic before just throwing out a blanket statement on this statement/question? People have done and are doing their own research as they have decided to STOP just believing the narrative they have been told. 🙄
I think she's saying that God can work through you even if you are a sinner
@@tinariches6690 i have been watching her and following this story for some time time and she along with all the others that are saying that polygamy was not of God are full of it, thats why i speak with boldness. She along with the rest of polygamist deniers have zero authority first of all and are coming up with there own doctrines. We are LDS, not protestants, we believe in revelation not sola scriptura, and lastly, by there fruits ye shall know them. And what has been the fruits of denying polygamy? look no further the RLDS.
@@akpred sister that is a cop out, you dont get to see the face of God if you are in such terrible sin, hell you dont get to go to the temple like hannah did if you are living in sin. I understand that Grace is always there, but polygamy has played a vital role in the abrahamic traditions, and to say is not of God? That does not even make sense. This is why Joseph asked God the quesiton in the first place, thats why God told Joseph to prepare his heart. Jews oficially stoped practicing polygamy 1,000 AD... I mean its in the old testament, its part of the law of moses. I'm sorry but no shes wrong.
I saw a short of one of these polygamy deniers. He said the way you know the “truth” was taught to him. He said to take off your garments and then pray about it. Sounds like a perfect recipe to be deceived!
For me, evidence that she has been deceived includes her inability to finish any of his counter arguments to its logical conclusion, the chaotic method in which she presents her arguments, bouncing from one to the other evidence when one is challenged, and her attacking the absolute wrong part of Greg’s counter arguments, blowing up portions that have nothing to do with his point. She is all chaos and confusion. That is not the Spirit. I myself tend to be chaotic, but when I have the Spirit of the Lord with me and it is necessary to do so, I can make concise and direct points that make perfect sense. It’s a fruit of the Spirit.
In other words, put off your covenants and pray about it for an answer from the god of this world.
How about read the book of Mormon? Jacob 2:24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.
@@4rcgoodwin
Again, that has nothing to do with what I said. Chaos.
@@4rcgoodwin Israel had 4 Wives and bestowed highly prophetic blessings upon his Sons. How about you read Jacob 2:30...
You have to create and eat scriptural spaghetti to come to the same conclusions as Ms. Stone.
The moment you start to take an objective look at the source documents, provennonce, and motivations, it becomes clear... Joseph, Hyrum, and Emma told the truth. Joseph always fought polygamy. Joseph was in alignment with Christs view on the matter as releaved in Jacob 2. But ultimately, the full knowledge comes by confirmation of the spirit as Moroni teaches. "By the power of the Holy Ghost, ye may know the truth of all things."
Absolutely spot on. Before I had even heard of Michelle Stone the voice of the Spirit gently revealed to me that polygyny/polygamy could not possibly be the eternal order of heaven and therefore is not a celestial principle. I was not even studying polygamy at the time. But in being tutored by the Spirit of Truth about other eternal principles, this truth was manifested so very clearly. Michelle is just the cherry on top to confirm what I already know.
What about people who say the Holy Ghost confirmed to them plural marriage is an eternal principle? Do I believe them or you?
@oshemer5066 I would believe what the Holy Ghost tells you after sincerely studying it out and praying in humility, sincerely seeking to know the will of the Lord no matter the cost. This is the only way to know anything for certain. Best wishes ❤️
Read 132 out loud all the way through with your spouse. Ask each other how you feel. Dont rely on others, it will be very clear. Not from god. Not a hard test. @@oshemer5066
@@oshemer5066 Joseph said himself, “some revelations are from God, some are from man and some are from devils.” I had a dark spirit try to move in me to persuade me to believe that Adam was God the father. When the scriptures are so clear (minus 132), I don’t think you need the spirit to confirm anything. Hold to the rod, not the arm of flesh.
Hagar absolutely was a slave. See Galatians 4:22-23 22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.
Correct. Hagar and her son mocked Isaac and Sarah. Sarah was within her legal and spiritual rights. In the matrilineal patriarchy, it was Sarah's duty, authority and responsibility to birth, select and train up the next patriarch. It was not Abraham's right. This is also why Rebecca chose Jacob over Esau. There was no deception. It was her God given choice.
Just starting but I want to say that I really appreciate and respect you, Greg, for having Michelle on to explain her views herself. If men having many wives and concubines is part of the gospel of Jesus Christ, we each need to embrace it and defend it with everything we’ve got. If it isn’t, we must change our minds. It will be much better for us all if we get aligned with God’s view of this doctrine before standing before God ourselves.
I agree with this, 100%. This is a difficult issue at best. I don't think either side of the debate is slam dunk, and I wish we could discuss this with that understanding. Neither side is without evidence, so we should all come to the table with a willingness to sift through and assess the credibility of the various bits of evidence.
@@OmahaAreaLoya Yes, you really can find enough evidence on both sides to justify a choice of belief. Just like believing in a higher power or atheism, the golden rule or the survival of the fittest. I strongly believe this is intentional on God’s part. What kind of world and heaven do we want? If we could choose, would we choose this?
@@gwendolynwyne please do a response video- I’m dying over the false assumptions and that those who haven’t even really looked into this just dismiss it saying it can’t be true and is just an emotional response to not wanting polygamy.
@@gwendolynwyne completely. This “doctrine of many wives and concubines” needs to be investigated with both being possible. Especially considering Joseph Smiths own words. I have believed both ways and I am very at peace now with the way God has shown to me. It is in line with the scriptures.
Just like Abraham had to repent from practicing concubinage, we should repent from multiple wives.
She makes a lot of good points, as a widow I can relate as I have struggled with the handbook thankful for President Nelson encouraging us to study Priesthood and living up to our privileges
Brigham lied about Emma trying to kill Joseph, he lied about Oliver Cowdrey being a polygamist, he lied about Joseph saying that Hyrum would lead the church to hell, he lied about Emma conspiring with the mob to kill Joseph.
I’m sure Greg would agree that these are lies. But lie about polygamy? No way, that’s just not possible….
When you are Brigham’s eternal terrestrial servant, you can ask him about those apparent lies.
@@knelson3326 That was actually pretty funny. Apparent lies? You think Brigham wasn’t lying?
@@Commenter2121 I wouldn’t be caught dead evil speaking of the Lord’s anointed. It’s the fast lane to apostasy.
@@knelson3326 That’s the attitude that is dangerous. It’s one thing to sustain leaders and follow their council when they lead in righteousness. It’s quite another to blindly obey and live in fear rather than speak out when you see a problem. I hope you don’t feel like you can’t think for yourself.
@@Commenter2121 The only thing I fear is your spiritual well-being. The point of sustaining is to forgive our leaders’ weaknesses. I don’t follow blindly, but doing so would be better than accusing them like Lucifer.
The daughter of Don Carlos didn't believe polygamy was of God. She wrote letter trying to convince her cousin Joseph F Smith that it was wrong. At 1:32
I don’t think she convinced him.
@@oshemer5066 God taught that polygamy is an abomination. Why don't we believe him?
@@jacbox3889Why did the Lord provide for it in the Law of Moses then? Why didn’t Jesus nor any of his apostles in the New Testament ever condemn it? The Lord revealed to Joseph Smith that plural marriage is part of His law and part of the New and Everlasting Covenant.
@@oshemer5066 JACOB 1-3 and Jeremiah 23 will answer your question I think.
