Introduction and Episode Overview

Host [00:00:01] Hello, is this thing on? Hello, everyone, and welcome to another edition of Mormon Stories Podcast. That's not the voice you usually hear, but it is me, Nemo. We are on the LDS discussion Series of Mormon Stories podcast, which appears on the main feed and on its own separate feed. So there's two ways to get it. I guess this is going to be episode 76, but for those of you who are wondering what on earth LDS discussions is, if you've just stumbled upon this, it started with a beautiful man named Mike who had a website that covers all sorts of things about the church, mainly truth claims and historical church topics. And he wrote a series of essays. And John, in his wisdom, decided it's going to be a series. And it is, according to John, one of the most important things that Mormon Stories Podcast has ever produced. And I would tend to agree. I think it's been great. I've been involved since episode two, and I think it's been really important and impactful. Mike has sadly retired. He has gone to pastures more green, more luscious, and more tasty, and you are now stuck with me. So sorry about that. But if this is the first time you're joining us and you've not discussed, discovered the LDS discussion series before, it is best consumed in sequence. It kind of builds upon itself. So feel free to, once you've enjoyed this live stream, maybe go back to the beginning and start from the beginning. You. You won't regret that it is an attempt to cover topics about the church, its truth claims and apologetics, and all sorts of things in between in a sort of dispassionate way in as fair and reasonable and dispassionate a way as possible. We often succeed in that aim. Sometimes we get a little impassioned. It's just the nature of the beast. But today we'll be discussing something that might raise some passions. It might get some people hyped up. We're discussing the sin next to murder. The idea that within Mormonism, within the teachings of the Church of Jesus Christ of Last Day Saints, sexual misconduct and particularly premarital sex is a sin next to murder. And to join me in elucidating this for you all, in covering this, in discussing why this. Why now is my good friend and co host, Julia. Hi, Julia.

Guest [00:02:13] Hey.

Guest 2 [00:02:13] That was brilliant.

Host [00:02:16] Yeah, that was good fun. Julia has a great YouTube, Instagram, TikTok presence under the name Analyzing Mormonism. So you can go find her there, support her there. And it is. Julia and I and others have been covering something today. Today, how Topical.

Guest [00:02:34] We are

Host [00:02:37] out of the mouth of Jasmine Rapley. So, Julia, explain what it is that's going on.

Guest 2 [00:02:41] Yeah, so hang on, I want to pause for a second because if you've been joining us for LDS discussions, this is kind of a. This is kind of an impromptu episode, I think, because we were talking about the Book of Abraham, and we're still planning on talking about that. And then we have the William Clayton journals coming out. But today, this Jasmine Rapley. Rapley. I don't. I still don't know how to say her name. Rapley. She dropped a short yesterday and it's gone mini viral on Instagram. And I even caught wind of it because people were stitching her. And so that's what we're going to discuss today. And so, yeah, so this.

Host [00:03:14] Take it away.

Guest 2 [00:03:15] Yeah. So this is Jasmine. This is her YouTube channel. And I just wanted to show the stats on this because it's kind. It's kind of taken off a little bit. This is as of 30 minutes ago. I'm pretty sure it's up now, but you can see that it says 18,000 views for this little short that she's created. This is her Instagram. It's 150 now. I checked earlier, and her TikTok is being really weird lately. Hers does not have very many views. When I checked last, it was 600. Um, so, you know, but. But still. Anyway. Yeah, but. Yeah, so I just want to share it and I'll make it full screen and then we can discuss it.

Host [00:03:50] Let's have a listen.

Guest 2 [00:03:51] Okay, perfect.

Is Sexual Sin Truly Next to Murder in LDS Doctrine?

Guest 3 [00:03:54] So I don't think that breaking the law of chastity is basically like committing murder. There are two scripture stories where the sin next to murder comes up, but I think they're leading to different conclusions. And it can actually make it easier to want to repent of sexual sin when you understand this concept. I think what makes the David and Bathsheba story so bad is not just David's sexual sin, though obviously, that was very serious. It was that when David realized that he couldn't keep his sin a secret because Bathsheba got pregnant, he arranged for the murder of Bathsheba's husband, Uriah to cover that sin. It was the combination of sexual immorality with murder and trying to cover it up that made it so serious. And the same thing happens in the Book of Mormon where people get this idea of sexual immorality being the sin next to murder. Alma told his son Corianton that his sins with the harlot Isabel were most abominable. Above all sins, save it be the shedding of innocent blood and denying the Holy Ghost. This has led some people to interpret any sexual sin as the sin next to murder. But again, the context here is also not just breaking the law of chastity, but in this case, it was Corianton abandoning his mission, leading to the spiritual murder of the flock he was supposed to be ministering to, according to Alma. So in both the David story and the Corianton story, there are compounding sins. Sexual sin is very serious. But I don't think that the message of these stories is that if you've broken the law of chastity, you're basically a murderer. I think the takeaway is that if you've made a mistake in this area, repent early and repent often so that you don't end up compounding sins that could lead to a path towards spiritual or literal murder. You can learn more about this idea in this article I found at Scripture Central.

Host [00:05:28] I mean, you give that to someone with scrupulosity and you tell them, hey, repent early of sexual sin or it will lead you down a path to murder. Like, that's no better. That is no better a take than what is evident.

Guest 2 [00:05:41] Yeah, I. This was so wild to me to hear her say all this stuff because I was like, it's one thing to be like, oh, that's not really this the next murder. Because I agree with her. I don't think that this sexual sin is next to murder. I don't think having sex outside of marriage or even cheating on your spouse, even though that is wrong or I think it's wrong, I don't think it's next to murder. And then like, I. I get like, like sexual abuse. Like, if that was the case, this would be different conversation. But yeah, the. The changing what these stories are is just appalling to me. And you said we won't. We'll try not to get impassioned. But like, this. This was kind of aggravating to watch.

Host [00:06:17] Well, and we will.

Guest [00:06:19] We.

Host [00:06:19] There's going to be emotions around this because people were shamed and made to feel terrible because they had been told that something they had done, they had acted on a natural human impulse. They'd done something sexual with a partner or whatever when they weren't meant to. And they were made to feel as though they'd done something next to murder. And Jasmine's argument seems to be, well, no, next to here we're reading the preposition wrong. And next to actually means directly adjacent to. So it's like it was a sin alongside murder. And it's like that's just a silly argument.

Guest 2 [00:06:51] Yeah, that is what it feels like it does.

Host [00:06:54] But I think before we get into possibly the easiest part of this, which is just fact checking her and saying, well, she's wrong. Why do you think she's doing this? Why do you think she's making this attempt to try and minimize this teaching that, that sexual immorality is a sin next to murder?

Guest 2 [00:07:12] Well, someone in the comments has suggested. I can't remember if it was her video or my response to her, and I know you've made a response as well, but I, but some people suggested that maybe it was come follow me or maybe it was the church's lessons this week had something to do with this. But. But overall I think it's just a horrible teaching that the church is maybe trying to push to get away from because like, and we'll see in these, we'll see in these next slides is that the last time I was spoken of in conference was I think in 93. So it's been a long time. The church hasn't really said it from the pulpit in a while. But that doesn't mean it's not in their manuals. It doesn't mean it's not in the Book of Mormon, which they encourage everybody to read on a daily basis.

Host [00:07:47] And it doesn't mean that it's not a scar through the membership of the church and the people that have internalized it and the parents that have passed it on to their children without it being said in general conference.

Guest 2 [00:07:56] Right, yes.

Host [00:07:59] So, okay, let's get into it.

Guest 2 [00:08:01] Okay, so the first part is I'm just breaking down the scriptures. So this is a teaching that stems out of the Book of Mormon and it's an Alma 39. I don't. Do we want to read the whole story or do we just want to read verse five?

Host [00:08:12] I just read verse five.

Guest 2 [00:08:13] Okay, so it says this is Corian. Corianton. It's been a minute since I've read the Book of Mormon. So Corianton has, has gone after the harlot Isabel and then his dad Alma, I think is rebuking him and is, is kind of giving him what for. But he says, know ye not, my son, that these things are an abomination in the sight of the Lord, yea, most abominable above all sins, save it be the shedding of innocent blood or denying the Holy Ghost. So he's putting those three next to each other, shedding innocent blood. Denying the Holy Ghost and sexual immorality.

Host [00:08:48] Yeah, it's the most abominable. Apart from these two. These two are the only things worse.

Guest 2 [00:08:53] Yeah. Well, okay, yes. Is it the most. So, like, how would we tier them? Because like everyone else after this, all the prophets say that it's next to. Which is like, oh yeah, so is badass.

Host [00:09:04] Next to. Well, so next to is either just as bad as. Or it's the one below. Right. So because here what you've got is it's saying, right, it's most abominable above all sins. Save it. So except for shedding of innocent blood, denying the Holy Ghost, those are the two things that are worse.

Guest 2 [00:09:24] So it has it in a tier. So it's not.

Host [00:09:26] So it has it in a tier. So it's right there next to it. But it's not worse than it. Those are slightly worse.

Guest 2 [00:09:32] Right, right.

Host [00:09:33] And then when you hear the plain teaching for prophets, because you know, we have Scripture and that's where it starts. And then prophets interpret, prophets teach. And what was clearly taught by prophets later is next to. Which is going to give you the idea that it's gone from being. These are the only two things worse than it to. They're all about as bad as each other.

Guest 2 [00:09:50] Right. But also in her video, I don't know if you noticed this, but she's like, well, I guess you had to have because she's. She's taking the argument of. Of David and Bathsheba, which. With Uriah and then this Coriantan story. Coriantum. No, I cannot remember it. But she's saying that he's kind of committing murder, this missionary, because he's forsaking the ministry because these people are going without the gospel.

Host [00:10:09] Spiritual murder of the flock.

