Episode Transcript
Host: John Dehlin · Guest: Radio Free Mormon
This transcript is machine-generated and lightly edited for readability. The audio is authoritative. Please excuse occasional errors in names and spelling.
Introduction and Episode Overview
John Dehlin [00:00:00] Hello, everyone, and welcome to another edition of Mormon Stories podcast. I am your host for today, John Dehlin. It is July 26, 2023, and today we're here to answer the question, was Joseph Smith a polygamist or revelation on plural marriage? Contemporary with Joseph Smith by none other than Radio Free Mormon.
Radio Free Mormon [00:00:22] Hey, RFM, you forgot the Copyright 2023 part. John, how are you doing? It's great to be here.
John Dehlin [00:00:27] Thanks for joining us. In studio.
Radio Free Mormon [00:00:29] In studio. I flew down here just to.
John Dehlin [00:00:32] I don't believe you, but I'm honored.
Radio Free Mormon [00:00:33] Anyway, I flew down here just to do this, among other things.
John Dehlin [00:00:37] Well, it's great to have you, but
Radio Free Mormon [00:00:39] this was up there in importance.
John Dehlin [00:00:40] Thank you, brother. Well, for those of you who don't know, Radio Free Mormon hosts the Radio Free Mormon podcast, and he co hosts Mormonism Live every Wednesday nights, 6:20pm Mountain time. Check it out on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts. It's great stuff. Why are we asking and answering the question, was Joseph Smith a polygamist? I'll tell you why. Long ago, let's just say 100 or 200 years ago, there was, let's just say, credible, different senses or feelings or beliefs or opinions about whether or not Joseph Smith was a polygamist. Specifically, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints or the Brighamite Church that went west to Salt Lake City, maintained that Joseph Smith was a polygamist because clearly Brigham Young and his successors, all, all were. But the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, founded by emma Smith, Joseph's first wife or 22nd wife, depending on how you're counting, and his son, Joseph Smith iii, the reorganized Church for what, a century or more, maintained that Joseph Smith never practiced polygamy, but instead that it started with Brigham Young. And so for over a century, you know, reasonable historians or people sometimes could differ or disagree. However, the Reorganized Church of Jesus of Latter Day Saints, now known as Community of Christ, in the 1960s, I believe, finally sort of came clean, reviewed the history, and sort of threw their hat in with the Brighamite or Salt Lake City Church by acknowledging that they were wrong and that indeed, Joseph Smith was a polygamist. So, you know, in the 70s and 80s and 90s and 2000s and 2010s, most of us kind of felt like this question was settled. However, recently with the emergence of what I call neo fundamentalism, Mormon neo fundamentalism, which would sort of be the Denver Snuffer kind of group, the remnant group, the Stoddard, what's her name?
Radio Free Mormon [00:02:47] Hannah Stoddard.
John Dehlin [00:02:48] Hannah Stoddard Smith foundation foundation, and with other kind of branches of neofundalist Mormon these days, there seems to be a real groundswell of neo fundamentalist Mormon who now want to say that Joseph Smith never practiced polygamy, that this was a scheme by Brigham Young, that it all started with big bad Brigham Young, and that the restoration prior to Brigham Young was all valid, but kind of the some of the Nauvoo era restoration and then everything that came after it basically was the Mormon Church falling in another apostasy. And rfm, that's my. And so RFM has decided and done original research to try and do his own best efforts to substantiate or answer the question whether or not Joseph Smith was indeed a polygamist. That's my intro for today. Rfm, what would you add, edit, or delete? From my introduction, I had thought it
Radio Free Mormon [00:03:49] was in the 1960s as well that the reorganized church backed off of their insistence that Joseph Smith did not practice polygamy. And based upon their analysis of the historical record, it may not have been the church as a whole. But I believe it was their church historian who finally said, look, Joseph Smith practice polygamy. We just need to get on board with it. I believe that wasn't the 1960s, but was actually as late as the 1980s. But other than that, I think you covered it very well.
John Dehlin [00:04:14] Yeah, well, I could definitely be wrong, so I'll go with your dates over mine.
Radio Free Mormon [00:04:18] I was wrong. I had said 1960s before, and then I looked it up for another podcast and I went, oh, crap, it's the 1980s.
John Dehlin [00:04:23] Yeah. Anything. Anything else you want to add about why you decided to take this particular topic on in the past month or two?
How This Polygamy Debate Got Started
Radio Free Mormon [00:04:33] Like so many things in my life, I blame Bill Real. And we were just doing Mormonism live, just minding our own business, doing Mormonism live. And a month and a half, two months ago, we're doing it on some unrelated subject and we take live calls at the end of the show. As you probably know, though, I don't think you've ever called in.
John Dehlin [00:04:51] I've listened to Collins and I actually was listening when what you're about to say happened.
Radio Free Mormon [00:04:56] Well, why don't you tell us your perception of what?
John Dehlin [00:04:57] No, no, that would be clumsy and awkward.
Radio Free Mormon [00:05:00] Okay.
John Dehlin [00:05:00] But I do remember I'll be the
Radio Free Mormon [00:05:02] clumsy and awkward one. Then it was Matt. Some guy named Matt calls in and there's always people out there who are listening in. And anytime we say something about Joseph Smith being A polygamist, even though it really has nothing to do with what we're talking about on the show, it's ancillary. There are people, it seems, who are listening who want to comment. No, Joseph Smith was not a polygamist. You're all wrong. It was all Brigham Young. And you need to read these books, which are published, I think usually self published. I'm not sure that they're actually published by a printing press. They're not peer reviewed. But they're starting to accumulate a number of books on the subject that attack this from their point of view. There's also some podcasts as well that people are watching and following and agreeing with. So this becomes a rising movement of what I consider to be erroneous information based upon faulty reasoning and an incomplete analysis of the evidence. But I have never looked into this. I'm going to get back to that call in a second. I've never looked into this. I've been aware of it. I've looked into it a little bit. But I am aware of the fact that this is its own bottomless pit. And one would have to spend. How much is it you have to spend to be an expert in something? Is it a thousand hour rule?
John Dehlin [00:06:18] It's not going to say 10,000 hours, but that's just arbitrary.
Radio Free Mormon [00:06:20] Okay, this would probably just take 10,000. I mean, 1,000, maybe 800. But there's still a lot to put into something that I'm not that invested in. Because it seems to me that when you have the established, reputable, peer reviewed, published authors who are historians, and you have them like Dan Vogel or Brent Metcalfe, you've got people who have left the church who agree with this, that Joseph Smith, yes, he practiced polygamy and he introduced polygamy. And yes, he's the author or receiver, if it's indeed a revelation. Section 132. You got him over here. You got him over here on the inside as well. You've got Richard Bushman, historian. You've got Brian Hales, anesthesiologist. He certainly has done an awful lot of work. Sometimes people accuse me of putting them to sleep. So maybe anyway. But he's done a lot of research. He put the three volumes together on Joseph Smith's polygamy. And I know that he had hired Don Bradley, I think it was to go out and do a lot of research and go across the country to all these libraries and depositories or repositories of documents. And Don just did an incredible job. And they came up with all the things that had been found before and some additional things, and they're put together in the three volumes. And so you've got Brian Hales, who is very, very tbm, very, very loyal to the leadership of the LDS Church. And he comes down on the same side. Yeah. Joseph Smith practiced polygamy, and the evidence leads us there. So you have people, reputable, peer reviewed, published by Academic Press's people, And can
John Dehlin [00:07:56] I just add, like Terrell and Fiona Givens, Rick Turley, former church historian, Marlon Jensen, former church historian, the Mormon Church's own gospel topics essays, and I think the entire Mormon Church, First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve, past, present and future would all endorse this even to their own detriment. Right. I mean, you could argue that if anyone today had an interest in Joseph Smith not being a polygamist, it would be the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints at its leadership, because it's always a black eye. There's no way to shine that shinola, as you might want to say.
Radio Free Mormon [00:08:35] I don't think I've ever said any such thing, Mr. Delin. Good day, sir. Good day.
John Dehlin [00:08:40] But anyway, like, pretty much all reasonable people agree, which. Which kind of.
Radio Free Mormon [00:08:46] Then that's a true Scotsman fallacy that you just engaged in. Just want to identify that.
John Dehlin [00:08:51] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [00:08:51] Because if you don't agree with what all these, you know, the historians and the church and everybody and their dog on both sides of the fence agree the historical record represents, then you're not reasonable. I don't want to go there because typically people who are on that side, they like to have side arguments about if we call them unreasonable or say anything that might be construed as being insulting.
John Dehlin [00:09:14] I guess I'm saying I'm unaware of any credible.
Radio Free Mormon [00:09:18] You just did it again.
John Dehlin [00:09:19] Historians who are, you know, who. Who work at universities or who publish credible history books with credible publishers. That would deny. Yeah, that. That would deny that Joseph Smith was polygamous. But anyway, let's let you do the evidence.
Radio Free Mormon [00:09:35] No, no, no, you're absolutely right. So. And it is. It's this massive, massive, bottomless pit of stuff. And Brian Hales, I mean, he's worked exclusively in this area. Not like Richard Bushman, who's worked in this area, but also all other aspects of Joseph Smith's life. For his biography, which came out in 2005, rust and rolling. But you've got. I have no idea. He must have spent more than 10,000 hours on those three books. So he knows his stuff backward and forward. But I'm just. Honestly, there are other things about Mormonism that I am more interested in. I only have so many hours in a day. But then Matt calls. His first name was Matt. I don't know him, but he called at the end of the show. It wasn't about polygamy, but something had been said about Joseph Smith and his practice of polygamy. In an ancillary fashion, he called in to challenge that. And much to my surprise, in Real time, Bill Real is answering him and taking him up on his challenge. Now, this must have been on a night that was my show, because we alternate shows. We're both there for all shows, right? But, like, tonight is my show, next week will be Bill's show, and then the week after that will be my show again. It's generally how we do it. So even though we can add things, the main responsibility for the show is on the person who's in charge of the show for that week. So this must have been a night that was my show, but Bill is going to be next week. And Bill just immediately live takes this guy up on his challenge and says, okay, here's what we're going to do. Because Bill didn't have anything planned for the next week. He says, here's what we're going to do. We're going to respond to that on next week's show. And even as he's doing it, I'm not saying anything, but what I'm thinking is, bill, do you realize what you're doing? We've got one week to get ready for this, and this is a bottomless pit of information. So we talked about it. By the way, Bill did. He didn't do 40 hours of research that week. He did like 60 or 80 hours of research. I might have done 40, but he was just absolutely amazing going through all this stuff. And what we decided to do because there's so much information out there, actually on both sides of the issue, depending on how you interpret it. But what I told Bill was that from my point of view, what we needed to focus on in order to make this manageable within a one or one and a half hour, Mormonism Live episode ended up being, I think two is let's focus on contemporary evidence, evidence that existed as of the time of Joseph Smith, before he died. That'll give us plenty of stuff to talk about. And that is generally, legally speaking and logically speaking is frequently and historically speaking, the more important evidence, the evidence that can usually be relied upon more rather than looking at 10 years later and Someone recollecting something that happened back in Nauvoo. But we're trying to get things in Nauvoo, so.
Challenging Denials of Joseph Smith's Polygamy
John Dehlin [00:12:21] And tell me if I'm right. RFM so, like, some want to cite, like, Doc. DNC132 as evidence that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. But the critics of Joseph Smith polygamy would say, well, that was added to the DNC way later. We don't know if it was tampered with or who might have actually written it. It was written by Joseph's own hand, so maybe someone got it wrong. And then others would say, well, many of Joseph's wives signed sworn polygamous wives testified and signed sworn affidavits that they were married to Joseph in very deed.
Radio Free Mormon [00:12:54] And.
John Dehlin [00:12:55] And again, the Joseph Smith polygamy critics would say that maybe they were intimidated or pressured by Brigham Young to lie to back up, you know, his practice. Right? Is that.