Here is the LORD speaking through JACOB, condemning past, present and future polygamy:
1:17 Wherefore I, Jacob, gave unto them these words as I taught them in the temple, having FIRST OBTAINED MY ERRAND FROM THE LORD. 2:2...I come up into the temple this day that I might declare unto you the word of God. 22:5...know that by the help of the all powerful creator of heaven and earth I can tell you concerning your thoughts... 2:9...strict commandments which I have receive from God... 2:10...I must do according to the strict commands of God, and tell you concerning your wickedness and abominations....and under the piercing eye of the Almighty God. 2:11...I must tell you the truth according to the plainness of the word of God. For behold, as I inquired of the Lord, THUS CAME THE WORD UNTO ME SAYING: "Jacob, get thou up into the temple on the morrow, and declare the word of which I SHALL GIVE THEE...2:12 ...this is the word which I declare unto you...2:23 But the word of God burdens me because of your grosser crimes. for BEHOLD< THIS SAITH THE LORD: "This people begin to wax in iniquity; THEY UNDERSTAND NOT THE SCRIPTURES, FOR THE SEEK TO EXCUSE THEMSELVES IN COMMITTING WHOREDOMS, because of the things which were written concerning David, and Solomon his son. -----NOTE: right here people claim that Jacob was wrong and didn't have the latest light and knowledge about David, Solomon, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses. Jacob makes it CRYSTAL CLEAR IT IS THE LORD REVEALING THESE WORDS. This just highlights one of the many theological contridictions of 132.... Now I continue with the exact words the LORD GAVE TO JACOB: 2:24 Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable to me, SAITH THE LORD. 25 Wherefore, THUS SAITH THE LORD, I HAVE LED THIS PEOPLE FORTH OUT OF THE LAND OF JERUSALEM, BY THE POWER OF MY ARM, THAT I MIGHT RAISE UP UNTO ME A RIGHTEOUS BRANCH FROM THE FRUIT OF THE LOINS OF JOSEPH. 26 Wherefore, I THE LORD GOD WILL NOT SUFFER that this people shall do like unto them of old. ((HMM Them of old is a very encompassing net--bringing them to the new world for a fresh start to establish a RIGHTEOUS people through MONOGAMY)) 2:27 Wherefore my brethren, 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; 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." ((note--there are actually 3 commandments that are addressed in this talk: pride, not caring for the poor and desiring/obtaining any more than one wife/concubines.
Elder Bednar just said in conference, The Book of Mormon is a futuristic book and written for OUR DAY. I would add, that the Lord was already condemning the Church for not heeding The book of Mormon 2 years after the organization.
I think Jacob makes it clear these are the LORD GOD OF HOSTS words condemning polygamy in the past, present, future, the old world and the new world. And remember, out of the thousands of records Mormon culled, Jacob's talk condemning polygamy made the cut. Another good one is Jeremiah 23...talking about the latter days. Another is D&C section 101 in the 1835 Doctrine and Covenants law on marriage and it became 109 in the 1844 version at the time of the martyrdom. It stayed in the D& C until 1876 when D&C 132 was added.
Now, The Book of Mormon went through some changes under Brigham. Footnotes were added, changes to how chapters and verses, some text changes and narratives added to influence how people were to interpret the doctrines. Jacobs talk really suffers because people do not read the full talk in context and it makes it much easier to wrest or twist the doctrines. A footnote was made to cause people to stumble and interpret Jacob as saying sometimes polygamy is authorized and footnotes to the brand new D&C132.
One of the beauties of scripture study is the lively way the Spirit can speak to us at different eras and times of our lives and times in the world. The narratives are restrictive and sometimes lead our study astray. Personally I wish they would remove them, and also revisit how Jacob 1-3 is chopped up.
Now we get to verse 30 and people like to pluck it out of 3 chapters which were just one chapter, and remove it from its context and claim this talk actually is teaching the opposite of what it is teaching. Astonishing.
Then the Lord explains WHY his law of marriage is monogamy--because it breaks the tender hearts of women and fathers lose the confidence of their children. And this plays out in every scriptural account of polygamy and there is a great deal of evidence this is how it played out in modern times and continues unfortunately to play out.
I stand with Elder Bednar, lets believe The Book of Mormon.
I don't assume that all the apostles support 132. President Hinckley said on national television with Larry King, and I recall my jaw dropping at the time, that he did not think polygamy was doctrinal. It really puzzled for a long time until I read about the removal of the Priesthood ban.
Hope that helps.
@@BridgeBuilder-x4c president Hinckley saying it’s not doctrine can also be interpreted to mean “it’s not a current teaching (doctrine) and practice of our church. You can argue it either way pretty easily IMO.
Cannot believe that I am having to defend polygamy in 2024😂😂. Didn’t see that on my bingo card.
😂
You must not be familiar with the Denver Snuffer narrative.
Why would anyone want to defend such an evil practice? 🤢
I would absolutely defend the practice in an eternal sense. My son’s first wife passed way leaving two small boys. He was single for a few years and then remarried and consequently had three more children with his new wife. I’m so grateful for BOTH of his wives and we love them both. Heaven would not be heaven without both of them. She is deceived.
ikr
Ha! If I eat ONE cookie at a time, then it only counts as eating one cookie. Perfect polygamy logic.
😂😂😂
And they certainly made Brigham very FAT!
Can I be on your diet!!?
Do we "pick" what Joseph and Hyrum actually said and did, or do we "pick" what their enemies accused, or bad late recollections decades after Joseph's death alleged?
I just want to be sure I'm following the careful, balanced reasoning of those who oppose and condemn Sister Stone when she simply says she believes Joseph Smith when he ALWAYS proclaimed he condemned polygamy and never EVER practiced it.
See if I've got this straight, will you Brothers Brian, Jacob, David, et al . . .?
* THE LORD GAVE Joseph Smith a direct and essential commandment for human salvation (marry your babysitters ...) and then ALSO TOLD JOSEPH TO ....
* .... PRACTICE this anti-Book of Mormon commandment in order to have TONS of CHILDREN beyond your relationship with Emma, without ever producing ANY other children--except for those with your wife, Emma,
* .... MAKE SURE there is NOT A SINGLE contemporary JOURNAL ENTRY about ANY of those earth-shattering unions of the Lord's prophet with any of those dozens of polygamous wives--even though they each kept regular journal entries of all important events in their lives (though DECADES LATER, other leaders will round them up & "jog their memories" & have them EACH SIGN BOILERPLATE AFFIDAVITS, which the unbiased judge at the "Temple Lot Trial" will aggressively dismiss as obviously coerced FRAUDS in their failed attempt to provide the necessary legal evidence that you, Joseph Smith, ever practiced polygamy),
* .... ALWAYS DENY and LIE about the new commandment of institutional adultery (whoops, "polygamy"), & loudly condemn polygamy (whoops, "institutional adultery") at every opportunity,
* (because, you know, the Lord giveth no commandments unto the children of men, save he shall prepare a way for them that they may then immediately deny that commandment & repeatedly lie about ever having received it),
* (and because, you know, the same guy who had the . . . courage to walk out of the Sacred Grove & announce to the entire world they must repent & follow every guideline given to him directly by God himself, word-for-word, to have any hope of salvation from hell; this same pretty tough guy by most standards, then quakes, trembles, & cowers at the prospect of some Missouri or Illinois hick walking past him & accusing him of keeping some commandment given to him directly by the Lord--with a Samurai angel making sure he is on the team)
* .... AND THEREFORE ALWAYS SNEAK AROUND in the dark--behind your wife's back--when adding to your teenage (& other men's wives) harem--as commanded by the Lord,
* .... AND EXCOMMUNICATE ANY OTHERS you know of who preach or practice that same polygamy,
* .... AND THEN PREACH and include additional verses & sections to the DC that clearly certify that the Lord's law of marriage is strictly MONOGAMOUS,
* .... AND THEN ARRANGE FOR FUTURE LEADERS (long after your death) to ERASE those monogamous verses & sections (DC 101, et al),
* .... AND HAVE THOSE FUTURE LEADERS REPLACE those clear monogamy verses & sections with the most ham-fisted & carnally-toned words of DC 132, which section suddenly CELEBRATES & COMMANDS having plenty of wives & concubines in order to satisfy any of those ole natural "desires" that may arise . . . which "desires" & accumulation of desire-quenching wives now become the top priority in a (male) saint's life)
* .... AND HAVE THEM INCLUDE blatantly FALSE DOCTRINES throughout that newly-forged (I mean placed ... or ... added ... or displayed ... or ...) DC section,
* .... AND have them ADDRESS your beloved WIFE and faithful matriarch of the Restoration, EMMA, in the threatening, debasing, HATEFUL TONES of that document,
* .... AND HAVE THOSE SAME LEADERS declare the earthly practice of polygamy "ESSENTIAL for exaltation" & "MORE IMPORTANT than BAPTISM" and declare Monogamy the enemy of morality & source of prostitution & disease,
* .... AND THEREBY, with all this ammo now available, PROVIDE anti-LDS GROUPS their GREATEST WEAPON (targeting potential investigators & vulnerable members) against reading the Book of Mormon, gaining a testimony of its truth, & joining the Lord's true and restored kingdom they could ever hope for in their deepest anti-LDS dreams . . .
Am I following you folks, or did I miss a few direct commandments of the Lord to his founding prophet of the Restoration ... ?