Guest 2 [00:10:10] Spiritual murder of the flock is how she put it. And that's wild to me because like some people, some young men can't serve missions. Some. Some of them cannot fulfill that priesthood duty or they go out on the sisters and elders, they go on. On their mission and then they have to return home because they're ill or because of whatever reasons. And then they're like, that's putting a lot on these missionaries to say that they're committing spiritual sin. I don't know. I just thought that was wild.

Host [00:10:35] That absolutely is. But the point is she's saying that. No, it's not sitting next to murder. Book of Mormon says it is pretty much. And the Book of Mormon is the basis for that teaching.

Guest 2 [00:10:46] She's just saying it's a slippery slope. Is she Just saying, like.

Host [00:10:49] Like, she is. She's like. Sexual immorality then leads to killing people. That seems to be genuinely her argument. If you don't repent of your sexual sin quickly, it will compound and get worse and you'll probably kill someone to cover it up, which is just insane.

Guest 2 [00:11:02] That's really what it sounded like, too. Like.

Host [00:11:04] Well, that's what I. Yeah, that's what I heard. Unless my ears are failing me.

Guest 2 [00:11:09] Yeah, I don't know.

Host [00:11:11] Seems to be what she said.

Guest 2 [00:11:12] Yeah. Okay, so I pulled up second Samuel. I pulled up second Samuel 11, where they tell the story of David and Uriah and Bathsheba. And it says, and David sent messengers and took her. So he's seeing her on the roof and she's bathing and she's beautiful. So David sent messengers and took her, and she came in unto him, and he lay with her, for she was purified. For she was purified from her uncleanliness, and she returned unto her house. So he sees her on the roof, he brings her. Has people bringing her to him. They have sex, she goes home. Yeah, and then in this. So that was verse four of chapter 11. And this is 11, verse 15. And so this is him later. He's. He's trying to kind of get rid of Uriah. And then later on the story, he wrote. He wrote a letter saying, set Uriah in the forefront of the hottest battle and retire ye from him, that he may be smitten and die.

Host [00:12:00] So take him to the front, leave him there and let him die.

Guest 2 [00:12:04] Because the main thing, I'm pretty sure, is because she gets pregnant. She tells David, hey, I'm pregnant. And he hasn't slept with his wife because, like. Because he was trying to be a good soldier. As far as I. If I remember the story correctly, he didn't. So. So he stayed with his soldiers. He didn't go home because he was trying to push Uriah at first to go home to sleep with her so that it could seem like he was impregnating his own wife. But anyway, so the pregnancy happens, and then he goes to literally send him to die.

Host [00:12:28] And sure, that's how David chose to deal with that situation. And it was terrible and it was awful, and it's not a good example. I don't think it's a universally applicable principle that has led to the idea that sexual sin is next to murder, because sexual sin leads to murder. That's, again, just a terrible take on this story.

Guest 2 [00:12:47] I. I feel like there would be a lot more murders if.

Host [00:12:51] If you're absolutely bloodbath amongst, you know, young teen Mormons.

Guest 2 [00:12:57] Yeah. But also just I think of it as breaking the law of chastity. And I'm pretty sure that's how the, the later, the clips that we'll show later frame it. Not just adultery, not just, not just sex before marriage. Like I think it's just all of it.

Host [00:13:10] Yeah, yeah. It starts to become all encompassing as Mormon purity culture kicks in. So let's get to, let's get to some, some more scripture.

Guest 2 [00:13:19] Yeah. So this is D and C19. This is Joseph Smith again, because you have him in the Book of Mormon. And then he. This is just a part that I found where it says and this is Jesus. This is the voice of Jesus and I command thee that thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor seek thy neighbor's life. So in this verse, it just, it doesn't quite say the thing. It doesn't say sit next to murder, but it's kind of listing them next to each other. Covet thy neighbor's wife sexually and then killing your neighbor. Which is kind of exactly what. What David did. So anyway, yeah, okay. And so next I have a whole series of, of clips from past journal conferences. And then, and then, you know, back when they didn't have filming, they had, they printed them off in the conference reports. And then I have shared a bunch of, bunch of times where the leaders have taught over the pulpit that this, that the law of chastity is the sin next to murder, that breaking that is the sin.

Host [00:14:10] And I think it's important to point out here that one General Conference is the place amongst. Of any where you can expect these men to be speaking for God. Right. Which is what they claim to be able to do. If they're going to be speaking for God anywhere, it should be in their official capacity as church leaders in General Conference where they know their words are going to be recorded by where they know they're speaking to an audience that is made up of members of the church who believe them to be prophets, seers and revelators. That's when you can expect them to be their most speaking for God.

Guest 2 [00:14:39] Exactly.

Host [00:14:40] So there's that and then there's the. Also the thing of apologists will try and weasel out sometimes when a prophet says something by, oh, that was just one prophet. That was just his opinion. If something is repeated by multiple prophets over time, that is what has been said by fair Mormon as the way in which you can know if something is doctrine. It has been spoken of by multiple prophets over time. So what we're about to hear is multiple prophets over time giving this teaching, that sexual misconduct, that breaking the law of chastity is next to murder. Is that right, Julia?

Guest 2 [00:15:11] Yeah. Yeah. And also to be clear, that story with Alma, I can't remember when that took place in the Book of Mormon, but the Book Mormon was written between 400, between my camera, 500 B.C. to 400 A.D. anyway, my point is, is that these. These Book of Mormon prophets are dead. And then we have the living prophet. This is first clip that we have is from Dallin H. Oaks. So you think that the living prophet would. Would be able to understand if this was a doctor?

Host [00:15:37] Well, according to Alan D. Haney, the key is to follow the living prophet. Unlike vintage cars and comic books, the words of prophets do not appreciate with age. They do not increase in value with age.

Guest 2 [00:15:49] Yeah, but so to have Jasmine try to redefine what this is, or seemingly try to redefine it, because, like, we have this whole slew of prophets that are more contemporaneous than Alma was to his son Grant, and I don't understand what she's doing. But anyway, we can go to the clips.

Host [00:16:06] Yeah, let's do it.

LDS Leaders and General Conference Teachings on Chastity

Guest 2 [00:16:07] So this first one is Dallin H. Oaks. The talk is called the Great Plan of Happiness. And this is in 1993, in our own day.

Guest [00:16:15] The first presidency of the Church has declared the doctrine of this church that sexual sin, the illicit sexual relations of men and women, stands in its enormity next to murder.

Host [00:16:29] Pretty clear, right?

Guest 2 [00:16:30] Yeah, I don't. I don't see any other way of seeing that.

Host [00:16:36] Yeah, as recently as 1993, which. Which is not that recent anymore, but it's still the teachings of prophets.

Guest 2 [00:16:43] Yeah, that guy is the leader now. So if he had that mindset in 93. What? I'm sure it's still the same in 2026.

Host [00:16:49] Yeah, he's the prophet of the church now.

Guest 3 [00:16:51] Yeah.

Guest 2 [00:16:52] Okay, so this next one is Ezra Taft Benson. The talk is called Cleansing the Inner Vessel, and it was given in April of 1986.

Host [00:17:01] President Joseph F. Smith said that sexual

Guest [00:17:04] impurity would be one of the three dangers that would threaten the church within.

Host [00:17:13] So it does. It permeates our society.

Guest [00:17:19] In the category of sins.

Host [00:17:22] The Book of Mormon places unchastity next

Guest [00:17:25] to murder,

Host [00:17:28] and it does place it next to murder again. So that's his interpretation of that scripture. And the difference here is when Jasmine is interpreting scripture, she's not authorized to do so on behalf of the church members. Don't have to believe her interpretations of Scripture. And we will cover this more as we go on. But when he interprets scripture like that and says, hey, it's next to murder, people ought to be listening if you're following the prophet, if you're being righteous. Right. Next clip.

Guest 2 [00:17:57] Okay, so this one is L L. I don't know how to say it. L Ray L. Christianson and I looked it up. He's. He was the assistant to the First Presidency. So he was a general authority. He's not necessarily an apostle, but an assistant. And the talk is called Power Over Satan. And it was given in 1974.

Guest [00:18:15] The first presidency of the Church a few years ago issued a warning to the Latter Day Saints and to all people generally against the dreaded sins of unchastity. Among other things, they said the doctrine of this church is that sexual sin, the illicit relations of men and women stands in its enormity next to murder.

Guest 2 [00:18:47] The doctrine of the church.

Host [00:18:49] Doctrine of the Church as stated by the First Presidency. It's interesting that you said a few years ago, I'm pretty sure the First Presidency statement he's referring to, we'll discover later on was in the 1950s and that talk was given in the 70s. So a few years ago is 20 years ago for this guy. But apart from that. Yeah, no, he's saying it is the doctrine of this church as revealed by the First Presidency. So why is Jasmine now putting forward an idea that goes contrary to the doctrine of the Church?

Guest 2 [00:19:23] Because it's a bad doctrine.

Host [00:19:24] Why is she trying to undermine the doctrines of the church?

Guest 2 [00:19:28] Well, like I feel like it sounds like apostasy. Well, which is really sad because like I, like I, I can see both sides because I can see why she's doing it because it is a very harmful teaching. People should not be shamed like that.

Host [00:19:39] I'm not.

Guest 2 [00:19:42] Right.

Host [00:19:42] Right.

Guest 2 [00:19:42] But it's, it's.

Host [00:19:44] Yeah, but I'm pro theological consistency and I'm proud consistent application of church discipline. And as someone who was excommunicated for apostasy myself for, for going to a town in Texas and quoting church leaders and saying this is the opinions of church leaders. Why are more local leaders and why are church architecture firms, etc why are they all running contrary to these teachings that gets you excommunicated? Going on a platform and getting 150000 views saying something that runs directly contrary to the doctrine of the church while claiming to be pro church isn't going to get her excommunicated. It's Nothing's going to happen to her.

Guest 2 [00:20:29] That talk in Texas is what.

Host [00:20:30] That was what broke the part of it, I'm sure.