Radio Free Mormon [00:13:06] Yes, very much so. Because there are two collections of affidavits that happened decades after Joseph Smith is dead and well into the time that the Mormon have gone into Utah. And one of them, I think the first one, though I could be wrong, has to do with a collection of affidavits in order to support the church's position in the Temple lot case. And the whole idea with the Temple lot case was, without going too much into it, the Temple lot is a very important piece of land in Mormonism. It's similar to the. What is it? The Mount, I'm sorry, Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Because it is a sacred piece of ground, and it is held as sacred by different factions or different religions. And that's why there's so much controversy over what happens with that. So now you have Muslims with the Dome of the Rock that's built there on the Temple Mount, and the Jews, or at least the Orthodox Jews, believe that that's where the Temple is supposed to be built, the Jewish Temple. And you can't have the two buildings there at the same time. And so that's one of the things that's difficult. But interestingly, that same kind of thing plays out in Mormonism with the Temple lot, which is in Missouri, and I believe in Jackson County, Missouri. And that's what was dedicated for the temple to be built. And that was, you know, shows up in the Doctrine and Covenants that this is the temple that will be built in this generation. And it wasn't built in this generation, but they still know where that plot of land is. So there ended up being a controversy among, well, there Was the group of Mormon who owned the temple lot. Right. Or claimed to own the temple lot. I think they prevailed in the lawsuit. And then you've got the Mormon out in Missouri, and then you've got the reorganites who are back there, back east, and they're all having this big fight about who should have the legal deed to this property. And one of the things had to do with whether Joseph Smith practiced polygamy, believe it or not, they got a judge, just a secular judge who's hearing all this stuff. And the idea is, well, if Joseph Smith practiced polygamy, then the church that. And he was there when the lot was bought, and the church is practicing polygamy, then should be the true successor to Joseph Smith's church and therefore should have the title to the land. Yes.
John Dehlin [00:15:20] Interesting.
Radio Free Mormon [00:15:21] And so those are the circumstances under which they produce the affidavits. They also have, I think, witnesses go back, including women. And by the way, I haven't studied this 100%. This is my best understanding of it. And I'm trying to represent the other side, the side that believes that Joseph Smith did not practice polygamy and give their argument about why these affidavits or testimony should not be taken at face value. It is produced in the course of a legal lawsuit where the church is trying to establish and has a vested interest in establishing that Joseph Smith did practice polygamy. And here you've got all the witnesses, and they end up losing the lawsuit. If they had won the lawsuit, then the LDS Church would have the temple lot today, but they don't. It may be a matter of time. I don't know. They got a lot of money, I heard. And there's a line in the temple that says something about money and you can get anything you want in the world for it, but we'll see. So it's decades later, and their argument is, look, this was done in a situation where pressure was likely put on these women to sign these affidavits and go testify. So we can't take what they say at face value because of the circumstances under which their testimony and affidavits arose. Okay, so I get that. So I'm talking with Bill, and that's very important. It's also, of course, important that we understand that we can't just brush away or wave away affidavits from people. But on the other hand, we also have to weigh them and see, you know, circumstances under which they were made in the context. So I said, bill, let's Just go with contemporary evidence. Let's not go there, okay? And he agreed with that because we didn't want to go beyond two hours for this whole podcast. So we did that. And as we're doing, occurs to me, because I'm looking at this really for the first time myself in a week's time, because I have a deadline. We've got to do a podcast about it. And I'm looking at the Nauvoo Expositor, and there are three affidavits in the Nauvoo Expositor, by the way. I'm also very familiar with the fact that those who believe that Joseph Smith did not practice polygamy, they have a tendency, it's almost a reflection or reflexive action, to wave away any documents that disagree with their theory that are written down. Whether it's written down in journals or meeting minutes or almost anything. If it disagrees with their theory, they wave it away with a uniform excuse of, well, Brigham Young went back and changed that later. And it doesn't make any difference if it's William Clayton's diary, where he says that on July 12, 1843, I believe that's the correct date that he wrote this revelation that Joseph Smith received, not claiming it was the first time Joseph Smith had received it, but Joseph Smith has already been practicing plural marriage, and now he's going to write it down or dictate it. And the idea was that Hyrum had said, you know, I think I can convince Emma if you just give me the revelation. And Joseph says, what is the story? That I've got it memorized, and so I'll just dictate it. And William Clayton, being his scribe, who wrote it down, and William Clayton wrote in his diary as well, that spent the morning writing this revelation from Joseph Smith. Pretty clear about what it's about. Of course, it's just a diary entry. It's not the full thing. It says 10 pages, it's pretty long. Talking about Abraham and Moses and how they were justified in having more wives than one, which sounds pretty much like section 132. But that's a diary entry, a journal entry dated July 12, 1843. That is very strong evidence. And the tendency that I've heard from those who deny Joseph practice polygamy is to say, well, that was written in later, that was changed, that was added. And a lot of times they don't take the next step and say, what would that look like? And how would you do that? And if you did that, wouldn't it show some kind of evidence that that was done. By the way, the church hasn't helped matters in this regard with their secretness of the William Clayton journals, which I think was it 2017 that they had promised would be published with the Joseph Smith Papers project? I don't know, but they said it would be published in its entirety. We have heard nothing about that since. And it's been six years, and those dates are pretty close. I'm not sure if it was 2017, but it's been years since that promise was made publicly and nope, no dice. So that also plays into their. Their hand because we can't exactly see it. And when we do exactly see it, I'm sure we'll have the normal excuses about. Well, that was written in later on to make it look like William Clayton wrote that. Okay, so having said all of that, because that is a standard reflexive excuse from those who practice, who claim Joseph Smith practiced polygamy or did not practice polygamy. Excuse me. I thought it was significant that we have a newspaper, and that newspaper is the Nauvoo Expositor, and there's one and only edition that was published, and it was published on June 7, 1844, which is before Joseph Smith died.
The Nauvoo Expositor and Its Publishers
John Dehlin [00:20:35] And you want to give our never Mormon listeners the 30 seconds overview of who published the Navo Expositor and why?
Radio Free Mormon [00:20:41] Yeah, there were some people who had been members of the church in high standing in the church who may have been recently excommunicated. It was a handful of people. But what they were doing was they.
John Dehlin [00:20:53] This is 1844 in Nauvoo, right?
Radio Free Mormon [00:20:55] Yes.
John Dehlin [00:20:56] Okay.
Radio Free Mormon [00:20:56] And I mean, one of them had been in the first Presidency, William Law. Yes. And one of them had been at least who provided an affidavit. I don't know if he was one of the publishers, but these are guys in church leadership. And the way they present it in the paper itself is that they were concerned about a number of things that Joseph Smith was doing. One of them was polygamy. And they knew he was practicing polygamy because of their in leadership. And the way they present it is that they had tried to talk to Joseph Smith and talk him out of this because this was leading nowhere good and he refused to be corrected. And so they felt they had no other option because what's going on in nauvoo in the 1840s is that Joseph Smith. I'll just say it because I believe it's correct and historically accurate. Joseph Smith is practicing polygamy, but he's practicing it with a limited set of leaders, those who he thinks are the most loyal and trying to keep it a secret. So there's a smaller group of Mormon in Nauvoo who know Joseph Smith is practicing polygamy because they're in on it. And then there's the vast majority, the 90% or more of the regular members of the church who are out there working on the temple or trying to, you know, raise crops and just off on a mission somewhere, or off on a mission. And they don't know anything about it, but they start hearing rumors, because you can't keep a secret like this.
John Dehlin [00:22:27] And. But also, they would have heard Joseph Smith's public denials when accused.
Radio Free Mormon [00:22:31] Yes.
John Dehlin [00:22:31] Where he would tell the membership, the people of Nauvoo, I'm not practicing polygamy.
Radio Free Mormon [00:22:36] Basically, in effect, this is what led to his public denials. It starts getting out. You just can't keep a secret like this. And so then he would go out publicly and say, no, I'm not practicing polygamy. And, you know, people accuse me of having seven wives or. And what a shame it is that I can find only one that's a famous one. And so you've got that situation. And here we have people in leadership who know he's doing it. They know he's denying it. He will not be corrected. They believe this is an abomination, that this is not from God. By the way, in the Nauvoo Expositor itself, they're very clear that they joined the church because of Joseph Smith. I mean, who doesn't join the church without Joseph Smith? He is the church. He's the foundation of the church. He and the Book of Mormon. If you take Joseph Smith out, you don't have Mormonism, just like if you took Jesus out, you wouldn't have Christianity. And so they love him. They adore him. They have read the Book of Mormon. They have a testimony of the Book of Mormon. They believe the Book of Mormon is a revelation from God. It is scripture. It teaches the gospel. And they talk about this in the Nauvoo Expositor itself. And so they believe in the Book of Mormon. They haven't changed their belief in the Book of Mormon. When the Doctrine and Covenants comes out, first edition in 1835, it has revelations in it. They believe that those are from God. They teach the gospel of Jesus Christ. Those are authentic revelations from God. They haven't changed their position about that either. So at least up to that point, Joseph Smith is golden. He is the prophet of God who's producing These things. And they believe that. And they continue to believe that in 1844. The thing that's changed is polygamy.
John Dehlin [00:24:09] And also to make it even more confusing, the Doctrine and Covenants and. Or Book of Commandments of the time in 1844, along with the Book of Mormon, both said that polygamy was forbidden.
Radio Free Mormon [00:24:22] Yes.
John Dehlin [00:24:22] Unless God made it. Okay. You know.
Radio Free Mormon [00:24:25] Yes. So you've got Jacob, chapter two, which is a book in the Book of Mormon, and that's the chapter in which it talks about polygamy, which strangely is happening at a very early stage. It's a second generation of the Nephites even being in the Americas. And you wonder where the heck are all the women coming from in order for them to be practicing polygamy? And it's not the Lamanites, remember, it's only the Nephites and apparently only a part of the Nephites. So it's like, where are these women coming from? Because you've got such a small group of people in the first instance. And this is still actually. I mean, you got Lehi, right. And Nephi and. And of course, Sam and Layman and Lemuel. And at some point after they leave Jerusalem, Jacob and Joseph get born. And then Jacob, who is a brother of Nephi, ends up writing his own book, and he's condemning the practice of polygamy amongst the Nephites. It's very strange where these women were coming from in order to practice polygamy. But nevertheless, that's the way the Book of Mormon presents it. But it's very clear, polygamy is an abomination in the Book of Mormon. And then in 1830. So the Book of Mormon gets dictated in 1829, it's published in March of 1830. The church is organized and established in April of 1830. In 1833, we have the. The Book Commandments. And in the Book of Commandments. Is that true? The Book of Commandments? No, I think it is the Doctrine and Covenants.
John Dehlin [00:25:47] No, it starts Book of Commandments.
Radio Free Mormon [00:25:48] It does. There's the Book of Commandments, but it's in Doctrine and Covenants, the first edition of the Doctrine and covenants, which is 1835, in which we find section 101. Okay, yeah, that's the thing. The point I was laboring toward there. Sorry, but you have section 101, which is not section 101 anymore because it got removed in 1876 with the new edition of the Doctrine and Covenants. And I believe it's verse four of the session. It's the church's statement on marriage. And what it says is, no, we're not practicing polygamy. We believe that there should only be one woman for every man.
John Dehlin [00:26:23] It says in response to rumors or something like that.
Radio Free Mormon [00:26:25] That's the thing. Why is the Church denying that they're practicing polygamy in 1835? Why? Because it says. Because there are reports out there that we are engaging in adultery and we're engaging in polygamy. We want to set the record straight and say way we're not practicing it. Which raises the interesting question is why were there reports.
John Dehlin [00:26:45] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [00:26:45] That Mormon were practicing polygamy as early as 1835 and on such a scale and of such a magnitude that the Church felt that they needed to respond to it officially in a book of scripture.
John Dehlin [00:26:59] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [00:27:00] So it sounds like it was more than just a couple of people rumoring it. But the reason, I don't know, and this is interesting because I don't know that we actually have the allegations being made to which this is responding, but we have the response and therefore we know that there were allegations.
John Dehlin [00:27:17] And if it's. If I can add to make it even more complicated, I believe we have a revelation around 1831 when Joseph's sending missionaries off to the frontier, where he tells the Mormon missionaries that if they happen upon a Native American woman, they have permission to take that woman as a wife in addition to whatever wife they may have. So there's that, as I understand it. And there's the Fanny Alger allegation, where Book of Mormon scribe and First Presidency member or co president of the church Oliver Cowdery, apparently catches Joseph Smith in an affair with Fanny alger somewhere between 1833 and 1835, I believe. And then Joseph Smith excommunicates Oliver eventually for that accusation. And it would seem to me that those two things, the Fanny Alger allegation plus the revelation to the missionaries on the frontier to Native Americans, could potentially have fueled some of the speculation about polygamy.