And you're mad at Sister Stone for doubting such "light-and-truth-filled" doctrines & related activities?
Hmmm, I think, instead of all that, I'll just go ahead & believe and sustain the Lord's founding prophet of the Restoration, the Prophet Joseph Smith, when he ALWAYS exclaimed that he condemned polygamy & was a loving and faithful husband to his dear wife, Emma, who also clearly denied that her husband ever polygamized.
Sure hope my decision doesn't get y'all too riled . . .
Give it a try, yourself, my friend, & see how the Lord feels about that decision. Okay?
Well... When you put it that way.... 😂 LOVE this comment!!!!
Amen!
It’s so ironic how many criticize her for speaking against the current prophet (which she is careful not to do) but yet have no problem to disparage the prophet of the final dispensation, Joseph Smith, (second only to Jesus), Hyrum and Emma to justify the abominable practice he openly condemned until his dying breath. I will err on the side of defending Joseph’s character, his loyalty to Emma and faithfulness to doing all of God’s commandments-which did not include any form of deception or betrayal. Michelle’s research and quest for truth are so well admired and needed and bring peace to a topic that does not align with who we know God and Joseph to be.
Oh my goodness you broke the thread! So well said!
Best comment ever ❤
Anyone who believes this lady is being misled.
Greg even said it "to bring another individual INTO THAT marriage". at 1:16
Greg looks like he’s screaming inside through this whole interview 🤣😂 Good job Greg for talking with Michelle and listening, even when it hurts. Michelle knows her stuff!!! 👏
Well, this was a lot to take in. Great job Greg, for being willing listen to Michelle's scholarship on the subject. Thanks for letting her speak and preparing great questions.
And it was admirable since it is clear you disagree. Michelle is the top scholar on Joseph Smith and polygamy. Brian reverts to name calling which I was honestly surprised to see in your opening paragraph. I thought you were on the most part respectful in the interview. And anyone can lose it a bit in a back and forth they feel passionate about. But really, the "polygamy deniers?" Not loving that political tactic. I could counter with the "monogamy deniers"--which I try not to, because we are all trying to be respectful and stick to a discussion of the facts. Quite frankly, Brian is out of date... And Don already fessed he was hired on the bias he was to prove Joseph is a polygamist....
Good interview. D&C 132 "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..." Do we seriously believe the Lord ever justifies concubines (sex slaves)? Think about that single issue and then ask yourself: seriously, the Lord says it is JUSTIFIED to have sex slaves?
Great job Michelle. I invite all true seekers after more truth and light to watch the videos of Michelle, Gwendlyn, Rob, Jeremy, and Whitney.
Thank you, Greg, for hosting this wonderful woman.
There is no doubt that, like portions of the Bible, (namely the Deuteronomists) D&C 132 was tampered with. And this is the perfect example. This is also why scribes (historians) are listed as hypocrites by Jesus. Our own historians have engaged in malpractice, whether intentionally or ignorantly. In section 25 Emma is an "elect lady", but by section 132, she is threatened with destruction seven times. Does that make sense?
A concubine is not a sex slave, but a wife of lower status
AMEN!
@@avoice423 NOT SO. But even if it was so, then 132 teaches of a caste system for women in Heaven. 132 is filled with false teachings. Time to actually read it and apply Alma 32
As Greg said, he finds it DIStasteful, and not "SWEET" and DELICIOUS"
Webster defines a concubine: a woman with whom a man cohabits without being married: such as one having a recognized social status in a household below that of a wife
or mistress. Oxford dictionary: ... (in polygamous societies) a woman who lives with a man but has lower status than his wife or wives. A mistress. King's College: a woman who cohabits with a man to whom she is not legally married, especially one regarded as socially or sexually subservient; mistress. (among polygamous peoples) a secondary wife, usually of inferior rank.
Even if we disregard the historical definition of a concubine--which would be historical malpractice--we would have to define what is a "wife of lower status." Obviously, a concubine is not a wife of higher status. How many lower status categories could there be?
Do we seriously think our Savior would ever establish a system in His Plan of Salvation for hundreds of thousands of His daughters to be consigned to be a "wife" of, 2nd, 3rd, 4th class as a member of a concubine? No, sex slave quite aptly describes a woman who is in a concubine.
Eventually the LDS church leaders will disavow Brigham's polygamy doctrine, just as they have done with Adam-God, blood atonement, and the blacks holding the priesthood.
I love Michelle Stone. She has helped me find peace with how I felt God viewed me as a woman for the majority of my life. I actually feel like Heavenly Father loves me now instead of feeling like an object. Thank you Michelle for the hours upon hours of research you have done.
@@brianbrown2237 Michelle is your counselor?
Words are inadequate to describe the first time I read 132 as a seminary student. It was soul crushing. I had a natural love for Heavenly Father and Jesus, and a budding passion for their words in scripture. I tried to understand what I clearly see as verbal nonsense in 132. Ask an English teacher to read this! I found some false doctrines in it, but no one ever wants to talk about it. So 132 had great dissonance for me. It was Elder Bednars talks on the teacher is no better than the student, and President Nelson's admonishment to "hear Him" where I finally felt free to trust my heart, mind, and soul that polygamy is an abomination! I appreciate the work that both sides of the polygamy discussion have done. Now it is time for Brian Hales and other historians to get caught up on the topic. I am not all about changing the Church. But my family knows that I believe Joseph, I believe the Lord and the words he gave to Jacob--that polygamy is an abomination. What has happened to Jacobs talk condemning polygamy: it gets wrested, chopped in pieces, verses pulled out to support what D & C literally calls, the Doctrine of Multiple Wives and Concubines! Funny how no one wants to talk about who gets to be the concubines--a Heavenly caste system! My testimony of my Heavenly Father and Jesus Christ have grown by leaps and bounds. I have greater love for my husband. I am now able to fully trust my heart with God. That childhood love for the Lord has been restored! Thank you Michelle!
I feel the same!! I feel like Jesus loves me.
@@BridgeBuilder-x4c I relate! So much healing and clarity
Amen! I share the same sentiment and similar experience. And the truth will set you free!
Greg!!! Very important conversation!! Thank you.❤
Lotsa fallout in comments section. I hope its all for the better. Bless you.
21 Min. With all due respect, my question for Greg would be, "How close was Joseph to Joseph? How close was Emma to Joseph? How close was Hyrum to Joseph?" All three of them were clear in their contemporary, verifiable statements regarding polygamy. They said polygamy was wrong; an abomination. Yes, the reality is that there had to be someone lying. It was either Joseph, Emma and Hyrum or those who were pushing for polygamy. I believe Joseph, Emma and Hyrum.
That's such a load of crap. None of you "I believe Joseph crowd" really believe Joseph. It's not like you say, "Well l, while I don't believe Joseph instituted plural marriage, Brigham was also a prophet and had the prophetic mantle to do it." No, your immediately conclusion is that if Joseph didn't start it, it wasn't legitimate. Which shows its about the issue for you, not what Joseph did or didn't do. Each of you revisionists would throw Joseph under the bus just as fast as you have Brigham and other prophets.
@@jaredshipp9207 Name one prophet of the restoration that has anywhere near the connection to heaven that Joseph did. I believe Joseph because I believe the BOM, temple, Pearl of great Price, JST, work for the dead. I believe Joseph when he said “What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one”, because I see the fruits of his work as the fruits of Christ.
@@4rcgoodwin And that kind of faulty thinking is why we have people writing off everything from Brigham Young, eventually apostatizing and cutting themselves off from the Church, while telling themselves they are being loyal to Joseph and the Restoration.
@@jaredshipp9207 Those be some big baby tears you're crying.
@dougknighton5348 Just calling out apostasy when I see it.
Mosiah 11: 2 “he did not keep the commandments of God, but he did walk after the desires of his own heart. And he had many wives and concubines. And did cause his people to commit sin.” Did Brigham Young read this and believe it? NO.
Listen to the Prophet Jacob: “This people [if we liken the scriptures to ourselves in these last days, what did Brigham Young do?] begin to wax in iniquity [starting with a lie]; 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” (Book of Mormon | Jacob 2:23).
“Behold, David and Solomon truly had many wives and concubines, which thing was abominable before me, saith the Lord.” (Book of Mormon | Jacob 2:24)!
Correct. If Eve was deceived by Satan, what makes us think Brigham was not?