Guest 2 [00:20:33] Okay.

Host [00:20:33] They were never clear about what exactly

Guest 2 [00:20:35] it was, but they don't seem to ever be clear on the reasons. But anyway. Okay, so this next one is Harold B. Lee. This was just his priesthood address. And this was in 1973.

Guest [00:20:48] This trend of divorce. One of the painful things that I have as a responsibility is to have a flood of recommendations for cancellation of sealings of those who have been married in the temple. It's frightening, brother. It all stems from one of the greatest of all the sins, next to murder, the sin of adultery that's running rampant throughout the church.

Host [00:21:16] Running rampant throughout the church.

Guest 2 [00:21:18] Rampant.

Host [00:21:20] It was the 70s, I suppose.

Guest 2 [00:21:22] Also, as he was speaking, I was thinking, it's really interesting that denying the Holy Ghost is right up there with the top three big sins. And denying the Holy Ghost seems like such a. Not a. I know it's a big spiritual deal, I guess, but I don't know, I. If I were God, I would. I would care much more about murder

Host [00:21:41] than more about murder. I mean, it's interesting that the abuse of children isn't up there.

Guest 2 [00:21:46] Yeah.

Host [00:21:47] Yeah.

Guest 2 [00:21:49] I don't think Jesus invoked violence very much, but in his teachings, he says that if anyone should harm these little. One of these little ones, it's better that a millstone be hanged about their neck and that they'd be cast into the sea. Like, yeah, where's that? Why can't that be one of the top.

Host [00:22:03] Yeah, I mean, and I'm pretty sure he said to the woman caught in adultery, go away and sin no more.

Guest 2 [00:22:07] Right, exactly.

Host [00:22:08] Who was Jesus more forgiving towards? The adulterers or the people abusing children?

Guest 2 [00:22:14] Excellent point.

Host [00:22:15] Yeah.

Guest 2 [00:22:16] Yeah.

Host [00:22:16] Sorry. Next video.

Guest 2 [00:22:19] Okay. This is Marion G. Romney. The talk is trust in the Lord and it was given April of 1979.

Guest [00:22:26] If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy. Some years ago, the First Presidency said to the youth of the Church, better dead clean than alive unclean.

Guest 2 [00:22:44] Okay, I should have set that one up a little bit better. He doesn't say that it's next to murder, but he does say that. What was that phrase?

Host [00:22:50] He said better dead clean,

Guest 2 [00:22:54] which I. Which was. So it's a different. It's a different context here, but like, it's just horrible.

Host [00:22:59] I mean, that's problematic in itself. It taps into what you could call faithful nihilism or Christian nihilism. The idea that you're so impure impure or imperfect, that you're better off dead and sort of risk your chances of forgiveness in the next life than trying to make it through this one because you just seem so unworthy. That's a horrible teaching.

Guest 2 [00:23:19] Yes, it is. Okay, so now we're done with the. We're done with Eclipse, but this next one. This is Marky Peterson, and this is in the April of 1969 General Conference. And he gives the same message.

Host [00:23:33] He says, you mean there's more church leaders quoting something that directly refutes what Jasmine started her video by saying?

Guest 2 [00:23:41] Wild, huh?

Host [00:23:42] Huh? Okay, let's carry on with that.

Guest 2 [00:23:44] So he says immorality is next to murder in God's category of crime and always brings in its wake both destruction and remorse, even to college students who carry the pill with a mother's consent. I thought that was interesting. And then the talk he goes on to say. He goes on to say adultery is still next to murder in the Lord's category of crime. No amount of rationalizing can change God's laws. And no, nothing in Jasmine says can change this doctrine.

Host [00:24:10] Yeah. Essentially nothing that she says can change this. And we're going to keep hammering this point home. We're probably going to come across as a broken record throughout this, but it really is worth hammering home. This is what apologists do. Sorry.

Guest 2 [00:24:23] Well, there was a lot of people in my comments, too, that they were thanking me for sharing some of these clips on my own platform. And they said, thank you for not letting this, not letting us be gaslit. Thanks for not letting us go down the memory hole. And like this, like, they haven't said it over the pulpit in the last several years, but it still is a teaching on the minds of, like, I was grow. I grew up with this, and my parents grew up with this. Yeah, it's. It's not. Just because they're not saying it over the pulpit doesn't mean.

Host [00:24:48] And I got, I got similar comments because you and I do similar work in this vein where, you know, we don't let church leaders or apologists get away with saying something that we know that there is direct contradictory evidence of out there. And we just go find that evidence and put it out there and it. And people do appreciate it because like you said, otherwise it would be very easy to start to kind of gaslight yourself or be gaslit by someone like Jasmine saying, oh, was. Was it never that big a deal? Yeah, absolutely it was.

Guest 2 [00:25:16] Yeah. And I will say that everything that I put on here, this is not everything that's out there. I just didn't want to put everything because there's so much.

Host [00:25:22] So she would be buried under an avalanche of disconfirming evidence. So we're trying to.

Guest 2 [00:25:27] Here's a handful.

Host [00:25:29] Yeah, here's some.

Guest 2 [00:25:30] Yeah, here's.

Host [00:25:30] And some is enough.

Guest 2 [00:25:32] Yeah, I think. Do you want to read. Do you want to read this one?

Host [00:25:34] Yeah, sure. In the April 1968 General Conference, this same message was given by David O. McKay. In the Teachings of the church, next to the crime of murder comes that of adultery and sexual unchastity. Seems pretty clear.

Guest 2 [00:25:49] Yeah. Next one is he. This next one is Heber J. Grant. This is given in the 1943 General Conference. He says, I pray that he, meaning heavenly Father, will bring into the hearts of every boy and of every girl a knowledge that cleanliness is next to godliness, that they must live both clean, that they must live clean both in mind and in body. That they will understand that the sin of unchastity is to the Lord next to the sin of murder.

Host [00:26:18] Again, so this next to murder language, it has been around since at least the 1940s, derives from their interpretation of scripture. And they are the ones that get to do that and get to speak.

Guest 2 [00:26:32] Well, you'll see it goes back to the 1800s. So, like, I know that the Book of Mormon doesn't say that phrase specifically next to murder, but that's why we have prophets. Yeah, exactly.

Host [00:26:42] And they've repeated it consistently over time.

Guest 2 [00:26:45] Yeah. Okay. So I don't know if you want to read this one, but this is the same General Conference. Someone else repeats it again.

Host [00:26:53] Okay. Yeah. So same General Conference for April 1943. A possible. J. Ruben Clark taught the same message. Furthermore, we stand for a single of chastity for boys. And for the girls, we look for unchastity as a sin next to murder. And later in his speech, he says, I urge you young women and girls to remember that in the schedule of crimes, unchastity comes next to murder. Do not subject yourselves to its penalty. The Lord has said, blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.

Guest 2 [00:27:25] Yeah, and like, three times that phrase in that one General Conference. That's a lot to be hearing in the 40s.

Host [00:27:34] Almost like it's. They feel it's an important message and, you know, is rather significant and shouldn't just be hand waved away.

Guest 2 [00:27:43] Yeah. This might be random, but I also noticed that most of these are in April conferences. I wonder if they give sort of a, hey, every April we should, like, warn against pornography. Or warn against law of chastity. I don't know. I don't know if they have.

Host [00:27:55] Like, it would be, it would be an interesting sort of textual analysis of general conference to go back and see what themes repeat at what time of year. Like, it's obvious that in the April conferences it's near Easter. So Jesus gets a bit of a bump in his mentions or in his quotes, rather. But certainly in recent years, you know, Jesus has needed all the help he can get, being quoted enough in General Conference when compared to Russell M. Nelson. But yeah, you know, it seems that that's a sort of obvious theme. But it would be interesting to see if, you know, like you said, masturbation and pornography and sexual purity get covered at a particular time of year. You know, maybe it's. Maybe it's because it's April. Maybe the summer's upon us and they know everyone's going to be frolicking around and they just want to, like, keep it in check over the summer.

First Presidency Messages and Historical Church Statements

Guest 2 [00:28:38] Kids, people are about to frolic. We have to talk about this.

Host [00:28:40] Yeah.

Guest 2 [00:28:43] Okay, so this next one is the, the First Presidency message that we mentioned earlier. And this, it was presented by J. Rubin Clark, but it's the First Presidency message and it was given in 1942, so I guess a few years before.

Host [00:28:55] So when you said in the 1970s, a few years before, it was actually almost 30 years.

Guest 2 [00:28:59] Yeah.

Host [00:29:00] Okay, cool. Time.

Guest 2 [00:29:01] Yeah. So it says. Yeah, for sure. Upon the heels of the demon drink, meaning alcohol, tread the demons of unchastity, harlotry, fornication, adultery, while murder itself lurks not far behind. So almost like that slippery slope language that Jasmine was using.

Host [00:29:19] Yeah. So, okay, right. This is a point where Jasmine is maybe echoing the teachings of church leaders, perhaps.

Guest 2 [00:29:24] And later in, later in this message, it says the doctrine of this church doctrine is that sexual sin, the illicit sexual relations of men and women, stands in its enormity next to murder.

Host [00:29:36] And just like that, they undermine Jasmine's point. Yeah, almost like she was cherry picking. Almost like she, you know, has gone. Right. Okay, here's an example of them giving the same slippery slope argument. And then, hey, look, if you engage in unchastity, harlotry, fornication, their murder's not lurking too far behind.

Guest 2 [00:29:55] That's such a weird argument.

Host [00:29:57] It is a weird, slippery slope arguments generally are. The causal chains of them are often quite ropey and questionable. You know, like, this leads to this, leads to this. That's often where they fall apart. And also the assumption that people will all act the same. So the idea that just so. So the idea that a young man somewhere has slept with his girlfriend and it was completely consensual, but he comes and confesses to his bishop. The idea that that young man, if he doesn't repent quickly enough, is somehow going to murder someone, just on the face of it, is crazy because that. Well, for a start, if we want to talk about presentism, the scriptures are written for our day, but I don't think any of us are King David in a time where, you know, he would need to protect his reputation or his honor or whatever by, you know, doing all this stuff.