Radio Free Mormon [00:28:19] Yes. Something definitely. I believe all historians are in agreement, something definitely happened with Fanny Alger in that barn. 1833, 1835. It's a bit squishy as far as the dates go. I have talked to Brent Metcalfe, though, and I'm glad you brought up the. The allegation, or at least the report that there was a revelation about the first four missionaries going to preach to the Lamanites and the borders by the Lamanites, because that's a late report. Was it Martin Harris? I Talked to Britt Metcalf about it, and he said, yeah, that's a lay report. He doesn't even believe it's correct.
John Dehlin [00:28:55] Except the Mormon Church, if I remember in their Gospel Topics essay or in some of their apologetics, has officially said there's evidence of a revelation around polygamy as early as 1831, which in my mind was the Church endorsing that theory.
Radio Free Mormon [00:29:13] I had thought that for a time, and then I found something. I talked with Brent about it. He told me his reasons for it, and they made sense to me, and I'm not prepared to talk about them. I just want to say this is an instance in which he sees it as a much later report of something that happened much earlier, which is one of those things that's not contemporary and can be influenced by intervening events. In other words, the Church is now practicing polygamy, so now we can backdate it to 1831. He's not persuaded by that. But there was something else that happened that I found out relatively recently. I did a podcast about it at Radio Free Mormon. I think it was called Four Recent Discoveries, or maybe it was Three Recent Discoveries and this was one of them, where I think I found what it is that's being referenced by that idea that the revelation on plural marriage or principles in it. In the italicized part in the introduction to section 132, it appears from the records that we have left or received that principles of this were made known as early as 1831, something like that.
John Dehlin [00:30:18] Okay.
Radio Free Mormon [00:30:19] And I think it's something else, and I can't remember exactly what it was, but it had to do with Joseph F. Smith, I think, and something he had said. I believe that's exactly right. Anyway, so I can't remember all the details, but I do. I know exactly what I'm going to talk about here today.
John Dehlin [00:30:35] Yeah. Yeah. Well, hopefully this background was useful to the people that kind of want some
Radio Free Mormon [00:30:40] of the context and to give you some of the idea of the morass that this is and why it is not exactly a friendly territory to go into. In some ways, it's like going in to learn about, I don't know, aeronautical engineering or the space program or how the mathematics involved in putting a man on the moon. That's probably pretty complicated. I haven't gone into it. I figure it's really complicated, and I don't need to spend my time doing that because it's not going to benefit me. But I understand that there are experts who have gone into it and they know what they're doing. And that's fine by me. Okay. So having said all of that, it occurred to me that the Navo Expositor, being a newspaper published on June 7, 1844, and revealing Joseph Smith's practice of polygamy is something that those who deny that Joseph Smith practice polygamy can't use that excuse for. They can't say, oh, this was written in later. You can say that even if it doesn't make real sense. But you can say that about anything that's in writing, like a journal or minutes of a meeting. Yeah, you can say that all day long that it was written in later. But you can't say that about a newspaper because it's got a date at the top. It's June 7, 1844, which means that anything that's published in that newspaper existed as of that date at the latest. Does that make sense?
John Dehlin [00:32:09] Yeah, it does.
Radio Free Mormon [00:32:09] Okay.
John Dehlin [00:32:10] And our family and viewers and listeners, I hope you're not furious at me. I was looking up that 1831 quote because it was really bugging me. So I'm going to just really read it really quickly. Forgive me, rfm. Will you forgive me?
Radio Free Mormon [00:32:21] Oh, yeah.
John Dehlin [00:32:22] This is Michael Marquardt in the Joseph Smith Revelations signature books quote. For it is my will that in time you should take unto you wives of the Lamanites and Nephites that their posterity may become white, delightsome and just for even now, their females are more virtuous than the Gentiles. So that's a revelation attributed to Joseph Smith, according to Michael Marco.
Radio Free Mormon [00:32:50] Was it Martin Harris, that quote that I just read, the one who attributed that revelation to Joseph Smith.
John Dehlin [00:32:58] I'll have to look.
Radio Free Mormon [00:32:59] Okay. Because it was a lot later. By the way, Brent Metcalf, he's an incredible historian, but he would be the first person to say it's just because it's his opinion one thing is one way doesn't mean that that's the way it is.
John Dehlin [00:33:08] Sure.
Radio Free Mormon [00:33:09] And that all discussions should cease.
John Dehlin [00:33:12] Okay. All right. Sorry I derailed you. So we're back to 1844. Proceed.
Radio Free Mormon [00:33:17] Yeah, back to 1844. So June 7th is the date on it. We know Joseph smith died on June 27, 1844, which means that this is 20 days prior to Joseph Smith's death, which means that Joseph Smith is alive. Okay. So having said that, section 132, the. The story that is told by the church and has been told by the church for a long, long time, which is that this is a revelation that was written down regardless of when it was originally received. Okay, so we'll cover that part that was originally committed to writing on July 12, 1843. Okay. And the scribe wrote it out, and then it was taken to Emma, who didn't care if it was written down, and she didn't accept it and probably destroyed it. But there were copies that ended up getting made. And the story that the Church presents is that from those copies that had been made from this original revelation ended up being created. Section 132, which is added to the Doctrine and Covenants in 1876, I believe at the same time that Section 101 was taken out.
John Dehlin [00:34:24] Yeah, that's right.
Radio Free Mormon [00:34:25] Is that right?
John Dehlin [00:34:26] Swapped. Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [00:34:26] Okay, so having said all that, 132 is kryptonite to those who believe that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy, by which I mean section 132, which is God commanding Joseph to enter into polygamy and teach others people about it. Joseph Smith could not have done that. I mean, obviously, if your position is Joseph Smith didn't practice polygamy, Joseph Smith did not receive that revelation. That's what. It's kryptonite. So they have to come up with some way to explain that. And typically, my understanding is that the way they come up to explain it is that this was a forgery that was created by Brigham Young after Joseph Smith died. And what I generally hear from them is that in 1852, which of course would have been six plus two, is eight years later, Brigham Young pulls this revelation out of his desk, says Joseph Smith received it. And their position on it is that Brigham Young created it and then attributed it falsely to Joseph Smith in order to justify Brigham Young's own practice of polygamy and the practice of polygamy throughout the church, because 1852 was when he announced it publicly that the Church was practicing polygamy. So that's the position with section 132. So if section 132 predates Joseph Smith's death, those who deny that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy have got a real problem. It's a critical problem for them. And I believe that based upon my analysis, the Nauvoo Expositor demonstrates to my mind conclusively, and that's saying something I say as close to conclusively as you could get, that section 132 did exist before Joseph Smith's death. And here we get to one of the contents of the Navo Expositor, which has a number of different things in it. It took me about three hours to Read the whole thing.
John Dehlin [00:36:29] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [00:36:29] It's four pages, but so much print.
John Dehlin [00:36:32] And can I just say, William Law was in the First Presidency, so he would be comparable to Down a Chokes or Henry B. Eyring today in. As one of the top three leaders of the church. So this is some low level scrub.
Radio Free Mormon [00:36:46] Right.
John Dehlin [00:36:46] Who's coming out with this newspaper?
Radio Free Mormon [00:36:48] Yeah, these are church leaders.
John Dehlin [00:36:50] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [00:36:52] Who are the ones who knew.
John Dehlin [00:36:53] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [00:36:53] Right. But yes, so.
John Dehlin [00:36:55] And by the way, William Law doesn't say the whole restoration's garbage in the Nauvoo Expositor. He says, I still believe in the Book of Mormon. I still believe in the foundations of the Restoration. I just think Joseph has kind of gone astray in a couple areas.
Radio Free Mormon [00:37:09] Right. And not. And of course not. Just kind of. I know you're saying that facetiously, but he's going, no. And it has to do with a couple of things that he's doing with the government of Nauvoo, which we don't need to get into here. Right. Where he's basically setting up a government that is above the Constitution of the United States in the city charter of Nauvoo. And he says this is. This is not going to end well.
John Dehlin [00:37:32] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [00:37:32] He can see the writing on the wall. And this, this is going to result in the destruction of Nauvoo because people are not just going to sit by and allow the judicial system to be turned on its head.
John Dehlin [00:37:46] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [00:37:47] Because the Nauvoo City Charter has a method in it by which they can get rid of any warrants for anybody's arrest from another jurisdiction. So like I said, we're not going to talk about that today. But that's the habeas corpus issue that was abused in Nauvoo to the benefit of Joseph Smith and the people he liked. Okay, so we still got this thing up here. Revelation on plural marriage, contemporary Joseph Smith. Because there are three affidavits, and these are not long affidavits in the Nauvoo Expositor, but there are three affidavits contained in it from people. And I'll say it's from William Law, from his wife Jane Law, and from another individual named Austin Cowles. And Austin Cowles had been a member of the Stake presidency of Nauvoo. When we hear that today, we typically go, it's stake presidents. I mean, who cares? Compared to President Nelson, your Joe Schmo, stake president, and not even a stake president, one of his counselors, that's nothing. But in Nauvoo, they were roughly Equal, because the structure of the Church then was different from the structure of the Church today. And the Stake Presidency had authority over where the Church was organized as a stake. The Apostles did not have authority over that. They had authority over where the Church was not organized.
John Dehlin [00:39:08] They were kind of missionaries, basically.
Radio Free Mormon [00:39:09] Yes, that's total missionary stuff. Kind of like you see in the New Testament.
John Dehlin [00:39:12] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [00:39:13] And of course, Joseph Smith in the First Presidency. They're equal in some ways as a body with the 70 and with the High Council. But also, I mean, Joseph Smith is the President of the Church.
John Dehlin [00:39:23] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [00:39:24] So having said all that, Austin Cowles is a high ranking leader in the Church. And what all three of them say in their own ways is we saw or heard read this revelation. And of course they wouldn't say Section 132 because it wasn't Section 132 at the time. It was a revelation about plural marriage. It wouldn't become Section 132 until 1876 when it was put into the Doctrine and Covenants. And I thought, well, how well do these affidavits from these three individuals, how well do they describe the contents of section 132? I thought that would be a worthwhile exercise to pursue and one that would not take 10,000 hours of my time. And what I found out is that between the three affidavits of William Law, Jane Law and Austin Cowles, every material aspect of section 132, I'll call it section 132 for brevity's sake, even though we understand it wasn't a section at the time. What we have today is section 132 is described in their three affidavits. And they have no misses, by the way. There's nothing that they describe as having read or heard from this, from this revelation that is not found in section 132. And between the three of them, they describe every material aspect of section 132. And in some cases they even describe the actual language that we have in section 132. And I'll come back to my conclusion at the end, which will actually probably take less time than the introduction here. But what I determined was that the evidence showed that a revelation or a document, we'll just call it a document, a document that in all material respects was identical to section 132 as we have it today existed prior to Joseph Smith's death. And that's all you have to know, because I think most people out there are probably like me and maybe even more so. I don't want to spend all this time going into this morass of conflicting data and the affidavits that were made decades later in the temple lot case. My gosh, it just makes the head spin at some point. But this is down, this is dirty, it's clean, and I think it is conclusive evidence. And if you just know this one simple trick, it'll cure the problem of the question of whether Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. And the answer is, he did.
John Dehlin [00:41:57] Fun. All right.
Radio Free Mormon [00:41:59] Okay, so let's get into it. Let me see. I've got a laptop here.
John Dehlin [00:42:02] All right.
Radio Free Mormon [00:42:03] Oh, look, it's on my lap. It's on top of my lap. And I'm gonna see if I can remember.
John Dehlin [00:42:07] Return is forward.
Radio Free Mormon [00:42:09] Return is forward. Okay. And delete is back. Okay, got it. Okay. So here we go. Did that work?
John Dehlin [00:42:16] Yep.
Radio Free Mormon [00:42:17] Now, by the way, I'll read through this, and I might enlist your aid in doing that. Okay, but could you read this first thing? We may have already gone over some of this stuff.