@@kencard6657 He is talking of King Noah. He was wicked, and the Lord did not give him his wives and concubines.
This is not comparable to Brigham Young
@@whazthatusay The Lord never gave anyone "many wives and concubines"
The sleep upon our people is deep, and we must arise and awaken. We are still under condemnation for not harkening to what we have received, even the covenant of the Book of Mormon.
You forgot Jocob 2:30
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
As Joseph Smith and Brigham Young were and imho are still prophets and they were commanded of and by the Lord for His people to raise up seed unto Him, the Lord, we may now disagree with it but at the last day will not be able to deny that He, the Lord, did directly command His people via His prophets.
@@magapefarmshomestead6453 you have reading comprehension issues. But the good news is you can learn to overcome those issues. Briefly...
"these things" consistently only refers to one thing in this chapter, the whoredoms and abomination of, many wives and concubines. (aka, the things they "ought not to have done")
In verse 30, the preceding conditional clause - "for if I will raise up seed unto me I will command my people"--- lacks adversative markers establishing its nature to be in contrariety to what was previously stated. "Otherwise" isn't introducing a clause counter to a conditional clause adversative to the prevenient text.
"Otherwise" is a conjunctive adverb, introducing an adverbial clause of condition, expressing what will happen if a certain condition is not met. It's in indicative mood.
It isn't acting as an adverb modifying the verb phrase "command my people" in the apodosis of the previous clause. It's not indicating that the command is in a different manner or in antithesis. If it were, the subordinate clause "they shall hearken unto these things" would then lack a proper coordinating conjunction linking it to the previous part of sentence. Even then, it still lacks an adversative marker; "for" isn't adversative and isn't interposing something in contrariety to the previous text.
The hypocrisy of wondering how it’s possible for Joseph F Smith to have lied, while at the same time accusing the Prophet Joseph Smith of having lied about his polygamy.
When Greg says at the hour mark “I don’t want anything to do with it” shows his own soul is testifying to him how gross it is. Why say that if there is nothing wrong with it? It’s the light of Christ testifying to you.
Ether 10: 5 “Riplakish did not do that which was right in the sight of the Lord, for he did have many wives and concubines” Did those who lived polygamy read this?!
He was an exception 😁
There’s a bit more to that scripture if you keep reading.
@@kencard6657 remember if there are any scriptures where someone ever practiced it, we can perform amazing mental gymnastics to prove they were exceptions so we don’t have to face the tough reality of making a mistake. Almost like we are anti repentance.
Concubines.
@@kencard6657 were they given to Riplakish by God?
God told Joseph Smith there were false brethren making false accusation against him.
Michelle is awesome. I’m grateful for all her hard work. We should not lay polygamy at Joseph’s feet- especially when he himself publicly denounced the practice.
It’s actually really cut and dry. Joseph was either a liar, a lethario and a pedophile… or he was telling the truth, and was not a polygamist.
Polygamy is an abomination. Similar to other abominations BY introduced (like blacks and the priesthood, blood atonement, Adam God, etc)
I truly pray that Michelle can understand why Polygamy happened and that for a time God allowed it. I pray she can get back on the covenant path.
It’s awesome to see Michelle on this channel. Well done. Her work is exceptional and needs to be heard. Polygamy still weighs on the hearts of women and children and should be condemned. It’s not of God as she beautifully points out. God cares about the hearts of women and children ALWAYS not sometimes with exception “when He sanctions polygamy”. Why would anyone believe that of God 😢 Praise to the truth of the Book of Mormon and Glory to God who is the great I Am ✨
Greg, I know you are catching heat for having Michelle on. I personally think it was a good choice and these are conversations that we need to have. As JSJr said (in quoting another), by proving contraries,' truth is made manifest,'. If JSJr did practice and teach polygamy, the truth is on your side and there is no need to fear the naysayers. If it isn't of God and JSJr never taught or practiced it, that will eventually be made known. Truth will prevail.
I have come to learn for myself that polygamy is not a godly principle and I find a lot of Michelle's early church research to be quite insightful. I don't agree with her on many things but there are many things I do agree with her on. There is ample evidence on both sides of the argument to support your beliefs (pro- or anti-polygamy) - it really comes down to how much you dig into the original sources, read their journals and the actual words of JSJr rather than what others said he said.
Good comment.
You are sounding kind of bitter and your comment doesn’t make any sense.
@@archiedunbar656 if this is to me, keep in mind he edited his comment.
@@CwicShow I did edit it b/c I felt it wasn't warranted. It was mostly in jest but that doesn't come across well in YT comments.
@@duncansh81 Fair enough. I will edit mine as well.
I have enjoyed this episode and appreciated that you treated each other with respect. I am familiar with much of Michelles's well researched work and believe that she is indeed seeking to find truth.
Cwic your explanation of a polygamists marriage being between one man and one women had me cracking up.
Then you don't understand how plural marriage worked.
@CwicShow no, I guess I don't.
@@CwicShow It didn't work, it was chaos from beginning to today. People still suffering in its chains today.
POLYGAMY LOGIC: If I eat “ONE cookie at a time,” then it only counts as eating one cookie!
This is the twisted logic it takes to make polygamy work.
No that would be eating more than one cookie but if I have a contract to distribute my cool new shoes with Walmart and another with target those are still both individual contracts between two corporate entities not one contract between three entities
No, and without making an argument for it, that is a poor analogy.
God wouldn’t have said it that way if he meant men could marry as many women as they want, to wrest what he says isn’t a good idea.
LOL. If I eat one cookie , one cookie got eaten. It was a wonderful union between one man and one cookie. Especially if it's a Lemon Cream.
Anti polygamy non logic is, if I eat another cookie two days later I've no longer only eaten one cookie at a time two days earlier.
According to the naysayers, the moral to this story is... even if the Lord says to eat another cookie, never eat more than one cookie in your life regardless.
The Scriptures cannot be broken and surely the Cookie Monster does NOT approve of your message either. BURP!! 🤢😂
“The principles of Plural Marriage were revealed for the benefit and exaltation of the children of men, but how much unhappiness has arisen through failure, on the part of some who have contracted this order of marriage, to conform to the laws that govern it! But does it arise through any defect in the order of the marriage system? O no; but from ignorance and the folly and wickedness of those individuals who enter into it, who abuse, rather than righteously obey, it.
Lorenzo Snow
Are people so afraid admit that she could be right? What do you loose? I support and sustain our prophet and love this gospel but she very much could be right. Why do these men have to be perfect without any flaw when we have biblical evidence of flawed men called of God. Christ was and is the only perfect being to ever live. I have in my 40+ years tried to justify polygamy but over the past couple of years of personally looking into this THIS MAKES THE MOST SENCE! Yes it shatters some things but those things coupled with this information actually makes all of the pieces fit together. Do I think she is teaching through revelation? NO she is doing what any of us could do (and what God has asked us to do ) STUDY IT OUT! Then pray and ask. We are the main religion that teaches that and we are afraid to do it ourselves on this issue because we I think are afraid of what that means to us about Brigham Young and others. Joseph Smith was the prophet of the restoration. The church and its leaders are guides to lead us to Christ, but they are not the gospel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Beautifully said. So many people reject this idea because they think they would have to reject the church. They do not! You can reject that polygamy came from Joseph and still be a faithful believing member!
I love that only people who agree with, or are the prophetess MS, have been deemed to have studied it out. Many others have studied it out and we’ve arrived at a different conclusion. The two sides disagree, but only one side is disparaging prophets old and new and it’s not the side that disavows MS as a prophetess.
@Ehcfe Nobody said the prophets are perfect. But it should be understood that they are also not going to be able to teach and practice institutionalized adultery (as the plural marriage-denying revisionists see it) and yet retain priesthood keys. So anyone who wants to go down this revisionist road, if they are consistent, can't claim "plural marriage was never commanded of God" and yet honestly claim they believe in the Church or understood how priesthood keys work. This is precisely why coming to this revisionist conclusion, which agrees with neither scripture or history, goes so often hand in hand with apostasy. It's only been apostate sects that have pushed this idea. Now those of like mind within the Church are pushing the same falsehoods. Before they're sifted out anyway.
@@jaredshipp9207 That is plainly incorrect. Even if Brigham committed adultery it does not invalidate his keys. That is not how priesthood keys work, currently or anciently.