Guest 2 [00:30:53] So one thing that I was noticing too is in one of those talks he said, even with a mother's consent and even with the birth control pill, I think is what he meant. It's. This is still listen next to murder. So in my head it's like, I think that there are maybe families in the church who, who have this understanding that sex outside of marriage or premarital sex is not really that bad because, like, I think is your. To save yourself. In my personal opinion, to save yourself till marriage can be. Can be a struggle later on if you find that you're not really compatible with that person anyway.

Host [00:31:24] But.

Guest 2 [00:31:24] So I think that there are people in the church now who live a different type of Mormonism who can. Who can. And maybe Jasmine does too. She. She kind of makes. Makes a place where she can be at home. And I don't know if that's actually the case, but I know that it's the case for some members of the church. But this, the fact that the prophet is undermining these parents, even with a mother's consent, he's undermining the mother. He says, listen to us because we're the prophets and this is the sinex to murder. I kind of think that they're. They're discouraging people having their own version of Mormonism on this.

Host [00:31:55] Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Guest 2 [00:31:56] And of course, that was in the. The 40s or 70s. I can't remember when that specific talk was given. I. I can't remember. But I don't know that that would be very much different to now. I don't know if Oaks would. Would agree that people could have their own version of Mormonism.

Host [00:32:10] Absolutely not. Absolutely not. It's one of the reasons that he wants podcasts and things shut down. He wants people not to be listening to them. The core behind the reason that the church doesn't want people listening to outside influences is because they want to Control messaging. They want to control what people hear, what information they have access to, all that sort of stuff.

Guest 2 [00:32:31] Well, I know that they've said things like, don't. I lost my train of thought. It'll come back to me later.

Host [00:32:40] That's all right. No worries.

Guest 2 [00:32:42] Okay, so the next one, quote. Yeah. So the sexton is Melvin J. Ballard. This is in April of 1922. So we're going pretty far back. And he taught the same thing. He says, it has been taught by this church that next to murder itself is the crime of sexual impurity. Jesus said, discussing the question of the morals of men, he that looketh upon a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery already in his or her heart. With her in his heart. Sorry. In these last days, he has said that he that looketh upon a woman to lust after her and does not repent shall deny the fate. You young men, it is incumbent upon you to preserve our standards, to preserve the moral integrity of the daughters of Israel and. And remember the next. To murder itself is the crime of sexual impurity. Let that be burned into your hearts and our souls, and we will weather the storms that beat upon us.

Host [00:33:36] So with that kind of messaging, which, you know, it's 1922, but someone's grandparents, that is, that has now got children of their own, so someone's great grandparents will have received that messaging. And it's hard to then imagine that that messaging passed down over the generations is sort of easily put to one side by someone like Jasmine coming out and saying, oh, well, actually, I'm. I don't think it is next to murder. I think it's more complicated when this very plain messaging has been coming out, people are going to feel the dissonance of that and rightly point it out in the comments and say, well, what are you talking about? This is what I was taught. And I think, yeah, and it's just like with garments when they went sleeveless, right? All of a sudden you have people coming out saying, it was never about

Guest 2 [00:34:25] not showing unveiling their faces. We never fail our faces. What do you mean?

Host [00:34:29] It's like I did. Or, you know, there's people in the comments going, yeah, I did, or yes, I was taught that. And I think it's important. Episodes like this are really important to not allow those things to go down the memory hole and instead to really put forward what was going on.

Guest 2 [00:34:47] Right. So I remembered my. My lost train of thought. So the leaders have in the past said, you can believe what you want, just don't share it with anybody. So, like, I don't know, because he's. But he's also kind of saying that that's not the case because even with a mother's consent and you have the pill and you can go forth in college and go sleep with people, don't do that. He's. He's saying don't. I'm confused because I'm getting mixed messaging because people like, people who don't believe that Joseph Smith was a polygamist. I have. I've heard that they say, oh, you can believe that, just don't share it. Or you can believe other things, just don't share it. But, like, they seem to be discouraging from that. I don't know. I don't understand the. I don't know. Mixed messaging. Okay.

Host [00:35:25] Definitely mixed messaging.

Guest 2 [00:35:27] Yeah. Anyway. Okay. So next is George Q. Cannon. Oh, excuse me. This is Wilford Woodruff. I just didn't change the title. So this is an 1883 from President Wilford Woodruff. And this is in the Journal of Discourses. He says, but let me tell you that the Latter Day Saints look upon adultery as one of the greatest crimes any man can commit in this world. It is next to murder.

Host [00:35:47] Huh. Again, pretty. Pretty assertive there.

Guest 2 [00:35:53] Yeah. Do you want to read this next? This next one? It's George q. Cannon in 1918 75.

Host [00:35:59] Okay. In the 1875 conference report, George Buchanan also shared this message. Wherever I have had the opportunity, I have endeavored to impress those with whom I have conversed with the idea that we regarded men and women guilty of immoral practices as being guilty of the worst possible crime next to shedding blood. I have said that we regard murder as the greatest crime in the sight of God and that next to that, we look upon unchastity and unvirtuous actions. This has created some surprise, but it is a lesson that we have yet to teach mankind on this point, and I trust that we should be true to our principles.

Guest 2 [00:36:35] Thank you. Yeah, there's not. That's very clear. It's the worst possible crime next to shedding blood. I don't. Yeah. Yeah. And then another part that people reminded me of in the comments is that the Miracle of Forgiveness written by Spencer W. Kimball in 1969. He has a whole chapter called the Sin Next to Murder in which he discusses this.

Host [00:37:03] Okay. Should we get. Let's. Let's get into that.

Guest 2 [00:37:06] Okay.

Host [00:37:06] So hang on. Before we do, I think it's important to explain what the miracle of forgiveness is.

Forgiveness, Shame, and the Miracle of Forgiveness

Guest 2 [00:37:10] Oh, yes, absolutely.

Host [00:37:11] Which is a book written by Spencer W. Kimball. But it was more than that. It was a. It was a cultural moment within Mormonism. It was a book that was often recommended and given to people by bishops, by ecclesiastical leaders when they needed help repenting, I. E. When they needed to start to feel sufficiently guilty about what they did wrong. Yeah, that's. That's what this book was about. It is a book that's caused irreparable damage, particularly to gay individuals by the. By its teachings about homosexuality and about being attracted to someone of the same sex as yourself. And so it's not a great book. I think it's finally been pulled from the shelves. I. Yeah, I think that's true, but it took them a while and. Yeah, so lots of people. It's caused lots of problems. I think people have killed themselves over it. Pretty terrible. Some of the teachings in that book. So, of course, it is no surprise that such a guilt inducing doctrine as sexual immorality is next to murder would appear in that book.

Guest 2 [00:38:14] Yeah, people are asking. Well, before we keep going, people are asking how old Jasmine is. Because people are saying. People have said to me that maybe she missed some of these teachings. Maybe she's younger and just hasn't heard these. But I kind of. I don't really know how old she is. I kind of thought of her as my age, like 30s, but I don't. But I don't know if that's accurate. Um. But yeah, there's. I guess there's a chance she could have missed the teachings, but I kind of. I. I don't know. Anyway. Okay, so going on to the miracle of forgiveness. This is a screenshot of this page in the book. And I'll just read it and then we can stop and talk about it. So he has a section here in the chapter of sin next to murder. So it says next to murder and seriousness. The enormity of this sin is underlined by numerous scriptures and particularly by Alma's words to his immoral son. And we've already read this where he says it's an abominable thing, and it's worse above all sin, save it be the shedding of innocent blood or denying the Holy Ghost. And then he goes on. Spencer Kimmel goes on saying, the Lord apparently writes adultery close to premeditated murder. Dang. For he said, and again, I have commanded thee that thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor seek thy neighbor's life. Which we read earlier to a young man seeking help who had. Seeking help who had allowed himself to indulge heavily in fornication, but was not quite yet pertinent. I wrote, your sin is the most serious thing you could have done in your youth. This side of murder. Your last experience in immortality was far more obnoxious than the first. You had been to the temple and had made solemn vows of chastity before God and holy angels. You made covenant that you would never have such ungodly relations. You had already done it and then did it again with a solemn promise on your lips. And then. I don't have the second page, but. But dang. Like you were talking about guilt. That's a lot of guilt right there.

Host [00:40:08] There's a lot. There's a lot of guilt, a lot of shame that comes around it. I think it's important to remember also that the endowment ceremony, rather than reveal what you learn and what there's death penalties all surrounding the things within the endowment ceremony, very serious consequences for breaking the covenants that you promised to keep. And one of them is to keep the law of chastity. Yeah, so it's very important within Mormonism, just FYI. Yeah, yeah. I don't think it can be understated just how important chastity is within Mormon doctrine. It's a temple covenant.

Guest 2 [00:40:47] Yeah, it's a very good point. And so in the Miracle of Forgiveness he quotes, at one point he quotes David O. McKay in the chapter this the Next Murder. Nima, will you read that little quote from David O. McKay.

Host [00:40:58] Your virtue is worth more than your life. Please, young folk, please preserve your virtue even if you lose your lives. Do not tamper with sin. Do not permit yourselves to be led into temptation. Conduct yourselves seemingly and with due regard, particularly you young boys, to the sanctity of womanhood. Do not pollute it.

Guest 2 [00:41:19] So that one.

Host [00:41:20] Again, virtue, even if you lose your lives. Yeah, wow.

Guest 2 [00:41:25] Yeah, that's a little bit different. But it's still valuing virtue above life. And I, I don't know.