John Dehlin [00:42:24] Yeah, sure. It says a growing number of people, well, Joseph. Joseph's polygamy. Fact or fiction? A growing number of people believe that Joseph Smith never taught or practiced polygamy in his lifetime. They believe this practice was implemented primarily by Brigham Young. They believe that any recorded evidence of polygamy, I. E. Journal entries, family Bibles, written statements, doctrine and covenants, Section 132 itself, etcetera, were all created after Joseph Smith's death. The key is to validate the reality of Joseph's polygamy using contemporary sources available during Joseph's lifetime.
Radio Free Mormon [00:43:03] Right. And I want to add, there's a whole lot of other contemporary sources that one can look at and that we did look at. We are restricting our analysis to the three affidavits that were published in the June 7, 1844, edition of the Nauvoo Expositor.
John Dehlin [00:43:18] Okay. Oh, because it was released before Joseph died.
Radio Free Mormon [00:43:22] Yes.
John Dehlin [00:43:23] Okay.
Radio Free Mormon [00:43:23] And you can't say it wasn't. And you can't say, oh, Brigham Young went back and changed the newspaper.
John Dehlin [00:43:31] Right.
Radio Free Mormon [00:43:32] That's.
John Dehlin [00:43:32] Was Brigham Young even in Nauvoo or was he out?
Radio Free Mormon [00:43:37] I think he was out stumping for Joseph Smith's presidential campaign.
John Dehlin [00:43:40] Okay.
Radio Free Mormon [00:43:41] Because it took him a while after Joseph Smith was killed to get word and then make his way back. Remember, he made his way back, I think, in early August. That's why they had to hold things off until they had the big debate. August 8, 1844, I think that was. Okay.
John Dehlin [00:43:55] Okay.
Radio Free Mormon [00:43:56] Don't want to make too long an answer to your. Your question. So, evidence of Joseph's authorship of DNC 132 found in the Nauvoo Expositor in June 1844. By the way, you can Google it and get a PDF Navajo Expositor on your computer and read the whole thing like I did, if you wish. And you'll find these three relatively short affidavits all together in it. And there they are. So here's the affidavits, and you can see this one page. There are four pages of the Navu Expositor, but they're big pages, and this is one of the pages, and you can see where they are located. You can't read them here, but can you read the part about the affidavits there?
John Dehlin [00:44:39] I can. It says affidavits. The one and only issue of the Nauvoo Expositor was published June 7, 1844, and among other things, contains three affidavits from persons claiming to have seen the written revelation authorizing plural marriage. We know that these affidavits must have been signed prior to June 7, 1844, because they appear in a newspaper published on that date. The three affidavits are signed by one, William Law, two, Jane Law, and three, Austin Kellis.
Radio Free Mormon [00:45:10] And they are notarized or. Yes, notarized as of. I think it was May 4, 1844. But once again, we're dealing with people. And by people, I mean those who deny that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. They don't care what the date is on the affidavit because that could always be monkeyed with. And if it contradicts their theory, the odds are really good that they're going to say it was monkeyed with. But they can't dispute or gainsay the June 7, 1844, publication date of the Navajo Expositor.
John Dehlin [00:45:40] Right.
The Affidavits Published in the Expositor
Radio Free Mormon [00:45:41] All right, so we go to the next one. Now, here are the affians, the three individuals who wrote the affidavits that were published. The guy there on the left, I think that's Austin Cowles. The fellow in the middle is William Law, and on the right is Jane Law. That is an actual photograph of Jane Law that was taken. She was very upset with Joseph Smith.
John Dehlin [00:46:01] You're joking.
Radio Free Mormon [00:46:01] Yes. This was created using AI generated technology by Rebecca Biblioteca.
John Dehlin [00:46:07] Nice.
Radio Free Mormon [00:46:08] And I think she put in there. Show me an 1840s woman who's mad at Joseph Smith over polygamy. And this is
John Dehlin [00:46:15] Shout out to Rebecca Biblioteca.
Radio Free Mormon [00:46:17] And she actually did the slide, too.
John Dehlin [00:46:18] Okay.
Radio Free Mormon [00:46:19] She's been very helpful with presenting the slides and encouraging me to continue with this because she thinks it's important.
John Dehlin [00:46:26] She's basically the best. I mean, tied with you for the best. No. Did I go too far?
Radio Free Mormon [00:46:31] No, no, no. You're. You're entitled to your opinion. And the other thing is that when we were talking about it later and I brought up a snippet of this on Mormonism live on that following, that week following when we actually did our shtick about this, I had said a couple of these things about Section 132. It wasn't the full analysis that I did later and that I'm giving now, but mainly I did the analysis later because it was Lindsay Hansen park, who knows a thing or two about polygamy and about, I think, everything related to Mormon polygamy by this point, including those who deny that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy.
John Dehlin [00:47:06] She's host of Year of Polygamy podcast.
Radio Free Mormon [00:47:08] Yes. Soon to be retitled the Decade in Polygamy. But, yeah, it's a Year in Polygamy. But it's like her eyes opened and lit and I just thought this was kind of obvious. I have no idea who's done it before, but if it's obvious to me, other people have seen it. And she just said she'd never heard of this before and she thought it was really exciting. And that encouraged me to continue as well. Okay, so we've got these three individuals. We've talked about them before. And would you like to read about William Law and his wife Jane Law?
William Law and His Wife Jane Law
John Dehlin [00:47:41] Sure. John William Law and his wife Jane Law joined the LDS Church in 1836 in Canada. In 1839, Law led a group of Canadian saints to Nauvoo, illinois. And in 1841, Joseph Smith chose him to be a member of the First Presidency. Over time, Law became troubled by certain practices of Smith. He felt Smith was confusing church and state roles in Nauvoo by evading extradition to be tried for crimes in Missouri. He also thought Smith used his church authority to sway political outcomes. However, it was Smith's completely separate. It was. Sorry. It was Smith's covert practice of polygamy and his alleged advances towards Law's wife Jane that caused Law to completely separate himself. Rumors circulated that Smith had made several proposals to Jane under the premise that she would enter a polyandrous marriage with Joseph Smith. Law and his wife confirmed these rumors were partly true. On April 18, 1844, First Presidency member William Law and his wife Jane were excommunicated from the Church. So basically what I'm reading there is that Joseph Smith propositioned William Law's wife, Jane Law, to be a polyandrus wife with Joseph. And neither Jane nor William took kindly to that.
Radio Free Mormon [00:49:08] Right. And it appears, I think, that as part of that, they were given a copy of the Revelation on Plural Marriage. That's how they obtained it. They both read it. They took it home. They read it. And I believe. I don't know if they. I think they did return it. I think they say they returned it in their affidavit, but that's their basis of knowledge. That's an important thing when you're looking at affidavits or witnesses. How do you know what it is you claim to know? And these people have a very obvious and clear cut method of knowing what it is they claim to know because they took it home and they both read it.
John Dehlin [00:49:42] It's also problematic that they were excommunicated for declining Joseph Smith's advances. But that's on brand with other women who denied Joseph Smith's advances and spoke publicly about it, as I understand it.
Radio Free Mormon [00:49:59] Yeah, it's actually even worse than that because what was going on behind the scenes, they got excommunicated on April 14, 1844. They were coming forward with, I think it was 41 witnesses about Joseph Smith practicing polygamy. And they were going to use a church court in order. I think it was a church court in order to demonstrate it and show that this is what he was doing. And so they have all their witnesses ready. They're ready to go to their hearing. And I think it was scheduled for it. Was it April 20th or 21st? They actually talk about this in the Nauvoo Expositor itself. And when they get there, they say, what are you doing here? There's no court. It says, well, we canceled it. Why? Because you got excommunicated two days ago. What? Yeah, we excommunicated you without telling you. So now you don't have any standing to bring any kind of allegations or charges or evidence against Joseph Smith because you're not members anymore. And that's the story as they frame it behind. They're getting excommunicated on April 18th. Okay, so was there anything left in that first paragraph?
John Dehlin [00:51:09] Nope, we read the first paragraph.
Radio Free Mormon [00:51:10] Okay, so then there's Austin Cows. Now Austin Cowles, he's very interesting. Once again, he was a counselor in the Nauvoo Stake presidency. So the stake president was William Marks. And what is not specifically stated in this paragraph is that July 12, 1843 is an important date because that's when Joseph Smith writes down the Revelation 10 pages, or dictates it about plural marriage. One month later to the day, on August 12, 1843, Hyrum Smith goes to the meeting of the Nauvoo High Council and reads the entire revelation to everybody who's present in the High Council.
John Dehlin [00:51:58] Whoa. How did I not know that?
Radio Free Mormon [00:52:01] Really?
John Dehlin [00:52:02] I didn't know that. But that's great.
Radio Free Mormon [00:52:03] There's tons of stuff I don't know. I didn't know this until I started researching it a month or two months ago.
John Dehlin [00:52:08] There's tons of stuff. A million things I don't know.
Radio Free Mormon [00:52:10] Yeah.
John Dehlin [00:52:10] Or more. Billions.
Radio Free Mormon [00:52:11] And the more you learn about Mormonism and Mormon history, the more you realize you don't know. Yeah, yeah. So that's. Austin Cowell is over there on the left. And he's there. He's present. Hyrum Smith comes over and reads this document. Because Hyrum Smith is like a true believer in his ability to convince people by reading the revelations. There was real authority at the time in having a revelation received by Joseph Smith as the Word of God. It was seen as the final arbiter and the answer to every theological question or practical question or how much stock you should buy in the Nauvoo House. There was nothing, no matter how profound or divine or profane or pedestrian, that was not answered authoritatively and finally by a revelation received by Joseph Smith. But he didn't have success with that with Emma. He didn't have complete success with that with the Nauvoo High Council. And Austin Cowles was one of the individuals who was present to hear it read by Hyrum Smith, who was not convinced that it was from God. So Austin Cowles became a fervent believer in the church and was baptized 1832 in New York. So he's been there for a while. In February 1841, he was elected supervisor of streets in Nauvoo. Cows became a member of the Nauvoo High Council February 6, 1841. A month later, March 30, he was appointed counselor to Nauvoo State President William Marks. On December. Excuse me. On December 1, 1842, Cowell's daughter Elvira had married Jonathan Holmes. Six months later, on June 1, 1843, Elvira married Joseph Smith as a polyandrus, plural wife. And I'm not sure that we exactly know what Austin Cowell's knowledge was at the time of his daughter marrying Joseph Smith polygamously. He may have known he may have found out, maybe didn't know until later. But then it says six months later. No, we already talked about that was June 1, 1843, because remember, August 12, now he's going to be at the High Council when Hyrum Smith reads the revelation on plural marriage. And that didn't make it into this particular synopsis. So August 12th happens in another month later to the day. On September 12th, 1843, Austin Cowles resigned his seat in the High Council. Afterwards, Cowles was far more outspoken and energetic in his opposition to polygamy than almost any other man in Nauvoo. Afterwards, he was looked upon as a seceder. On May 18, which would be 1844, cows was excommunicated for apostasy. So these are these three individuals. By the way, it's important to note that those who deny that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy cast these people as lying. I mean, they have to be lying. They can't be telling the truth. Otherwise they would recognize that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy, which they don't want to
John Dehlin [00:55:19] do because it's unsavory.
Radio Free Mormon [00:55:21] Whatever their reasons are, and I don't want to speculate, I think it's pretty obvious it's a religiously motivated argument masquerading sometimes as a historical argument. But it is very important to them to prove that Joseph Smith is pure and chaste and good and trustworthy and brave, clean and reverent. And he sure didn't practice polygamy, which the Book of Mormon says is an abomination. And this all started with Brigham Young, that Brigham Young was even practicing it behind Joseph Smith's back with his cronies, Heber C. Kimball and some other people. And now it's going to the point where there are people among this group who are now making the allegation that Brigham Young was involved in giving the order for John Taylor to assassinate Brigham Joseph Smith inside the Carthage jail, that it was an inside job. This is where it leads. Or as you say, this is where it has led. And I see this as one step after another.
John Dehlin [00:56:22] Conspiracy theories.
Radio Free Mormon [00:56:24] Yeah, and I'm trying not to say conspiracy theory. So it's.
John Dehlin [00:56:27] I said it so you didn't have to.
Radio Free Mormon [00:56:29] I'm just trying not to say it because then it gets a lot of people upset about calling them names and, you know, blah, blah, blah. Sometimes you got to call a spade a spade. But I'm going to try and not do that on that issue today.