As per the church handbook (38.2.6), unworthiness is not something that invalidates an ordinance, including ordinances that confer priesthood keys. If a stake president is excommunicated, for adultery, apostasy, or even murder, it does not invalidate any of the ordinations he performed. Otherwise, an investigation would have to be performed to discover when he became unworthy, and which ordinances and temple work would have to be redone. Alma the younger received his priesthood authority from king Noah (Msh 11:5), a man openly committing adultery and who killed Abinadi. If this does not invalidate Alma’s authority, you’ll be hard pressed to argue that Brigham’s keys would be invalidated for lying about polygamy’s origins. (Additionally, John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff were ordained by Joseph, not Brigham, so it’s a null point anyways.)
Ultimately, we do not believe in a gospel of perfection. Jesus died so that we might not be condemned by the mistakes of our past. Just as God is eager to forgive us of our sins individually, even heinous ones, so too is He eager to forgive us institutionally.
“Ordinances of the priesthood are valid if they are performed by authorized priesthood bearers in the prescribed manner.… The ordinance does not become invalid if someone involved is unworthy at the time he participates. The sanctity of the ordinance is violated, but not the validity. ” Rex W Allred (Melchizedek General Priesthood Committee), Liahona, March 1989
@bbbarham6264 You're confusing this with the ability to lead the Church, maintain one's prophetic mantle, and receiving continual revelation while living and teaching gross sin. Sorry, it doesn't work like that and those history revisionists who claim it does are simply trying to have their cake and eat it too. They don't have the courage of their own convictions and will attack the Church and its leaders from the inside, leading others to leave, while they themselves don't. That's what Michelle Stone is doing.
My heart is sad as I read through the comments here. As brothers and sisters can we feel the love of our Savior for one another? Can we pray for each other to find truth?
Knowing whether or not God commands His children to live polygamy is very important because it is a direct reflection of the character and nature of our God.
I believe that He is a God of love and He cares very deeply about the feelings of His children. Through much research and learning, I can now see in the scriptures and through sources of church history (Joseph Smith Papers) that polygamy is not a commandment from God and never has been! When I asked the Lord if Joseph practiced polygamy, I received a beautiful dream where He showed me that Joseph did not practice polygamy and he only loved Emma.
I believe that the research and online sharing Michelle and others are doing is literally a manifestation of scripture that the truth is being shouted from the rooftops! The fruit of this truth is so beautiful! I am grateful for a loving God that cares deeply about the tender hearts of his daughters. 💕
If we won’t soften our hearts and open our eyes to the possibility of another narrative than this “false tradition of men” that we have been taught about polygamy, we will end up fulfilling the prophecies in the Book of Mormon that were given for us!
Please don’t trust in the arm of flesh (as we are warned of in the Book of Mormon) to tell you what is true. Ask the Lord! This is my prayer for you all 🙏
Yes! Take it in prayer to THE source of truth!
Anyone that argues that Joseph didn't practice polygamy has to also argue that Joseph recieved false revelations and was likely decieved by Satan to ordain wicked men to be his quorum of apostles and lead the church who conspired to lie about polygamy and abuse women. You are basically shooting yourself in the foot and destroying Joseph's prophetic powers.
@@justinbosley692 But we don’t have to believe he was a liar and adulterer, and Brigham was above reproach.
Unlike all of the general authorities and the vast majority of the church, I choose to believe Joseph, Hyrum and Emma.
If, in the end, I’m wrong about their integrity? Well…then I have much bigger problems to wrestle than Joseph’s marital status.
@@brijsmi072 So, you'd rather believe that Joseph recieved revelation from Satan than that he lied because he was afraid for his life.
@@justinbosley692 No. All of Joseph’s revelations on polygamy were against it’s practice…repeatedly calling it an abomination, in keeping with scripture.
Joseph, very obviously, didn’t write 132. A ten year old could compare the writing in 132 to ANYTHING Joseph took down and see it’s worlds apart in difference.
Repeatedly…over and over again… in private record AND in public utterances, he adamantly eschewed polygamy and threatened its proponents and practitioners with disciplinary measures.
We should really, really, consider exactly why, Emma stayed away from the church once Brigham took over. She wasn't wrong.
We could also ask why did Mary Fielding, Hyrum’s widow, go with Brigham Young and the church?
She did not want her children to be groomed into polygamy. I don't either. All my children and grandchildren know that polygamy is an abomination. Not everyone bought into the false doctrines that lead to slavery in Utah. I can hold my own conviction to believe the Lord, that polygamy is an abomination.
@@BridgeBuilder-x4c I’m not sure about that. Joseph F Smith practiced plural marriage, and Hyrum stated that Mary Fielding sat in as proxy for his first wife’s (Jerusha) sealing to him.
@@oshemer5066 Not sure I get what you are saying. Emma did not want her children to become polygamists and that is what Brigham was practicing before they left Nauvoo. This was a big rift as well as other things. Yes, Hyrum was sealed to one woman for eternity, his first wife after her death. Mary went west with the Saints where she was left to live in horrible poverty. Mary died when Joseph F. Smith was young. Watch Michelles episode on this.
Greg, I love the episodes where you dig into politics; however, this was painful. Michelle Stone is an expert on this topic. She knows the scriptures, history, and every other detail about this crazy topic. Any other expert would present the information as if they were the expert and not be challenged by someone who doesn't have her knowledge. While it's a huge time commitment, I think it would be helpful for you to watch all her episodes, look at the references, and then ask the questions. BTW, polygamy has wrecked havoc among many men in the way Michelle described. You're fortunate to now know any of them.
Over where I live we're surrounded by them. It's so potent that the practice of it is frequently brought up. People believe it is coming back and if it is coming back (be it from God or not) we better find out for ourselves so we can defend the truth. Seeing what I've seen and knowing what I know, the Book of Mormon is right. It is a whoredom and abomination!
The Church not addressing the polygamy narrative bolsters all those still practicing it and all the abuses. Now that I have spent the time to review all put forward by Brian Hales, the Church's leading experts, Don Bradley, and others on his side--And all Michelle's work along with Whitney Horning and Jeremy Hoop--and studied every scripture relating--it is difficult to understand how it is we cannot dispose of this once and for all! Stop the bleeding... Stop the cries of the women and children--and men.
Yes Greg is not familiar enough with the crazy amount of details on the subject. Unfortunately, that was exposed with bad reasoning and arguments and ignorant challenges.
But we are so grateful that he did have Michelle on! Others choose not to have her on their platforms because they know she knows her stuff. They would rather just talk about her instead, Jacob Hanson.
You, the commenters agreeing with you and absolutely Michelle does not understand her scriptures. Or should I say... will not understand them. Righteous plural marriage has never been a sin as is proven by the scriptures.
To rephrase @cwicshow pinned comment: Oh no, our church is in trouble. The book of Mormon teachings are seeping into our church. The meaning of being faithful to your wife will change forever!
I was not expecting Michelle to be so articulate and knowledgeable. She answered every question calmly, and clearly. However, the fact that every prophet since Joseph Smith would have to be deceptive and a liar revealed the greatest amount of concern to me. I know President Nelson is God’s Prophet and does NOT have a deceptive spirit. There is much I don’t understand but I’ve asked many questions of God, and God has each time pointed me to the words of President Nelson. In his biography, Insights” written by Sheri Dew, at the very end it reveals that the most difficult commandment we will be asked to live in the latter days will be to follow the prophet. I’m sticking with the prophet.
By the power of the Holy Ghost-you can know the truth of ALL things.
A woman in my ward, who homeschools her kids like me, said she was going to stop teaching math and teach deeper gospel topics because there could be another mom in their house soon (referring to the topic of polygamy). Her husband was on the stake high council. IT IS A BIGGER DEAL THAN PEOPLE REALIZE.
How can you not love her! Using reason and logic to the edifying of the body of the church. She may not have it all right but neither does the culture of the church.
Thank you, Greg, for letting her talk on your platform.
At least we can all agree, along with Joseph, that we need some clarification on the topic.
THAT'S NUTS! Homeschool dad here (non bunker-building). However... what if polygamy did come back? Half the church would leave. I'm glad those days are gone and I hope they don't come back in my time, but I suppose they could. And so, I wonder what huge things will come to us in our time that will squeeze the believers, any ideas? The trans/homo/identity stuff is from the outside-in. I wonder what may test the saints from the inside to such a degree (from the prophet).