Host [00:41:31] Well, I think placing virtue next to life in that way is connected to this, in that if sexual sin is next to murder, that is the taking of life. Right. The, the taking of life is, is murder forcibly taking someone's life. And so if sexual sin is next to that, it is going to. Again, it is severe enough as to be connected to the taking of life. So the loss of your own life, rather than engaging something so serious, it's being put on par value wise with your life, I guess is my point. Right. Virtue and one's life are being put on a par.

Guest 2 [00:42:09] These Two stories that Jasmine pulled are. I'm thinking about them again, where they. Only one of them really has to deal with murder because to say he's

Host [00:42:17] spiritually murdering, that's such a stretch anyway.

Guest 2 [00:42:20] It's a huge stretch. I, I don't, I don't know where she got that idea, but I just, it's not any. This man didn't murder anybody.

Host [00:42:28] I'm going to do a video on this at some point. But Henry Biring did give a talk essentially that goes on about all the things you could have done. Were you worthier, the people you could have helped, were you. It's like scrupulosity 101. And I think sometimes these very hyperbolic terms about like spiritual murder come from this very strong belief within Mormonism that people's salvation is the responsibility of others. Sometimes it is the responsibility of others to help them find it. It is the responsibility of others to help keep them on the straight and narrow. You know, no one's really an island within Mormonism in a lot of ways. We are kind of sharing in the, in the pursuit to salvation.

Guest 2 [00:43:12] Yeah. I remember as a fourth grader, I was riddled with guilt because I was so shy and I didn't want to share the gospel with my friends. And like, they were all different religions and they were all, we were all really good friends. But I was just constantly, every day like, oh my gosh, I have to be a missionary. I have to teach them the gospel. What if I am the only chance that they can hear this and if I don't teach them the gospel, they could go to hell or, you know,

Host [00:43:31] and yeah, anyone that's been a missionary knows the level of guilt that gets piled on you because you are, you are their only way to salvation because they will die not knowing the gospel otherwise. So if the gospel is the thing that brings eternal life, which it is because it. You have to follow the covenant path, you have to go through those things to achieve salvation. Then denying someone that, I guess you could call it spiritual murder because you're denying them spiritual eternal life.

Guest 2 [00:43:58] I just, Yeah, I guess in an apologetic way.

Guest 3 [00:44:03] Yeah.

Guest 2 [00:44:04] Okay.

Host [00:44:05] So my apologist hat on for a minute.

Guest 2 [00:44:07] Yeah, yeah. Okay. So that's what we, that's what I've gathered so far of, of those talks and the past teachings from prophets that it is indeed the sin next to murder. But one of my favorite things also was, were people's reactions to her video or what people were saying about it.

Host [00:44:22] So just before we get into the responses, I think it is Worth just finally one last time rounding it up and saying, Julia, do you think that it has been taught by multiple prophets over time, unapologetically and clearly, that the doctrine of this church is that sin, the sin next to murder, is sexual misconduct, is breaking the law of chastity, is sexual impropriety, however you want to phrase it?

Guest 2 [00:44:51] Yeah. It has absolutely been taught and by the mouthpieces of God.

Host [00:44:54] Yes.

Guest 2 [00:44:55] And like you said, Jasmine doesn't have the authority to be saying this. Yeah.

Host [00:45:00] So do you think it's problematic that a church apologist is saying something that directly contradicts the doctrine of the Lord as revealed by the leaders that she claims to sustain, even if we disagree with that doctrine?

Guest 2 [00:45:14] So the question is, is it. Is it probably a problem?

Host [00:45:17] Yeah, like.

Guest 2 [00:45:19] Well, I, Well, I don't like her apologetics around this, but I, I would not. I would have supported her saying this. I don't agree with this teaching at all. And then just stop the end the video right there. I would have absolutely not seen that as problematic. I would have been like, yeah, I agree with you. Great, Great for you for sharing that message. The, the sex outside of marriage or whatever is not a synaxed murderer. I agree with that. I, I do think it's a little sticky because she's undermining the prophets. She's. She's undermining the scriptures. She's twisting, seemingly twisting certain narratives in that aren't really there. I think that's problematic.

Host [00:45:53] So here's, I guess, my take on the back of that, which is that the church will seemingly tolerate her trying to dismantle or undermine or. Or minimize certain teachings that the church is now feeling uncomfortable about. Yeah. There's possibly a reason why it hasn't been directly mentioned since 1993 in General Conference. Right. Even if it is still church doctrine, it's not been repealed, it's not been revoked. Perhaps it's a bit less comfortable in the same way as they were happy to allow people running around saying that of course we don't get our own planet. What are you talking about? They even produced a Q and A of their own to try and wiggle out of that one. Right. I think the church picks and chooses when they let people undermine them in public view. And so when I undermined them in public view, it undermined their power and their sense of authority, and they did not care for it. But if Jasmine is just kind of doing their dirty work for them and trying to minimize or backtrack on something they're now finding uncomfortable Then of course they're gonna let it get away with it. Of course she's gonna be allowed to do it, because it's kind of what they want.

Guest 2 [00:46:57] I. I think it's interesting that she doesn't bring up any of these talks or it doesn't bring up the fact that it's a doctrine. And this does remind me of our last episode where we were talking about the Book of Abraham and Jasmine's response to that where she was like, oh, somehow this idea of us getting our own planets has been, like, changed and twisted and characterized differently. But then we show. We demonstrated in the episode that past prophets, since Brigham Young, since whatever, even

Host [00:47:20] as recently as Ruslan Nelson.

Guest 2 [00:47:22] Yeah, yeah. In his Christmas devotional. Like, we. They've been. It's been a constant teaching that people will get their own planets, but she. She just leaves that part off and just says, oh, they get this weird idea. And then in this video that we just watched, she was like, oh, this idea comes from the Book of Mormon. But, like, it's. It's not just from the Book of Mormon judgment. It's been taught by the prophets and leaders throughout all church history. I guess not up until. Well, at least not in conference until 1993, but still. Like, it's weird that they would allow her to undermine them because she is undermining them. Yeah, she is, but she's not saying that she's undermining them, and maybe that's why she's getting away with it. I don't know.

Host [00:47:58] Maybe they don't realize. But I think. I think the other problem as well is often in Jasmine's delivery, and I don't want to be the tone police at all, but because she didn't explicitly say, hey, look, this is the teaching. But I disagree with the teaching. Yeah, right. This is the teaching as found in canonized scripture. This is the teaching, as you know, as discussed by multiple prophets over the years. I don't agree with it. Here's how I think we can engage with it in a way that's healthier. She said that. Awesome. I'm all for it. But instead, she comes at it with this tone, with this vibe, with this almost attitude of being somewhat dismissive to anyone who ever thought of it, a way other than the way in which she thinks of it now, as though they were wrong to ever think of it like that. And that's what makes you want to stand up and go, well, no, I wasn't wrong to ever think of it like that. I was taught it like that. Explicitly by church leaders. So I think that her delivery is part of the problem, is that she. She delivers in this way that seems dismissive. Is that. Is that.

Guest 2 [00:49:01] Yeah, that's. I totally agree with you.

Host [00:49:04] Yeah, so. And the Internet seems to agree with us as well, because we do have some responses which I think is great to read. These are all public, so we're not doxing anyone by showing these. These were left publicly on videos, so let's get into them and discuss them.

Guest 2 [00:49:21] Yeah, so some of them were left on my channel. Some of them were left on her channel, and I did not. Docs. I did not cover anybody's names because these are public. So. Yeah, but this is the first comment that I picked, and I really like this one. This is, to me directly. It says. One thing that often gets lost in these discussions is that the biblical story isn't simply about consensual sex outside of marriage. David was the king, Bathsheba was a subject, and the power imbalance was absolute. The text never records Bathsheba's consent. Many modern scholars therefore read this as an abuse of power. If not outright rape, followed by David arranging Uriah's death to conceal it, Reducing the story to sexual sin alone risks overlooking the exploitation, coercion, and violence at the heart of the narrative. And I love that comment. It's like Bathsheba's voice is totally not even in this story. It was. I think of this as an incident of rape in the Bible. And. And that even is. Why don't we call that the sinex to murder? Why don't we call those other things? Like, it's. It's just weird that she's. She doesn't even address that in her. In her. In her video.

Rape, Consent, and Gaps in LDS Moral Teaching

Host [00:50:33] It's like there is. There is a massive difference, morally speaking, between consensual sex between two adults and rape. Right. Society has recognized that for a very long time in more or less successful forms. But it has been recognized for a long time that rape is different to consensual sex. You know, with. With that big caveat that, you know, it has not always been effectively prosecuted or effectively. You know, there's been massive loopholes to those things, such as, you know, spousal rape wasn't even legally recognized for a long time. Things like that.

Guest 2 [00:51:09] Right.

Host [00:51:09] But my point. My point is there has always been that distinction for a very long time. And so it's interesting that the scriptures don't make that distinction. And they're just like, nope, all sex outside of marriage is just bad. With the Same brush.

Guest 2 [00:51:24] Yeah.

Host [00:51:25] And that allows this. These sorts of stories to be talked about in. Oh, well, what David did was wrong because he had sex with someone that wasn't his wife. Well, actually, no, there's more to it. What David did was wrong because he sent his guards to go and take a woman that he had seen in a vulnerable position and bring her to him, and then with the power of him being the king, basically command sex from her and then kill her husband so that he wouldn't be discovered. That's way worse.

Guest 2 [00:51:53] Yeah, yeah, that's. Yeah, that's not. She's not even presenting the story accurately.

Host [00:51:57] But you can just focus on the thing that he did wrong, which was, oh, well, he shouldn't have been having sex outside of marriage. Naughty boy.

Guest 2 [00:52:04] Yeah, right. It's way worse than that. Yeah. Okay, so just for record's sake, that was research chaplain who, who gave that comment. And there was another one that was left. This is Justin D. Sweeney. He says Jasmine has built unto herself a church and doctrine that have nothing to do with Mormonism but are the teachings of one woman as she builds a church in her own image, trying to keep people from learning the truth. And I, I like that one because it does seem to be that she is sort of creating her own Mormonism.