John Dehlin [00:56:44] That's good.
Radio Free Mormon [00:56:46] But. Yeah, yeah, okay. So there's Austin Cowell. So we read through the end of that. Let's go to their affidavits one by one, and we'll read those, and then we'll compare them to section 132. And this is where it gets so simple, so straightforward. A kid can do this, and I know that because I did it. So let's go to their first. Oh, I'm sorry. I keep waiting for you to do it. And it's me. Hello. William Law affidavit. Can you read that for us?
John Dehlin [00:57:13] Yes.
Radio Free Mormon [00:57:13] Could you read it in the voice of William Law?
John Dehlin [00:57:15] Yes, I absolutely will.
Radio Free Mormon [00:57:17] That is so. I didn't know you did. William Law.
John Dehlin [00:57:22] I hereby. Sir, this is William Law affidavit. I hereby certify that Hyrum Smith did in his office read to me a certain written document which he said was a revelation from God. He said that he was with Joseph when it was received. He afterwards gave me the document to read, and I took it to my house and read it and showed it to my wife and returned it next day. The revelation, so called, authorized certain men to have more wives than one at a time in this world and in the world to come. It said this was the law and commanded Joseph to enter into the law and also that he should administer to others. Several other items were in the revelation supporting the above doctrines.
Radio Free Mormon [00:58:16] And so that's signed by William Law, State of Illinois, Hancock county, and the notary is Robert D. Foster, who was another person who had seceded from the church over this issue. Okay. And it's fourth day of May, 1844. It was the date of the affidavit being signed. So what I want to do is just break this down into its component parts and then compare it to section 132. And then we'll do the same thing with the other two affidavits, and we'll see what we come up with. Okay, I got to push the button.
William Law's Affidavit Compared to Section 132
John Dehlin [00:58:44] All right.
Radio Free Mormon [00:58:47] And I think here we got comparison of William law affidavit with DNC132. What I ended do is I end up talking ahead, and then I find out that I've already covered. Slide. That's next.
John Dehlin [00:58:55] That's okay.
Radio Free Mormon [00:58:56] Okay.
John Dehlin [00:58:57] Repetition helps people learn.
Radio Free Mormon [00:58:58] Honestly, I'm sorry, What?
John Dehlin [00:59:02] I see what you're doing there.
Radio Free Mormon [00:59:04] You're supposed to say it again. I go, I got it.
John Dehlin [00:59:06] Repetition helps people learn.
Radio Free Mormon [00:59:07] Okay, thank you.
John Dehlin [00:59:08] I got it.
Radio Free Mormon [00:59:08] Okay. William Law purports to have read the written document containing a revelation from God and that he showed it to his wife Jane. William Law says the revelation so called. That's the parenthetical comment that he puts in his document in his affidavit, because he doesn't believe it's a real revelation. The revelation, so called, authorized certain men to have more wives than one at a time. That's a quote that we just read. While this is certainly a broad Description of Section 132, it is not very particularized, so we first have to note. Broad description, yes, that describes section 132. That wouldn't be very impressive to me and I wouldn't expect it to be very impressive to anybody else. But there's more, as the saying goes, and I'm going to get used to this. Okay, so first off, we look at this. More particularized is William Law stating that the revelation to have more wives than one in this world and the world to come, it's not just here, it's going to be forever. This mirrors the language in a broad swath of 132, particularly verses 15 through 19, where the antitheses are presented of what will happen to those who do not enter into polygamy, followed by what will happen to those who do enter into polygamy. And by the way, it is pointed out that even though this is in the context of a revelation that is talking about polygamy, this particular language right here doesn't mention plural wives, at least not until we get to the end of this. All right, so dnc, I just want to try and make sure I'm being as accurate as possible to avoid confusion or allegations that I'm not playing fair with the evidence. So section 132, verse 15. Could you read that for us, John?
John Dehlin [01:00:46] Yes. Therefore, if a man marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me, nor by my word, and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him. Their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead and when they are out of the world. Therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world. In other words, all non Mormon approved marriages don't count in heaven. That's what I'm understanding that to say.
Radio Free Mormon [01:01:19] Exactly. And then the first line of verse 16 continues the theme. Therefore, when they are out of the world, they neither marry nor are given in marriage. Then in verse 18 and 19, you get into the antithesis, which is, if you do marry a wife, by my word and by my power, and they will be with you in this world and in the world, to come and verse 18 there's a lot of language. These are long verses, but it says and again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife and make a covenant with her for time and for all eternity, if that covenant is not by me or by my word, which is my law, and is not sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise through him whom I have anointed and appointed under this power, then it is not valid. Neither of force when they are out of the world, because they are not joined by me, saith the Lord, neither by my word when they are out of the world. So 19 is where it flips it now and says if you do it. And again, verily, verily like saying to you, if a man marry wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, etc. Etc. Etc. And we'll come back to some of that language later, just not here because it doesn't matter for this connection. And it goes down and says and that their marriage shall be a full force when they are out of the world. Okay, so you've got the in the world. The out of the world which is mirrors what William Law is stating in this world. In the world to come about having more wives. When you get to verse 30. Now by the way, section 132 has 66 verses. That's helpful to know just so you know basically when we're talking about and where you are in the revelation. So 30 is going to be right around the middle. Abraham. Now we're talking about Abraham received promises concerning his seed and of the fruit of his loins. From whose loins ye are, namely my servant Joseph, which were to continue so long as they were in the world. And it's touching Abraham and his seed out of the world. They should continue both in the world and out of the world. So there's that expression being used again, not necessarily about plural marriage, but this is what William Law remembers. And we find the same kind of language in Doctrine and covenants from 15 through 19 and again in verse 30. Okay, so do you have questions about that?
John Dehlin [01:03:20] How in the world could Joseph Smith be a descendant of Abraham if he was not Jewish and has kind of European comes from European descent?
Radio Free Mormon [01:03:30] Oy vey, John. Sorry, do you not read about being spiritually adopted into the.
John Dehlin [01:03:35] Okay, so that's what it.
Radio Free Mormon [01:03:36] I think so.
John Dehlin [01:03:37] I think the McConkie family believes that Joseph had the blood of Jesus Christ in his veins.
Radio Free Mormon [01:03:42] He went up to Abraham.
John Dehlin [01:03:43] Okay, anyway, I digress. Yes, continue.
Radio Free Mormon [01:03:46] Holy Blood. Holy Grail. That was Joseph Smith. He was a direct descendant of Jesus Christ. Yeah, yeah. Okay. But that doesn't. That has nothing to do what we're talking about here. Just so everybody knows. Okay.
John Dehlin [01:03:58] Okay.
Radio Free Mormon [01:03:58] And now we get to. Next thing that William Law talks about in his affidavit is the law. Okay. It's also his last name.
John Dehlin [01:04:07] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:04:07] But it's. It's obvious that as he's remembering this, he was very much impressed with this idea of the word the law. And William Law repeats the word law and emphasize it in the original. He emphasizes it in the original with italics. It's the only word that's italicized. And he says it twice. And in both cases, it's italicized. And here's what he says. Oh, I think that we. We read through it anyway. But the word law appears throughout section 132 and is a major focus of emphasis as shown by the following examples. Now, my count. This shows the quotation marks because Rebecca was taking my original research and making it into slides. This is quoting me, so I get to quote myself to you. My count is the word law appears at least 30 times. I know it appears at least 30 times. Maybe I missed some, but 30 times, that's once every verse, every two verses, basically throughout DNC 132. It is reasonable that this is why William Law remembered this so specifically, repeated it twice in his affidavit and emphasized the word law by putting it in italics. And now here we've got some instances of the law appearing in section 132. And it starts as early as verse three. There. I'm not going to read all of these. Okay.
John Dehlin [01:05:31] Thank you.
Radio Free Mormon [01:05:32] You're welcome. Because it's like the law. The law. The law.
John Dehlin [01:05:35] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:05:35] I always thought that was such a stupid law movie.
John Dehlin [01:05:40] Don't know.
Radio Free Mormon [01:05:40] Pee Wee's Big Adventure.
John Dehlin [01:05:41] Oh, good.
Radio Free Mormon [01:05:42] Okay.
John Dehlin [01:05:42] I don't think I ever saw that. I know, I know.
Radio Free Mormon [01:05:46] You have your homework set out for you?
John Dehlin [01:05:47] I do.
Radio Free Mormon [01:05:48] Okay. Verse 3. Therefore prepare thy heart to receive and obey the instructions which I am about to give unto you. For all those who have this law. This is God speaking to Joseph Smith. For all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same. And then you go. Verse five, abide the law. Verse six, the law. Verse seven, conditions of this law. Verse 11, except it be by law. You know, verse 12. And if you see the highlights in yellow, you see where I have highlighted the words. My law. My law. My law. We'll go to the next page. Look at this. We got all this now and all these instances of the word law. And it is from beginning to end of section 132. And this continues here at the end. If you look at this one before you go down to verse 62, we're getting to the end of section 132, because we know that there's 66 verses, but here we have the last verses, the last four verses. They're not done. The law is throughout. And when I saw this, it made sense to me that William Law would be struck with that he would remember that. And it sort of gave it meaning and understanding to me why he would repeat it twice in his affidavit and italicize it, because it's like 30 times in there. It's from beginning to end. And if you've read Section 132, and I have, but not with this in mind, it's like talking about seeing a certain kind of car, like a red Volkswagen Beetle on the highway, and you suddenly start seeing them because you're, you're tuned to it, you're looking for it. So if you look for the law, you're going to see it everywhere.
John Dehlin [01:07:22] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:07:22] And this, this, these slides show that. Any questions about this before the next
John Dehlin [01:07:26] part, that's maybe that's important, at least for one reason. To show that this wasn't just policy, this wasn't just an opinion. This whole new and everlasting covenant, this whole law of eternal marriage, ceilings and marriage and polygamy. Joseph was saying, this is it. This is the law of heaven. This is right up there with like, faith, repentance, baptism, gift of the Holy Ghost. You know, the endowment like this is crucial.
Radio Free Mormon [01:07:55] You have to receive it. If it's revealed to you, you have to obey it, otherwise you're not going to be exalted.
John Dehlin [01:08:03] Right.
Radio Free Mormon [01:08:04] Something worse will happen. And also that he should administer to others. So William Law says in his affidavit, not just that Joseph Smith is going, is commanded to do it and it's the law, but that he is commanded to administer it to others. And we find references to that in section 132 as well. Now we get to verse 44. Could you read 44 through 46? And then I'll read 48, and if
John Dehlin [01:08:31] she had not committed adultery, but is. This is talking about a woman.
Radio Free Mormon [01:08:35] This is talking about a woman. And there's an allegation, I think, about her committing adultery. And then there's a trial, and God reveals the truth of it. You know, she's Innocent. And what happens in that circumstance?
John Dehlin [01:08:47] If. And this is 44. And if she had not committed adultery but is innocent and had not broken her vow, and she knoweth it, and I reveal it unto you, my servant, Joseph Smith. Sorry, Joseph. Then shall you have power by the power of my holy priesthood to take her and give her unto him that hath not committed adultery, but hath been faithful, for he shall be made ruler over many.
Radio Free Mormon [01:09:12] So here's this idea of Joseph Smith administering it to others. And you can go on in verse 46 as well.
John Dehlin [01:09:19] And verily, verily I say unto you that whosoever you seal on earth shall be sealed in heaven. And whatsoever you bind on earth in my name and by my word, saith the Lord, it shall be eternally bound in the heavens. And whatsoever sins you remit on earth shall be remitted eternally in the heavens. And whosoever. And whosoever sins you retain on earth shall be retained in heaven.
Radio Free Mormon [01:09:43] Okay, so there's this idea about sealing and separating, and that's the whole basis for this idea of plural marriage is that if you have the power and authority from God. By the way, God is on a first name basis with Joseph. He doesn't call him Joseph Smith.
John Dehlin [01:09:57] And isn't the God of the doctrine and covenants Jesus Christ, Jehovah? That's what I understand.
Radio Free Mormon [01:10:04] I believe it typically is understood to be that, yes, Jesus is talking to Joseph. They're on a first name basis.
John Dehlin [01:10:10] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:10:10] And Joseph calls Jesus Jesus. He doesn't say Jesus Christ.