Did she honestly jump to the conclusion we'd be recommencing the practice? On what basis? Where is she pulling this from? Also, math is...ehhhh...sort of important, so instead of not teaching math, she could just add on more Gospel centered education. I am totally sold on it as a Celestial principle, but I'm also always wary of people that become enamoured with the law. Laws are not give for our indulgence, but to perfect the Saints. If the Brethren reinstitute it, I'll support it, but I think it is dangerous to either desire or expect it, lest we fall into temptation and away from our covenants.
@@TheYgdsha! I totally agree. I told the stake pres about it and he just laughed. Love my stake pres (husband is his secretary), but it’s annoying when it’s so close to home. She is the ward primary pres too 🙄
@@bloviaxhaha, love the “non-bunker-building” clarification😅
@@bloviaxit’s not coming back. Read The 2018 church news article (Sep 16?)-Elder Cooke basically says it’s not coming back. If you want I’ll find the quote. Pres Hinckley also said on Larry king Live that polygamy was not doctrinal and he condemns it. Of course, people are going to interpret it how they want, but to me it’s pretty clear.
Also, we don’t need something major like plural marriage to wreck the church, a jibby jab was bad enough 😉
Heck, in my ward right now, elephants and donkeys can’t even get along right now
At the hour mark, Greg is being ridiculous. He ignores D&C 42 “he shall cleave unto her and NONE else” and then argues that polygamous marriage (poly = many) is still an agreement between one man and one woman. Sheer wresting of the scriptures.
I agree that polygamous marriages were not agreements between one man and all his wives at once, but you cannot ignore D&C 42.
“None else.”
Yes, I agree. This is Greg's weakest argument, least thought out comment ever. And I usually agree with him!
Agree. In addition, marrying other women would automatically break the covenant of marriage with the first!
No, you’re missing what he is saying. He is saying those women were not sealed to more than one man which would be polyandry. They were married for time to one man and then sealed to another man to make dynastic connections for the afterlife which is how they understood it at that time.
Polygamy is one man sealed to many women, polyandry is one woman sealed to many men; as those early Saints understood it. The women weren’t sealed to more than one man n their lifetime therefore they didn’t practice polyandry. That was his point.
@@amynazzaThis is more evidence that 132 is NOT of God. Christ did not encourage men to build kingdoms for themselves in the afterlife. He did not even want his apostles considering who would have the most important position in relation to Him.
It is called WOKE MATH. I live in California. 1 plus 1 and 1 plus 1 can equal either 2 or 4--it is up for interpretation... And, it would be racist to focus on getting the correct answer.
It’s not just Michelle Stone. More and more voices from faithful TBM are echoing what Michelle is saying.
Greg, I love your channel! This was a ballsy interview, so I tip my hat to you. But if your going to dance with the bull, you need to do your homework. You really should have watched some of Michelle's key episodes before the interview to better inform your questions. You spent the majority of the time rehashing basic things she has addressed at nauseum on her channel. She generally does not "cherry-pick" as you assert several times. She thoroughly (and verbosely) addresses both sides of the argument and faces contrary evidence fairly. Michelle rightfully declares this to be an important topic and each of us LDS need to face it with courage, open hearts and with ears to hear. The reason your comments are filled with emotion is because this information radically changes our worldview of "modern prophets" and requires us to really scrutinize our centralized institution. For many, this information has shattered unfounded testimonies. But for others (like me) it has initiated a spiritual revival. My first reaction to this information was similar to yours. But after study and prayer, the spirit has promptly taught me. This isn't RLDS doctrine. It's simply truth. Joseph taught us to embrace truth, despite it's origin. I have no intention of leaving the church and hope that this discovery can serve as a fire that will turn us towards the Savior in a meaningful way. You seem keen to frame this topic as a binary (e.g., Brigham was either a true prophet or conspirator against Joseph's life, Abraham was either a perfect man or an adulterer). Reality (as you well know) is much more nuanced.
@18:30, again your "natural trail" assumes a binary (e.g. polygamy was from God vs. a conspiratorial cabal to cover it up). Reality is always more complicated. One possible angle is that the Brighamites' justification of polygamy comes from a misunderstanding of Joseph's doctrine of sealing (here is one attempt to alternatively explain this doctrine: scriptures.info/scriptures/tc/glossary/adoption). There is strong evidence that Joseph was "sealing" people to him, both male and female. Most of the females were pregnant and husbands even participated in the ordinance [ref the work of Don Bradley]. Those that were zealous about spiritual wifery (concept adopted from other revival religions of the time) sought justification for the practice and found it in this idea of sealing. I don't think the Brighamites were necessarily explicitly "lying" about Joseph, they were simply very motivated to find a prophetic justification for their understanding. They may have even felt very strongly that the practice was righteous. The "cabal" theory is unlikely. There is a beautiful scriptural word for this phenomena: apostasy.
Thanks for commenting. I have done my homework but did not want to speak much in this interview. I'll do that another time. My goal was to let her speak and give her opinions and conclusions. I wanted to put light on this and the best way is for her to do it herself.
@@CwicShow Fair enough. Good stuff. Thanks for reading my comment. You're a good man and I really enjoy learning from you. I especially love the Bruce Porter stuff.
Im trying to understand why Michelle Stone hasn't joined the Community of Christ
Interestingly, for years the Community of Christ rejected the idea that Joseph was married to multiple wives. They have since accepted that he probably did, even though he, Emma and the leaders of church from testified from the pulpit that there was a doctrine that taught polygamy.
She's got to fix The Church, she said, is why she stays in The Church.
Probably because Community of Christ is a leftist organization that has left the belief of Joseph and the Book of Mormon behind.
I don't think the Community of Christ church has authority to officiate in the saving ordinances we receive in the temple. That is paramount above all else.
She has the courage to stay with our church even though there are tares among the wheat.
The doctrine of polygamy makes me feel worthless as a daughter of God.
Then I would ignore it. It's not something any of us have to deal with today.
I think she clearly demonstrated her mastery of this topic. I think there is a lot we don’t know about this. But I do agree with the fact that the book of Mormon is a powerful witness against many wives and concubines.
@@risefromthedust it is also a witness for polygamy! If God commands it, then it will be done.
@@tamragoodrich6067 Nowhere in the Book of Mormon does it say this, or anything remotely like it.
@@shanestone5563Jacob obviously states that generally men should have 1 wife and 0 concubines, but then in Jacob 2:30 he clearly says thay God may command the men to differ from the former commandment in order to raise up seed unto Himself.
@@cameronhoward99 It does not clearly say that. It doesn't even unclearly say it. In fact, nobody interpreted it that way for over twenty years until Orson Pratt pulled that interpretation out of his nether regions.
@@shanestone5563😂😂 yes!
I think you are wrong, Greg. Her argument is totally valid. Also if you read in the Nemenhah record, Christ Himself explains what he says about polygamy
She is right. Joseph Smith was only married to Emma. In a copy of the Book of Mormon, he wrote "One Wife" in the margin. In History of The Church published by Deseret Book on behalf of the church in 1980, Joseph has his scribe write down to hold those accountable that teach, preach or practice polygamy. So she is right that Joseph Smith was NOT a polygamist. The sealings to women were NOT marriages, but Law of Adoption sealings that has nothing to do with marriage, but rather being sealed to Priesthood leaders as a church family. Wilford Woodruff changed this is 1894 to be sealings to father's rather than Priesthood leaders.
So Joseph Smith was NOT a polygamist at all!
I am 26 minutes into this podcast and two things stand out like a sore thumb: first, Ms. Stone forces many, many ambiguous sources and evidences to support her main proposition: Joseph Smith, good (and never bought in to the practice of polygamy) and other leaders bad. If the issue is whether polygamy is a true, doctrinally based practice, why the need to save Joseph from the rest of the bad actors except out of a naïve need to protect her view of the world and testimony. Joseph Smith just as easily could be lumped in with the rest of the bad actors and polygamy could still be, a false principle. To me, this suggests that Ms. Stone is not intellectually honest and is subconsciously motivated by a narrative she is trying to make fit.
The second thing I noticed is that Ms. Stone very knowingly and intentionally stops short of criticizing modern day prophets such as President Nelson and President Oaks. The logical extension of what she preaches condemns these brethren, but she seeks to protect her church membership. If she were seeking truth earnestly, she would follow it wherever it leads. To “cancel“ 4-5 early prophets and presidents of the church (but not Joseph Smith), but shy away from canceling modern prophets again shows a certain naïveté. Selective cancellation of prophets will not preserve her membership.