Host [00:52:36] Yeah. I don't think deliberately, but I think out of expedience. This is what apologists have to do. And I see it particularly, again, like with people who are trying their best with compassionate apologetics and things like that. They are creating a version of Mormonism that doesn't exist over the pulpit at General Conference. That's a phrase I've used a lot, and I think it still stands up. They create a version of Mormonism that doesn't exist over the pulpit. It doesn't exist according to the leaders of the church who claim to speak for God. Even if I think it would be a more beautiful reading of Mormonism, even I think it would be a more healthy version of Mormonism. For example, things that the givens share often.

Guest 2 [00:53:15] Yeah, yeah. I was going to say, to be clear, I don't disagree with people making their own Mormonism. If it, if you can make something that works for you, for example, Charlie Bird and his husband Ryan, they have created a Mormonism that doesn't really exist outside of maybe their ward or that. I haven't seen that outside. I hope that it exists. In other words, but they're a gay couple that are able to go. They take the sacrament, they have callings. And this, this would never Happen where? Ironically, I'm from the same state that he is. We grew up in the same town, but it wouldn't happen here, but it's happening for him there. And if people can create a safe space for them, whether they're. I know that there's a trans woman that was baptized not very long ago, and that seems to be like a. An unheard of thing, but she's making a Mormonism that's working for her. And then, you know, Charlie and his husband, they're making a church that's working for them.

Host [00:54:01] I don't disagree with that. You could all have it.

Guest 2 [00:54:04] Yeah.

Guest [00:54:04] And.

Guest 2 [00:54:05] Or don't pretend that these things aren't. Aren't accurate. Don't. Don't say that. Don't try to brush off. This was not a doctrine. She didn't say that specifically, but she's not addressing the fact that it is a doctrine. She's just trying to make it okay from these two stories. Like it's not questioning it. Yeah, and that's not to dismiss. It's just very dismissive, I guess, is what I mean.

Host [00:54:25] It would kind of be like producing a video saying, are gay members of the church second class? And then just looking at Charlie Bird and his partner and saying, no, they're not. Look. See? Yes, but that isn't the lived experience of 99 of people in that position. That is an anomaly. It's an anomaly. We could celebrate. It's an anomaly. We would love to see reproduced. But it's not what is being taught. It's being tolerated for some reason that we can't quite get to the bottom of because of their unique position. But there are so many examples of that not being tolerated that it would be dishonest to try and say that that is the norm.

Guest 2 [00:55:04] Yeah.

Host [00:55:05] Yeah.

Audience Responses and Apologist Criticism

Guest 2 [00:55:06] Okay, this next one. Do you want to read this next comment?

Host [00:55:10] Okay, so Aria Bethards said. Wait, now she is trying to leave. To say leaving early on your mission and abandoning your flock is considered second to murder. She needs to be so careful with her weaponizing words because that can lead a lot of kids down a very dark hole of shame they are already consumed with. Yeah, the idea we've talked about a little bit here, the idea that this spiritual murder, if you don't, you know, if you don't teach the people that you're meant to be teaching, just incredibly destructive. Anyone that's already struggling with scrupulosity will find it terrifying, this idea that they are all of a sudden not good enough because they haven't taught every Single possible person that they could. And they've abandoned their spiritual flock and they've spiritually murdered them all.

Guest 2 [00:55:55] Oh, my gosh.

Host [00:55:56] Just a spiral waiting to happen.

Guest [00:55:58] Yeah.

Guest 2 [00:55:59] And I, I, My, my companion on my mission was the sister trainer leader and sort of like the district leader. But they're, they're over the sisters specifically. And there was a lot of sisters that really struggled, and some of them were really contemplating going home. And for them to be struggling so much with depression or with whatever they're struggling with, like to have a narrative like, oh, if you go home, you're murdering your flock. You're. You're literally. I, that's just a horrible thing on its own. Like, I feel like Jasmine, by trying to solve one problem, it seems like she's creating another problem.

Host [00:56:30] Yes, absolutely. Okay, next one.

Guest 2 [00:56:34] Okay, so this next one is religious poison Exmo. And they say an apologist is not supposed to directly contradict the very teachings of the leaders of the church. And then it's a rolling their eyes face. She knows. We all know. We all know that leaders have been very clear about the psycho stance on sexual sin. So, yeah, again, she's going directly against what the leaders have said.

Host [00:56:59] Yeah. And I think she knows. Like, she does know.

Guest 2 [00:57:02] Yeah. The actual position is, which makes this even stranger to me, like, why not address it? Why not say I disagree because she

Host [00:57:12] can't or risk losing her. Yeah. That is apostasy. And, But I think, hang on. If we actually look for the definition of apostasy teaching as church doctrine, what is not church doctrine, I believe is in the definition. Because I used to spend a lot of time looking at the handbook definition of apostasy when I was preparing for my excommunication council. But if I grab apostasy. Yeah. Teaching false doctrine is apostasy. Could you argue that she's teaching false doctrine here?

Guest 2 [00:57:57] I. If she's trying to change, I think so could. Because she. Well, her first sentence was, I don't think that this is a next murder. I'm pretty sure that's what her first sentence was. So.

Host [00:58:07] Yeah. Yeah, let me find the exact wording, because I think it is. Is important.

Guest 2 [00:58:16] Yeah, I agree.

Host [00:58:17] Okay. So as used here, when it comes to membership councils, apostasy refers to a member of the Church engaging in any of the following. So repeatedly acting in clear and deliberate public opposition to the church, its doctrine, its policies, or its leaders. Persisting in teaching as church doctrine what is not church doctrine after being corrected by the bishop or stake president showing a pattern of intentionally working to weaken the faith and activity of church members continuing to follow the teachings of apostate sect after being corrected by the bishop or state president or formally joining another church and promoting its teachings. So I think her bishop or state president, if they were to correct her and then she carried on to just doing her apologetics, she'd be guilty of apostasy.

Guest 2 [00:59:00] But she's not guilty now. And also it's just one video, Even though it has150,000 views across.

Host [00:59:06] Across her channel. I'm sure we could find examples of her teaching other things.

Guest 2 [00:59:10] Very likely that.

Host [00:59:12] As though you know, or disagreeing. Because there is a difference between teaching something as church doctrine and disagreeing. So, you know, there's that. I'm not, I'm not on a witch hunt for Jasmine to be excommunicated, by the way, just to be clear. I am just from my experience as someone that was excommunicated for apostasy, feeling like, you know, it's worth mentioning that sometimes apologists stray into that sort of territory and it's only because the church chooses to tolerate it for reasons of expedience. Because them standing up against something that people find uncomfortable helps the church minimize those discomforts without having to come out against them themselves and risk really upsetting the members. Because the only people that are looking at Jasmine's content are the sort of people that are kind of got questions or, you know, really looking into these things. Anyway, letting her do that saves them from having to get up on the pulpit and potentially wobble millions of members.

Guest [01:00:12] Yeah.

Host [01:00:15] Yeah.

Guest 2 [01:00:16] Okay, so this next comment is from. Hey, word 12. They. They reminded me that the sin next to murder chapter of the Miracle of Forgiveness kind of says differently Jasmine. And it's a laugh crying face. But yeah, so they. That's what made me think of the. Reminded me of the miracle forgiveness story. We have another one that says this is from M. Lars 58. It says the job of the Mormon apologist. Yes. What the church and its leaders teach you is horribly bad. But let me explain to you why it's not really what they are saying, even though that's exactly what they are saying.

Host [01:00:50] Yeah, that's. That is essentially it in a nutshell.

Guest 2 [01:00:54] Yeah, I do feel pretty accurate.

Guest [01:00:56] Yeah.

Guest 2 [01:00:58] Okay. Do you want to read a couple of these?

Host [01:00:59] Yeah. Yeah. So why would she say this is it? Because this week's come follow me lesson is about David. Why is Jasmine trying to minimize David's sin? Who approved her script for this video? How much of this script is Jasmine's own opinion. And we don't know the relationship that Jasmine has with the church. Not fully.

Guest 2 [01:01:20] So she was working for Scripture Central, which I think was church adjacent or at least funded somewhat in part. But. But she's her own content creator now and I really don't know if she's a paid apologist. I don't know. I know that she has made videos addressing that, but I haven't seen them because I don't really consume her content. But yeah, anyway, and then that other comment on that page, this is from South. South as tail the. This apologist is insane. I. Or I would say apologetics is insane because that's just wild.

Guest 3 [01:01:53] Yeah.

Host [01:01:53] I wouldn't call her specifically.

Guest 2 [01:01:54] Yeah, I wouldn't call her, but I'd

Host [01:01:56] say the argument that she's promoting.

Guest 2 [01:01:58] Yeah.

Host [01:01:59] Is crazy.

Guest 2 [01:02:00] Yeah. This is actually one of the reasons why I wanted the responses to be shown is because of this one right here. This was left on my channel. This is from German Cowgirl and I'll read the whole thing. It says Jasmine wasn't there to hold my hand in the bishop's office when he handed me the miracle of forgiveness to annotate. She didn't. She didn't hand me tissues when he told me I was on the road to perdition, my sin, having sexual dreams that he deemed were me allowing Satan in. I hadn't done anything with anyone of any gender. He was a voyeur and perhaps delighted in my pain on that chapter about a sin next to murder because he made me reread it again before he would let me go on my mission. She wasn't there at the therapist with me or the psychiatrist as I tried to explain. I wanted to die because my bishop said as long as I had any thoughts of sex before marriage, I was unclean. She wasn't at the MTC when a different branch president asked me questions about my shower routine. She wasn't in the room when my mission president cast demons from me in the name of the priesthood. And she wasn't in the hospital with me when they saw me have a seizure from stress. Jasmine isn't any anywhere in the true walk of love and kindness. She's too busy salivating for crumbs by stepping on women to fawn at men who will use her. And this is their opinion. But I just really liked the story because this is. It's just showing the lived experiences of this specific person and how hard. And this is very similar to other stories and John or on Mormon stories. There have been people who. Who share These similar stories about how the miracle of forgiveness and how this teaching has really harmed them. I just thought that one was really worth sharing. And if they're out there, I would really like to hear your story on Mormon stories. But.