John Dehlin [01:10:14] Yeah, okay, okay.
Radio Free Mormon [01:10:16] I'm kind of being. Making that up. That's supposed to be funny. But you get to really, really clear stuff now in verses 47 and 48, verse 48. And again, verily I say unto you once again, God, Joseph, my servant Joseph, that whatsoever you give on earth and to whomsoever you give anyone on earth, by my word and according to my lot, shall be visited with blessings and not cursing. So we see in section 132 that what, what William Law described here again, that Joseph should administer this plural marriage to others is reflected in the actual document. So let me go to the next one. So those are the three things in the William Law affidavit. Now we go to the Jane Law affidavit. And they see some things that are similar, but they also see things that are different, just like three people would.
John Dehlin [01:11:01] Contradicting or additional information.
Radio Free Mormon [01:11:03] Additional.
John Dehlin [01:11:04] Okay, all right.
Radio Free Mormon [01:11:04] Additional.
John Dehlin [01:11:05] Okay.
Radio Free Mormon [01:11:05] There's nothing that's contradicting. And the thing that, that really struck me and it Was a little bit later, after I was putting this together, I realized not only do they describe accurately so much of what's in the Doctrine and Covenants 132, but they don't get anything wrong. There is nothing they say they saw in this revelation that is not in section 132. And I think that's meaningful. So the Jane Law affidavit. Can you do your Jane Law impression? I haven't brushed up on that one. Okay.
John Dehlin [01:11:37] I could read it, though.
Radio Free Mormon [01:11:38] Would you read it?
John Dehlin [01:11:38] Okay. Okay. This is Jane Law affidavit. I certify that I read the revelation referred to in the above affidavit of my husband. It sustained in strong terms the doctrine of more wives than one at a time in this world. And in the next, it authorized some to have to the number of 10 and set forth that those women who would not allow their husbands to have more wives than one should be under condemnation before God.
Radio Free Mormon [01:12:07] Okay, so sworn, May 4, 1844, etc. Now, you'll notice the first part is repeating the same information that her husband, William Law stated at the beginning of his affidavit, which were two points, that it's a state in strong terms the doctrine of more wives than one at a time in this world and in the next. That's redundant. That's duplicative of what William Law said in his affidavit. But she adds, now some things that William Law does not have in his affidavit, but that are present in other verses in section 132. So let me go to the next. So Jane agrees. See, once again, I got ahead of myself. Jane agrees with William that she read the revelation and that it sustained in strongest terms the doctrine of more wives than one at a time in this world and in the next. And now she adds this. Ready? And it authorized some to have to the number of 10. And in the context of her affidavit, she's obviously talking about having to the number of 10 wives. Boom. Section 132, verses 62 and 63. Toward the very end of the revelation, it says exactly that. And this is verse 62. And if he have 10 virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery. By the way, this is talking about a third party as well. So once again, this is Joseph Smith having others do it. Not just Joseph. He cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him. Therefore is he justified. Verse 63. But if one or either of the ten virgins after she is espoused shall be with another man. She has committed adultery. Etc. And then that leads into that passage that you read where it's talking about God revealing it and etc. But she's exactly right. Convergence.
John Dehlin [01:13:54] That's super significant because there are a lot of numbers she could have come up with. She came up with the exact number.
Radio Free Mormon [01:13:59] Yes.
John Dehlin [01:14:00] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:14:00] So I think that's. That's spot on. And I will tell you honestly, it's been a while before we did this episode on Mormonism Live. Since I had read section 132 and I had this idea in my head that it was seven and she said 10. I thought, did she? And it was Bill who went back and read it and said she got this exactly right with 10. I went, there you go. Yeah, she was right, I was wrong.
John Dehlin [01:14:21] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:14:22] Okay. So that's startling to me. Jane goes on to say the revelation set forth that those women who would not allow their husbands to have more wives than one should be under condemnation before God. That was the quote. This is reflected in the law of Sarah, which comprises the Last section of 132. This is the part that.
John Dehlin [01:14:45] Not actual numerical section, but sort of the last multiple sections.
Radio Free Mormon [01:14:51] And I'm so sorry, because I had made a point of that in my head.
John Dehlin [01:14:55] That's okay. It's not a big deal.
The Law of Sarah and Emma Smith
Radio Free Mormon [01:14:57] Section 132. So I want to say the last part of section 132. Thank you for that. So can you read verse 54, which is the law of Sarah as given directly to Emma Smith?
John Dehlin [01:15:07] Absolutely.
Radio Free Mormon [01:15:08] This is the part you're not supposed to cover in Sunday school when we're actually talking about section 132.
John Dehlin [01:15:14] Section.
Radio Free Mormon [01:15:14] I think it goes up to 26.
John Dehlin [01:15:16] Okay. Okay. That's interesting in and of itself.
Radio Free Mormon [01:15:20] Yeah.
John Dehlin [01:15:20] Okay. D and c.132, 54. And I command mine handmaid Emma Smith to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment, she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord. For I am the Lord thy God and will destroy her if she abide not my law. Meaning if Emma, if you Jesus saying to Emma, if you don't allow Joseph to keep practicing polygamy yet, you are not allowed to practice polygamy yourself or polyandry. But Joseph must be allowed to do it by you, or else you shall be destroyed by Jesus himself.
Radio Free Mormon [01:16:05] Yes. So the law of Sarah part precedes us. And it is something that is so juvenile that I can't believe that I bought into this. But the law of Sarah is not just that she'll be destroyed. The law of Sarah is to make it fair to the women, to the wives. Okay. The first wife to the first wife. To make it fair. If the husband is commanded to practice polygamy and he goes out and says, I like this girl over here, and he brings this girl to his wife, and his wife gets a thumbs up or a thumbs down vote on this girl being her husband's new wife. That's the first part of the law of Sarah. The second part of the law of Sarah, which follows hard after in section 132, is that if the wife says no to this new wife, the husband gets to marry her anyway. True story.
John Dehlin [01:17:00] But all that's weird because Joseph married like 20 plural wives without Emma's knowledge or consent. So why was Joseph defying Jesus and his own revelation?
Radio Free Mormon [01:17:11] I don't know. Yeah, it's a huge question and it's a good one, but I have not the answer to it. I don't think there's a reasonable answer to it. Not the one that I've discovered anyway. But yeah, so if she says no, then the husband, Joseph here, gets to marry the plural wife anyway, and Emma's gonna get destroyed by God for having said no.
John Dehlin [01:17:31] And I don't think that's an attempt to make it fair. I think that's an attempt to make it semi palatable.
Radio Free Mormon [01:17:37] Look how fair I'm being, Jesus speaking. Look how fair I'm being to the women. And if you say no, then, oh my gosh, I almost flipped off your camera. Then you know, this is. You're going to get destroyed.
John Dehlin [01:17:51] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:17:52] Because you, you have the choice of going along with it or being destroyed.
John Dehlin [01:17:56] They don't have the choice of saying no. They don't.
Radio Free Mormon [01:17:59] They can say no.
John Dehlin [01:18:01] They can't say no without being destroyed.
Radio Free Mormon [01:18:03] That's true. Okay, so what is made specific to emma in verse 54 is now generalized to any other woman who's in her position in verses 64 and 65, which are the penultimate verses in section 132. Would you like to read those?
John Dehlin [01:18:17] Sure. And this 64. And again, verily, verily I say unto you, if any man have a wife who holds the keys of this power, and he teaches unto her the law of my priesthood as pertaining to these things, then she shall. Then shall she believe and administer unto him, or she shall be destroyed, saith the Lord your God. For I will destroy her. For I will magnify my name upon all those who receive and abide in my law. So Jesus slays non polygamous, consenting Mormon women? Basically, yes.
Radio Free Mormon [01:18:54] Okay, but whatever might be meant by this word destroy, which seems to have a rather direct application and interpretation, I mean, things will not be well for you.
John Dehlin [01:19:04] Mormon apologists would say they don't get to go to the good place in the afterlife.
Radio Free Mormon [01:19:08] Yes, right. They'll be fine. It's okay. God doesn't really mean it. That's the apologetic take. And then verse 65, the theme is revisited where the woman who doesn't play nice or go along with this is called a transgressor. Therefore it shall be lawful in me, Jesus speaking, if she receive not this law, for him to receive all things whatsoever, I the Lord his God will give unto him, because she did not believe and administer unto him according to my word. And she then becomes the transgressor. And he is exempt from the law of Sarah, which says she gets to have a say, but if she says no, then he's exempt from the law of Sarah and he can marry her anyway. Okay, but I put that in there because she's now called the transgressor. And showing how this is describing, or how Jane Law in her affidavit is describing this section where she says that the revelation set forth that those women who would not allow their husbands to have more wives than one should be under condemnation before God. You know, the other thing that. It's a direct hit. These are all bullseyes, some more general, some more specific, and like 10 virgins and another one we'll see here later, are so narrow, it's like a smart bomb. Bam. Right on target. But another interesting thing about this, psychologically speaking, is that, as I say, there are different things that these different. These three different affiants notice and put in their. Their affidavits. Jane is the only one who puts this in there. And it is interesting to think that reading a revelation as long as section 132 and certain things stick in your memory more than others, what sticks in her mind is the unjust way that women are treated in this revelation. It doesn't come out in William Law's affidavit. It doesn't come out in Austin Cowell's affidavit, but it is found exclusively in Jane Law's affidavit. And to me, that seems to give it even a greater degree of authenticity. What do you think about that?
John Dehlin [01:21:16] Yeah, I think that that makes a lot of sense. I think this is just. I mean, we've done episodes on DC132 before. We've done it with Micah and LDS discussions, and we've done it with Sandra Tanner. And those are some of my favorite episodes or most fun or disturbing fun episodes of all time. If you haven't really read DNC 132, no matter who you are, just read it. It's mind blowing and it's frankly stunning to me. The Mormon Church has been able to survive and thrive with that as canonized. With DNC 132 as canonized scripture.
Radio Free Mormon [01:21:59] I taught the Gospel doctrine class for a number of years, and that's why I know that in the teacher's manual it says you don't go past verse 26. There is no other revelation. There is no other place in any of the standard works where I saw that admonition given in the teacher's manual produced by the LDS Church to avoid going over or reading or presenting the subject matter in a certain section of Scriptures. That was exclusively section 132. After verse 26, you just go up to 26, you talk about eternal marriage. That's it. Lesson over. We're not talking about plural marriage here.
John Dehlin [01:22:33] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:22:34] And the other interesting thing is I didn't come up with that connection myself that I had just made about Jane Law. Seeing it. Guess who saw it and told it to me?
John Dehlin [01:22:44] Rebecca.
Radio Free Mormon [01:22:45] Rebecca, a woman?
John Dehlin [01:22:46] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:22:47] She made the connection perfect.
John Dehlin [01:22:49] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:22:49] Yeah. And then she told me. I went, you're right.
John Dehlin [01:22:52] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:22:54] So for whatever that's worth, and I think it's worth something, she was the one who saw that. Now we get to the third affidavit. It's Austin Cowles affidavit. And once again, we get to go to John Dehlin to read this. And I'll just probably interrupt a couple times, if that's okay.
Austin Cowles Affidavit and Plural Marriage Doctrine
John Dehlin [01:23:12] Okay, sure.
Radio Free Mormon [01:23:13] Okay. I'm sorry.
John Dehlin [01:23:14] Yeah, no worries. To all whom it may concern. Forasmuch as the public mind hath been agitated by a course of procedure in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints by a number of persons declaring against certain doctrines and practices therein, among whom I am one, it is but meet that I should give my reasons, at least in part, as a cause that hath led me to declare myself in the latter part of the summer, 1843.
Radio Free Mormon [01:23:48] That's the August 12, 1843 date when Hyrum Smith read the entirety of the revelation to the Nauvoo High Council.
John Dehlin [01:23:54] Okay. In the latter part of the summer, 1843, the patriarch Hyrum Smith did in the High Council of which I was a member introduce what he said was a revelation given through the prophets. It that the said Hyrum Smith did essay to read the said revelation in the said council that according to his reading there was contained the following doctrines. First, the sealing up of persons to eternal life against all sins save that of shedding innocent blood or of. Or of. Or of consenting thereto. Second, the doctrine of a plurality of wives or marrying virgins that David and Solomon had many wives, yet in this they sinned not save in the manner of Uriah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:24:54] They sinned not save in the matter of Uriah.