Loved your comment! Michelle hesitates to call the early Church leaders "liars" but has no problem referring to them as "lustful and power-hungry". She accuses them of the heinous abomination of committing whoredoms but protects them from being viewed as "liars"??? - even though she clearly says they all lied about Joseph Smith's polygamy and D&C 132! Pretty funny stuff. For some reason she just can't bring herself to throw the prophets all under the bus completely! Her position is ridiculous.
Michelle is awesome. Joseph did nothing less than condemn polygamy until the day he died. Then Brigham and his buddies went to work revising history to make it look like their religified adultery had begun with Joseph.
Are you a Snufferite?
@@CwicShow I am not. I assume that refers to a Denver Snuffer follower. I don't know much about him. I am actually a member of the LDS church.
He condemned polygamy, not Celestial Plural Marriage. Big difference between the two. Polygamy is when a man decides to take more than one wife. Celestial Plural Marriage is when a prophet calls a man to take on more than one wife. It's a calling that can only be extended by the prophet and is not for the general membership of the church. That is why men were excommunicated from the church for practicing polygamy.
@@philapos I'm sorry. I just don't buy the claim that Joseph engaged in equivocatory word games like that. I understand your argument, I just don't agree with it.
@philapos as if women would be used in such a manner! If God calls a mam to it then certainly the girls and women should be called as well.
I agree with Greg that marriage being between A man and A woman could go both ways, polygamy or no polygamy.
Ya know, I can’t say one way or the other. But I believe Joseph Smith to be a man of character, the Book of Mormon is the word of God, and Jesus is the Christ. I’m sure we’ll find out about all of the secrets during the millennium.
Greg,
Thank you very much for inviting Michelle on your show, and allowing her to have her say. I think you both handled your disagreements very well, and I hope you have her on again some time, because there are still so many questions that need answers.
Will be interesting to see what they do when William Clayton's journals get released. One lf the guys working on them says there is a lot of challenging things in them and that they give us much more detail on how polygamy was practiced.
Respect to Greg for having Michelle on. We need trusted platforms likes Greg’s where we can have these discussions without people accusing the other of “apostasy” - these are legitimate conversations we should have a no seeker of truth should be afraid to have them.
People like her is why President Nelson said “One of our greatest challenges today is distinguishing between the truths of God and the counterfeits of Satan. That is why the Lord warned us to “pray always, … that [we] may conquer Satan, and … escape the hands of the servants of Satan that do uphold his work.”
The Power of Spiritual Momentum
Exactly- polygamy is a counterfeit to gods law of monogamy given throughout scripture.
So then you side with the liars that wrote the Nauvoo Expositor and killed Joseph Smith. Or do you believe Joseph was honest. “What a thing it is for a man to be accused of committing adultery, and having seven wives, when I can only find one” JS
Amen
When Hyrum Smith, who had been appointed Prophet, Seer, and Revelator by the time, declared in general conference, only around 3 months before his death, with "the power of God," that "it is lawful for a man to marry a wife, but it is unlawful to have more, and God has not commanded any of you to have more," was he wrong, or right?
@@Hmcc0712👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
How can you say that the original 101 “one man one wife” makes room for polygamous marriage when it literally says this….
….”Inasmuch as this church of Christ has been reproached with the crime of fornication, and polygamy: we declare that we believe, that one man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband, except in case of death, when either is at liberty to marry again. It is not right to persuade a woman to be baptized contrary to the will of her husband, neither is it lawful to influence her to leave her husband. All children are bound by law to obey their parents; and to influence them to embrace any religious faith, or be baptized, or leave their parents without their consent, is unlawful and unjust. We believe that husbands, parents and masters who exercise control over their wives, children, and servants and prevent them from embracing the truth, will have to answer for that sin…..”
Women were also encouraged to leave their husbands (even members of the church) to be in polygamous marriages if they can find someone with “higher keys.” What about these sources??
And ironically, Joseph and Hyrum taught that a man or woman should not leave their non believing spouse to join the Saints. They understood that families needed to stay together.
What year was this created? It wasn't in response to the Nauvoo Era... have you studied why this particular section was added? What aspects of marriage in early Colonial America was experiencing? This quote is used AS IF it was in response to Nauvoo which it wasn't.
@@zionssuburb This was written in 1835 as a response to accusations against the Saints in Ohio, during a time they were accused of polygamy due to many cochranites joining the church, and due to the law of consecration. It was reiterated in Nauvoo multiple times as result of continued polygamy accusations in Nauvoo. Cowdrey was gone by Nauvoo so the continued use of this statement shows that it was repeatedly perpetrated with Joseph’s support up until his death.
He answers that and his answer is unfathomable, deceitful. I cannot imagine the feelings of his wife, if he has one, hearing him explain it. 😢
Plural marriage is NOT a black stain on Joseph Smith’s character. It is not a black stain on our history or the Church.
How many people have left or shunned the church over polygamy? I would say it is a huge black stain
@@katherineshiver9428
That is a testimony issue. Millions of members have joined the church.
@@voicesoftherestoration a testimony issue over polygamy
Many more would be members now if it weren’t for polygamy
@@voicesoftherestorationin spite of polygamy, it’s a miracle
Thank you Greg for hosting this episode. It was apparent you were a bit frustrated at times, and I appreciate you working through that.
Although Michelle comes across more argumentative than she means to, I believe the Church desperately needs additional prophetic direction on this matter. You hosting this discussion helps to raise awareness which I pray will lead our Prophet to seek that revelation.
This has already been answered. Revelation isn't going to come because Michelle Stone and other spiritually immature members can't emotionally handle the issue of plural marriage.
I also hope it is addressed by the prophet and other leaders because it has become a dividing point for many members, and a reason for others to fall away from the church.
@@TheyWereInOne Rough Stone Rolling and the anti Mormon narrative adoped by historians is driving people away from God and the Gospel.
These three verses should end the debate. Although the question posed is about divorce, Jesus’s answer is very telling. He reaffirms that the pattern from the beginning has not changed, one man and one women, leaving their father and mother and cleaving to each other. He rebukes them for resting the scriptures, which means no deviation from this was ever condoned or commanded by God. This is again confirmed in the Book of Mormon multiple times and in D&C 42. How many witnesses do we need?
Matthew 19:4-6
4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
And, we have zero scriptural accounts of God actually commanding polygamy. In Jacob God says he suffered and the women and children suffered. 132 is so filled with statements counter to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. We have only a suspect copy written in the hand of a suspect person. God is hearing the cries of us women--can the brethren open their ears? And bring it before the Lord as they did the Priesthood ban?
For what purpose? So sealings to second wives will cease? To make you feel better about history? Because it is not just the modern church history. Go listen to David Alexanders testimony. He had a problem with poligamy until the lord gave him his testimony, he even stated that he would have loved to have lived in that time, if i remember correctly. I also have a testimony of it. I think i know why this is an issue and i belive many will leave the church over it.
@@avoice423 The purpose would be for prophets, seers, and revelators to inquire with the Lord whether the latter portions of D&C 132 contain true doctrine, considering the pain it causes so many members of the church. It is similar to the priesthood ban, many leaders believed and taught false doctrine until there was enough pressure to reconsider the narrative. This is a top reason that people leave and I know many that have studied it out and prayed for comfort or confirmation of its truthfulness but feel nothing but darkness. I’ve conversed with David Alexander a number of times, he’s not the angel that so many paint him out to be. If you want to better understand why this issue is so damaging for so many, I’d encourage you to read The Ghost of Eternal Polygamy.
@@avoice423 I’d love to hear more about your testimony of polygamy and how you’ve obtained it. I’ve studied this topic for years and 1000’s of hours and the more I’ve learned the more I know it’s not from God, despite trying to understand it and make peace with it.
@@Commenter2121 why do you want to know? It seems you have already made your mind up. Go listen to David Alexanders testimony. The Lord is not going go interfere with your agency. I think the key to gaining the testimony is to be willing to except and live it if the Lord so chooses. My personal testimony is private between me and the Lord. He began telling me things over 14 years ago. It is not new to me. I am concerened many will leave the church over this issue.