Host [01:03:46] Yeah, but we'll see.

Guest 2 [01:03:48] Yeah. Okay. This one I actually really liked. This is another comment. This was left by Wesley Adams 3235. Do you want to read this one, Nemo?

Host [01:03:55] Yeah, sure. It says a good explanation of why these sins are related in severity is from Jeffrey R. Holland's BYU Talk, Soul Symbols and Sacraments or Personal Purity from October 98 Conference.

Guest [01:04:09] There.

Host [01:04:09] He relates murder and chastity as disrupting God's timing of souls leaving and entering mortality respectively. Clearly, among his greatest concerns regarding mortality are how one gets into this world and how one gets out of it. He has set very strict limits in these matters.

Guest 2 [01:04:24] Thank you. Yeah. So, like, to me, it seems like. So Holland is making this, you know, sexual sin is like being in charge of putting life on Earth and then. And then, you know, murders. Taking life from Earth.

Host [01:04:40] Yeah.

Guest 2 [01:04:41] Like, I don't know if you had

Host [01:04:42] other thoughts, but then, like. Well, so, I mean, I have a couple of thoughts. If you take a strictly sort of. If you take an interventionist view of God, if you look at God as someone who intervenes in life and is. Is omnipotent, then it would be very difficult to disrupt God's timing and bringing souls to Earth.

Guest 2 [01:05:00] Yeah.

Host [01:05:01] Because all that would happen is, no, no soul that's not meant to come to earth would come to Earth. Which means that sex in sexual immorality would have a very low conception rate.

Guest [01:05:16] Right.

Host [01:05:16] Well, if, if, if. Otherwise, God's just getting foiled by horny teenagers. He's just like, oh, darn it, I didn't want to send this one. It wasn't ready yet. But I guess it's gonna have to go because this. This guy had sex with his girlfriend and he wasn't meant to like it. It just paints a very impotent God who's very bound by this idea that, you know, the moment a womb, it's like. It's like God is bound by biology. The moment an egg is fertilized, whether he likes it or not, he's got to chuck a soul in it. And that just seems like a really weird conception of God from Jeffrey R. Holland there to say. Right. Okay. He's just kind of has to. Or that it's disruptive because it puts the cart before the horse. It's kind of this idea that Right, Okay. Well, the moment a child is conceived, it just has to have a soul from God. God's got to put a soul in it. Rather than God being able to actually say, well, no, I'm not ready. Yes, this person doesn't get to have a kid.

Guest 2 [01:06:10] Well, I guess the, the workaround for that is like with David, because he got Bathsheba pregnant, it's like, oh, well, this is the. This is the trial for this child. This is that specific child's trial is to be born.

Host [01:06:22] Yeah, but then. Then what you're doing, then you're just. I don't even know where to start with that because then all you're doing is essentially saying anything outside of God's control just becomes a trial. It's like. It's like the trial itself is then God's inability to actually, there's this idea that God has a plan for your life and God is like playing 3D chess with your life and all this other stuff. Well, he's clearly not. He's just going, oh, well, I guess that's gonna be a trial for you then, bud.

Guest 2 [01:06:49] I feel like that's the cop out, though. That's what you said.

Host [01:06:51] I hear the cop out. Right? That is what he said. But it makes no sense.

Guest 2 [01:06:55] No, it doesn't. It really does.

Guest [01:06:58] Yeah.

Host [01:06:58] Because God is just becoming the. The Mormon conception of God tends

Guest [01:07:04] when

Host [01:07:05] they're trying to fix an argument. When apologies try to fix an argument about the Mormon conception of God, I feel as though they tend towards weakening him rather than strengthening him. They just go, yeah, well, actually God can't do that, or he's not in control of that. And so they paint this very un omnipotent God. When you have leaders of the church again teaching that God is omnipotent, this is something I saw Jacob Hansen do in his. I believe it was in his surrounded thing that he did with Alex o' Connor where he essentially argues that God is not omnipotent. And then you just have to play Dietre Fookdorf saying that we believe God is omnipotent. You're like, well, then why are you. Why are you undermining what says? This is what apologists do. And it's frustrating.

Guest 2 [01:07:43] Yeah, that's so weird. So another comment is from Din Din Jerus. I don't. Dangerous, I guess is how they're saying it. But this is. They say this is such a twist of the gospel. Breaking the law of chastity is next to murder. It's explicitly stated in church doctrine and in the scriptures. Why are you trying to act like it isn't? And that's, I think, the main points that we've been trying to say today, too.

Host [01:08:10] Like, sometimes it is just a case of saying, why can't apologists just stand up and own the church's weird doctrines? Like getting your own planet, like Kolob, like things in the Book of Abraham. Why can't they just own it?

Guest 2 [01:08:25] Yeah. Like, the Mormons are a peculiar people. Why don't. Why are we trying to move away from that?

Host [01:08:31] And I think it's expedience, and I think it's a bit of an enemy of my enemy is my friend. I think it's a bit of, like, we need to try and chum up to, you know, people in other faith groups, and they might tolerate us more if we get a little bit less weird. Yeah, yeah. Colby's put a good point in the chat that King Benjamin literally calls him the Lord God Omnipotent.

Guest 2 [01:08:49] Yeah. Good to see Colby in the. In the chat.

Host [01:08:51] Yes.

Guest 2 [01:08:51] That's fun.

Guest [01:08:53] Yeah.

Guest 2 [01:08:54] Okay, so the sex that I have is from LEM JWP 1756 and they say has led some people.

Host [01:09:01] Oh, yeah, yeah.

Guest 2 [01:09:02] It was the prophets, including Spencer Kimball, who taught this idea. So, yeah, again, that was one of the parts I did not like in her video. She's like, it's some people. I don't know. I just feel like there's a lot of gaslighting.

Host [01:09:13] It's that minimizing of gaslighting. It's, oh, well, some people. The implication being people who are wrong. So why were we wrong to listen to the words of a prophet when he spoke very clearly and believe him? When you're a faithful member of the church. What, What?

Guest [01:09:28] What?

Host [01:09:29] What failure of discernment was there for me, Jasmine, that meant that I failed to discern what I ought to have discerned when I listened to a prophet speak very clearly to me, or I believe my parents when they taught me what a prophet had taught them. What. Where's that failure of discernment? What should I have taken away from it? Should I have been more skeptical of the words of a prophet? Is that the takeaway here?

Guest 2 [01:09:54] Also? The. The. I don't know how she got to this conclusion that she came to. Like, I know on her. On her Instagram, she shared another, like, a scripture central article, I guess. But I don't know if this is a past teaching. I've never heard these things before that she's saying in this video. Like, I've never heard People make. Draw these connections or make these conclusions of this spiritual murder of his flock. Like, I. I don't know where she's getting this. And it's so interesting to me that, that she's just. Because some of the apologetics I've heard before, like the Book of Abraham, like the Kinderhook plates, like, I've seen people have workarounds, but I. I didn't think that this one had an apologetic, but do you want to read this one, Nemo?

Guest [01:10:32] Yeah.

Host [01:10:32] Please explain why Jesus seemed unconcerned about the sexual immorality of a woman at Jacob's well, as described in John 4, he knew she was living with a man outside of marriage, but did not bother to chastise her and was more focused on preaching about his mission. Yeah. And again, we spoke about the woman caught in adultery earlier and how he told her to go away and sin no more. He said he didn't condemn her, and yet he was very condemnatory of those who offend little children.

Guest 2 [01:10:59] Yeah. And there's another comment from my friend Dan Child, and he says something very similar. He says, bathsheba, and I may have spelled it incorrectly, but she was married to Uriah. When whom? When King Benjamin's king, excuse me, King David saw her and found out she was married. He had her husband sent to the front lines and he was killed. And he killed him. And he says there's a lot that they're missing, though, from all of that. Sure, it was a sin. It's also with her that the line leading to Jesus came, which I. I've heard this before. But he goes on, again, they are missing the point to all of that, saying how sexual sin is next to that of murder. When they brought the adulterous woman to Jesus Christ, he neither condemned her nor allowed or allowed punishment to be made against her. So I think it is on good authority that of Jesus Christ that we are good and not on the authority of the Church that we are condemned. So I think what he's saying is, again, those. Like, what we've said before is Jesus. Jesus, you know, got onto people who are abusing and that kind of thing, but he never. He didn't condemn this woman. He. People were ready to stone her, as was the law back then. And. And he was just like, if you're out, if he who is without sin among you, let him first cast the stone. And. And nobody did. So he just like, go and sin no more. That's literally all that happened to her. And so, yeah, Jesus, yeah, better authority Than.

Wrapping Up and Final Reflections

Host [01:12:14] Yeah, I think so. I think it. If in doubt, follow the example of Jesus Christ.

Guest 2 [01:12:19] Yeah.

Host [01:12:20] As a believing woman. But the problem is then that will bring you into conflict with the leaders of the church. And is then Jesus Christ just a dead prophet? Are his words less valuable? He can't be a dead prophet because they believe in the literal resurrection of Jesus Christ. He was resurrected on the third day and ascended to heaven and he lives with the Father alive, very much alive, with a body of flesh and bones. So he's the one person they can't consign to the history books and say, well, he's a dead prophet. We don't have to listen to him. They claim to be his representatives and yet they're not representing his position on sexual immorality. They're just not. It's, it's anti biblical to say that it's next to murder when all we saw from Christ was forgiveness for those who were caught doing it.