John Dehlin [01:24:58] It's a difficult yet in this they sinned not save in the manner of. In the matter of Uriah. This revelation with other evidence that the aforesaid heresies were taught and practiced in the church determined me to leave the office of first counselor to the president of the church at Nauvoo inasmuch as I dared not teach or administer such laws. And further deponent saith not right.
Radio Free Mormon [01:25:29] And then they have his signature and the other language that says it was sworn on the fourth day of May, same day as the others. Okay, so that particular line that I brought you back to.
John Dehlin [01:25:43] Yes.
Radio Free Mormon [01:25:44] Is quoted in his affidavit. That's significant. He is trying to quote language from the section that he heard read the prior August. Remember, this is May now of 1844. When he's swearing to this affidavit he had heard this read the previous August. I don't know if he took notes or anything, but he's going to end up being spot on. But the part that he quotes says second, the doctrine of a plurality of wives or marrying virgins semicolon that begin quote. David and Solomon had many wives, yet in this they sinned not save in the matter of Uriah. Now, by the way, that is exactly how it appears in the Navu Expositor. There is no close quote. There is only the open quote, which appears to be a type O. But it's clear that it should come at the end of the period after Uriah because it's obvious that the next sentence is him talking again. Austin Cowles. He starts saying this revelation with other evidence that the aforesaid heresies were taught in practice in the the church determined me to leave the office. So now he's talking again. He's not quoting anymore. So it's my take that. That's where the end of the quote goes. Okay, if we can go to the next slide, which is my job. Austin, comparison of Austin Cowell's affidavit with DNC132. We'll do the same thing here that we did with the others. Austin Cows gives two additional details to the contents of the revelation. He read two additional details not in the other two affidavits. First, the sealing up of persons to eternal life against all sins, save that of shedding innocent blood or of consenting thereto. That is from his affidavit. This is the other primary principal doctrine that is taught in section 132. It's not just about eternal marriage. It's not just about plural marriage. There's also this aspect of being sealed up into eternal life. And he actually gets the language virtually identical, even though he doesn't put quotation marks around this part in his affidavit. Can you read section 132? And if you want to read it with alacrity up until you get to the highlighted part, that's fine by me.
John Dehlin [01:27:55] Alacrity meaning quickly. Okay. Starting with 19.
Radio Free Mormon [01:28:01] Yes. This shows up in 19 verses 19, 26 and 27.
John Dehlin [01:28:06] Okay, you tell me when to slow down.
Radio Free Mormon [01:28:07] Okay.
John Dehlin [01:28:09] And again. Verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife, by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood. And it shall be said unto them, ye shall come forth in the first resurrection, and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection, and shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities and powers, dominions, all heights of depths.
Radio Free Mormon [01:28:35] All heights and depths. And now take your time.
John Dehlin [01:28:38] Then shall it be written in the Lamb's book of Life that he shall commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood.
Radio Free Mormon [01:28:47] And if you hang on just a second, because there are large swaths in yellow. No murder whereby to shed innocent blood. That's exactly mirrored in what Austin Cowell said. He heard red in this same. And the revelation from Hyrum Smith that Hyrum Smith read from Joseph. Okay, go ahead.
John Dehlin [01:29:09] And if ye abide in my covenant and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them in time and through all eternity, and shall be of full force when they are out of the world. And they shall pass by the angels and the gods, which are set there to their exaltation and glory in all things as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a Fullness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.
Radio Free Mormon [01:29:47] All right, so that right there is a direct parallel to what Austin Cowell says he heard red. But it goes on in verses 26 and 27. Can you read those as well?
John Dehlin [01:29:58] Yes. Verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man marry a wife according to my word, and they are sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise according to mine appointment, and he or she shall commit any sin or transgression of the new and everlasting covenant, whatever, and all manner of blasphemies. And if they commit no murder wherein they shed innocent blood, yet they shall come forth in the morning of. In the. In the first resurrection and enter into their exaltation, but they shall be destroyed in the flesh and shall be delivered unto the bufferings of Satan until the day of redemption, saith the Lord God. What the heck is going on there?
Radio Free Mormon [01:30:43] What the heck is going on? Is this talking about the second anointing?
John Dehlin [01:30:45] Yeah, that's what I was going to say.
Radio Free Mormon [01:30:47] This is being sealed up unto eternal life unconditionally. I say unconditionally. That's not technically correct. Because there is something that you can do. You can go rob stores, you can commit adultery, you can basically do anything that you want. Start World War II. That's cool too. And you're still going to go to the celestial kingdom. If you have been sealed up to eternal life, there is this one thing that you can do that will nix the deal, and that's shedding innocent blood. And of course, there have been pages and books written about what the heck does that mean? And some take a more conservative interpretation, some a more liberal interpretation. But I think the. The bottom line is Joseph Smith never said, and God didn't help us out with it. Now, so that's been repeated a couple of times about being sealed up to eternal life against all sin, save that of shedding innocent blood. But Austin Cowles adds this idea or of consenting thereto. We haven't seen anything in verse 19 or 26 that you've read which has that element of. Or consenting thereto. Everything else is there. Can you read verse 27 and look for that idea of. Or of consenting there too?
John Dehlin [01:32:00] 27. The blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which shall not be forgiven in. In the world, nor out of the world, is in that ye commit murder wherein ye shed innocent blood and ascent unto my death.
Radio Free Mormon [01:32:16] Boom. That's. There's a comma there. It's not the end of the verse, but that's it and ascend unto my death. Austin Cowles even remembered that part. So he has this amazing recollection. It's not of the whole thing. He doesn't pick up on the thing about women being destroyed, but he picks up on this, which is not in the other two affidavits, this whole additional idea. And it's a big idea in section 132 about being sealed up unto eternal life. And that's there. Everything that he said was in there is in there. And he even has the exact language down. Now, I want to go to something else here and continue to compare it. Can I just say one other thing? It has occurred to me, first off, that especially in verse 19 and in verse 26, the concept of being sealed up to eternal life is interwoven with the idea of being married. Did you see that when you were reading it, John?
John Dehlin [01:33:21] Yes.
Radio Free Mormon [01:33:24] That led to a lot of Latter Day Saints believing that once you were sealed in the temple, you had your calling and election made sure. By which I mean married in the temple under the priesthood for time and
John Dehlin [01:33:38] eternity, meaning you'd become a God in the celestial kingdom and it was assured. Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:33:44] Yes. And only shedding innocent blood could keep you from doing that.
John Dehlin [01:33:49] Right.
Radio Free Mormon [01:33:51] That belief was so prevalent in the church as of 1980 or 81 that Bruce, er McConkey, in his famous address The Seven Deadly Heresies, included that as one of the heresies.
John Dehlin [01:34:05] That what?
Radio Free Mormon [01:34:06] That if you got married in the temple, you had your calling and election,
John Dehlin [01:34:09] made sure Bruce Armaconke said that's a heresy to believe that.
Radio Free Mormon [01:34:12] Yes.
John Dehlin [01:34:12] Okay.
Radio Free Mormon [01:34:13] But what I'm saying is I actually don't know where people are saying it, but I know this is like what I'd said before. Yeah, right. About section 101. I can't tell you where people were saying it, but I can sure as heck tell you that If Bruce or McConkey is going to list it as one of his seven deadly heresies, enough people were believing it that he was concerned about it.
John Dehlin [01:34:30] That if they were sealed in the temple, they were exalted.
Radio Free Mormon [01:34:34] Yes.
John Dehlin [01:34:35] Unless they shed innocent blood.
Radio Free Mormon [01:34:37] And I think.
John Dehlin [01:34:38] Which means they could be a pedophile, they could rape someone. They could, you know.
Radio Free Mormon [01:34:44] Yes.
John Dehlin [01:34:45] Murder. I'm not murdered. Just all sorts of bad things.
Radio Free Mormon [01:34:48] Unless it's an innocent person.
John Dehlin [01:34:49] Right. Murder a guilty person. Yes.
Radio Free Mormon [01:34:53] Yeah. We're all guilty in some way. So I think the reason that got turned around that way, though, is because I think historically Speaking, in section 132, what Joseph Smith did was he had inextricably intertwined the idea not of marriage and being sealed up to eternal life, but of plural marriage and being sealed up to eternal life. And that if you entered into this very, very sacred, super secret squirrel ceremony of being married polygamously in the quorum of the anointed, you also then became sealed up to eternal life. And this, of course, we find, remember in some of the accounts about Joseph Smith talking about, if this girl, if you marry me, you assure not only your salvation, but the salvation of your family. Right. So we see that idea there, this idea of connecting plural marriage to Joseph Smith and assuring not only your salvation, but also that of your family, which is second anointing kind of idea. So I think that's what's going on. And then the church ended up decoupling Section 132 from polygamy, focusing on it and saying it applies only to being married to one woman in the temple. And therefore, I think it's understandable why people looking at it after that happened would make that mistake, because it does look like if you take that reinterpretation of it not applying to plural marriage, but just to monogamous marriage in the temple, that, yeah, it is connected with having your calling, an election made. Sure.
John Dehlin [01:36:44] Makes sense.
Radio Free Mormon [01:36:45] Okay.
John Dehlin [01:36:45] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:36:45] All right. So that was that. And if we can go to the next slide, not only does Austin Cowles talk about marrying plural wives, he talks about virgins. We'll come to that in the next slide. But here's where he uses the quotes that. This was second. This is from his affidavit. He had two things in it. We went over the first one. This is the second one. Second, the doctrine of a plurality of wives or marrying virgins that, quote, david and Solomon had many wives, yet in this, they sinned not. They sinned not, save in the matter of Uriah, period, my presumed. End of quote. And we find this exactly in Doctrine and Covenants, Section 132, verses 38 and 39. If you would do the honors, please.
John Dehlin [01:37:27] David also received many wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses, my servants. Is that good enough?
Radio Free Mormon [01:37:33] Yes. And then verse 39.
John Dehlin [01:37:35] And then 39, David's wives and concubines were given unto him of me by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power. And in none of these things did he sin against me, save in the case of Uriah and his wife. And again, just like the number 10, he's naming names that directly correspond and When I say he, I mean Austin Cowles is naming names of people whose names also appear in the Revelation.
Radio Free Mormon [01:38:07] And this exact concept about David and Solomon had many wives, yet in this they sinned not, save in the matter of Uriah.
John Dehlin [01:38:14] Right.
Radio Free Mormon [01:38:14] And here it says in none of these things. This is in DNC section 132, verse 39. In none of these things did he sin against me. Speaking of David, save in the case. In the case not matter. In the case of Uriah and his wife is added. Okay, I am impressed with Austin Cowell's memory.
John Dehlin [01:38:35] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:38:35] And what he is doing is he is describing in detail and even using the virtually the exact language and definitely the exact concepts that exist in Section 132 today. There was one other thing. Any other comments about that?
John Dehlin [01:38:50] No.
Radio Free Mormon [01:38:50] Okay, so I'll. I'll hurry on here. The doctrine of plurality of wives or marrying virgins. He said. Now, we saw that Jane Law talked about to the number of 10, but she doesn't use the word virgins.
John Dehlin [01:39:05] That's right.
Radio Free Mormon [01:39:05] She talks about 10 wives.
John Dehlin [01:39:07] Right.
Radio Free Mormon [01:39:09] Austin Cowles is the one who uses the word virgins, and he seems to use it as an equivalent to wives where he says the doctrine of plurality of wives or marrying virgins.
John Dehlin [01:39:19] Maybe Jane thought it was gross and disgusting to to be using that term.
Radio Free Mormon [01:39:24] I have no idea. I think it was a proper term back then. It's assumed some different kind of baggage as of today, but. Yeah, but Doctrine and Covenant, Section 132 does talk about virgins. In fact, it talks about virgins in terms of. Those are the only types of women that can be married in a plural marriage relationship.
John Dehlin [01:39:46] I just have to add that Joseph Smith married men who are already. Who are. Sorry. Joseph Smith married women who already married other men, meaning they weren't virgins. So just like he violated the law of Sarah by not giving Emma a chance to refuse the first 20 or so wives, he also married several women who weren't virgins, which again contradicts DNC 132, his own revelation. Okay, keep going.