“And Solomon did evil in the sight of the LORD, as David his father, and went not fully after the Lord.” (Old Testament” | JST 1 Kings 11:4-6)!
So like David ended up doing as well... just what was the evil(s) Solomon was doing?? In David's case, we already know the sin wasn't having many wives. It was what he was doing with and to those wives AND... lusting other men's wives. Murder Too.
So again... what whoredoms were they doing?? How about sleeping with more than one wife at a time, would that be a whoredom and defilement of chastity? How about they were also indulging and allowing or forcing women to sleep with each other, would that be a whoredom?? What about not treating all wives equally and breaking their hearts, would that be a abomination in the eyes of God??
You have just learned the difference between righteous plural marriage and not.
Why would I listen to Michelle Stone when there’s a living prophet on the earth right now…..
😂
Agreed 👍 ❤
Said the Zoramites to Alma. Do you believe that John Taylor was wrong when he received a revelation teaching that the church can never abandon polygamy?
It’s simple. EITHER the modern leaders of the church and all past proponents of Joseph’s polygamy were lying…or Joseph, Hyrum and Emma were.
By supporting the current presidency, you are absolutely saying that Joseph was a liar.
There is no room at all for middle ground on this.
Bing! Nailed it!
Sorry Greg, you were clearly playing word games at one point. One man and one woman doesn’t leave the door open for polygamy. I laughed out loud when you made that argument!
That being said I’ve never heard of this woman but she made some good points and I’m glad you had her on the show.
I do t think he was playing games or word games, as you put it. It makes perfect sense to me. Just offering a different perspective. Not trying to argue.
Michelle says "I would invite people to tell me what abomination does God sometimes command, that He only sometimes wants for His own purposes". Greg mentions the abomination of the murder of Laban that God commanded and she glossed right over it saying "So we need to murder the hearts of our wives and children"? What? Sorry Michelle but since you didn't seem to catch it when Greg said it, I want to highlight it again here: Besides polygamy, MURDER is also an "abomination" that God sometimes commands for His own purposes! So now you can stop saying that "God would never command an abomination".
What if she is right? What if Brigham was a fallen prophet? Worse, what if he was no prophet at all; what if he was a usurper?
Would God‘s plans be frustrated? would the entire church be false?
I don’t think so. God‘s plans cannot be frustrated. The Book of Mormon remains true, no matter what. And this church remains Christ’s Church, even if imperfect, even if damaged, even if wrong in certain key instances.
I know this much. The Book of Mormon says only bad things about polygamy, but it has a whole lot to say about the “remnant of Jacob.“
Jesus Christ himself, after the resurrection, and after his brief sermon on the mountain, spoke about nothing but the remnant of Jacob. That is the focus of the Book of Mormon.
And it was pretty much close to the sole focus of Joseph Smith. In the fall of 1844, he planned to travel to the Rocky Mountains to find a place to live with the Lamanites, who are among the Native Americans.
But he died, obviously, and then Brigham Young came to the Rocky Mountains, but he did not live peacefully with the Lamanites.
The church took a hard turn into apostasy when it took on polygamy. In my view, we barely survived it. It’s a real mercy that the Lord arranged to have polygamy quashed in this church. It’s one of the proofs to me, in fact, that the Lord does direct this church.
But he can do it only through imperfect humans. We do the best we can.
Mormon 8
36. ...and your churches, yea, even every one, have become POLLUTED because of the pride of your hearts.
D&C 124
32 But behold, at the end of this appointment your baptisms for your dead shall not be acceptable unto me; and if you do not these things at the end of the appointment ye shall be rejected as a church, with your dead, saith the Lord your God.
The Nauvoo house was never finished. Church was rejected. 3 years later, both smith prophets were murdered.
D&C 124
45 And if my people will hearken unto my voice, and unto the voice of my servants whom I have appointed to lead my people, behold, verily I say unto you, they shall not be moved out of their place.
46 But if they will not hearken to my voice, nor unto the voice of these men whom I have appointed, they shall not be blest, because they POLLUTE mine holy grounds, and mine holy ordinances, and charters, and my holy words which I give unto them.
They did not listen and were moved from their place. All the way to SLC.
The time of the gentiles is up. The gospel will go from them back to the house of israel. (3 nephi 16: 10-11)
Well said. And that is why I still believe. Alma, although a wicked priest of Noah, still held the priesthood. His power or authority wasn't truly efficacious until he repented. Michelle is correct, we are still under condemnation for not taking the Book of Mormon as seriously as we should.
@@evamat Interesting. Do you believe a church can fall?
@@evamat According to many, if polygamy originated from Brigham Young, it would invalidate his keys and the modern prophets. This is plainly incorrect. It is not how priesthood keys work, currently or anciently.
As per the church handbook (38.2.6), unworthiness is not something that invalidates an ordinance, including ordinances that confer priesthood keys. If a stake president is excommunicated, for adultery, apostasy, or even murder, it does not invalidate any of the ordinations he performed. Otherwise, an investigation would have to be performed to discover when he became unworthy, and which ordinances and temple work would have to be redone. Alma the younger received his priesthood authority from king Noah (Msh 11:5), a man openly committing adultery and who killed Abinadi. If this does not invalidate Alma’s authority, you’ll be hard pressed to argue that Brigham’s keys would be invalidated for lying about polygamy’s origins. (Additionally, John Taylor and Wilford Woodruff were ordained by Joseph, not Brigham, so it’s a null point anyways.)
You might ask, “wouldn’t this mean the Catholic Church still has keys?” The answer is still no. The Catholic Church abandoned the apostolic order, relevant ordinances, and permanently adopted false creeds and doctrines. Whereas we have not, and have rejected false doctrines taught by Brigham.
Ultimately, we do not believe in a gospel of perfection. Jesus died so that we might not be condemned by the mistakes of our past. Just as God is eager to forgive us of our sins individually, even heinous ones, so too is He eager to forgive us institutionally.
“Ordinances of the priesthood are valid if they are performed by authorized priesthood bearers in the prescribed manner.… The ordinance does not become invalid if someone involved is unworthy at the time he participates. The sanctity of the ordinance is violated, but not the validity. ” Rex W Allred (Melchizedek General Priesthood Committee), Liahona, March 1989
@@amybaker1880read the book of mormon again and you’ll find your answer
Based on many of the comments here, it’s safe to assume that many have not been open minded enough to at least engage with her research and try and understand her position. If nothing else, she has made an effective case against polygamy being from God and has shown that there are many holes in the polygamy story we’ve all been told. More and more historians are acknowledging that she’s raising some valid points and that some of the accepted narrative needs to be revisited. We should all be striving for the truth of our history and if that challenges your long held beliefs or makes you uncomfortable, I’m sorry but that’s just life. Church leaders have been wrong before and the Book of Mormon warns us of holding to false traditions and ideas. I believe that the story the church tells on polygamy takes more people out of the church than any other issue, I think it’s exciting that there is more to the story.
Or she is wrong and this is the enticing spirit which has led her and many others from denying the priesthood. I choose to follow the prophet today, president Nelson over Michelle. He is sealed to two women. Michelle teaches false doctrine. She teaches the same as the churches who formed who didn’t like Brigham young
@@6barbers There is a precedent for prophets and apostles being wrong. Luckily there have been others with the courage to push back and bring positive change. You’re right, she could be wrong but I just hope people are willing to hear someone out before making judgment.
@Commenter2121 yours is the correct attitude, open-mindedly seeking truth s throughout this discussion. Thank you.
@Commenter2121 yours is the correct attitude, open-mindedly
seeking truth throughout this discussion. Thank you.
@@UpperCutZX10 Thanks, I’m not sure why so many are afraid to consider that there may be more to learn.
Polygamy being a "marriage between one man and one woman" is hilarious.
That was definitely a mischaracterization by Greg.
Each marriage is between one man and one woman. This has nothing to do with supporting polygamy. It is simply how they did it. A polygamous man had several marriages, not one big marriage.
@@CwicShow This is the argument that current fundamentalist polygamists make. It is a laughable justification for polygamy. It’s like trying to explain how a man can cleave to one wife while also being married to other women at the same time. I know you’re smarter than that.
@@CwicShow132 is clear that the contract is among One Man, his first wife and a third party.
@@CwicShow And by this logic it is only men who practice polygamy (aka Celestial Marriage) because women only mary one and they just have to accept it be cut off. LOL, polygamy is such an obvious whoredom and abomination.