Guest 2 [01:13:03] Yeah, great point. Yeah. It's like the opposite from what DNC and what the Book Mormon are saying. And Joseph was familiar with the New Testament, so I don't know why that didn't work its way. A little bit more in there, but I wanted to share. We have Megan in the chat from Generally Unquotable and she's often on Mormon stories with the news when they cover the news. She says the most infuriating thing is that Jasmine doesn't seem to realize that she's affecting what real people's lives. This isn't a joke, Jasmine. And I really agree with that because she's got a lot of followers and she's very influential. She is an influencer like I. She is affecting people.

Host [01:13:36] And to give her the benefit of the doubt, if she is trying to help people and if she is trying to say, hey guys, this teaching that a lot of you are fretting over and are you feeling a lot of guilt over. You don't need to feel so guilty because actually I think it's about a combination of sins, not just about one sin. And I mean it's a bogus take because of what previous profits have said. But even if that's what she's trying to do and we give her the benefit of the doubt, then fine, but she needs to sort out her delivery so it doesn't sound so dismissive and so much like she is just minimizing people's experience.

Guest 2 [01:14:09] Yeah. Okay, so we have another commenter here and I haven't fact checked any of these, but I'm. But I Can add these in the show notes for sure. There's an Andrew Jensen where he's showing. He says this teaching is found in a 2017 Book of Mormon seminary teacher manual, which I will.

Host [01:14:22] Obviously, we'll look into that.

Guest 2 [01:14:24] Yeah. They also say it's found in the Eternal Marriage student manual. They also say that it is found in the Book of Mormon study guide for home study seminary students. And then they list another, like a video by Elder Holland. And I'll have to. I'll have to find these. But, like, so to me, what I'm seeing is that it. It is still a teaching from 2017, at least. I don't know if they have more recent ones, but that's still pretty recent to me. And can we.

Host [01:14:47] Can we throw Julie's comment up on screen for a second? Julie d' Azevedo is saying from her professional practice that this teaching. I can throw that on there.

Guest 2 [01:14:57] Oh, perfect.

Host [01:14:58] Saying that this teaching has caused so much trauma for so many of her clients and that the level of shame surrounding consensual sex is intense.

Guest 2 [01:15:06] Dang.

Host [01:15:07] Yeah.

Guest 2 [01:15:07] Like lived experiences. This is really harmful to people. This is really harming people. Dang. Thank you for sharing that, Julie. That was great. Okay, so there's more comments. This is from Jamie Pittman Newton. Thank you for not gaslighting this doctrine. The church taught. The purity and chastity doctrines of the church are so abusive. Notice how they said doctrines, not culture. And I think that's really important. This next one is from Desiree Clark, the spiritual murder of his entire flock. Omg, this is unhinged. Let's start. And even worse, guilt trip for missionaries coming home before the expected time.

Host [01:15:42] And.

Guest 2 [01:15:43] Yeah, that's.

Guest [01:15:43] Yeah.

Host [01:15:44] If Jasmine was trying to make it better, she made it worse.

Guest [01:15:47] Yeah.

Host [01:15:47] Like that's specifically with this concept of spiritual murder.

Guest 2 [01:15:52] Yeah. Okay, there's a. So Andrew Jensen is showing it is found in gospel principles chastity lesson 17. And then they say lesson 39 later. Anyway, I. Yeah, we put all that

Host [01:16:04] in the show notes for sure.

Guest 2 [01:16:06] Yeah. Okay. So these next two comments. Do you want to read these ones?

Host [01:16:09] Yeah.

Guest [01:16:09] Cool.

Host [01:16:11] It says if breaking the world chastity meant sexual assault instead of sex out of wedlock, I'd understand.

Guest 2 [01:16:18] Or sexual abuse. Yeah.

Host [01:16:19] Sexual abuse. Yeah. I think what she's alluding to is that modern apologists know better than those prophets. So we trust the scripture and the apologies current interpretation and nix those prophets. Unfortunately. Yeah. I think some people do end up holding on to apologists like that. They end up holding on to Apologists beyond the prophets because the apologists produce something more palatable in the end. And it's important for people for many ways and we. I certainly am very compassionate to this, that for some people they need to try and stay in. And I get it and I understand. And so when apologists provide a lifeline to deal with the discomfort, people are willing to take it. And I think that puts greater responsibility on these apologists to actually be honest and accountable and not just make stuff up or come up with their own theories that contradict the teachings of church leaders and not address the fact that they contradict so that people feel gaslit. Because providing comfort through gaslighting is abusive. It's not helpful.

Guest 2 [01:17:21] No. Yeah. So that was all the comments I had to share there. There are some really good ones coming in. I don't know if you want to throw any up on the screen. There's one here. I'll share. This is from Marion D. I don't know how to say that. Marion Dyer. And then she says I used to feel. Or they say I used to feel so guilty as a missionary for leaving the apartment late. What happened if we missed someone? So again, like this is just greater guilt for people who are. Who either return home early from their mission or just go in at 8 o' clock instead of 9 o'. Clock. Like the murder of people's flocks. That's just so wild.

Guest [01:17:57] Yeah.

Host [01:17:57] The more, the more I think about it. I wasn't really planning to hit that point too hard in this episode because I, I thought we would more into focusing on Jasmine's contradiction of church leaders. And we have. But I think it is definitely worth, you know, mentioning.

Guest 2 [01:18:12] Definitely. I think with her, with that, I think with her interpretation that will fall down the memory hole because it's, it's just her video. Whereas this teaching of this is the Sinex murder has been repeated and is still being repeated in these manuals that we've. That this individual has shown. So.

Host [01:18:29] Yeah.

Guest 2 [01:18:29] Yeah.

Host [01:18:30] All right. Well, I think, I think that's it. Should we land the plane?

Guest 2 [01:18:36] Sure. Do you want to. Do you want to call out for any kind of super chats or anything like that?

Host [01:18:40] I'll do, I'll do closing remarks in a second, I think. But if you want to tell me your, your closing thoughts.

Guest 2 [01:18:46] Sure. Like to me watching, to me watching her video. I don't, I don't mind that she doesn't, she doesn't agree that this is the Sinex murder. I think it is not the Sinex murder. I Think that's, I think that's a healthy perspective that she has. But to then dismiss past leaders for decades, that's. That seems wild to me. This is kind of bordering on apostasy until, like you were saying, until she's approached by a bishop and stopped. I guess it's not apostasy, but it's like toeing that line. But just, just the way she's twisting things. This is stuff I've never heard before. This is never an interpretation. I would have come, I would have naturally come to that. Oh, this is sort of like this is adjacent to murder or this act will lead to murder. Just like with Uriah and then this sort of like with Corianton abandoning his missionary work. This, that is so harmful. And if this teaching does take off, this apologetics does take off, then that can be really harmful to these missionaries who, who can't. Commissions are hard, who either can't. Who have to go home early for sickness or because it is so hard, or even just the ones like was the comment that was shared earlier with the individual, just, just by going home early, just like 30 minutes early, you could have spiritually killed somebody. That's a harmful teaching. And I hope that this apologetic does not take off. And it's. Yeah, it's just so disingenuous to ignore the fact that this has been, this has been taught as a doctrine for, since, I guess since 1830 when the book of Mormon was published, or if not since 1875 or whenever George Q. Cannon was teaching it. So that's not good apologetics to me.

Host [01:20:21] No, I think my point is very much that you don't just get to pick and choose what's church doctrine and what's not just because it suits you or just because we're uncomfortable about a certain teaching or just because a certain teaching seems weird. Now, if a teaching is doing harm. So if the teaching or the doctrine that sexual immorality is a sin next to murder is doing harm and we're noticing that it's doing harm, then the solution is not to pretend that it was never a doctrine or to tell people they were wrong in their interpretations of it, or here's a brand new interpretation, you can say, here's a new interpretation, here's a new way of looking at it. But you need to address how it was previously taught so that people can understand the difference, so that people can then adequately move on from how it's taught, so people don't feel gaslit or just aren't being gaslit by you. So I think there's nothing wrong with trying to give different interpretations. I think there's everything wrong with ignoring how things used to be and trying to just cherry pick what's doctrine and what's not. Any. Any thoughts to that?

Guest 2 [01:21:29] No, I, I was, I was reading these comments and I think this one's. We've been covering the William Clayton journals and those will come out next week hopefully. So look forward to those. But this person says this is random. Randoms 7113. They say, remember it's not adultery if you have multiple virgins.

Host [01:21:44] And I think DNC132 exactly as much. Yeah, yeah,

Guest 2 [01:21:50] yeah, yeah.

Host [01:21:51] Well, thank you very much, Julia. Remind people where they can find you.

Guest 2 [01:21:54] Oh, yeah, sure. Analyzing Mormonism on all the platforms. Patreon, if you wanted to help out in that way, and I know you have a Patreon as well, if people wanted to help Nemo out. And then of course donate to Mormon Stories. We're going through the. The John had to they return in their response and those have been published on the website. If you wanted to get a little update on the lawsuit that the church is putting against John for using the word Mormon and other things. So yeah, if you want an update on that or if you wanted to help support their legal fund, then you're welcome to go do that on their website and I can leave those in the show notes as well. So. Yeah, but yeah, and then you can plug your Nemo the Mormon.

Host [01:22:33] Oh, I, I'm not gonna plug my name at the woman shamelessly other than to say go check out Nemo the Mormon on all platforms. And this is the sort of work I do. Me and Julia work in this sort of field. And we're. I certainly am very happy and I think I can speak for Julia to say that we're. We are both very happy to be here on LDS discussions and bringing these kinds of topics to light. And we wouldn't be able to do it without your kind support. So make sure you are smashing the like button as the kids say. Make sure you are hitting subscribe if you don't want to miss these videos and you want to see more of this and make sure that if you really value this work, you see it continue by becoming a monthly donor over@mormonstories.org and with that, I will say what John always says, which is be good to each other, be kind to each other and we will see you again soon on another episode of Mormon Stories podcast. Take care, everyone. Bye.