Radio Free Mormon [01:40:13] Yeah, good point. But section 132 corroborates Austin cows on this point as well. No, no, no, it's good because I went off on that long thing about why it is that the seven deadly heresies addresses that and why that probably came to pass as a misunderstanding. So verses 61, 62 and 63 talks about verse virgins. If any man espouse a virgin and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent. Right. And if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, that's really important here. And have vowed to no other man, then is he justified. Verse 62. And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery. Right. And verse 63. But if one or either of the ten virgins after she is espoused. We use this passage when we're talking about Jane Law because she uses the number 10, but she doesn't say virgin, she says wives. But Austin Cowles talks about virgins without using the specific number 10. And it's all reflected here. Yeah, absolutely. By the way, the whole 10 virgins, I cannot help but understand or conclude that Joseph Smith used the parable of the 10 virgins in the New Testament as a justification for his practicing of plural marriage, because it seems to be referenced here in section 132.
John Dehlin [01:41:34] Weren't they all at a wedding or something like that?
Radio Free Mormon [01:41:36] Yeah, there's a wedding feast and the bridegroom's coming, and so they've got their little lamps, and five of them have been diligent and had the oil in the lamp, and the other five didn't have the oil in the lamp. So the five get to go in and the other five get to go home.
John Dehlin [01:41:48] And someone's interpreting that to mean wives of the group.
Radio Free Mormon [01:41:53] I think this is similar to what happened with James Talmadge and probably other apostles before him interpreting the marriage at Cana in John chapter two. I think it is as being Jesus's marriage. When that is a strained interpretation. I'll put it that way.
John Dehlin [01:42:11] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:42:11] And this would be a very strained interpretation. Yet this is what happens sometimes when radical doctrines and practices are sought to be justified by the New Testament.
John Dehlin [01:42:22] Right.
Summary of Section 132 and Closing Thoughts
Radio Free Mormon [01:42:23] Okay, so now we go to the final slide, which is where, if you look up there. Well, first off, let me say this is a representation of DNC section 132. It comprises six pages. When you put it all out there. And if you look there at the top of section 132, it says, William Law is yellow, Jane Law is green. And by that I mean highlighting. And then Austin Cowles is in blue. So obviously there's going to be the overlap between Jane and William on some things, But I think we just gave that to William in terms of just making it yellow. Otherwise it would be needlessly confusing. So you can see the highlights for the things that he talks about. You can see the green from Jane Law, which ends up happening more in the bottom of the fifth page and on the sixth page, and then you see the blue, which happens. Well, where it happens, you can see it. It's. It's at the bottom of the second page, in the middle of the third page, and in the middle of the fourth page. But when you look at these, what you can see is that what is described in the affidavits published in the Navajo Expositor on June 7, 1844, basically covers the entirety of Doctrine and Covenants, Section 132. That's the point of this slide. And I have read through it, and it is my conclusion that it covers every material aspect of section 132. In fact, it does a much better job of doing it than pretty much any Mormon. You would stop on the street and ask them to describe what's in section 132 without going back to look. So what we have are three affidavits that describe a document that in all material respects is identical to Section 132 as we have it today. Those three affidavits that make such a description were published in a newspaper on June 7, 1844, which means they could not have been monkeyed with or changed or redacted by anybody, Brigham Young or otherwise.
John Dehlin [01:44:33] Brigham Young was in Boston. I looked that up.
Radio Free Mormon [01:44:36] Oh, good. Yeah, because it's in a newspaper, right? And you can't go back and monkey with a newspaper like you can with a journal. So that excuse or that reason for rejecting it is out the window. Which leads me to the conclusion that during Joseph Smith's lifetime, a document that in all material respects was identical to section 132 was in existence. And that fact is proven by the three affidavits of William Law, Jane Law, and Austin Cowles published in the Nauvoo Expositor. That's all I have.
John Dehlin [01:45:06] Amen and amen.
Radio Free Mormon [01:45:07] What do you think?
John Dehlin [01:45:08] I am just dying to know because one of the most important and frustrating things that I've discovered is that if you go into back Archives of Dialogue, a Journal of Mormon Thought, and Sunstone Magazine, and all the books, the signature books, is put out and all the articles from the Mormon Historical association or Journal of Mormon History, there's so many amazing scholars over the past five decades that have five, six decades that have done such amazing work that we've all completely forgotten, have no idea that they even did it. So I'm dying to know whether this appears somewhere in dialogue or appears somewhere in Sunstone. But regardless, we have it now. And that's what's most important. Now, as far as I'm concerned.
Radio Free Mormon [01:45:54] I would be shocked if I were the first person to see this.
John Dehlin [01:45:57] Yeah.
Radio Free Mormon [01:45:58] And so. But then again, sometimes that happens.
John Dehlin [01:46:03] Yeah, absolutely.
Radio Free Mormon [01:46:04] And sometimes being a novice in this area in terms of I haven't immersed myself in all this stuff. Sometimes immersing yourself in a subject matter makes you blind to things that a person who's coming to it fresh and new can see.
John Dehlin [01:46:18] So basically, all praise be to RFM with a little bit of praise for Rebecca Bibliotech. Is that basically what we're concluding today?
Radio Free Mormon [01:46:24] And you just flipped it back to me, didn't you? I will not argue with your opinion. You're entitled to your opinion. No, that's not what I'm arguing. What I'm arguing is I think this is a very, very solid case. And what it means is you don't have to necessarily get involved in all the back and forth and all the affidavits and all the arguments, because I think this is conclusive evidence that the people who say Joseph Smith did not practice polygamy are in error.
John Dehlin [01:46:53] They have no leg to stand on.
Radio Free Mormon [01:46:55] I think this refutes their argument effectively.
John Dehlin [01:46:58] Yeah. Yeah. For me, this makes it an open and shut case. I get this monthly somebody saying, john, I hear that there's credible evidence that Joseph didn't practice polygamy. I'm just going to point them to this episode and just say, end of discussion. Stop bothering me, silly people.
Radio Free Mormon [01:47:15] Well, what I've heard is now people are trying to respond to this because when you're committed, you see my face. This is my face when I'm trying to choose my words carefully. When people try and respond to this frequently, they're not responding it to people who deny that Joseph Smith practiced polygamy. They don't encounter this evidence and say, oh, maybe I need to rethink my position. Not if they're all in. There are people who are in the middle who will be swayed and will consider the evidence and allow it to affect their understanding and their opinions. But people who are all in typically don't look at this and say, maybe I need to reevaluate my position. Instead, they look at this as a problem to be worked around and to come up with any kind of explanation, no matter how it might strike me as implausible, irrational, and sometimes even impossible. And this is a case in point, because what I've heard that some people have come up with is, oh, well, what Brigham Young did was in 1852, or whenever it was after Joseph Smith died, he got a copy of The Navu Expositor, which I guess he took with him across the plains. I don't know. Joseph Smith wanted them all destroyed, but he took one with him. And then he used his copy of the Nauvoo Expositor and these three affidavits in the Nava Expositor in order to create his forged 132, which he then attributed to Joseph Smith. And somebody thought that was a good idea. I'm not kidding. Somebody has actually proposed this without apparently thinking that if this actually existed in the time of Joseph Smith, then Brigham Young didn't have to create a forgery and attribute it to Joseph Smith because it actually already existed. And Joseph Smith's the one who wrote it.
John Dehlin [01:48:57] Yeah. Well, as always. And I guess we should say Bill Real was a. Was a part of this. A little bit of part of this.
Radio Free Mormon [01:49:06] You know, I will tell you that Bill Riehl has done an incredible job in an analysis, which I am not fit to comment on, about the land deeds in Nauvoo that were given under auspices of being sold to quite a number of Joseph Smith's plural wives or people that historians believe were Joseph Smith's plural wives. And the odds of it being coincidental are astronomically against it. And he actually did a podcast on that. He's continuing to do his research about it, but he did a podcast on that at Mormon Discussions under his channel and hopefully he will revisit that. But that's also a very interesting angle that hasn't been addressed.
John Dehlin [01:49:52] Well, rfm, you've done it again. Thank you so much for your brilliance and your intellectual.
Radio Free Mormon [01:49:57] Oh, Magoo.
John Dehlin [01:49:58] All the good things.
Radio Free Mormon [01:49:58] Oh, Magoo, you've done it again. Is he Irish? No, he's not Irish.
John Dehlin [01:50:04] And please subscribe to Radio Free Mormon Podcast. Subscribe to and or follow Mormonism live on both YouTube and on Facebook. Check out Radio Free Mormon on TikTok and donate. Donate to Radio Free Mormon Podcast. Become a monthly donor. RFM how do people donate to Radio Free Mormon?
Radio Free Mormon [01:50:29] Donate early, donate often. No job is. What is it? No job is too big. No fee is too big. You go to radiofreemormon.org that was Ghostbusters. Radiofreemormon.org There's a donate button. Click on it. Hopefully you can make a monthly donation. $5 a month would be great. You don't have to do it all by yourself. 20. There's power.
John Dehlin [01:50:50] 50. None of this five garbage.
Radio Free Mormon [01:50:52] But the problem is that then people think I can't do the $50 a month. And if I'm doing $5 a month and I'm not really helping. You know, it's the age old problem.
John Dehlin [01:51:00] Here's the deal. You paid 10% when you were an Orthodox believing Mormon. Give him 1% of your monthly income. That's all he asks, 1% and your firstborn but not your wife or your virgin children. Sorry we took it too far. All right. Support Rich Radio Free Mormon. Support Mormonism Live. Support all the things.
Radio Free Mormon [01:51:25] And even though this is not going live right now, it is about a quarter till six here on a Wednesday night and I've got to get ready for Mormonism Live which is coming up live in just a few minutes.
John Dehlin [01:51:35] All right. So thanks rfm. Thanks everyone for joining us today on Mormon Stories. Love you Rebecca and Bill. And please join us again soon for another episode of Mormon Stories podcast and check out Radio Free Mormon and Mormonism Life. Take care everybody. Talk to you soon.
Transcript © 2026 John P. Dehlin. All rights reserved. Brief quotations are welcome with attribution and a link to mormonstories.org; all other use requires written permission.
In this intriguing interview with John Dehlin and Radio Free Mormon, we delve into the contentious topic of Joseph Smith’s polygamy. We start by questioning the need to discuss Smith’s polygamy and encounter neo-fundamentalist Mormons asserting it was a scheme. The 1980s saw the Community of Christ church retracting their stance on Smith’s polygamy. A caller on Mormonism LIVE claims Smith wasn’t a polygamist, raising the pivotal question: Was he truly one? Historians unanimously agree he was.
Examining contemporary evidence, including the Nauvoo Expositor, we see a mosaic of affidavits and records debunking theories of D&C 132 being a forgery. The interview tackles apologetic tactics in the face of such evidence, uncovering the truth behind Joseph Smith’s complex history. Tune in to unravel the mysteries surrounding Joseph Smith’s polygamy and witness the uncovering of undeniable truths.
Mormon Stories Thanks Our Generous Donors!
Help us continue to deliver quality content by becoming a donor today:
- One-time or recurring donation through Donorbox
- Support us on Patreon
- PayPal
- Venmo
Our Platforms:
- YouTube
- Patreon
- Spotify
- Apple Podcasts
Contact us:
MormonStories@gmail.com
PO Box 171085, Salt Lake City, UT 84117
Social Media:
Show Notes:
- Radio Free Mormon Podcast
- Mormonism Live! Podcast
- Joseph Smith’s Polygamy by Brian Hales
- Temple Lot Case
- Nauvoo Expositor
- William Clayton diaries – transcript
- Original D&C Section 101: Statement on Marriage
- Fanny Alger
- Indian Polygamy Revelation
- Year of Polygamy Podcast with Lindsay Hansen Park
- D&C 132
- Mormonism Live! Episode – Evidence that Joseph Smith was a polygamist
- Second Anointing
- Mormon Discussions – Bill Reel going over land deed evidence
- Radio Free Mormon – Tik Tok
- Donate to Radio Free Mormon
One Response
Did smith practice polygamy. Is the Pope Catholic. Hid did and also polyandry and concubinage. The evidence is overwhelming. But the question is was any of that God sanctioned? The answer to that is so obvious it is not even a good question.